faustod - 4/4/2008 4:46 PM
Perhaps NRO-26 is a satellite similar to the old Trumpet's USA 103-112-136.
Those satellites were all launched by Titan4-Centaur into Molniya orbit.
GW_Simulations - 4/4/2008 1:12 PMQuotefaustod - 4/4/2008 4:46 PM
Perhaps NRO-26 is a satellite similar to the old Trumpet's USA 103-112-136.
Those satellites were all launched by Titan4-Centaur into Molniya orbit.
It is possible, but most people think that the role of those satellites is now filled by NRO L-22 and L-28, which where launched by D-IVM+(4,2) and AV-411 respectively.
GW_Simulations - 8/4/2008 3:59 AMThe shooting star in the patch makes me wonder if the black suits have a sense of humor: L-21/USA-193?
Mission Patch:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&Item=200214497445&Category=1346&_trksid=p3907.m29
Antares - 10/4/2008 5:47 PMQuoteGW_Simulations - 8/4/2008 3:59 AMThe shooting star in the patch makes me wonder if the black suits have a sense of humor: L-21/USA-193?
Mission Patch:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&Item=200214497445&Category=1346&_trksid=p3907.m29
Jim - 16/4/2008 6:32 PM
Reading too much into things. Lacrosse is a west coast bird, shuttle mission was only due to backlog and VAFB shutdown
GW_Simulations - 16/4/2008 1:41 PM
SLC-6 is not currently able to take D-IVH, and is closed for refurbishment anyway. Presumably if L2 is ageing, there will be some urgency to get a replacement up, so they can't wait for Vandenberg.
GW_Simulations - 16/4/2008 2:41 PMQuoteJim - 16/4/2008 6:32 PM
Reading too much into things. Lacrosse is a west coast bird, shuttle mission was only due to backlog and VAFB shutdown
I disagree with you there (morituri te salutant). Lacrosse 5 was launched from Canaveral as well (on a Titan). SLC-6 is not currently able to take D-IVH, and is closed for refurbishment anyway. Presumably if L2 is ageing, there will be some urgency to get a replacement up, so they can't wait for Vandenberg.
edkyle99 - 16/4/2008 6:48 PM
Are they prepping it to support Heavy?
daver - 15/5/2008 2:56 AM
Spacefellowship says that the launch is on May 15th @ 8:00.
Is this possible?
http://spacefellowship.com/Calendar/calendar.php?mode=view&id=5324
I would not be surprised - based on history - if this flight slips more. Wouldn't be the first time. Even Stuttle is more on schedule than Detla IV.
Analyst
I would not be surprised - based on history - if this flight slips more. Wouldn't be the first time. Even Stuttle is more on schedule than Detla IV.
Analyst
I would not be surprised - based on history - if this flight slips more. Wouldn't be the first time. Even Stuttle is more on schedule than Detla IV.
Analyst
Makes you wonder, doesn't it, what the heck is going on with that payload? For this long a delay, it must be nearly as complex as Shuttle. It must be a massive program, employing tens of thousands at least.
It must cost billions, each year. There must be cavernous satellite factories hidden beneath mountains somewhere. It must be the secret weapon that will find Bin Laden. Maybe it will solve the credit crises and the energy crises and global warming all at once.
- Ed Kyle
LOL. Keep in mind this mission has been planned for Titan IV
I would not be surprised - based on history - if this flight slips more. Wouldn't be the first time. Even Stuttle is more on schedule than Detla IV.
Makes you wonder, doesn't it, what the heck is going on with that payload? For this long a delay, it must be nearly as complex as Shuttle. It must be a massive program, employing tens of thousands at least.
It must cost billions, each year. There must be cavernous satellite factories hidden beneath mountains somewhere. It must be the secret weapon that will find Bin Laden. Maybe it will solve the credit crises and the energy crises and global warming all at once.
- Ed Kyle
LOL. Keep in mind this mission has been planned for Titan IV, ca. 2003. It can't solve the energy crises and global warming because both were not recognized as problems by then. Oh wait, they are redesigning the super satellite because of these new enemies. Now I have hope again.
Analyst
I am quite sure DSP-23 was not the only one left over from Titan.
I don't know...Would be an eight year delay.
How do you guys define "left over"? The TIV program wasn't cancelled abruptly. So were these payloads just planned before the program ended and the assumption was that they would fly on a Titan, or were they actually manifested on a Titan IV?
Makes you wonder, doesn't it, what the heck is going on with that payload? For this long a delay, it must be nearly as complex as Shuttle. It must be a massive program, employing tens of thousands at least.
Wasn't there a Titan IV left over at the end of the programme? IIRC, it was just a core vehicle (no upper stage), which seems to suggest a LEO payload. DSP would have needed an IUS, and a GSO ELINT (which is what L-26 is believed to be) would require a Centaur. That suggests that there could be a leftover LEO bird waiting around. L-15's out of sequence designation suggests it has been delayed somewhat.
Ed's been watching too much Star Gate.
--Damon
It was for DSP-23 , there was a leftover IUS
Now, on http://msdb.gsfc.nasa.gov/launches.php
I read : NRo L-26 launch date 11 November.
So, it can be advanced a few days.
I would not be surprised - based on history - if this flight slips more. Wouldn't be the first time. Even Stuttle is more on schedule than Detla IV.
Analyst
Makes you wonder, doesn't it, what the heck is going on with that payload? For this long a delay, it must be nearly as complex as Shuttle. It must be a massive program, employing tens of thousands at least.
It must cost billions, each year. There must be cavernous satellite factories hidden beneath mountains somewhere. It must be the secret weapon that will find Bin Laden. Maybe it will solve the credit crises and the energy crises and global warming all at once.
- Ed Kyle
The date is 16 December.
The date is 16 December.
For now ;)
Analyst
Launch period is 03:29-06:28 GMT on 17 December.
Can anyone confirm whether that fits with previous GSO ELINT launches?
Oh, that's a big tower eh! I remember watching it getting built and to think that its the size of an office tower and that it rolls back and forth is crazy.
Postponed. apparently trying to see if they will launch before xmas or in new year.
Postponed. apparently trying to see if they will launch before xmas or in new year.
Old news. That's the delay from 17 December (16th EST). It's already been rescheduled for 20 December.
Postponed. apparently trying to see if they will launch before xmas or in new year.
Old news. That's the delay from 17 December (16th EST). It's already been rescheduled for 20 December.
December 20 seems to be the old news. The launch has now slipped into January, according to SFN.
- Ed Kyle
As expected. ;)
This ends US space launch activity for this year: 15 launches, 14 successful.
5 Delta II, 4 STS, 2 Atlas V, 2 Pegasus, 2 Falcon 1 (1 failure). No Delta IV, just 2 EELVs. 9 out of 15 by soon to be retired systems. Quite depressing.
From January: "United Launch Alliance plans 16 Atlas and Delta rocket launches at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station next year. Six Delta 2 rockets, four Delta 4 rockets and six Atlas 5 rockets are to be sent aloft."
http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/ft-080102-lauches-ahead.html
Analyst
This ends US space launch activity for this year: 15 launches, 14 successful.
5 Delta II, 4 STS, 2 Atlas V, 2 Pegasus, 2 Falcon 1 (1 failure). No Delta IV, just 2 EELVs. 9 out of 15 by soon to be retired systems. Quite depressing.
From January: "United Launch Alliance plans 16 Atlas and Delta rocket launches at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station next year. Six Delta 2 rockets, four Delta 4 rockets and six Atlas 5 rockets are to be sent aloft."
http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/ft-080102-lauches-ahead.html
Analyst
This ends US space launch activity for this year: 15 launches, 14 successful.
5 Delta II, 4 STS, 2 Atlas V, 2 Pegasus, 2 Falcon 1 (1 failure). No Delta IV, just 2 EELVs. 9 out of 15 by soon to be retired systems. Quite depressing.
From January: "United Launch Alliance plans 16 Atlas and Delta rocket launches at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station next year. Six Delta 2 rockets, four Delta 4 rockets and six Atlas 5 rockets are to be sent aloft."
http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/ft-080102-lauches-ahead.html
Analyst
This year's results are, unfortunately, par for the course for the past five years or so. Since 2004, inclusive, the U.S. has averaged only 16 orbital launch attempts per year. Each year was preceded by seriously flawed predictions of many more launches. I find it interesting that this collapse from previous launch totals (in the 20-35 per year range) has coincided with the "EELV Era". One wonders if this isn't turning out to be the "DELV Era".
The anticipated flood of commercial launches never materialized, and the lowest-price guarantee made EELVs commercially uncompetitive. This has put EELV into the typical procurement death spiral.
The anticipated flood of commercial launches never materialized, and the lowest-price guarantee made EELVs commercially uncompetitive. This has put EELV into the typical procurement death spiral.
IIRC, isn't Delta IV only available for US Government customers?
1) There's a conveniently preserved 2004-era EELV manifest here (http://"http://spaceflightnow.com/tracking/eelv.html"), and a summary of EELV flights to date here (http://"http://space.skyrocket.de/index_frame.htm?http://www.skyrocket.de/space/doc/eelv.htm").
2) As of 2004, there were 25 EELV launches scheduled through the end of FY 2008. Of these 25 payloads, 16 of them are still not ready for launch. 1 is currently delayed a few months due to LV issues, but was 3 years late before those issues arose.
1) There's a conveniently preserved 2004-era EELV manifest here (http://"http://spaceflightnow.com/tracking/eelv.html"), and a summary of EELV flights to date here (http://"http://space.skyrocket.de/index_frame.htm?http://www.skyrocket.de/space/doc/eelv.htm").
2) As of 2004, there were 25 EELV launches scheduled through the end of FY 2008. Of these 25 payloads, 16 of them are still not ready for launch. 1 is currently delayed a few months due to LV issues, but was 3 years late before those issues arose.
1) Both links don't work for me.
2) I don't know if these are payload or booster issues or both. But assume these are only payload issues: What does this say about the US military space program (USAF, NRO) and its contractors, who are pretty much the same contractors building and operating EELVs?
You can argue "EELV is a failure because it costs way more than the Atlas/Delta/Titan that it's replacing". You can argue "EELV is a failure because it didn't get a big share of the commercial launch market". You could argue "EELV is a failure because it's less reliable than Atlas/Delta/Titan". But arguing "EELV is a failure because it only flies four times a year", when there haven't been a bunch of payloads sitting around waiting for rides doesn't make sense, and if you draw the conclusion "EELV only flies four times a year, so we need a new rocket that will fly 8 times a year", you'll have been lead astraay.
It should be noted that much of the delay in the EELV flight rate is due to issues outside the control of the rocket programs.
The net result is that the flight rate slows down, but that goes hand-in-hand with a greater degree of confidence that the rocket will get the job done. I'd much rather wait out the delays and fly my comsat on an Atlas than put the bird on that crap-shoot of a booster, the Proton.
EELV is a failure because it costs too much.
A rocket that's flown as long as Proton has should not have such an abysmal flight record. But, oh yeah, it's cheap (relatively) and I can fly my sat real soon.
What kind of car do you drive? EELV's are expensive on the world market for the same reason the big three are: American labor rates. Wanna trade your national security and standard of living for a cheaper rocket? I don't.
note that six of the 10 most reliable on this list are Russian/Ukrainian. Only two are from the United States.
Which begs the question - if all of the money being spent on EELVs is supposed to buy extra reliability, where are the results?
note that six of the 10 most reliable on this list are Russian/Ukrainian. Only two are from the United States.
Dubious!! You stack your list against American rockets. Of your 47 on the list:
former Soviet are 24 (51%)
American are 9 (19%)
Oh look. 20% of the top ten are American, the same fraction as the overall list. Plus, you skew the share of Eastern bloc rockets by separately counting 6 different flavors of Proton and 7 different flavors of Soyuz.
Launch Vehicle Reliability by Family
Active Family Orbital Launch History
as of 12/14/2008
=========================================
Vehicle Successes/Tries Realzd Pred
Rate Rate*
=========================================
STS 122 124 .98 .98
R-7 1599 1684 .95 .95
R-36 256 269 .95 .95
R-14 434 460 .94 .94
Thor 540 594 .91 .91
DF-5 (CZ) 108 119 .91 .90
M55 7 7 1.00 .89
Ariane 5 37 41 .90 .88
Atlas 5 13 14 .93 .88
Proton 300 340 .88 .88
Pegasus 35 40 .88 .86
RS-18 10 11 .91 .85
H-2(A) 18 21 .86 .83
Zenit 55 67 .82 .81
Delta 4 7 8 .88 .80
MX 11 14 .79 .75
P/GSLV 14 19 .74 .71
=========================================
* First level Bayesian estimate
Russia/CIS 2654/2831 = 0.94
USA 724/787 = 0.92
China 108/119 = 0.91
Europe 37/41 = 0.90
Japan 18/21 = 0.86
I think the problem of EELV launchers is a result from monopoly of ULA in U.S. government´s "market".
I think the problem of EELV launchers is a result from monopoly of ULA in U.S. government´s "market". The same situation is in the cost overruns in progammes for DoD, NASA and NOAA.
However you slice it, the history shows that
the former USSR orbital launchers are just as
reliable as any other nation's rockets, and
probably more so.
- Ed Kyle
One difference is that Western rockets tend to get more reliable when they fly a lot, while the reliability of Russian rockets stays about the same, no matter how much they have flown.
One difference is that Western rockets tend to get more reliable when they fly a lot, while the reliability of Russian rockets stays about the same, no matter how much they have flown.
I disagree. To give one example, Proton has become much more reliable since the 1960s - It failed every few launches, and I believe it took 61 launches before the Proton-K was accepted into service. In the last 10 years, there have only been three core vehicle failures.
One difference is that Western rockets tend to get more reliable when they fly a lot, while the reliability of Russian rockets stays about the same, no matter how much they have flown.
I disagree. To give one example, Proton has become much more reliable since the 1960s - It failed every few launches, and I believe it took 61 launches before the Proton-K was accepted into service. In the last 10 years, there have only been three core vehicle failures.
One difference is that Western rockets tend to get more reliable when they fly a lot, while the reliability of Russian rockets stays about the same, no matter how much they have flown.
I disagree. To give one example, Proton has become much more reliable since the 1960s - It failed every few launches, and I believe it took 61 launches before the Proton-K was accepted into service. In the last 10 years, there have only been three core vehicle failures.
Let's compare Proton with Ariane 4, two launchers of the same class (Proton about 6 tons to GTO and Ariane 4 about 4 tons).
At Gunter's space page, there is nice list with the launch history of both rockets:
http://space.skyrocket.de/doc_lau/ariane.htm
http://space.skyrocket.de/doc_lau_fam/proton.htm
If we look at the last 74 flights of the Ariane 4, we see there wasn't a single failure anymore, while Proton had 2 total and 3 partial failures in its last 74 flights.
Ariane 4 was a real mature vehicle, while Proton now and then still encounters a problem.
So it's just the fact that Russian mindset to keep upgrading old rocket designs and constant retesting somewhat fails it!
I think that people are failing to understand the proper idea of rockets in the east!
For example in NASA, a launch vehicle family tends to be retired after about 20-25 years max! And by that time they will be performing to their capability!
In the east, people tend to upgrade the existing launchers and keep the family for what, 40 years or something and keep upgrading them and retesting them! So the chances of failure will be higher. Take Proton for that matter, it flew first in 1965, same as the Saturn age. But Saturn was retired with the arrival of Titan family! While Proton was being upgraded with new technologies and being retested!
So we tend to forget that the present Proton Breeze M is almost completely different expect or some things. So, launched in 2007 the new Proton Breeze M is just like something new and can't be compared to a Proton of 1960s!
So it's just the fact that Russian mindset to keep upgrading old rocket designs and constant retesting somewhat fails it!
I think that people are failing to understand the proper idea of rockets in the east!
For example in NASA, a launch vehicle family tends to be retired after about 20-25 years max! And by that time they will be performing to their capability!
In the east, people tend to upgrade the existing launchers and keep the family for what, 40 years or something and keep upgrading them and retesting them! So the chances of failure will be higher. Take Proton for that matter, it flew first in 1965, same as the Saturn age. But Saturn was retired with the arrival of Titan family! While Proton was being upgraded with new technologies and being retested!
So we tend to forget that the present Proton Breeze M is almost completely different expect or some things. So, launched in 2007 the new Proton Breeze M is just like something new and can't be compared to a Proton of 1960s!
So it's just the fact that Russian mindset to keep upgrading old rocket designs and constant retesting somewhat fails it!
Ariane 4 posted an excellent record, but keep in mind that Space Shuttle recorded 88 consecutive success before Columbia, the Soviet Union's R-7 series once posted 133 consecutive success before failing again, and so on. Although the Proton series has suffered four failures so far this decade, it had suffered five at this point during the 1990s, seven during the 1980s, and so on. The trend is improving, though I'm sure that Krunichev would like to see even better results.
Titan offers one counter-example of the idea that Western reliability improves with time. The Titan series (all types) recorded better reliability during the 1980s than it did during the 1990s. STS is another example, having done better during the 1990s than during this decade.
- Ed Kyle
... this will be the live update pages for the launch when it happens, ...
I intend to, of course my vantage point is about 1 mile away from my house.That's cheating. ;D
More info from Aviation Week: http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=space&id=news/NRODSP12108.xmlNothing new as that article is dated December 10 2008! So you're just repeating old and known facts. Nothing new at all.
More info from Aviation Week: http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=space&id=news/NRODSP12108.xml
Anybody thinking about going to watch this? I am, just not sure if I'll be able to yet... :)
From ULA PAO Mike:
Hi, you’ll see releases from the Air Force, but just in case, I wanted to give you some critical times for the upcoming Delta IV heavy launch.
1) The unclassified launch period was announced today. The launch will take place Jan. 13, between 7 p.m. – midnight. The exact launch time will be announced Jan. 12, 4 p.m.
2) Remote camera set up/MST rollback: Please meet at the old Space Florida parking lot at the front of Cape Canaveral AFS Jan. 13, 0745 for escort. We’ll arrive at the pad at 0815 and depart at 1015. The MST will rollback during this time so you can see the rocket.
3) Launch viewing: The meet time for media who need to be escorted to the KSC press site for the launch is Jan. 13, 6:15 p.m. We will meet at the new KSC Pass and ID badging station near the KSC visitor complex on SR 405. Those media who are already KSC badged can proceed directly to the press site.
Other Notes: The launch broadcast will begin 25 minutes prior to T-0 and end just after payload fairing separation, approximately 8-10 minutes into the flight. It will also be simulcast on the ULA website at www.ulalaunch.com. The satellite coordinates are below:
Carrier: INTELSAT
Satellite: GALAXY 28C
Transponder - GAL28C-15
Orbital Position: 89 DEGREES WEST
Band: C
Bandwidth: 36.00 MHZ
Uplink Frequency: 6225.0000 Horizontal
Downlink Frequency: 4000.0000 Vertical
NOTE: SPLIT AUDIO
Complete Broadcast Audio on 6.8 MHz subcarrier (Right Channel Audio)
Rocket Blast-off / PAD ONLY audio 6.2 MHz subcarrier (Left Channel Audio)
I think so. I assume the timing of the webcast end is due to the classified payload?
Spaceflight Now is reporting this mission uses a 3-burn upperstage profile as did the two flights before. This strongly indicates a GEO mission. The long launch window indicates GEO too. So most likely a big SIGNIT/ELINT, like the two different types launched by Titan 4. Probably a (improved?) "leftover", as discussed before.
Analyst
Quite a lot of recent NRO high-orbit ELINT satellites seem to operate in threes (three Mentors, three Mercurys (including the failed one), three Trumpets (assuming 184 and 200 are Prowler), three Magnums, etc.)
Quite a lot of recent NRO high-orbit ELINT satellites seem to operate in threes (three Mentors, three Mercurys (including the failed one), three Trumpets (assuming 184 and 200 are Prowler), three Magnums, etc.)
You are repeating programs. The some of the names you listed describe the same program
Quite a lot of recent NRO high-orbit ELINT satellites seem to operate in threes (three Mentors, three Mercurys (including the failed one), three Trumpets (assuming 184 and 200 are Prowler), three Magnums, etc.)
You are repeating programs. The some of the names you listed describe the same program
Which ones? I've got them all down as separate programmes?
Magnum: USA-8/48/67
Trumpet: USA-103/112/136
Mercury: USA-105/108/FTO
Mentor: USA-110/139/171
Prowler: USA-184/200/TBD
When does the webcast start?
I'm going to drive down and watch this launch. Will take photos :)
They're still trying to fix the Gaseous nitrogen Relief valve, but SpaceFlightNow indicates that they are going to start fueling.
Link, http://spaceflightnow.com/delta/d337/status.html
Official's are going to look in to a new launch time later tonight.
once they start fueling, how long does that take? I'm planning to drive down to watch it...15 minute drive.Between 3 and 4 hours is my guess.
once they start fueling, how long does that take? I'm planning to drive down to watch it...15 minute drive.Between 3 and 4 hours is my guess.
Scrub. ECS issue.source?
nothing on spaceflight now yet
From ULA, here's an image of today's Delta IV Heavy, sporting Delta No. 337 on the Delta logo. It has some different fairing details near the base of the fairing, compared to the last Heavy.
