Author Topic: SpaceX F9 : Zuma : Dec. 2017, KSC : DISCUSSION  (Read 120379 times)

Online ChrisGebhardt

  • Assistant Managing Editor
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5449
  • ad astra scientia
  • ~1 AU
  • Liked: 2077
  • Likes Given: 339
SpaceX F9 : Zuma : Dec. 2017, KSC : DISCUSSION
« on: 10/14/2017 01:07 PM »
Discussion Thread for unknown Northrop Grumman payload Codename Zuma mission.


NSF Threads for Codename Zuma : Discussion / Updates / L2 Coverage November-December / ASDS / Party

NSF Articles for Codename Zuma :
   SpaceX adds mystery “Zuma” mission, Iridium-4 aims for Vandenberg landing

NET 0100 UTC Nov. 18 (2000 EST on Nov. 17), 2017 on Falcon 9 (booster 1043) from LC-39A.  RTLS landing is expected.



Getting this started per this FCC launch license from yesterday


There are approved FCC licences for an RTLS launch 1390 from 39A on November 10th.

1446-EX-ST-2017:
https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/els/reports/STA_Print.cfm?mode=current&application_seq=80568&RequestTimeout=1000

1318-EX-ST-2017:
https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/els/reports/STA_Print.cfm?mode=current&application_seq=80217&RequestTimeout=1000

Licenses call for this to go from LC-39A on 10 November 2017 and RTLS to LZ-1.

Currently targeting launch 12 days after Koreasat (which is NET 30 October).



Other SpaceX resources on NASASpaceflight:
   SpaceX News Articles (Recent)
   SpaceX News Articles from 2006 (Including numerous exclusive Elon interviews)
   SpaceX Dragon Articles
   SpaceX Missions Section (with Launch Manifest and info on past and future missions)

   L2 SpaceX Section
« Last Edit: 11/20/2017 07:45 PM by gongora »

Offline SmallKing

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 376
  • Zhejiang, China, the Earth
  • Liked: 161
  • Likes Given: 186
Even launchphotography.com and SFN didn't have any information about this launch, it's more like a military payload I thought
Some are bound for happiness, some are bound to glory, some are bound to live with less, who can tell your story?

Offline wannamoonbase

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2709
  • Denver, CO
    • U.S. Metric Association
  • Liked: 534
  • Likes Given: 926
Interesting.  Something they kept this quiet, I wonder if there will even be a webcast
Excited to be finally into the first Falcon Heavy flow, we are getting so close!

Online Galactic Penguin SST

I'm thinking if there are any light geostationary comsats (say 2 to 3.5 tonnes) around that had never had a launch contract announced, or even without their identities known, that might be launching by now.

For example, there was that 3 Boeing 702SP order from the US government in 2013 that cannot be pinned down to any known satellite and was once floated around as a candidate for NROL-76 earlier this year. So far none of them seemed to have been launched yet, and if they are launched on F9 one at a time the 1st stage would have easily made an RTLS.
Chinese spaceflight is a cosmic riddle wrapped in a galactic mystery inside an orbital enigma... - (not) Winston Churchill

Offline vapour_nudge

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 411
  • Australia
  • Liked: 168
  • Likes Given: 282
Perhaps it's another PAN or CLIO type launch similar to what was launched on Atlas V. The agency responsible for those sats wasn't even named. Assuming, of course, this is military.
« Last Edit: 10/14/2017 02:09 PM by vapour_nudge »

Offline ZachS09

Maybe this mission will use B1043.

Just a total assumption; nothing to do with L2 info.
"Liftoff of Falcon 9: the world's first reflight of an orbital-class rocket."

Offline ZachS09

Interesting.  Something they kept this quiet, I wonder if there will even be a webcast

If SpaceX does not stream this launch, the only evidence of a successful launch/landing will be from spectators and photographers at the press sites.
"Liftoff of Falcon 9: the world's first reflight of an orbital-class rocket."

Offline su27k

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 668
  • Liked: 415
  • Likes Given: 38
Does SpaceX need to file papers with FCC if it's a government payload? I thought the filing is only for commercial launches. Kind of defeat the purpose of a secret payload if you have to get public license from FCC.