- Ed Kyle
The fairing looks like the Titan-derived aluminium one, rather than the composite one. That could add some weight to the arguments that the payload was transferred from a Titan IV.
The fairing looks like the Titan-derived aluminium one, rather than the composite one. That could add some weight to the arguments that the payload was transferred from a Titan IV.
Both, DSP and this one, are T-IV fairings.
The fairing looks like the Titan-derived aluminium one, rather than the composite one. That could add some weight to the arguments that the payload was transferred from a Titan IV.
Both, DSP and this one, are T-IV fairings.
So what fairing did the maiden flight use? The Ariane/Atlas V version?
there was only one non-weather hold in the past 4 flights.
I'd rather see them scrub than launch with a known issue and fail.
Can some of these technical issues be attributed to the Delta IV's low flight rate?
there was only one non-weather hold in the past 4 flights.
I make it three. GOES-N scrubbed twice due to technical issues, and there was a short hold in the DSP-23 countdown, but this was resolved within the window.
Of course, that's not counting delays before the start of the countdown. This launch is already over three years behind schedule, and there hasn't been a Delta IV flight since 2007. Only one Delta IV has launched within a year of its scheduled launch date.
I've never seen a launch of any kind and I happen to be in Orlando. Will I be able to see much of anything? Thanks.
I've never seen a launch of any kind and I happen to be in Orlando. Will I be able to see much of anything? Thanks.
If you have a car, you can get a really good view of the Pad from the *second* SR-528 causeway just as you enter Port Canaveral (check Google maps) roughly an hour down the road from where you are. There will be hundreds of other spectators so you won't miss the crowd :)
You could spend the day at the Space Center and see all the sites there.
And the beach area is a nice place to visit anyway -- at least on warmer days than today!!! :)
Ross.
With shuttle launches one can see all up and down the east coast, would that be possible for Delta IV? I am in Virginia Beach right now, so was wondering if I could briefly glance her going by if the weather is right....
I would say it's highly unlikely. You can see the shuttle launches because their on a 57degree inclinationThe SSP hasn't flown a 57° inclination mission since STS-99 in Feb. 2000! ISS resides in a 51.6° inclination orbit.
I've never seen a launch of any kind and I happen to be in Orlando. Will I be able to see much of anything? Thanks.I remember seeing a Delta launch while standing in the carport at the Orlando Airport La Quinta sometime around 1990. I didn't know exactly what it was at the time (other than a launch), but got some details in news reports later that evening. There wasn't much to see -- just a contrail against a clear blue sky, but I was impressed by fact that I could see it at all.
I've never seen a launch of any kind and I happen to be in Orlando. Will I be able to see much of anything? Thanks.I remember seeing a Delta launch while standing in the carport at the Orlando Airport La Quinta sometime around 1990. I didn't know exactly what it was at the time (other than a launch), but got some details in news reports later that evening. There wasn't much to see -- just a contrail against a clear blue sky, but I was impressed by fact that I could see it at all.
There appears to be a foam patch in the fairing? ???
There appears to be a foam patch in the fairing? ???
Payload umbilicals are in the aftThere appears to be a foam patch in the fairing? ???
The orange/brown rectangular area just above the apparent repair area seems to have two regular appertures in it. Maybe an umbilical socket for testing the payload's systems whilst it is in the fairing?
There appears to be a foam patch in the fairing? ???
The previous Delta IVH fairing had this same "spot" on it. I'm guessing this isn't a repair but a design feature.
I've never seen a launch of any kind and I happen to be in Orlando. Will I be able to see much of anything? Thanks.
Do those three core boosters remain strapped together until staging?
--- CHAS
Do those three core boosters remain strapped together until staging?
--- CHAS
Do those three core boosters remain strapped together until staging?No. The two side CBCs will be jettisoned first after which the center CBC burns for a while longer after which it too is shut down and jettisoned after which the upperstage ignites.
--- CHAS
Do those three core boosters remain strapped together until staging?
--- CHAS
Do those three core boosters remain strapped together until staging?
7:33 PM ET. Everything is still go at this point. *knock on wood*
7:33 PM ET. Everything is still go at this point. *knock on wood*
And for those interested, the webcast will start at 7:07pm EST.
Do those three core boosters remain strapped together until staging?
--- CHAS
No. The outer two are run at full power for their entire burn duration and so run out of fuel earlier. The center one throttles back to 58% a few seconds after liftoff. When the outer two run out, the center CBC (which still has fuel left) goes to full power and the outer two separate. The center CBC runs for a little bit longer until 1-2 sep.
If you go back and watch the video of the last D-IVH launch, you can actually see the center engine throttle down if you look closely. The flame gets a little smaller compared to the outers.
I have only watched Spacex and Shuttle launches, will this one include the cameras on the 2nd stage like Spacex?
Good work William. There will be a webcast starting shortly, I assume you are aware.
I have only watched Spacex and Shuttle launches, will this one include the cameras on the 2nd stage like Spacex?
I would not believe so. This is a classified mission. The Titan rockets and Delta II's (IIRC) do not have them on the second stage either.
Webcast now scheduled to start at 7:25 according to the ULA-homepage
Launch at 7:41
Webcast now scheduled to start at 7:25 according to the ULA-homepage
Launch at 7:41
ULA: Launch still targeting 00:33.
Webcast now scheduled to start at 7:25 according to the ULA-homepage
Launch at 7:41
ULA: Launch still targeting 00:33.
Don't know why they changed the times on the HP...it's definetly confusing...
Someone's in the "anomaly channel"?MEQ-A, seems like a mechanical problem being talked about on the anomaly channel.
Heard 'troubleshooting'...
Impressive beast, indeed. Too bad this is a night launch again. The maiden flight was spectacular daylight footage.
Impressive beast, indeed. Too bad this is a night launch again. The maiden flight was spectacular daylight footage.
This'll be pretty too!
Always looks rediculously danagerous with the flame riding up the stack at launch. Would that even be safe for a manned launch?
Impressive beast, indeed. Too bad this is a night launch again. The maiden flight was spectacular daylight footage.
Good, I'm not the only one that prefers day launches then! :)
In the animation, the fairing seemed to have three pieces... I seem to recall Titans had these types of fairings, and since this launch is using one it may make sense. Is that so?
Great news, thanks Ford :)
What is the live coverage link? Thanks.
Where is the LCC for Delta? Is the LC37 blockhouse used anymore?
I suppose from where the range officer controls the weather?
Still in the hold. Working a "what we think is a minor issue".
It would be great if they did - would eliminate quite a few scrubs...
File loading complete, FMA is going to remain on the backup station.
Is the "technical issue" the workstation problems that they have been discussing or a separate vehicle problem?
Is the "technical issue" the workstation problems that they have been discussing or a separate vehicle problem?
Is the "technical issue" the workstation problems that they have been discussing or a separate vehicle problem?
I believe it's a separate vehicle-related problem. Sounds to me like they successfully switched over to a backup workstation.
Is the "technical issue" the workstation problems that they have been discussing or a separate vehicle problem?
I think the workstation issue has been resolved, so I'd assume the hold is for the mechanical issue that was mentioned earlier.
Where is the LCC for Delta? Is the LC37 blockhouse used anymore?
It is in the DOC (Delta Operations Center) which is located some ways away from the pad. I don't know exactly where it is in relation to the pad but you should be able to trace it back on Google Maps or something.
How long is the launch window?
"They must be running Vista"....or maybe Windows Millennium???
Is it just me or does anyone else get suspicious with 'delays' on classified payloads. My inner conspiracy theorist thinks they are masking the true liftoff window. I know it doesn't matter as liftoff time lets people track it. But I figure those NRO spooks like to mess with people.
I think the first problem they had was the the Met (weather) console couldn't communicate and upload the wind ascent data to the Heavy, after reconfiguring and using a backup console, they are ready to support, however the newest problem is that the winds ascent data from the latest weather balloon, number 7 is missing some information from 25000 feet or so. They are relaunching another balloon, number 8 to get the required data, send that data to the Delta office in Denver where they will code this information into a computer file, send that file to the Cape to be uploaded by the Met console to the Heavy. If I am wrong, someone correct me.
Can't go out, the wife is working the launchThat's pretty cool! What does she do? (if you can tell us)
I have channel 12 NASA webcam, among others, in my desktop at the office showing pad C17A, and all the way I thought this was the one we were following up throughout the week. Obviously I was not familiar with the Delta IV, now I know the difference. Any idea what is the thing on NASA webcams on channel 12 then?
A friend of mine asked me why someone includes planned holds into a countdown. I explained it as times when you don't want to be rushed during certain vehicle checkouts, etc. But I'd like to give him a better explenation from people who are a bit closer to this part of the industry. So I pose his question to you....
"Why are there 'planned' holds in the countdown as opposed to just longer countdowns?"
I think the first problem they had was the the Met (weather) console couldn't communicate and upload the wind ascent data to the Heavy, after reconfiguring and using a backup console, they are ready to support, however the newest problem is that the winds ascent data from the latest weather balloon, number 7 is missing some information from 25000 feet or so. They are relaunching another balloon, number 8 to get the required data, send that data to the Delta office in Denver where they will code this information into a computer file, send that file to the Cape to be uploaded by the Met console to the Heavy. If I am wrong, someone correct me.
Bingo :)
Just for reference, this is the inside of the Delta Operations Center (which was asked about earlier).
Why the flame in the longshots?
Did anyone catch who called the hold?
LOX and LH2 recycling, igniters reset.
Assessing another try tonight.
Something about "solid motor safe and arm to safe".
Solid motor?
- Ed Kyle
I saw a huge ball of flame come out of the flare stack right after the hold was called, is there a chance this may have been related to what cause the hold, or an after-effect?
I saw a huge ball of flame come out of the flare stack right after the hold was called, is there a chance this may have been related to what cause the hold, or an after-effect?
Assessing another try tonight.
Did hear a go for recycle..
Problem detected by the launch computer (TCSR?)
Problem detected by the launch computer (TCSR?)
too early for TCSR
This seems to be a fairly large launch window. What were the limiting factors for this window? Is it likely Range related? It certainly doesn't seem to be orbit limited, as over the course of that window, many orbit windows are possible.
Problem detected by the launch computer (TCSR?)
too early for TCSR
Seems to me a script starts running at T-5 (like ones I built for Ariane launches some years ago), and this hold was detected within the script (what ever it's name is); & my ? then is when does the TCSR come in and 'take over'?
Problem detected by the launch computer (TCSR?)
too early for TCSR
Seems to me a script starts running at T-5 (like ones I built for Ariane launches some years ago), and this hold was detected within the script (what ever it's name is); & my ? then is when does the TCSR come in and 'take over'?
TCSR comes in at about 8.5 seconds.
Terminal countdown sequencer rackProblem detected by the launch computer (TCSR?)
too early for TCSR
Seems to me a script starts running at T-5 (like ones I built for Ariane launches some years ago), and this hold was detected within the script (what ever it's name is); & my ? then is when does the TCSR come in and 'take over'?
TCSR comes in at about 8.5 seconds.
Ahh - the terminal sequencer.... Tks.....
Problem detected by the launch computer (TCSR?)
too early for TCSR
Seems to me a script starts running at T-5 (like ones I built for Ariane launches some years ago), and this hold was detected within the script (what ever it's name is); & my ? then is when does the TCSR come in and 'take over'?
TCSR comes in at about 8.5 seconds.
Ahh - the terminal sequencer.... Tks.....
launch crew
seems more like a SpaceX launch at this point....
Problem detected by the launch computer (TCSR?)
too early for TCSR
Seems to me a script starts running at T-5 (like ones I built for Ariane launches some years ago), and this hold was detected within the script (what ever it's name is); & my ? then is when does the TCSR come in and 'take over'?
TCSR comes in at about 8.5 seconds.
Ahh - the terminal sequencer.... Tks.....
I left my countdown book at work
I wonder how a charred Delta IV would handle a T-0 abortThey did a flight readiness firing on the first Delta IV (293), there's a big fireball and a lot of black smoke when the engine shuts down.
seems more like a SpaceX launch at this point....
I wonder how a charred Delta IV would handle a T-0 abort ;)
That's news for me, thank you!
They did a flight readiness firing on the first Delta IV (293), there's a big fireball and a lot of black smoke when the engine shuts down.
That's news for me, thank you!
They did a flight readiness firing on the first Delta IV (293), there's a big fireball and a lot of black smoke when the engine shuts down.
Is there a video somewhere? Now you've tickled my curiosity.
That's news for me, thank you!
They did a flight readiness firing on the first Delta IV (293), there's a big fireball and a lot of black smoke when the engine shuts down.
Is there a video somewhere? Now you've tickled my curiosity.
Lost the webcast
Can anyone confirm the link below is an image of the Delta Operations Center?
http://www.wikimapia.org/#lat=28.5078105&lon=-80.5744171&z=18&l=0&m=a&v=2
Who was it who said they'd only had one issue in the last four Delta IV counts?
Prop ready to go again.
And they say the R7 was slow getting off the pad for rapid response (I know, apples and oranges ;) )
Interesting contrast with SpaceX's try-and-try-again launches. Much more methodical.
Reminds me a bit of the New Horizons launch -- that had a few holds (weather, I think) and finally shot through a hole in the clouds after a few tries, right?
Could be worse, at least it is not a navaho launch, didn't one of those attempts once take 24hrs.
How many attempts can be made before scrubbing? I know the launch window is 4 hours.
How many attempts can be made before scrubbing? I know the launch window is 4 hours.
We're halfway into the window and there's been 2 aborts... so say other 3 more attempts if they're quick.
Prop ready to go again.
And they say the R7 was slow getting off the pad for rapid response (I know, apples and oranges ;) )
Could be worse, at least it is not a navaho launch, didn't one of those attempts once take 24hrs.
Be thankful this is a four hour launch window. All these problems and failure to resolve what seems to be the previous problem would cause havoc if working to short windows.
Launch team has "a good understanding of the issue"
"The launch team appear to have a good understanding of the issue... again"
I'm not entirely sure about that.
Be thankful this is a four hour launch window. All these problems and failure to resolve what seems to be the previous problem would cause havoc if working to short windows.
Getting familiar with an potential Ares I replacement?
-- and I think they are being unusually cagy about details on this launch --
Be thankful this is a four hour launch window. All these problems and failure to resolve what seems to be the previous problem would cause havoc if working to short windows.
Getting familiar with an potential Ares I replacement?
Given the Delta IV's track record, the EDS won't so much need a 2 week "loiter window" as a 2 year window...
Are all these small issues coming up due to the infrequency of Delta IV launches? They have only launched ~1 per year since the Delta IV became available. Not a very impressive flight rate.
-- and I think they are being unusually cagy about details on this launch --
Could the problem possibly be with the payload itself then? Or would they tell us if that were the case?
-- and I think they are being unusually cagy about details on this launch --
Could the problem possibly be with the payload itself then? Or would they tell us if that were the case?
I don't think a payload issue would be so 'recyclable', or would crop up during the terminal count script.
Be thankful this is a four hour launch window. All these problems and failure to resolve what seems to be the previous problem would cause havoc if working to short windows.
Getting familiar with an potential Ares I replacement?
Looked good from Jacksonville.
Good to see it fly.
When's the next launch? I love these things.
Looked good from Jacksonville.
Good to see it fly.
When's the next launch? I love these things.
Congrats to ULA for (finally) pulling it off! Took a long time but was definitely worth the wait.
Looked good from Jacksonville.
Good to see it fly.
When's the next launch? I love these things.
Next launch from Canaveral is a Delta II with Kepler on 6 February. Next orbital launch worldwide is an H-IIA with GOSAT on 21 January.
See the various "launch schedule" threads around the forum.
Kepler is in March, not Feb. NOAA-N' is in early Feb.
Free launch video is now in the free section: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=15586
Ensure you are logged into the forum to access the free video section.
Wouldn't it be cool to see an Orion launch on a Delta IV Heavy!!!
This one lifted off only two hours 14 minutes late. That's better than a lot of my airline passenger flights!
I remember trying to watch Atlas Centaur launches during the 1980s. Hold - recycle - hold - recycle. Over and over again until the window closed, then back at it the next day. They always flew finally. Somehow, Atlas eventually turned into an on-time launcher.
This one lifted off only two hours 14 minutes late. That's better than a lot of my airline passenger flights!
Plus at least three years of pushing back the launch date...I wouldn't fly with that airline...
This one lifted off only two hours 14 minutes late. That's better than a lot of my airline passenger flights!
Plus at least three years of pushing back the launch date...I wouldn't fly with that airline...
Wouldn't it be cool to see an Orion launch on a Delta IV Heavy!!!
Atlas V-H has my vote (because then we could add back in all of the Orion systems left in the parking lot, not to mention all but one box is redundant and a Cosmonaut-rated booster engine), as long as the culture doesn't become Titan-ic between now and then.
This one lifted off only two hours 14 minutes late. That's better than a lot of my airline passenger flights!
Plus at least three years of pushing back the launch date...I wouldn't fly with that airline...
Again, it's not reasonable to expect your flight to take off when the other airplanes on the taxiway in front of you haven't taken off either...
I know the "three year delay" thing is a nice convenient way of bashing D-IV but it's really not accurate. I won't dispute they have a few kinks to work out though, as illustrated by tonight's launch...
Darn it... I live in NC and I checked a few minutes before the launch was supposed to happen (the first time tonight) and everything seemed to be a go. I went out to the beach to see if I could see it from here as I can with many shuttle launches, but didn't see anything. I didn't know that it was because of a delay. I've never looked for spy satellite launches from here, so I was going to use this as a sort of test to see if they were visible from the beach here. I guess next time I'm going to have to have a little crew for me... someone on the computer calling me on my cell phone and updating me :D Really wish I had known. It was still a nice night, though.Don't believe you would have seen tonights launch of Delta 4 since it was being launched due east from Pad 37.
It seemed to take forever for the D IV-heavy to clear the tower this time... Are there any examples of rockets which clear the tower any slower? The Shuttle seems to jump off the pad in comparison...Yeah, Delta IV Medium (no solids), that's even slower. Atlas V 401 (also no solids) is not exactly a hot rod either. The Ariane 4s without solid motors were pretty slow too. Some people call it "slow", I call it majestic. :)
It seemed to take forever for the D IV-heavy to clear the tower this time... Are there any examples of rockets which clear the tower any slower? The Shuttle seems to jump off the pad in comparison...
Wouldn't it be cool to see an Orion launch on a Delta IV Heavy!!!
It sure was cold waiting out there at the cruise terminals waiting for them to light the fuze. Beautiful launch, though.
Damn! :o
By Pat Corkery, ULA.
Click it to enlarge, sit back, and nod in approval.
Damn! :o
By Pat Corkery, ULA.
Click it to enlarge, sit back, and nod in approval.
It sure was cold waiting out there at the cruise terminals waiting for them to light the fuze. Beautiful launch, though.It was OK for the first cutoff, but the wind picked up a little after that where I was. Regardless, the launch was definitely worth the wait.
It sure was cold waiting out there at the cruise terminals waiting for them to light the fuze. Beautiful launch, though.
Damn! :o
By Pat Corkery, ULA.
Click it to enlarge, sit back, and nod in approval.
It seemed to take forever for the D IV-heavy to clear the tower this time... Are there any examples of rockets which clear the tower any slower? The Shuttle seems to jump off the pad in comparison...
Saturn V
It sure was cold waiting out there at the cruise terminals waiting for them to light the fuze. Beautiful launch, though.
Did you take any photos of the launch last night?
Question: Would that be an injector issue with the right engine? Running a little lean or rich perhaps? Just slightly brighter in the exhaust plume than the other two engines.
Question: Would that be an injector issue with the right engine? Running a little lean or rich perhaps? Just slightly brighter in the exhaust plume than the other two engines.
Just a little streaking by the ablative nozzle
It sure was cold waiting out there at the cruise terminals waiting for them to light the fuze. Beautiful launch, though.
Did you take any photos of the launch last night?
It sure was cold waiting out there at the cruise terminals waiting for them to light the fuze. Beautiful launch, though.
Did you take any photos of the launch last night?
Not sure if you've seen these but Ben got some really good shots of the launch:
http://www.launchphotography.com/Delta_4-Heavy_NRO_L-26.html
I like this one:
http://www.launchphotography.com/Delta_4-Heavy_NRO_L-26_10.JPG
I remember when I first saw that timelapse (dunno if that's the correct term, or is it over exposure? - anyway) type of photo with a shuttle launch in the 80s and it was the first time I realized (as a kid) that they didn't "go straight up" ;D
Any news on whether spacecraft separation has occurred?
http://www.launchphotography.com/Delta_4-Heavy_NRO_L-26_10.JPG
as long as the culture doesn't become Titan-ic between now and then."Titanic culture"? What's that saying about "Glass Houses?" ;)[/quote]
http://www.launchphotography.com/Delta_4-Heavy_NRO_L-26_10.JPG
Is the jiggle (about even with that blue star trail) wind shear, strap-on jettison or ground jiggle?
Would they release information if there had been a problem? The lack of any negative updates would suggest all went to plan. Understand why the Americans don't release details, glad we got the coverage we were allowed.
Here is another wow.Thanks, Jim. Doesn't look cold at all. :)
http://www.i-ota.net/DeltaIVa071110/
Here is another wow.
http://www.i-ota.net/DeltaIVa071110/ (http://www.i-ota.net/DeltaIVa071110/)