Offline Thorny

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 645
  • San Angelo, Texas
  • Liked: 103
  • Likes Given: 85
Dragonlab?

Offline rockets4life97

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 388
  • Liked: 175
  • Likes Given: 120
Dragonlab?

Unlikely, SpaceX would be talking it up to recruit future customers.

Offline jfallen

  • Member
  • Posts: 44
  • Liked: 34
  • Likes Given: 52
Since it seems speculation is permitted, I'm going to go with a Starlink launch.  Keep it quiet to not tip the hand?

Or there is simply a commercial customer that doesn't want it announced.

Offline yokem55

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 442
  • Oregon (Ore-uh-gun dammit)
  • Liked: 242
  • Likes Given: 12
Since it seems speculation is permitted, I'm going to go with a Starlink launch.  Keep it quiet to not tip the hand?

Or there is simply a commercial customer that doesn't want it announced.
Unless this is a used booster, I don't see SpaceX launching their own payload on a new one.

Offline Oberon_Command

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 344
  • Liked: 24
  • Likes Given: 0
SpaceFlightNow lists a Falcon 9 launch with "Hispasat 30W-6" in 4th quarter 2017 before two other November launches, but no specific date. Could this be that launch?
« Last Edit: 10/14/2017 03:14 PM by Oberon_Command »

Offline gth871r

  • Member
  • Posts: 24
  • GA, USA
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 4
Any possibility this is SpaceIL or some other Lunar X-Prize entrant?

Offline old_sellsword

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 582
  • Liked: 462
  • Likes Given: 428
Since it seems speculation is permitted, I'm going to go with a Starlink launch.  Keep it quiet to not tip the hand?

Or there is simply a commercial customer that doesn't want it announced.

Starlink sats (Microsats 2a, -b) are launching as secondary payloads with Paz next year.

Online ChrisGebhardt

  • Assistant Managing Editor
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5449
  • ad astra scientia
  • ~1 AU
  • Liked: 2077
  • Likes Given: 339
SpaceFlightNow lists a Falcon 9 launch with "Hispasat 30W-6" in 4th quarter 2017 before two other November launches, but no specific date. Could this be that launch?

No.  Hispasat is GTO and way too heavy for RTLS.

This is an as yet publicly unannounced mission.

Offline input~2

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5219
  • Liked: 354
  • Likes Given: 165
In these FCC licenses, the "operation start date" of the"requested period of operation" (here November 10) is not necessarily the planned launch date..
For example the requested period of operation for the last Iridium Next launch from Vandenberg (SpaceX Mission 1339)[/font] started on September 30, and the launch took place on October 9

Offline Bubbinski

Will this be a new core, or a flight-proven core?
I'll even excitedly look forward to "flags and footprints" and suborbital missions. Just fly...somewhere.

Online ChrisGebhardt

  • Assistant Managing Editor
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5449
  • ad astra scientia
  • ~1 AU
  • Liked: 2077
  • Likes Given: 339
In these FCC licenses, the "operation start date" of the"requested period of operation" (here November 10) is not necessarily the planned launch date..
For example the requested period of operation for the last Iridium Next launch from Vandenberg (SpaceX Mission 1339)[/font] started on September 30, and the launch took place on October 9

When they filed the launch license for Iridium 3, 30 September was the target launch date.  It then slipped to 4 Oct and then 9 Oct.

Offline saliva_sweet

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 475
  • Liked: 372
  • Likes Given: 1173
In these FCC licenses, the "operation start date" of the"requested period of operation" (here November 10) is not necessarily the planned launch date..

Yes, but they are usually the expected NET dates at the time of requesting the license. CRS-13 license has a start date of Nov. 28 for example. This one was also previously assigned to pad 40 and only recently moved to 39A
previous lilcense:
https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/els/reports/STA_Print.cfm?mode=current&application_seq=80178&RequestTimeout=1000

This suggest that they want to fly it before pad 40 is ready.

Tags: