Author Topic: The SpaceX Launch Log  (Read 45114 times)

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
The SpaceX Launch Log
« on: 06/16/2016 10:02 PM »
This is a thread that has grown out of the SpaceX Scrubs thread into a stand-alone launch log. With your help I will try to capture everything interesting about each launch, including payload info. The first post will have the full log, while new info and discussion can happen in subsequent posts.

----Key----
S: Static fire attempt (unsuccessful)
X: Weather scrub of static fire
F: Successful static fire
C: Countdown attempt (unsuccessful)
W: Weather scrub of launch
R: Range scrub of launch
D: Mission delay
L: Launch
LF: Launch Failure
BL: Booster Lost (controlled re-entry/landing attempted)
BR: Booster Recovered

[] source
(not verified) kindly requesting the community to verify my info about this mission, as I believe I have gathered all public info about it
(verified) mission info verified

----Missions---
->Falcon 1
Falcon 1 flight 01 - FalconSAT-2
  S) 2005-05-?? (Vandenberg SLC-3W), Igniter sensor failure [159]
  S) 2005-05-?? (Vandenberg SLC-3W), Incorrectly closed helium ground supply valve [160]
  F) 2005-05-27 (Vandenberg SLC-3W), Successful Static Fire [161]
  C) 2005-11-26, Manual vent valve incorrectly set to vent [162]
  C) 2005-12-19, Draining tank during weather hold, valve caused vacuum, deforming the tank [163]
  S) 2006-02-09, Various technical issues [164]
  F) 2006-02-10, Successful Static Fire [165]
  LF) 2006-03-25, Launch failure (the one with the corroded nut) [166]

Falcon 1 flight 02 - DemoFlight 2
  D) 2007-01-19, Second stage TVC pitch actuator issue [167]
  D) 2007-02-07, Delay due to range availability [168]
  D) 2007-03-07, Installing upgraded TVC boards [169]
  F) 2007-03-15, Successful static fire [170]
  C) 2007-03-19, Aborted during range source telemetry switchover [171]
  C) 2007-03-20, Abort on chamber pressure 1% low [172]
  LF) 2007-03-20, Launch failure (the one with too much slosh) [173]

Falcon 1 flight 03 - Trailblazer, NanoSail-D, PRESat, Explorers
  D) 2008-06-23, Range availability after finding weld defect [174][175]
  F) 2008-06-25, Successful Static Fire [176]
  C) 2008-08-02, Parameter about 1% out of range (turbopump purge pressure) [177]
  LF) 2008-08-02, Launch failure (the one that hit itself for lack of a few seconds' delay at stage sep) [178]

Falcon 1 flight 04 - RatSat
  F) 2008-09-20, Successful Static Fire [179]
  D) 2008-09-23, Replacing a 2nd stage LOX supply line component [180]
  L) 2008-09-28, Successful launch (the one that finally made it to orbit) [178]

Falcon 1 flight 05 - RazakSAT
  F) 2009-04-15, Successful static fire [181]
  D) 2009-04-20, Delay for "Potential impact of predicted vehicle environments on the satellite" [182]
  L) 2009-07-13, Successful launch (the one that orbited the first real satellite) [183]


->Falcon 9 v1.0
Falcon 9 flight 01 - Test flight 1
  S) 2010-03-09, Abort at spin start T-0:02[44]
  X) 2010-03-11, Weather Scrub of Static Fire Attempt [184]
  F) 2010-03-13, Successful Static Fire [185]
  C) 2010-06-04, Out of range engine parameter, sensor error T-0:01[43]
  L) 2010-06-04, Successful launch (the one with the rolling second stage) [144]

Falcon 9 flight 02 - COTS Demo flight 1
  S) 2010-12-03, Aborted at T-1.1 seconds due to high engine chamber pressure [50]
  S) 2010-12-04, Low gas generator pressure in engine 6. [51]
  F) 2010-12-04, Successful static fire [52]
  C) 2010-12-08, False abort on the Ordnance Interrupter (OI) ground feedback  [53]
  L) 2010-12-08, Successful launch [54]

Falcon 9 flight 03 - COTS Demo flight 2+
payload mass: Dragon + 620 kilograms delivered to ISS, orbit: LEO [155]
core number: Unknown - Expendable - Pad 40
  S) 2012-04-30, Improperly set criteria limit (overly restrictive redline on second stage engine position) at T-0:47 [151]
  F) 2012-04-30, Successful static fire [151]
  D) 2012-05-04, Delay for ongoing Dragon Rendezvous/Prox. software testing and ISS VV schedule [152]
  C) 2012-05-19, Scrub at T-0:00.5 due to high pressure reading in center engine chamber due to a faulty check valve [42][153]
  L) 2012-05-22, Successful launch (the one with the first commercial vehicle to visit the ISS) [154]

Falcon 9 flight 04 - SpaceX CRS-1
  F) 2012-09-29, Successful static fire [32]
  L) 2012-10-07, Successful launch (the one with the engine failure) [33]

Falcon 9 Flight 05 - SpaceX CRS-2
  F) 2013-02-25, Successful static fire [28]
  L) 2013-03-01, Successful launch [29]

->Falcon 9 v1.1

Falcon 9 flight 06 - CASSIOPE (verified)
  S) 2013-09-11, Several issues during tanking [3]
  S) 2013-09-12, Countdown abort [3]
  S) 2013-09-12, Countdown abort [3]
  S) 2013-09-12, Fired with issues [3]

  F) 2013-09-19, Successful static fire [3]
  D) 2013-09-19 - 2013-09-29, Delay due to LRR and mostly due to range conflicts [31]
  L) 2013-09-29, Successful launch [4]

  BL) 2013-09-29, First Boostback/landing burn attempt. First water landing attempt but "spun up due to aero torque, centrifuged and flamed out" (received telemetry only)

Falcon 9 flight 07 - SES-8
  S) 2013-11-20, Unspecified issues, weather [7]
  F) 2013-11-21, Successful static fire (the one with the excessive venting) [7]
  C) 2013-11-25, 1st stage LOX vent/pressure relief valve. [5]
  C) 2013-11-25, Ground electrical power supply. [5]
  C) 2013-11-25, 1st stage LOX vent/pressure relief valve, premature release of ECS duct. [5][41]
  C) 2013-11-28, Abort at ignition by low ramp up of thrust on Merlin 1D engines, T-0:01 [6][40]
  C) 2013-11-28, Oxygen contamination of ground side TEA-TEB T-1:00 [6]

  L) 2013-12-03, Successful launch [6]

Falcon 9 flight 08 - Thaicom 6
  F) 2013-12-29, Successful static fire [26]
  D) 2014-01-03 - 2014-01-06, Delay due to payload fairing issue [26]
  L) 2014-01-06, Successful launch [27]

Falcon 9 flight 09 - SpaceX CRS-3 (verified)
  X) 2014-03-07, Weather scrub of static fire [30]
  F) 2014-03-08, Successful static fire [21]
  D) 2014-03-16 - 2014-03-30, Delay due to payload contamination [22]
  D) 2014-03-30 - 2014-04-14, Delay due to fire damage to range radar [23]
  C) 2014-04-14, Helium leak on 1st stage [24][39]
  L) 2014-04-18, Successful launch [25]
  BL) 2014-04-18, First use of landing legs. NSF video reconstruction effort

Falcon 9 flight 10 - OG2 Mission 1
  S) 2014-05-08, Umbilical connections between the pad and the rocket [15]
  S) 2014-05-09, Helium leak at Composite Overwrap Pressure Vessels (COPV) [16]
  D) 2014-05-10 - 2014-06-20, Delay due to helium leak, range, re-test on the satellites [16,17]
  F) 2014-06-13, Successful static fire [18]
  C) 2014-06-20, Pressure decrease in 2nd stage [19]
  W) 2014-06-21, Weather (the one without the webcast) [19]
  C) 2014-06-22, 1st stage TVC actuator [19]
  D) 2014-06-22 - 2015-07-14, Delay due to TVC actuator, range maintenance [19]
  F) 2014-07-11, 2nd Successful static fire [19]
  C) 2014-07-14, Ground Support Equipment (GSE) [20]
  L) 2014-07-14, Successful launch [20]
  BL) 2014-07-14, Third water landing attempt, first "soft" water landing

Falcon 9 flight 11 - Asiasat 8
  F) 2014-07-31, Successful static fire [13]
  C) 2014-08-06, Abort, 1st stage hydraulic parameters T-0:45 [14]
  L) 2014-08-06, Successful launch [14]

Falcon 9 flight 12 - Asiasat 6
  F) 2014-08-22, Successful static fire [10]
  D) 2014-08-27 - 2014-09-06, Delay due to F9R accident, commonality evaluation [11]
  L) 2014-09-07, Successful launch [12]

Falcon 9 flight 13 - SpaceX CRS-4
  F) 2014-09-17, Successful static fire [8]
  W) 2014-09-19, Weather scrub [9][45]
  L) 2014-09-21, Successful launch [9]

Falcon 9 flight 14 - SpaceX CRS-5
  S) 2014-12-17, Early engine shutdown during static fire [8]
  F) 2014-12-19, Successful static fire [1]
  D) 2014-12-19 - 2015-01-05, Delay due to static fire issue, ISS beta angles and holidays [1]
  C) 2015-01-06, Z axis actuator drift on the 2nd stage thrust vector control system, Τ-1:21 [2][38]
  L) 2015-01-10, Successful launch (the one with the ASDS crash landing) [34]
  BL) 2015-01-10, First ASDS landing attempt at JRTI, First use of Hypersonic Grid fins (ran out of hydraulic fluid), 45 degree crash/explosion

Falcon 9 flight 15 - DSCOVR
  F) 2015-01-31, Successful static fire [35]
  R) 2015-02-08, Scrub due to AF radar outage, Τ-2:26. Issue with 1st stage video transmitter (not needed for launch). There may have been a non-public vehicle issue that would have scrubbed launch as well [36][37]
  D) 2015-02-09, Weather delay[36]
  W) 2015-02-10, Weather scrub, red upper level winds T-12:41[36]
  L) 2015-02-11, Successful launch (the one with the ASDS call off due to 10m waves) [36]
  BL) 2015-02-11, No ASDS - 10m waves - "soft, precise water landing"

Falcon 9 Flight 16 - ABS-3A & Eutelsat 115 West B
  F) 2015-02-25, Successful static fire [46]
  L) 2015-03-02, Successful launch (The one with the 2 electric satellites) [47]

Falcon 9 Flight 17 - SpaceX CRS-6
  F) 2015-04-11, Successful static fire [48]
  W) 2015-04-13, Weather scrub, anvil rule, T-3:07 [48]
  L) 2015-04-14, Successful launch (the one where the 1st stage landed and tipped over)[48]
  BL) 2015-04-14, Second landing attempt at JRTI, high lateral velocity (because of stuck valve), tipped over.

Falcon 9 Flight 18 - TurkmenAlem52/MonacoSat
  F) 2015-04-22, Successful static fire [56]
  L) 2015-04-27, Successful launch (the one that was swapped with CRS-6 due to a helium bottle issue) [55]

Falcon 9 Flight 19 - SpaceX CRS-7
  F) 2015-06-26, Successful static fire [57]
  LF) 2015-06-28, Launch failure (the one where the second stage went kaboom 139 seconds into first stage flight) [58]

Falcon 9 Flight 21 - Jason-3
payload mass: 510 kilograms, orbit: LEO 1,336km [62]
  F) 2016-01-11, Successful static fire [63]
  L) 2016-01-17, Successful launch (the one that was the last F9 v1.1)[62]
  BL) 2016-01-17, Successful barge landing at JRTI but a leg lockout didn’t latch, so it tipped over after landing [62]

->Falcon 9 FT
Falcon 9 Flight 20 - ORBCOMM-2 RTF Mission
core number: 1019
  S) 2015-12-16, Unsuccessful static fire [59]
  S) 2015-12-17, Unsuccessful static fire, deep cryo liquid oxygen presenting some challenges [59]
  F) 2015-12-18, Successful static fire [59]
  D) 2015-12-20, 24h delay for improved odds for landing attempt and better analysis for subcooled LOX (Possibly due to wind gusts that affect landing and LOX temps) [60]
  L) 2015-12-21, Successful launch (the one with the epic landing at LZ1)[61]
  BR) 2015-12-21, Successful landing at LZ1[61]
  S) 2016-01-14, Static fire scrub (ground side issues) [67]
  F) 2016-01-15, Successful static fire (engine 9 showed thrust fluctuations. Maybe some debris ingestion) [67]

Falcon 9 Flight 22 - SES-9
payload mass: 5,271 kilograms, orbit: geosynchronous, delivered orbit: 334 x 40648 km x 27.96° [65], [69]
core number: 1020
  F) 2016-02-22, Successful static fire [64]
  D) 2016-02-24, 24h delay to ensure liquid oxygen temperatures are as cold as possible in an effort to maximize performance of the vehicle (due to high winds) [66]
  C) 2016-02-25, Scrub at T-1:41, LOX loading issues [65]
  R) 2016-02-28, Delay, wayward boat got into range [65]
  C) 2016-02-28, Scrub at T-0, aborted on low thrust alarm. Rising oxygen temps due to hold for boat and helium bubble triggered alarm [65]
  D) 2016-03-01, Delay due to extreme high altitude wind shear [68]
  L) 2016-03-05, Successful launch (the one with the difficult landing attempt) [65]
  BL) 2016-03-05, Hard landing at OCISLY (3 engine landing burn, run out of propellant, no boostback burn) [65][74]

Falcon 9 Flight 23 - CRS-8
payload mass: Dragon + 3,136 kilograms delivered to ISS, orbit: LEO, delivered orbit: 357 x 211 km x 51.66° [71],[73]       
core number: 1021 (flight #1)
  (McGregor) 2016-02-05, Successful static fire [72]
  (McGregor) 2016-02-08, GSE failure damaged most of the first stage’s engine nozzles [72]

  F) 2016-04-06, Successful static fire [70]
  L) 2016-04-08, Successful launch (the one with the webcam stalking at port Canaveral) [71]
  BR) 2016-04-08, Successful landing at OCISLY [71]

Falcon 9 Flight 24 - JCSAT-14
payload mass: 4,696.2 kilograms, orbit: geosynchronous, delivered orbit: 189 x 35957 km x 23.70° [75] [78]
core number: 1022
  F) 2016-05-01, Successful static fire (no payload) [74]
  D) 2016-05-05, Weather delay [76]
  L) 2016-05-06, Successful launch (the one with the first GTO barge landing) [77]
  BR) 2016-05-06, Successful landing at OCISLY (3 engine landing burn) [77]
  F) 2016-07-28, Successful full duration static fire @ McGregor [91]
  F) 2016-07-29, Successful full duration static fire @ McGregor [91]
  F) 2016-07-30, Successful full duration static fire @ McGregor [91]
  F) 2016-10-05, Confirmation of 8th static fire @ McGregor [98]


Falcon 9 Flight 25 - Thaicom-8
payload mass: ~3,200 kilograms, orbit: geosynchronous, delivered orbit: 349 x 90392 km x 21.21° [81]
core number: 1023
  F) 2016-05-24, Successful static fire (with payload) [79]
  C) 2016-05-26, Scrub due to an issue with an upper stage engine actuator [80]
  L) 2016-05-27, Successful launch (the one with the first stage landing cam) [80]
  BR) 2016-05-27, Successful landing at OCISLY (1-3-1 engine landing burn) [80]

Falcon 9 Flight 26 - Eutelsat 117W B & ABS 2A
payload mass: 4,200 kilograms, orbit: geosynchronous
delivered orbit: 395 x 62591 km x 24.68°(Eutelsat), 398 x 62750 km x 24.68°(ABS) [83] [84]
  D) 2016-06-10, 2 day static fire delay probably due to range conflict with Delta IV Heavy at the pad [85]
  F) 2016-06-12, Successful static fire [85]
  L) 2016-06-15, Successful launch (the one with the Delta IV Heavy conflict) [82]
  BL) 2016-06-15, Hard landing at OCISLY (3 engine landing burn, low thrust on 1 engine) [82][86]

Falcon 9 Flight 27 - CRS-9
payload mass: Dragon + 2,257 kilograms to ISS including IDA-2, orbit: LEO [88]
delivered orbit: 391 x 393km  x 51.6637° [90]
  F) 2016-07-16, Successful static fire [87]
  L) 2016-07-18, Successful launch (the one with the second land landing)[89]
  BR) 2016-07-18, Successful landing at LZ1[89]

Falcon 9 Flight 28 - JCSAT-16
payload mass: 4,600 kilograms, orbit: geosynchronous [94]
delivered orbit:  184 x 35912 km x 20.85° [96]
  F) 2016-08-11, Successful static fire (no payload) [92] [93]
  L) 2016-08-14, Successful launch (the one with the first GTO 1 engine landing burn) [95]
  BR) 2016-08-14, Successful landing at OCISLY (1 engine landing burn) [95]

Falcon 9 Flight 29 - AMOS-6
payload mass: 5,500 kilograms, orbit: geosynchronous [97]
  S) 2016-09-01, Failure during prop loading for static fire, loss of payload (the one where the static fire went kaboom) [97]

Falcon 9 Flight 30 - Iridium NEXT-1 RTF Mission
payload mass: 9,600 kilograms (10x860kg + 1000kg dispenser)[99] orbit: 780 km x 780 km, 86.4° [104]
delivered orbit:618 x 627 km x 86.66° [103]
core number: 1029 - Droneship landing - Pad SLC-4E
  S) 2017-01-03, Scrub due to a minor GSE issue [101]
  F) 2017-01-05, Successful static fire (no payload) [100]
  L) 2017-01-14, Successful launch (the one with the live rocketcam S1 landing) [102]
  BR) 2017-01-14, Successful landing at JRTI (1 engine landing burn) [102]

Falcon 9 Flight 31 - CRS-10
payload mass: Dragon + 2,490 kilograms to ISS including SAGE-III, STP-H5, orbit: LEO [105]
delivered orbit: 363 x 209km  x 51.63° [106]
core number: 1031 - RTLS - Pad 39A
  F) 2017-02-12, Successful static fire [105]
  C) 2017-02-18, Scrub at T-13sec due to an issue with an upper stage engine actuator [105]
  L) 2017-02-19, Successful launch (the one with the first 39A launch)[105]
  BR) 2017-02-19, Successful landing at LZ1[105]

Falcon 9 Flight 32 - Echostar 23
payload mass: 5,500 kilograms, orbit: geosynchronous [108]
delivered orbit:  179 x 35903 km x 22.43° [109]
core number: 1030 - expendable - Pad 39A
  S) 2017-03-07, Scrub due to an unspecified issue [107]
  F) 2017-03-09, Successful static fire [107]
  W) 2017-03-14, Scrub due to high winds [108]
  L) 2017-03-16, Successful launch (the one with the first non-NASA launch from 39A)[108]

Falcon 9 Flight 33 - SES-10
payload mass: 5,300 kilograms, orbit: geosynchronous [112]
delivered orbit: 247 x 35673 km x 26.18° [113]
core number: 1021.2 - Droneship landing - Pad 39A
  F) 2017-03-27, Successful static fire (5 second burn) [109]
  L) 2017-03-30, Successful launch (the one with the first reflight of a core stage)[110]
  BR) 2017-03-30, Successful landing at OCISLY[110]

Falcon 9 Flight 34 - NROL-76
payload mass: classified,  orbit: classified
delivered orbit: 398 x 401 km x 49.95° (classified, was found at this orbit by Leo Barhorst) [120]
core number: 1032 - RTLS - Pad 39A
  F) 2017-04-25, Successful static fire [115]
  C) 2017-04-30, Scrub at T-52sec due to an "out of family" TOTO (Temperature Ox. Tank Outlet) sensor on the first stage [117]
  L) 2017-05-01, Successful launch (the one with the awesome recovery video) [114]
  BR) 2017-05-01, Successful landing at LZ1 [114]

Falcon 9 Flight 35 - Inmarsat 5 F4
payload mass: 6,070 kilograms, orbit: geosynchronous [118]
delivered orbit: 384 x 70181 km x 24.47° (GTO-1570)[119]
core number: 1034 - expendable - Pad 39A
  F) 2017-05-11, Successful static fire [117]
  L) 2017-05-15, Successful launch (the one where they moved from Falcon Heavy to Falcon 9)[118]

Falcon 9 Flight 36 - CRS-11
payload mass: Dragon + 2708 kilograms to ISS including NICER, ROSA, and MUSES,  orbit: LEO [121]
delivered orbit: 204 x 355 x 51.6° [137]
core number: 1035 - RTLS - Pad 39A
  F) 2017-05-28, Successful static fire [122]
  W) 2017-06-01, Scrub at T-25min:38sec due to lightning strike within 10 nmi [123][124]
  L) 2017-06-03, Successful launch (the one with the first reused Dragon capsule)[121]
  BR) 2017-06-03, Successful landing at LZ1[121]

Falcon 9 Flight 37 - Bulgariasat-1
payload mass: 3669kg, orbit: GTO [125]
delivered orbit: 210 x 65641 km x 23.91° [126]
core number: 1029.2 - Droneship landing - Pad 39A
  F) 2017-06-15, Successful static fire [125]
  D) 2017-06-19, Mission delay in order to replace a faulty valve in the fairing separation system [125]
  L) 2017-06-23, Successful launch (the one with the booster that landed on two oceans) [125]
  BR) 2017-06-23, Successful landing on OCISLY [125]

Falcon 9 Flight 38 - Iridium NEXT-2
payload mass: 9,600 kilograms (10 x 860kg + 1000kg dispenser) [99] orbit: 780 km x 780 km, 86.4° [104]
delivered orbit: 610 x 625 km x 86.67° [127]
core number: 1036 - Droneship landing - Pad SLC-4E
  F) 2017-06-20, Successful static fire [128]
  L) 2017-06-25, Successful launch (the one where they launched 2 rockets in a weekend) [129]
  BR) 2017-06-25, Successful landing on JRTI [129]

Falcon 9 Flight 39 - Intelsat 35e
payload mass: 6,761kg, orbit: GTO [131]
delivered orbit: 296 x 42742 km x 25.85° [132]
core number: 1037 - expendable - Pad 39A
  F) 2017-06-29, Successful static fire [130]
  C) 2017-07-02, Scrub at T-09sec due an issue with the GNC criteria [131]
  C) 2017-07-03, Scrub at T-09sec due to an issue with the ground computers [131]
  D) 2017-07-04, Mission delay in order to review all rocket and pad systems [133]
  L) 2017-07-05, Successful launch (the one where they took 3 attempts over the July 4th weekend to launch a naked rocket) [131]

Falcon 9 Flight 40 - CRS-12
payload mass: Dragon +  2,910 kilograms to ISS including ISS-CREAM, orbit: LEO [134]
delivered orbit: 202 x 358 x 51.6° [136]
core number:  B1039 - RTLS - Pad 39A
  F) 2017-08-10, Successful static fire [135]
  L) 2017-08-14, Successful launch (the one with the one month gap due to range maintenance)[134]
  BR) 2017-08-14, Successful landing at LZ1[134]

Falcon 9 Flight 41 - Formosat-5
payload mass: 475 kilograms [138] orbit: SSO 720 km x  720 km, 98.28° [139] 
delivered orbit: 730 km x 717 km x 99.26° [140] 
core number: B1038 - Droneship landing - Pad SLC-4E
  F) 2017-08-19, Successful static fire [141]
  L) 2017-08-24, Successful launch (the one with the tiny satellite that was originally manifested on Falcon 1e) [138]
  BR) 2017-08-24, Successful landing on JRtI [138]

Falcon 9 Flight 42 - OTV-5 (X-37B Spaceplane)
payload mass:  classified orbit: classified
delivered orbit: classified   
core number:  B1040 - RTLS - Pad 39A [142]
  F) 2017-08-31, Successful static fire [142]
  L) 2017-09-07, Successful launch (the one launched in the teeth of a hurricane) [143]
  BR) 2017-09-07, Successful landing at LZ1 [143]

Falcon 9 Flight 43 - Iridium NEXT-3
payload mass: 9,600 kilograms (10 x 860kg + 1000kg dispenser) [99] orbit: 780 km x 780 km, 86.4° [104]
delivered orbit: 612 x 627 km x 86.68° [147]
core number: B1041 - Droneship landing - Pad SLC-4E
  F) 2017-10-05, Successful static fire [145]
  L) 2017-10-09, Successful launch (the one with the impressive plume interaction between S1 and S2) [146]
  BR) 2017-10-09, Successful landing on JRTI [146]

Falcon 9 Flight 44 - SES 11/Echostar 105
payload mass: 5,200 kilograms, orbit: GTO [149]
delivered orbit: 309 x 40519 km x 27.89° [150]
core number: B1031.2 - Droneship landing - Pad 39A
  F) 2017-10-02, Successful static fire (5 second burn) [148]
  D) 2017-10-07, Mission delay in order to resolve an issue with a first stage engine [149]
  L) 2017-10-11, Successful launch (the one with the sparks and glowing gridfins on reentry) [149]
  BR) 2017-10-11, Successful landing on OCISLY [149]

Falcon 9 Flight 45 - Koreasat-5A
payload mass: 3,700 kilograms, orbit: GTO [186]
delivered orbit: 285 x 50185 km x 22.0° [158]
core number: B1042 - Droneship landing - Pad 39A
  F) 2017-10-26, Successful static fire (5 second burn) [156]
  L) 2017-10-30, Successful launch (the one which landed with its pants on fire) [157]
  BR) 2017-10-30, Successful landing on OCISLY [157]


----Sources----
[1] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/12/spacex-static-fire-falcon-9-crs-5/
[2] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/01/spacex-dragon-crs-5-launch-historic-core-return/
[3] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2013/09/falcon-9-v1-1-hot-fire-ahead-cassiope-mission/
[4] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2013/09/spacex-debut-falcon-9-v1-1-cassiope-launch/
[5] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2013/11/falcon-9-aiming-thanksgiving-launch-ses-8/
[6] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2013/12/spacex-falcon-9-v1-1-milestone-ses-8-launch/
[7] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2013/11/spacex-falcon-9-v1-1-hot-fire-slc-40/
[8] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/09/falcon-9-v1-1-static-fire-crs-4-launch/
[9] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/09/spacex-launch-dragon-crs-4-mission/
[10] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/08/spacex-static-fire-asiasat-6-test-failure/
[11] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/08/spacex-delay-asiasat-6-launch/
[12] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/09/spacex-falcon-9-asiasat-6-mission/
[13] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/07/falcon-9-static-fire-test-ahead-asiasat-8-mission/
[14] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/08/spacex-falcon-9-v1-1-asiasat-8-launch/
[15] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/05/spacex-falcon-9-static-fire-test/
[16] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/05/spacex-targets-june-11-falcon-9-orbcomm/
[17] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/06/commercial-duo-refine-upcoming-launch-dates/
[18] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/06/spacex-completes-falcon-9-static-fire-delays-launch/
[19] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/07/spacex-conducts-static-fire-next-falcon-9/
[20] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/07/spacex-falcon-9-v1-1-orbcomm-og2-mission/
[21] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/03/falcon-9-v1-1-static-fire-crs-3-mission/
[22] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/03/sewing-machine-contamination-spacexs-crs-3-dragon/
[23] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/03/eastern-range-radar-upcoming-launches/
[24] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=34476.15
[25] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/04/spacex-crs-3-dragon-new-milestones/
[26] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/01/spacex-falcon-9-v1-1-static-fire-test-thaicom-6-launch/
[27] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/01/spacex-falcon-9-v1-1-launch-thaicom-6/
[28] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=30700.msg1017390#msg1017390
[29] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2013/03/spacex-milestone-falcon9-launch-dragon-crs2/
[30] http://www.spaceflightinsider.com/space-flight-news/spacex-delays-static-test-fire-falcon-9-crs-3-mission/
[31] http://spacenews.com/37251pad-interface-anomalies-range-conflicts-push-falcon-9-11-launch-to-late/
[32] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2012/09/falcon-9-hot-fires-engines-iss-prepares-dragons-arrival/
[33] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2012/10/falcon-9loft-dragon-crs-1-mission-iss-attempt1/
[34] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/01/spacex-dragon-crs-5-launch-historic-core-return/
[35] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/01/spacex-static-fire-test-dscovr-mission/
[36] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/02/spacex-falcon-9-dscovr-mission/
[37] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TWlnkVK5xpQ#t=1053&feature=youtu.be
[38] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvnSRlmI1NY&t=1m18s&feature=youtu.be
[39] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zic9hqrY5Uk&feature=youtu.be
[40] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5v0k_0PTLnI&feature=youtu.be
[41] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDm91UdkeCk&t=41s&feature=youtu.be
[42] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwAcq7lFjMQ&t=1m48s&feature=youtu.be
[43] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNl4eAy2yaM&t=22s&feature=youtu.be
[44] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_0KqS13weI&t=1m&feature=youtu.be
[45] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7MBy9abJcM&t=2528&feature=youtu.be
[46] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/02/legless-falcon-9-static-fire-ahead-launch/
[47] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/03/spacex-falcon-9-debut-dual-satellite-mission/
[48] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/04/spacex-falcon-9-crs-6-dragon-stage-return/
[50] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=23454.msg665911#msg665911
[51] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=23454.msg666165#msg666165
[52] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=23454.msg666253#msg666253
[53] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=23516.msg668072#msg668072
[54] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=23516.msg668153#msg668153
[55] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/04/spacex-falcon-9-loft-turkmenistans-first-satellite
[56] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/04/spacex-ready-launch-key-commercial-crew-test
[57] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/06/spacex-static-fire-falcon-9-crs7-mission
[58] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/06/falcon-9-crs-7-dragon-commute-orbit
[59] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/12/spacex-static-fire-falcon-9-og-2-rtf
[60] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=38667.msg1460721#msg1460721
[61] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/12/spacex-rtf-core-return-attempt-og2
[62] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016/01/spacex-launch-jason-3
[63] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016/01/spacex-preparing-west-coast-jason-3-launch-with-last-falcon-9-v1-1
[64] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016/02/spacex-falcon-9-static-fire-ahead-ses-9-launch
[65] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016/03/spacex-falcon9-ses-9-launch
[66] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=39348.msg1495393#msg1495393
[67] http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016/01/spacex-fire-up-falcon-9-first-stage-slc-40
[68] https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/704770247769722880
[69] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=39348.msg1499997#msg1499997
[70] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016/04/spacex-falcon-9-static-fire-crs-8-mission
[71] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016/04/spacex-dragon-rtf-falcon9-launch
[72] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016/02/spacex-prepares-ses-9-mission-dragons-return
[73] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=39537.msg1514345#msg1514345
[74] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016/05/spacex-static-fire-jcsat-14-mission
[75] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=40231.msg1528689#msg1528689
[76] https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/727873475466153984
[77] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016/05/falcon-9-jcsat-14-launch
[78] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=39843.msg1529873#msg1529873
[79] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016/05/spacex-line-up-falcon-9-upcoming-missions
[80] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016/05/falcon-9-thaicom-8-launch
[81] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=40182.msg1541194#msg1541194
[82] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016/06/spacex-falcon-9-dual-satellite-launch
[83] http://www.zarya.info/Diaries/Launches/Launches.php?year=2016#038
[84] http://spaceflightnow.com/2016/06/14/mission-events-timeline-for-falcon-9s-launch-for-abs-and-eutelsat
[85] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016/06/spacex-readies-falcon-9-reuse-testing
[86] https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/743097337782763521
[87] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016/07/spacex-static-fire-falcon-9-rocket-crs-9-launch
[88] http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/spacex_crs-9_mission_overview.pdf
[89] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016/07/spacex-falcon-9-crs-9-dragon-launch
[90] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=40577.msg1561436#msg1561436
[91] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016/07/spacex-returned-falcon-9-booster-mcgregor
[92] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVq-vd1QMTM&feature=youtu.be
[93] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016/08/spacex-static-fire-test-jcsat-16s-falcon-9
[94] https://www.satbeams.com/satellites?id=2652
[95] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016/08/spacex-second-jcsat-launch-via-falcon-9
[96] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=40769.msg1569455#msg1569455
[97] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016/09/falcon-9-explodes-amos-6-static-fire
[98] http://spacenews.com/spacexs-shotwell-on-falcon-9-inquiry-discounts-for-reused-rockets-and-silicon-valleys-test-and-fail-ethos
[99] http://spacenews.com/iridiums-spacex-launch-slowed-by-vandenberg-bottleneck/
[100] https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/817123579343028227
[101] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=41751.msg1625643#msg1625643
[102] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/01/spacex-return-to-flight-iridium-next-launch/
[103] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=41751.msg1630306#msg1630306
[104] http://space.skyrocket.de/doc_sdat/iridium-next.htm
[105] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/02/spacex-historic-debut-launch-39a-crs-10-dragon/
[106] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=42182.msg1644626#msg1644626
[107] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/03/spacex-falcon-9-echostar-23-slc-40-return
[108] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/03/falcon-9-expendable-echostar-23/
[109] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=41932.msg1655058#msg1655058
[110] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/03/ses-10-static-fire-spacex-first-core-re-flight/
[111] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/03/spacex-historic-falcon-9-re-flight-ses-10/
[112] https://airbusdefenceandspace.com/newsroom/news-and-features/airbus-defence-and-space-signs-a-new-satellite-contract-with-ses/
[113] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=42544.msg1662116#msg1662116
[114] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/04/spacex-static-fire-tests-spy-sat-rocket-falcon-heavy-core/
[115] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/05/spacex-launch-cadence-new-goals/
[116] https://spaceflightnow.com/2017/04/30/spacex-launch-scrubbed-in-final-minute-of-countdown/
[117] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/05/falcon-9-static-fire-1-inmarsat5f4/
[118] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/05/expendable-falcon-9-inmarsat-5-f4-launch/
[119] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=42846.msg1679199#msg1679199
[120] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=42639.msg1682404#msg1682404
[121] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/06/spacex-falcon-9-crs-11-dragon-iss-100th-39a/
[122] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/05/spacex-static-fire-crs-11-falcon-9/
[123] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=42972.msg1685251#msg1685251
[124] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=42972.msg1685271#msg1685271
[125] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/06/spacex-falcon-9-second-flight-bulgariasat-1-mission/
[126] https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=42913.msg1694051#msg1694051
[127] https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=43149.msg1695259#msg1695259
[128] https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=43149.msg1692164#msg1692164
[129] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/06/spacex-falcon-9-iridium-next-2-launch/
[130] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/06/spacex-returns-boosters-third-static-fire-test/
[131] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/07/spacex-launch-surge-falcon-9-launch-intelsat-35e/
[132] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=43211.msg1699923#msg1699923
[133] https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/882117255407980545
[134] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/08/spacex-falcon-9-launch-crs-12-dragon-mission-iss
[135] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/08/spacex-falcon-9-static-fire-falcon-heavy-waits/
[136] https://twitter.com/planet4589/status/897221206872662016
[137] https://twitter.com/planet4589/status/898705460651466752
[138] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/08/falcon-9-vandenberg-launch-formosat-5/
[139] http://www.spacex.com/sites/spacex/files/formosat5presskit.pdf
[140] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=43396.msg1716223#msg1716223
[141] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/08/spacex-static-fire-formosat-5-falcon-9-asds-landing/
[142] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/08/spacex-final-preps-falcon-9s-first-x-37b/
[143] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/09/spacex-first-x-37b-launch-falcon-9/
[144] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2010/06/live-spacex-attempt1-maiden-launch-falcon-9/
[145] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/10/spacex-falcon-9-iridium-3-static-fire-vandenberg-manifest-realigns/
[146] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/10/spacex-falcon-9-launch-third-set-iridium-satellites/
[147] https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=43777.msg1734543#msg1734543
[148] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/10/recycled-falcon-9-static-fire-ses-11/
[149] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/10/falcon-9-second-launch-week-ses-11/
[150] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=43728.msg1735686#msg1735686
[151] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2012/05/falcon-9s-merlin-engines-for-may-7-target/
[152] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2012/05/iss-schedule-dragon-launch-19-may-future-manifest-outlook/
[153] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2012/05/spacex-falcon-9-send-dragon-to-iss/
[154] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2012/05/spacexs-dragon-achieving-milestones-falcon-9-ride/
[155] https://www.nasa.gov/pdf/649910main_cots2_presskit_051412.pdf
[156] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/10/spacex-static-fire-falcon-9-koreasat-5a/
[157] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/10/falcon-9-koreasat-5a-nasa-approves-flown-boosters/
[158] https://twitter.com/planet4589/status/925127539131060225
[159] http://www.spacex.com/news/2005/february-2005-may-2005
[160] http://www.spacex.com/news/2005/february-2005-may-2005
[161] https://spaceflightnow.com/falcon/050527frf/
[162] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=918.msg10654#msg10654
[163] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=1043.msg12801#msg12801
[164] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=1431.msg19956#msg19956
[165] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=1431.msg20078#msg20078
[166] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=3533.msg52550#msg52550
[167] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=5101.msg104272#msg104272
[168] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=5101.msg109976#msg109976
[169] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=5101.msg117933#msg117933
[170] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=5101.msg121395#msg121395
[171] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=5101.msg122306#msg122306
[172] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=7169.msg122640#msg122640
[173] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=7169.msg1037430#msg1037430
[174] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=13179.msg292907#msg292907
[175] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=13179.msg293795#msg293795
[176] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=13179.msg293428#msg293428
[177] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=13939.msg303651#msg303651
[178] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2008/09/live-space-xs-falcon-i-to-make-fourth-attempt-for-success/
[179] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=13507.msg316895#msg316895
[180] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=13507.msg317354#msg317354
[181] http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/hyperbola/2009/04/spacex-no-rocket-damage-link-t.html (link is dead, original blog entry copied below via the Wayback Machine)
Quote
SPACEX: No rocket damage link to Razaksat delay
By Rob Coppinger on April 22, 2009 12:19 AM
Space Exploration Technologies has responded to Hyperbola's enquiry about the last minute announcement of the delay to the company's first commercial launch with its Falcon 1 rocket, scheduled for 20 April, and denied there is any damage to the rocket:
We are re-evaluating predicted launch vehicle environments on the satellite to ensure all systems are ready to support a successful launch. As for this being a "late" find, flushing out this type of potential issue is exactly why we do pre-launch tests and checkouts. Contrary to other reports, there is no damage to the launch vehicle (all prelaunch checks were accomplished successfully, including the successful static test fire of the vehicle last Wednesday). We are evaluating the extent of the delay, and I will let you know as soon as we have a new date for both RazakSAT and Falcon 9.
[182] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=16054.msg393169#msg393169
[183] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2009/07/live-falcon-1-razaksat-for-malaysias-atsb/
[184] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=20799.msg559044#msg559044
[185] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=20799.msg559800#msg559800
[186] https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/worldwide/space/press-release/another-thales-alenia-space-built-satellite-now-orbit



----Thanks----
ClayJar, Erazzzer, Proponent, eriblo, rower2000, saliva_sweet, heweheweh, meekGee, llanitedave, savuporo,
foltster, deruch, Bargemanos, Smoke-away, Comga, Swoopert, mikelepage, EspenU, dmc6960, Jonathan McDowell
« Last Edit: 10/31/2017 08:30 AM by cartman »

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #1 on: 06/17/2016 05:11 AM »
reserved

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #2 on: 06/17/2016 05:11 AM »
reserved

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #3 on: 06/17/2016 05:11 AM »
reserved

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #4 on: 06/17/2016 05:11 AM »
reserved

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #5 on: 06/17/2016 05:12 AM »
reserved

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #6 on: 06/17/2016 05:14 AM »
reserved

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #7 on: 06/17/2016 05:14 AM »
reserved

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #8 on: 07/18/2016 08:55 PM »
Log updated for CRS-9.

Has anybody seen any news articles about the two landed boosters that went to Hawthorne and McGregor?
« Last Edit: 07/18/2016 08:55 PM by cartman »

Online abaddon

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1506
  • Liked: 938
  • Likes Given: 752
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #9 on: 07/18/2016 09:02 PM »
Not sure what you're looking for, but there is this regarding the Orbcomm 2 booster: http://www.floridatoday.com/story/tech/science/space/2016/07/09/historic-spacex-booster-approved-display-california/86709956/

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #10 on: 07/18/2016 09:18 PM »
Thank you for that, its a good start, but I am looking for a news article with the date of arrival of the booster to Hawthorne. I only have some saved images from facebook posts that point to a ~2016-06-19 arrival, but i would like to have a better quality source if possible.

Actually the best one I can find is this one https://www.facebook.com/groups/spacexgroup/permalink/10154325854221318/
« Last Edit: 07/18/2016 09:19 PM by cartman »

Offline mikelepage

Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #11 on: 08/05/2016 08:28 AM »
Flights 20 & 21 are out of order ;)
Great effort mate!

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #12 on: 08/05/2016 08:42 AM »
Flights 20 & 21 are out of order ;)
Great effort mate!
Thanks for your kind words!
the flights are out of order because I have grouped launches by rocket type, so I had to put flight 21 before flight 20 in order to keep it in the F9 v1.1 group.

Offline mikelepage

Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #13 on: 08/05/2016 11:00 AM »
Flights 20 & 21 are out of order ;)
Great effort mate!
Thanks for your kind words!
the flights are out of order because I have grouped launches by rocket type, so I had to put flight 21 before flight 20 in order to keep it in the F9 v1.1 group.
Aha right, that makes sense.  Sorry I had actually noticed that and realised the rationale behind it before, I just did a double-take this time around because I keep expecting to see the successful landing immediately after the launch failure.  I remember it that way because watching flight 20 live was easily one of the most dramatic successes in space that I've been able to watch live, and the achievement was made all the more dramatic by their doing it on the return to flight.

Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #14 on: 08/05/2016 11:16 AM »
Flight 24 booster is missing its 3 so far static fires at McGregor.

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #15 on: 08/06/2016 01:45 PM »
Flight 24 booster is missing its 3 so far static fires at McGregor.
Thanks, I just added them.

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #16 on: 08/14/2016 06:13 AM »
First post updated for JCSAT-16

Quote
Falcon 9 Flight 28 - JCSAT-16 (not verified)
payload mass: 4,600 kilograms, orbit: geosynchronous [94]
  F) 2016-08-11, Successful static fire (no payload) [92] [93]
  L) 2016-08-14, Successful launch (the one with the first GTO 1 engine landing burn) [95]
  BR) 2016-08-14, Successful landing at OCISLY (1 engine landing burn) [95]

Online luinil

Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #17 on: 08/16/2016 05:53 AM »
Is there a reason that when the landing fails the barge is called ASDS and when it succeeds it is called by it's name OCISLY?

Offline mikelepage

Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #18 on: 08/16/2016 08:02 AM »
Is there a reason that when the landing fails the barge is called ASDS and when it succeeds it is called by it's name OCISLY?

Different authors ;) (the use of "ASDS" was from my original contribution to the thread)

A question of timing though: does anyone remember when the original Just Read The Instructions (JRTI) was swapped out for Of Course I Still Love You (OCISLY) at Port Canaveral? Confusingly, the new west-coast barge is now called JRTI - I leave it to Cartman to decide if he feels pedantic enough to call it JRTI2  ;)

Offline mikelepage

Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #19 on: 08/16/2016 08:21 AM »
Ah, so JRTI1 was retired following the launch failure.

To clarify:
Flight 14 was JRTI1
Flight 17 was JRTI1
Flight 21 (Vandenberg), was JRTI2
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016/01/spacex-launch-jason-3/

and Flight 26 was OCISLY
« Last Edit: 08/16/2016 08:25 AM by mikelepage »

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1973
  • US
  • Liked: 1386
  • Likes Given: 991
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #20 on: 08/16/2016 09:12 PM »
Should this thread be moved to the SpaceX Missions Section instead of the SpaceX General Section?

Offline russianhalo117

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3803
  • AR USA / Berlin, DE / Moscow, RF
  • Liked: 733
  • Likes Given: 448
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #21 on: 08/16/2016 09:25 PM »
Should this thread be moved to the SpaceX Missions Section instead of the SpaceX General Section?
Ask the mods since it is a pinned duplicate thread. It would require some work to merge the multiple threads together.
« Last Edit: 08/16/2016 09:45 PM by russianhalo117 »

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #22 on: 08/16/2016 09:53 PM »
Ah, so JRTI1 was retired following the launch failure.

To clarify:
Flight 14 was JRTI1
Flight 17 was JRTI1
Flight 21 (Vandenberg), was JRTI2
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016/01/spacex-launch-jason-3/

and Flight 26 was OCISLY
Thank you for posting this information, I used it to update the first post with the correct name of the barge ASDS for each sea landing attempt.


Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8618
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 5370
  • Likes Given: 3552
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #23 on: 08/17/2016 12:08 AM »
Should this thread be moved to the SpaceX Missions Section instead of the SpaceX General Section?
Ask the mods since it is a pinned duplicate thread. It would require some work to merge the multiple threads together.
Duplicate? I didn't think it was duplicate. Do tell...

 (once this is sorted these metaposts will disappear)
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline russianhalo117

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3803
  • AR USA / Berlin, DE / Moscow, RF
  • Liked: 733
  • Likes Given: 448
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #24 on: 08/17/2016 01:33 AM »
Should this thread be moved to the SpaceX Missions Section instead of the SpaceX General Section?
Ask the mods since it is a pinned duplicate thread. It would require some work to merge the multiple threads together.
Duplicate? I didn't think it was duplicate. Do tell...

 (once this is sorted these metaposts will disappear)
Well we have four threads of this one (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=40231.0) that is the same or similar to the newer one im posting this reply in.

So they need to be merged one way or the other.

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1973
  • US
  • Liked: 1386
  • Likes Given: 991
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #25 on: 08/17/2016 01:53 AM »
Well we have four threads of this one (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=40231.0) that is the same or similar to the newer one im posting this reply in.

So they need to be merged one way or the other.

This thread is specifically to record past launches.  We were only going to show a limited amount of recent launches (current year?) in the manifest thread.

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8618
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 5370
  • Likes Given: 3552
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #26 on: 08/17/2016 02:09 AM »
OK I see what you mean.

Manifest Update AND DISCUSSION (emphasis mine) has 4 threads because when a thread gets to a certain size it becomes difficult  to work with and we start a new one. So 3 of those are NOT dups, they are archives.

And scrubs (another thread we have), launch log and manifest are different things... it would be very unwieldy to try to merge all of them together.

No merging needed.

Moving it to missions? could argue that either way.
« Last Edit: 08/17/2016 02:10 AM by Lar »
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Online luinil

Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #27 on: 08/19/2016 02:30 AM »
I see, thanks

Offline gregpet

  • Member
  • Posts: 46
  • Liked: 14
  • Likes Given: 40
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #28 on: 08/19/2016 02:37 AM »
I just found this. Really cool thread.

Thank you for everyone's efforts!

Offline Jakusb

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 541
  • NL
  • Liked: 290
  • Likes Given: 84
The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #29 on: 08/25/2016 11:11 AM »
Maybe good to note that F9-20 (or should this be 21?) Orbcom2 is now on Display and thus retired
Also there are reports on Reddit that a 4th static fire might have taken place for jcsat-14
And Reddit seem to have some core id's that might be useful to mention here too, especially when reuse starts happening...
The redditors report test fire #4 for JCSAT-14. 

Takes a lickin' and keeps on tickin'....
Do you have link to source?

Edit: I searched Reddit, Twitter, everywhere but found nothing...

Zucal reported a firing after Amos 6 came down. From the reddit thread above,

https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/4ymvcz/falcon_9_first_stage_sighting_in_el_paso_texas/

this subconversation

https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/4ymvcz/falcon_9_first_stage_sighting_in_el_paso_texas/d6oys5y
« Last Edit: 08/25/2016 01:16 PM by Jakusb »

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #30 on: 09/01/2016 03:09 PM »
Quote
Falcon 9 Flight 29 - AMOS-6 (not verified)
payload mass: 5,500 kilograms, orbit: geosynchronous [97]
  S) 2016-09-01, Failure during static fire, loss of payload (the one where the static fire went kaboom) [97]
Top post updated for AMOS-6 failure  :'(

As for JCSAT-14 static fires, do we have a source with dates for each one after the first 3?

Online Comga

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3910
  • Liked: 1232
  • Likes Given: 1048
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #31 on: 09/15/2016 01:03 AM »
https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/775815358812782593

Foust says SpaceX is up to seven firings of the Flight 21 JCSAT-14 first stage as of Sept 13.
What kind of wastrels would dump a perfectly good booster in the ocean after just one use?

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #32 on: 09/15/2016 06:34 AM »
https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/775815358812782593

Foust says SpaceX is up to seven firings of the Flight 21 JCSAT-14 first stage as of Sept 13.
Thank you for the heads up! i will search the FB group for the missing firing dates and update the first post

Offline sewebster

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 229
  • British Columbia
  • Liked: 168
  • Likes Given: 73
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #33 on: 09/21/2016 06:10 AM »
  D) 2014-05-10 - 2015-06-20, Delay due to helium leak, range, re-test on the satellites [16,17]

Second date there should be 2014?

Offline Roy_H

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 718
  • Liked: 183
  • Likes Given: 1171
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #34 on: 09/24/2016 02:54 PM »
S) 2016-09-01, Failure during static fire, loss of payload (the one where the static fire went kaboom) [97]

Just a nit-pick on the wording. It looks like the description is it exploded during the static fire (as last step) I think it would be better:

S) 2016-09-01, Failure during static fire, loss of payload (the one where it went kaboom during prop loading) [97]
"If we don't achieve re-usability, I will consider SpaceX to be a failure." - Elon Musk

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #35 on: 09/24/2016 03:20 PM »
Thank you for your suggestions, first post updated!

Online Comga

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3910
  • Liked: 1232
  • Likes Given: 1048
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #36 on: 10/05/2016 05:55 PM »
https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/775815358812782593

Foust says SpaceX is up to seven firings of the Flight 21 JCSAT-14 first stage as of Sept 13.

And it seems to be up to eight firings

SpaceNews: SpaceX’s Shotwell on Falcon 9 inquiry, discounts for reused rockets and Silicon Valley’s test-and-fail ethos


From Q&A with Gwynne Shotwell
Quote
Q: The first stage recovered from the JCSat-14 launch, a mission to GTO, has now been put through eight ignition sequences in Texas, with two more to go. Then what happens?

The questioner makes it sound like ten firings is public knowledge.
What kind of wastrels would dump a perfectly good booster in the ocean after just one use?

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #37 on: 10/05/2016 09:38 PM »
Thanks, now we have a good source for the 8 firings. first post updated

https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/775815358812782593

Foust says SpaceX is up to seven firings of the Flight 21 JCSAT-14 first stage as of Sept 13.

And it seems to be up to eight firings

SpaceNews: SpaceX’s Shotwell on Falcon 9 inquiry, discounts for reused rockets and Silicon Valley’s test-and-fail ethos


From Q&A with Gwynne Shotwell
Quote
Q: The first stage recovered from the JCSat-14 launch, a mission to GTO, has now been put through eight ignition sequences in Texas, with two more to go. Then what happens?

The questioner makes it sound like ten firings is public knowledge.

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #38 on: 01/05/2017 09:06 PM »
aaaaaand we have something to report :)
Quote
Falcon 9 Flight 30 - Iridium NEXT (not verified)
payload mass: 10 x 800 kilograms, orbit: 780 km x 780 km, 86.4° [99]
  S) 2017-01-03, Scrub due to a minor GSE issue [101]
  F) 2017-01-05, Successful static fire (no payload) [100]

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #39 on: 01/14/2017 07:11 PM »
RTF at last :)

Quote
Falcon 9 Flight 30 - Iridium NEXT (not verified)
payload mass: 10 x 800 kilograms, orbit: 780 km x 780 km, 86.4° [99]
delivered orbit:618 x 627 km x 86.66° [103]
  S) 2017-01-03, Scrub due to a minor GSE issue [101]
  F) 2017-01-05, Successful static fire (no payload) [100]
  L) 2017-01-14, Successful launch (the one with the live rocketcam S1 landing) [102]
  BR) 2017-01-14, Successful landing at JRTI (1 engine landing burn) [102]
« Last Edit: 01/14/2017 10:33 PM by cartman »

Online catdlr

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4652
  • Marina del Rey, California, USA
  • Liked: 1469
  • Likes Given: 898
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #40 on: 01/15/2017 05:30 AM »
RTF at last :)

Quote
Falcon 9 Flight 30 - Iridium NEXT (not verified)
payload mass: 10 x 800 kilograms, orbit: 780 km x 780 km, 86.4° [99]
delivered orbit:618 x 627 km x 86.66° [103]
  S) 2017-01-03, Scrub due to a minor GSE issue [101]
  F) 2017-01-05, Successful static fire (no payload) [100]
  L) 2017-01-14, Successful launch (the one with the live rocketcam S1 landing) [102]
  BR) 2017-01-14, Successful landing at JRTI (1 engine landing burn) [102]


Cartman,  The Iridium flight has a number 29 stamped on the core.  Is the Falcon Flight 30 suppose to be different than the core number?  source: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=41751.msg1630497#msg1630497
« Last Edit: 01/15/2017 05:30 AM by catdlr »
Tony De La Rosa

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #41 on: 01/15/2017 09:41 AM »
Cores are named at the factory and flights can happen out of the order they were produced. In any case I think it is a good idea to start tracking these numbers, so i will start adding them to each flight

edit: core number added. do we have any good sources for the previous cores?

Quote
Falcon 9 Flight 30 - Iridium NEXT-1 (not verified)
payload mass: 9,600 kilograms (10x860kg + 1000kg dispenser)[99] orbit: 780 km x 780 km, 86.4° [104]
delivered orbit:618 x 627 km x 86.66° [103]
core number: 29 [105]
  S) 2017-01-03, Scrub due to a minor GSE issue [101]
  F) 2017-01-05, Successful static fire (no payload) [100]
  L) 2017-01-14, Successful launch (the one with the live rocketcam S1 landing) [102]
  BR) 2017-01-14, Successful landing at JRTI (1 engine landing burn) [102]

RTF at last :)

Quote
Falcon 9 Flight 30 - Iridium NEXT (not verified)
payload mass: 10 x 800 kilograms, orbit: 780 km x 780 km, 86.4° [99]
delivered orbit:618 x 627 km x 86.66° [103]
  S) 2017-01-03, Scrub due to a minor GSE issue [101]
  F) 2017-01-05, Successful static fire (no payload) [100]
  L) 2017-01-14, Successful launch (the one with the live rocketcam S1 landing) [102]
  BR) 2017-01-14, Successful landing at JRTI (1 engine landing burn) [102]


Cartman,  The Iridium flight has a number 29 stamped on the core.  Is the Falcon Flight 30 suppose to be different than the core number?  source: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=41751.msg1630497#msg1630497
« Last Edit: 01/15/2017 10:19 AM by cartman »

Offline Hauerg

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 685
  • Berndorf, Austria
  • Liked: 285
  • Likes Given: 1047
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #42 on: 01/15/2017 10:46 AM »
This was the 29th FLIGHT of F9, the 28th successful.
Looks like they did not count the September "anomaly". (It never made it to launch date.)

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #43 on: 01/15/2017 11:11 AM »
ok so what do we do with AMOS-6? one solution would be to leave it there without a number:

flight 28 jcsat 16
n/a - amos-6
flight 29 iridium next-1

Offline Hauerg

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 685
  • Berndorf, Austria
  • Liked: 285
  • Likes Given: 1047
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #44 on: 01/15/2017 11:18 AM »
That's what I did in my own xls.

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #45 on: 01/15/2017 11:20 AM »
We are in agreement, first post updated

Quote
Falcon 9 Flight 28 - JCSAT-16 (not verified)
payload mass: 4,600 kilograms, orbit: geosynchronous [94]
delivered orbit:  184 x 35912 km x 20.85° [96]
  F) 2016-08-11, Successful static fire (no payload) [92] [93]
  L) 2016-08-14, Successful launch (the one with the first GTO 1 engine landing burn) [95]
  BR) 2016-08-14, Successful landing at OCISLY (1 engine landing burn) [95]

Falcon 9 Flight n/a - AMOS-6 (not verified)
payload mass: 5,500 kilograms, orbit: geosynchronous [97]
  S) 2016-09-01, Failure during prop loading for static fire, loss of payload (the one where the static fire went kaboom) [97]

Falcon 9 Flight 29 - Iridium NEXT-1 (not verified)
payload mass: 9,600 kilograms (10x860kg + 1000kg dispenser)[99] orbit: 780 km x 780 km, 86.4° [104]
delivered orbit:618 x 627 km x 86.66° [103]
  S) 2017-01-03, Scrub due to a minor GSE issue [101]
  F) 2017-01-05, Successful static fire (no payload) [100]
  L) 2017-01-14, Successful launch (the one with the live rocketcam S1 landing) [102]
  BR) 2017-01-14, Successful landing at JRTI (1 engine landing burn) [102]
« Last Edit: 01/15/2017 11:20 AM by cartman »

Offline old_sellsword

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 581
  • Liked: 461
  • Likes Given: 427
The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #46 on: 01/15/2017 11:28 AM »
ok so what do we do with AMOS-6? one solution would be to leave it there without a number:

flight 28 jcsat 16
n/a - amos-6
flight 29 iridium next-1

SpaceX gave Amos-6 flight number F9-029, and they're not reusing it even though it never left the pad. My vote would be to give it flight number 29, however this isn't my thread :)

Also, here's a list of known serial numbers that flew missions:

1019 - Orbcomm 2
1021 - CRS-8
1022 - JCSAT-14
1023 - Thaicom 8
1029 - Iridium-1
« Last Edit: 01/15/2017 11:29 AM by old_sellsword »

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #47 on: 01/15/2017 11:49 AM »
I think you have a point here... Most sites covering SpaceX launches have iridium as nr 30. So i will go back to the previous arrangement. I will leave it at that until we have an official source or we see the number on the Echostar core next week.
Quote
Falcon 9 Flight 30 - Iridium NEXT-1 RTF Mission (not verified)
payload mass: 9,600 kilograms (10x860kg + 1000kg dispenser)[99] orbit: 780 km x 780 km, 86.4° [104]
delivered orbit:618 x 627 km x 86.66° [103]
core number: 1029
  S) 2017-01-03, Scrub due to a minor GSE issue [101]
  F) 2017-01-05, Successful static fire (no payload) [100]
  L) 2017-01-14, Successful launch (the one with the live rocketcam S1 landing) [102]
  BR) 2017-01-14, Successful landing at JRTI (1 engine landing burn) [102]
« Last Edit: 01/15/2017 11:52 AM by cartman »

Offline gospacex

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3030
  • Liked: 532
  • Likes Given: 604
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #48 on: 01/23/2017 12:27 AM »
Maybe this should be put into Wikipedia.
Forum posts tend to be more prone to bit rot after some years pass.

Offline cscott

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2515
  • Liked: 1711
  • Likes Given: 656
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #49 on: 01/23/2017 04:14 PM »
Maybe this should be put into Wikipedia.
Forum posts tend to be more prone to bit rot after some years pass.
Wikipedia tries not to publish "original research" which are not reflections of primary source documents.  It is an encyclopedia, not a research journal.
I think it would be easier if NSF would periodically post a data-heavy article with the flight history to date -- maybe once a year, as a year-in-review sort of thing -- and then a WIkipedia article could draw from that as its source and maintain an archived master list.

(I'm a Wikimedia Foundation engineer, but not anything special on Wikipedia. We try to keep code editing and content editing separate. So appropriately discount my advice and feel free to consult a real editor or admin, etc.)

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27022
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 6914
  • Likes Given: 4875
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #50 on: 01/23/2017 04:18 PM »
This is just a compilation of other sources, not "original research." Additionally, Wikipedia is nice because it keeps a full history of revisions.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #51 on: 01/23/2017 06:29 PM »
I try to have a source for everything, so I guess this would be a good start for a wikipedia article.

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8618
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 5370
  • Likes Given: 3552
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #52 on: 01/23/2017 10:59 PM »
Maybe this should be put into Wikipedia.
Forum posts tend to be more prone to bit rot after some years pass.
Wikipedia tries not to publish "original research" which are not reflections of primary source documents.  It is an encyclopedia, not a research journal.
I think it would be easier if NSF would periodically post a data-heavy article with the flight history to date -- maybe once a year, as a year-in-review sort of thing -- and then a WIkipedia article could draw from that as its source and maintain an archived master list.

(I'm a Wikimedia Foundation engineer, but not anything special on Wikipedia. We try to keep code editing and content editing separate. So appropriately discount my advice and feel free to consult a real editor or admin, etc.)

I'm a current admin on the English Wikipedia but way out of practice, much less active than formerly. Used to hold multiple roles on multiple other wikis including being a steward, and a 'crat, checkuser, etc on Commons and Meta.

Normally forum postings aren't considered reliable enough to be used as sources, and many WP editors would balk if they were routinely cited, especially in more controversial areas. This possibly might be an exception but sourcing articles rather than forum postings is likely to generate less attempts to delete material by overzealous editors.
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #53 on: 02/19/2017 11:21 PM »
First post updated for today's launch

Quote
Falcon 9 Flight 31 - CRS-10 (not verified)
payload mass: Dragon + 2,490 kilograms to ISS including SAGE-III, STP-H5, orbit: LEO [105]
delivered orbit: 363 x 209km  x 51.63° [106]
core number: 1031
  F) 2017-02-12, Successful static fire [105]
  C) 2017-02-18, Scrub at T-13sec due to an issue with an upper stage engine actuator [105]
  L) 2017-07-19, Successful launch (the one with the first 39A launch)[105]
  BR) 2017-07-19, Successful landing at LZ1[105]

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1973
  • US
  • Liked: 1386
  • Likes Given: 991
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #54 on: 02/20/2017 12:03 AM »
First post updated for today's launch

Quote
Falcon 9 Flight 31 - CRS-10 (not verified)
payload mass: Dragon + 2,490 kilograms to ISS including SAGE-III, STP-H5, orbit: LEO [105]
delivered orbit: 363 x 209km  x 51.63° [106]
core number: 1031
  F) 2017-02-12, Successful static fire [105]
  C) 2017-02-18, Scrub at T-13sec due to an issue with an upper stage engine actuator [105]
  L) 2017-07-19, Successful launch (the one with the first 39A launch)[105]
  BR) 2017-07-19, Successful landing at LZ1[105]

You have some typos in the dates (2017-07-19).  Also the flight numbering issue pops up again, it was Flight 32 on the paperwork and got pulled ahead of Flight 31 (Echostar).

Offline old_sellsword

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 581
  • Liked: 461
  • Likes Given: 427
The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #55 on: 02/20/2017 12:31 AM »
First post updated for today's launch

Quote
Falcon 9 Flight 31 - CRS-10 (not verified)
payload mass: Dragon + 2,490 kilograms to ISS including SAGE-III, STP-H5, orbit: LEO [105]
delivered orbit: 363 x 209km  x 51.63° [106]
core number: 1031
  F) 2017-02-12, Successful static fire [105]
  C) 2017-02-18, Scrub at T-13sec due to an issue with an upper stage engine actuator [105]
  L) 2017-07-19, Successful launch (the one with the first 39A launch)[105]
  BR) 2017-07-19, Successful landing at LZ1[105]

You have some typos in the dates (2017-07-19).  Also the flight numbering issue pops up again, it was Flight 32 on the paperwork and got pulled ahead of Flight 31 (Echostar).

The rest of the Launch Log uses sequential flight ordering (ie. Jason 3 = Flight 21), not the SpaceX flight numbering scheme (ie. Jason 3 = F9-19). Therefore this launch would indeed be Flight 31 (but F9-32) as long as we're still counting Amos-6.
« Last Edit: 02/20/2017 12:55 AM by old_sellsword »

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #56 on: 02/20/2017 06:33 AM »
Dates fixed, this was a late night update :)


Offline cscott

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2515
  • Liked: 1711
  • Likes Given: 656
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #57 on: 02/20/2017 11:33 PM »
"the one with the extremely low cloud cover"?

Of course, 39A was the historic part.  But the bit that will stick in my memory is the awkward two broadcast minutes of sound and no visible rocket after the falcon disappeared into the clouds.

Online Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3454
  • California
  • Liked: 2691
  • Likes Given: 1700
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #58 on: 02/21/2017 11:56 PM »
"the one with the extremely low cloud cover"?

Of course, 39A was the historic part.  But the bit that will stick in my memory is the awkward two broadcast minutes of sound and no visible rocket after the falcon disappeared into the clouds.

Indeed. Did someone forget the rocket cams were available?

Offline cscott

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2515
  • Liked: 1711
  • Likes Given: 656
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #59 on: 02/22/2017 01:00 AM »
On the technical broadcast they quickly cut to the "signal lost" CGI, so I think they didn't have rocketcam available.  Probably new pad plus large source of ionized hot gas caused some interesting reception issues.

Theory #2 is that rocketcam multiplexing is done by the rocket on a schedule fixed before flight, and it wasn't expected that they'd need rocketcam so soon.  So this theory would say rocketcam's schedule had it transmitting either itar-controlled areas of the rocket or boring ones like the inside of the lox tank, and so it wasn't appropriate to cut to them.

I like the first theory better.

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #60 on: 03/18/2017 10:16 AM »
First post updated with Echostar 23 launch

Quote
Falcon 9 Flight 32 - Echostar 23
payload mass: 5,500 kilograms, orbit: geosynchronous [108]
delivered orbit:  179 x 35903 km x 22.43° [109]
core number: 1030
  S) 2017-03-07, Scrub due to an unspecified issue [107]
  F) 2017-03-09, Successful static fire [107]
  W) 2017-03-14, Scrub due to high winds [108]
  L) 2017-03-16, Successful launch (the one with the first non-NASA launch from 39A)[108]
edit: fixed wrong month
« Last Edit: 03/22/2017 07:54 PM by cartman »

Offline rnataraja

  • Member
  • Posts: 5
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #61 on: 03/22/2017 02:56 AM »
March and not April?

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #62 on: 03/22/2017 07:53 PM »
Whoops... Yes, that should have been March ;D
First post updated.

March and not April?

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #63 on: 03/30/2017 11:35 PM »
Update for today's historic first reflight!

Awaiting for the delivered orbit.

Quote
Falcon 9 Flight 33 - SES-10
payload mass: 5,300 kilograms, orbit: geosynchronous [112]
delivered orbit:
core number: 1021 (flight #2)
  F) 2017-03-27, Successful static fire (5 second burn) [109]
  L) 2017-03-30, Successful launch (the one with the first reflight of a core stage)[110]
  BR) 2017-03-30, Successful landing at OCISLY[110]


Offline mikelepage

Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #64 on: 03/31/2017 06:47 AM »
Update for today's historic first reflight!

Awaiting for the delivered orbit.

Quote
Falcon 9 Flight 33 - SES-10
payload mass: 5,300 kilograms, orbit: geosynchronous [112]
delivered orbit:
core number: 1021 (flight #2)
  F) 2017-03-27, Successful static fire (5 second burn) [109]
  L) 2017-03-30, Successful launch (the one with the first reflight of a core stage)[110]
  BR) 2017-03-30, Successful landing at OCISLY[110]


Exciting!  And two thumbs up for the improvements you've made to the log.

But FYI: Small error - you've got the first flight of core 1021 listed as flying for SES-9 (which I think must have been core 1020 - it had a hard landing and was destroyed).  Core 1021 flew NASA CRS-8 and was the first successful barge landing.  I've seen this stated wrongly in news articles elsewhere too so I'm not sure whose error it was originally.

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #65 on: 03/31/2017 11:08 PM »
thank you for your kind words and for noticing the core mix-up! I rechecked the core numbers and i think they are now in sync with the best public sources.


Update for today's historic first reflight!

Awaiting for the delivered orbit.

Quote
Falcon 9 Flight 33 - SES-10
payload mass: 5,300 kilograms, orbit: geosynchronous [112]
delivered orbit:
core number: 1021 (flight #2)
  F) 2017-03-27, Successful static fire (5 second burn) [109]
  L) 2017-03-30, Successful launch (the one with the first reflight of a core stage)[110]
  BR) 2017-03-30, Successful landing at OCISLY[110]


Exciting!  And two thumbs up for the improvements you've made to the log.

But FYI: Small error - you've got the first flight of core 1021 listed as flying for SES-9 (which I think must have been core 1020 - it had a hard landing and was destroyed).  Core 1021 flew NASA CRS-8 and was the first successful barge landing.  I've seen this stated wrongly in news articles elsewhere too so I'm not sure whose error it was originally.

Offline deruch

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1517
  • California
  • Liked: 1155
  • Likes Given: 1627
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #66 on: 05/11/2017 11:16 PM »
To update 1st post:

Falcon 9 Flight 34 - NROL-76
payload mass: classified,  orbit: classified
delivered orbit: ?
core number: 1032
  F) 2017-04-25, Successful static fire
  C) 2017-04-30, Scrub at T-52sec due to an "out of family" TOTO (Temperature Ox. Tank Outlet) sensor on the first stage
  L) 2017-05-01, Successful launch (the one with the awesome recovery video)
  BR) 2017-05-01, Successful landing at LZ1


Static fire source: https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/04/spacex-static-fire-tests-spy-sat-rocket-falcon-heavy-core/

Launch/Recovery source:  https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/05/spacex-launch-cadence-new-goals/
Shouldn't reality posts be in "Advanced concepts"?  --Nomadd

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #67 on: 05/12/2017 06:54 AM »
Thank you deruch! This was a very difficult week and i didn't have enough time to do this. First post updated.
Quote
Falcon 9 Flight 34 - NROL-76
payload mass: classified,  orbit: classified
delivered orbit: ?
core number: 1032
  F) 2017-04-25, Successful static fire [115]
  C) 2017-04-30, Scrub at T-52sec due to an "out of family" TOTO (Temperature Ox. Tank Outlet) sensor on the first stage [115]
  L) 2017-05-01, Successful launch (the one with the awesome recovery video) [114]
  BR) 2017-05-01, Successful landing at LZ1 [114]

Offline deruch

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1517
  • California
  • Liked: 1155
  • Likes Given: 1627
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #68 on: 05/12/2017 07:58 PM »
Neither of the NSF source articles I originally included (for the static fire or the actual launch) had anything on the scrubbed first launch attempt.  I meant to find an outside source but forgot.  Here's one though: 
https://spaceflightnow.com/2017/04/30/spacex-launch-scrubbed-in-final-minute-of-countdown/
Shouldn't reality posts be in "Advanced concepts"?  --Nomadd

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #69 on: 05/15/2017 10:55 PM »
Thanks again deruch. First post updated

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #70 on: 05/24/2017 03:50 PM »
Updated for flight 35
Quote
Falcon 9 Flight 35 - Inmarsat 5 F4
payload mass: 6,070 kilograms, orbit: geosynchronous [118]
delivered orbit: 384 x 70181 km x 24.47° (GTO-1570)[119]
core number: 1034 - expendable - Pad 39A
  F) 2017-05-11, Successful static fire [117]
  L) 2017-05-15, Successful launch (the one where they moved from Falcon Heavy to Falcon 9)[118]

also updated NROL-76 with the orbit it was found in
Quote
delivered orbit: 398 x 401 km x 49.95° (classified, was found at this orbit by Leo Barhorst) [120]
« Last Edit: 05/24/2017 03:58 PM by cartman »

Offline deruch

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1517
  • California
  • Liked: 1155
  • Likes Given: 1627
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #71 on: 06/12/2017 08:30 AM »

Falcon 9 Flight 36 - CRS-11
payload mass: Dragon + 2708 kilograms to ISS including NICER, ROSA, and MUSES,  orbit: LEO [121]
delivered orbit:  []
core number: 1035

  F) 2017-05-28, Successful static fire [122]
  W) 2017-06-01, Scrub at T-25min:38sec due to lightning strike within 10 nmi [123][124]
  L) 2017-06-03, Successful launch (the one with the first reused Dragon capsule)[121]
  BR) 2017-06-03, Successful landing at LZ1[121]


[121] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/06/spacex-falcon-9-crs-11-dragon-iss-100th-39a/
[122] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/05/spacex-static-fire-crs-11-falcon-9/
[123] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=42972.msg1685251#msg1685251
[124] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=42972.msg1685271#msg1685271

no info on delivered orbit yet, I asked in the mission thread, so maybe someone will reply.
Shouldn't reality posts be in "Advanced concepts"?  --Nomadd

Offline EspenU

  • Newbie Spacegeek
  • Member
  • Posts: 38
  • Norway
  • Liked: 24
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #72 on: 06/27/2017 11:06 AM »
Flight numbers are assumed since I could not find references to them.


Falcon 9 Flight 37 - Bulgariasat-1
payload mass: 3669kg,  orbit: GTO [125]
delivered orbit: 210 x 65641 km x 23.91° [126]
core number: 1029.2
  F) 2017-06-15, Successful static fire [125]
  L) 2017-06-23, Successful launch (the one with the second reused booster) [125]
  BR) 2017-06-23, Successful landing on OCISLY [125]


[125] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/06/spacex-falcon-9-second-flight-bulgariasat-1-mission/
[126] https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=42913.msg1694051#msg1694051

Falcon 9 Flight 38 - Iridium NEXT-2
payload mass: 9,600 kilograms (10 x 860kg + 1000kg dispenser) [99] orbit: 780 km x 780 km, 86.4° [104]
delivered orbit: 610 x 625 km x 86.67° [127]
core number: 1036
  F) 2017-06-20, Successful static fire [128]
  L) 2017-06-25, Successful launch [129]
  BR) 2017-06-25, Successful landing on JRTI [129]


[127] https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=43149.msg1695259#msg1695259
[128] https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=43149.msg1692164#msg1692164
[129] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/06/spacex-falcon-9-iridium-next-2-launch/

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #73 on: 06/27/2017 11:39 AM »
Thank you for your kind help, the last couple of weeks were quite hectic in real life so i wasn't able to update for the latest launches. Once i get back home i will put everything in the first post :)

Offline cscott

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2515
  • Liked: 1711
  • Likes Given: 656
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #74 on: 06/27/2017 01:29 PM »



Falcon 9 Flight 37 - Bulgariasat-1
payload mass: 3669kg,  orbit: GTO [125]
delivered orbit: 210 x 65641 km x 23.91° [126]
core number: 1029.2
  F) 2017-06-15, Successful static fire [125]
  L) 2017-06-23, Successful launch (the one with the second reused booster) [125]
  BR) 2017-06-23, Successful landing on OCISLY [125]


Isn't this also "the one with the booster than landed on two oceans"? Or "two drone ships", if you prefer.

Offline Beittil

Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #75 on: 06/27/2017 02:13 PM »



Falcon 9 Flight 37 - Bulgariasat-1
payload mass: 3669kg,  orbit: GTO [125]
delivered orbit: 210 x 65641 km x 23.91° [126]
core number: 1029.2
  F) 2017-06-15, Successful static fire [125]
  L) 2017-06-23, Successful launch (the one with the second reused booster) [125]
  BR) 2017-06-23, Successful landing on OCISLY [125]


Isn't this also "the one with the booster than landed on two oceans"? Or "two drone ships", if you prefer.

"The one that cheated on 'JRTI'"

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #76 on: 06/27/2017 10:41 PM »
Thank you for helping out with this! first post updated!

Quote
Falcon 9 Flight 36 - CRS-11
payload mass: Dragon + 2708 kilograms to ISS including NICER, ROSA, and MUSES,  orbit: LEO [121]
delivered orbit:  []
core number: 1035
  F) 2017-05-28, Successful static fire [122]
  W) 2017-06-01, Scrub at T-25min:38sec due to lightning strike within 10 nmi [123][124]
  L) 2017-06-03, Successful launch (the one with the first reused Dragon capsule)[121]
  BR) 2017-06-03, Successful landing at LZ1[121]

Falcon 9 Flight 37 - Bulgariasat-1
payload mass: 3669kg, orbit: GTO [125]
delivered orbit: 210 x 65641 km x 23.91° [126]
core number: 1029.2
  F) 2017-06-15, Successful static fire [125]
  L) 2017-06-23, Successful launch (the one with the booster that landed on two oceans) [125]
  BR) 2017-06-23, Successful landing on OCISLY [125]

Falcon 9 Flight 38 - Iridium NEXT-2
payload mass: 9,600 kilograms (10 x 860kg + 1000kg dispenser) [99] orbit: 780 km x 780 km, 86.4° [104]
delivered orbit: 610 x 625 km x 86.67° [127]
core number: 1036
  F) 2017-06-20, Successful static fire [128]
  L) 2017-06-25, Successful launch (the one where they launched 2 rockets in a weekend) [129]
  BR) 2017-06-25, Successful landing on JRTI [129]

Offline dmc6960

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 262
  • Liked: 34
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #77 on: 06/28/2017 03:12 AM »
I believe Bulgariasat should have a Mission Delay in it due to the fairing issue discovered after the static fire.
-Jim

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #78 on: 07/06/2017 08:37 PM »
I believe Bulgariasat should have a Mission Delay in it due to the fairing issue discovered after the static fire.
Thank you for noticing that dmc6960! Just found a source and added the delay to the log. Also, i updated the first post for the Intelsat 35e mission.
Quote
Falcon 9 Flight 39 - Intelsat 35e
payload mass: 6761kg, orbit: GTO [131]
delivered orbit: 296 x 42742 km x 25.85° [132]
core number: 1037 - expendable - Pad 39A
  F) 2017-06-29, Successful static fire [130]
  C) 2017-07-02, Scrub at T-09sec due an issue with the GNC criteria [131]
  C) 2017-07-03, Scrub at T-09sec due to an issue with the ground computers [131]
  D) 2017-07-04, Mission delay in order to review all rocket and pad systems [133]
  L) 2017-07-05, Successful launch (the one where they took 3 attempts over the July 4th weekend to launch a naked rocket) [131]

Offline cscott

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2515
  • Liked: 1711
  • Likes Given: 656
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #79 on: 07/07/2017 02:01 AM »
"the one where the rocket noticed it didn't have legs and didn't want to launch"?

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #80 on: 07/07/2017 07:19 AM »
Haha that's much better than mine!   ;D ;D First post updated

"the one where the rocket noticed it didn't have legs and didn't want to launch"?

Online Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3454
  • California
  • Liked: 2691
  • Likes Given: 1700
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #81 on: 07/08/2017 01:11 AM »
Why in the world is July 4th marked as a launch attempt? It was not... Only July 3rd (scrub) and July 5th was.

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1973
  • US
  • Liked: 1386
  • Likes Given: 991
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #82 on: 07/08/2017 01:48 AM »
Why in the world is July 4th marked as a launch attempt? It was not... Only July 3rd (scrub) and July 5th was.

It's not marked as a launch attempt.  (The colors do kinda blend together for me, I don't have spectacular color vision.  That's one reason I used to like using the bold tt font in the manifest, I could actually see what color things were marked.)

Online Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3454
  • California
  • Liked: 2691
  • Likes Given: 1700
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #83 on: 07/08/2017 03:07 AM »
Why in the world is July 4th marked as a launch attempt? It was not... Only July 3rd (scrub) and July 5th was.

It's not marked as a launch attempt.  (The colors do kinda blend together for me, I don't have spectacular color vision.  That's one reason I used to like using the bold tt font in the manifest, I could actually see what color things were marked.)

I understand that, but why mark it at all? It seems to A) take up unnecessary space with information of little value and B) inconsistent - if there was a delay before a first attempt that pushed a launch back two weeks, shouldn't there be 14 rows of that?

It seems to me to be a clear case of someone trying to add more precision than what there is data for.

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8618
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 5370
  • Likes Given: 3552
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #84 on: 07/08/2017 03:12 AM »
I think it's not too unwarranted, since there was widespread speculation that there would be an attempt, and Musk explicitly tweeted that there would not be. It's not quite the same as just another day going by out of 14 in a long slip...
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Online Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3454
  • California
  • Liked: 2691
  • Likes Given: 1700
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #85 on: 07/08/2017 05:57 AM »
I think it's not too unwarranted, since there was widespread speculation that there would be an attempt, and Musk explicitly tweeted that there would not be. It's not quite the same as just another day going by out of 14 in a long slip...

But since when is forum speculation noteworthy enough to create a day entry? There is always work going on at the pad, every day. But either there is a launch attempt, or there isn't. Seems pretty clear to me.

But do as you want. Just think of this... The point of this is to create a record of what happened. A couple of years from now when someone finds this, will it matter exactly why there was no launch attempt on the 4th?

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #86 on: 07/08/2017 08:09 AM »
They said in the webcast that they were going to attempt a launch at the 4th. Then they decided to delay one day in order to review all rocket and pad systems, so that counts as an attempt that was delayed in my book.

Offline cscott

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2515
  • Liked: 1711
  • Likes Given: 656
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #87 on: 07/08/2017 01:37 PM »
I agree delay seems reasonable in this case. It is explicitly what SpaceX said about the issue, and by all accounts the range was ready to go on the 4th. In fact, AIUI they had to get the range to push off the start of it's maintenance window by two days to allow the attempt on the 5th (and 6th if necessary).  So it's pretty clear they were aligned for the 4th, then (after consulting with the range) took an opportunity to delay one day for added mission assurance.

Online Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3454
  • California
  • Liked: 2691
  • Likes Given: 1700
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #88 on: 07/08/2017 09:15 PM »
They said in the webcast that they were going to attempt a launch at the 4th. Then they decided to delay one day in order to review all rocket and pad systems, so that counts as an attempt that was delayed in my book.

No. There was never a firm announcement about a 4th of July. That was a possibility, but never stated as a firm launch attempt. We were told that they would announce it. And they did... that they would try next on the *5th*.
« Last Edit: 07/08/2017 09:15 PM by Lars-J »

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #89 on: 08/15/2017 01:27 PM »
Updated for CRS-12. Does anyone have the delivered orbit? I got one from n2yo.com,but I guess that's the current orbit of Dragon.
edit: found source

Quote
Falcon 9 Flight 40 - CRS-12
payload mass: Dragon +  2,910 kilograms to ISS including ISS-CREAM, orbit: LEO [134]
delivered orbit: 202 x 358 x 51.6° [136]
core number:  B1039 - RTLS - Pad 39A
  F) 2017-08-10, Successful static fire [135]
  L) 2017-08-14, Successful launch (the one with the one month gap due to range maintenance)[134]
  BR) 2017-08-14, Successful landing at LZ1[134]
« Last Edit: 08/18/2017 11:49 PM by cartman »

Offline deruch

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1517
  • California
  • Liked: 1155
  • Likes Given: 1627
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #90 on: 08/28/2017 01:27 AM »
Falcon 9 Flight 41 - Formosat-5
payload mass: 475 kilograms [138], orbit: SSO 720 km x  720 km, 98.28° [139] 
delivered orbit: 730 km x 717 km x 99.26° [140] 
core number: 1038 - Droneship landing - Pad SLC-4E
  F) 2017-08-19, Successful static fire [141]
  L) 2017-08-24, Successful launch (the one with tiny satellite that was originally manifested on Falcon 1e) [138]
  BR) 2017-08-24, Successful landing on JRtI [138]


[138] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/08/falcon-9-vandenberg-launch-formosat-5/
[139] http://www.spacex.com/sites/spacex/files/formosat5presskit.pdf
[140] http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=43396.msg1716223#msg1716223
[141] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/08/spacex-static-fire-formosat-5-falcon-9-asds-landing/
Shouldn't reality posts be in "Advanced concepts"?  --Nomadd

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #91 on: 08/28/2017 11:12 AM »
Thank you for your kind help! Will update the first post once i get back home edit: first post updated!
« Last Edit: 08/28/2017 08:52 PM by cartman »

Offline cscott

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2515
  • Liked: 1711
  • Likes Given: 656
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #92 on: 09/08/2017 08:00 AM »
This last launch was "the one launched in the teeth of a hurricane", perhaps?

Offline Stefan.Christoff.19

  • Member
  • Posts: 9
  • RI USA
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #93 on: 09/08/2017 04:17 PM »
Or is it "the one that the commentator got the grid fins wrong" ;)

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #94 on: 09/09/2017 11:36 AM »
Both are very good suggestions, but I think I prefer the hurricane one!

Quote
Falcon 9 Flight 42 - OTV-5 (X-37B Spaceplane)
payload mass:  classified orbit: classified
delivered orbit: classified   
core number:  B1040 - RTLS - Pad 39A [142]
  F) 2017-08-31, Successful static fire [142]
  L) 2017-09-07, Successful launch (the one launched in the teeth of hurricane Irma) [143]
  BR) 2017-09-07, Successful landing at LZ1 [143]

« Last Edit: 09/11/2017 07:44 AM by cartman »

Offline deruch

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1517
  • California
  • Liked: 1155
  • Likes Given: 1627
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #95 on: 09/11/2017 04:34 AM »
Both are very good suggestions, but I think I prefer the hurricane one!

Quote
Falcon 9 Flight 42 - OTV-5 (X-37B Spaceplane)
payload mass:  classified orbit: classified
delivered orbit: classified   
core number:  B1040 - RTLS - Pad 39A [142]
  F) 2017-08-31, Successful static fire [142]
  L) 2017-09-07, Successful launch (the one launched in the teeth of a hurricane) [143]
  BR) 2017-09-07, Successful landing at LZ1 [143]


IMO, you should edit to include the hurricane's name: the one launched in the teeth of Hurricane Irma. 

Gives better context when people look back and try to figure out which storm it was.
« Last Edit: 09/11/2017 04:35 AM by deruch »
Shouldn't reality posts be in "Advanced concepts"?  --Nomadd

Offline Nomadd

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2579
  • Boca Chica, Texas
  • Liked: 3130
  • Likes Given: 228
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #96 on: 09/11/2017 04:41 AM »
 Gregory Peck could launch through the eye of the hurricane.

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #97 on: 09/11/2017 07:46 AM »
Yeah that sounds better.

Offline EspenU

  • Newbie Spacegeek
  • Member
  • Posts: 38
  • Norway
  • Liked: 24
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #98 on: 10/08/2017 05:13 PM »
Just noticed that the actual launch of the first F9 flight is missing.

L) 2012-06-04, Successful launch (the one with the rolling second stage) [xx]


[xx] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxSxgBKlYws?t=1m54s

and/or: https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=21869.460

Edit: Argh! Copied and edited the launch line and forgot to change the year. Should be 2010.
« Last Edit: 10/08/2017 08:00 PM by EspenU »

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #99 on: 10/08/2017 07:37 PM »
Thanks!

Quote
  L) 2010-06-04, Successful launch (the one with the rolling second stage) [144]

https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2010/06/live-spacex-attempt1-maiden-launch-falcon-9/
« Last Edit: 10/08/2017 08:43 PM by cartman »

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #100 on: 10/10/2017 08:11 AM »
Updated for Iridium NEXT-3

Quote
Falcon 9 Flight 43 - Iridium NEXT-3
payload mass: 9,600 kilograms (10 x 860kg + 1000kg dispenser) [99] orbit: 780 km x 780 km, 86.4° [104]
delivered orbit: 612 x 627 km x 86.68° [147]
core number: B1041 - Droneship landing - Pad SLC-4E
  F) 2017-10-05, Successful static fire [145]
  L) 2017-10-09, Successful launch (the one with the impressive plume interaction between S1 and S2) [146]
  BR) 2017-10-09, Successful landing on JRTI [146]


Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #101 on: 10/12/2017 10:32 AM »
Updated for SES/11 Echostar 105
Quote
Falcon 9 Flight 44 - SES 11/Echostar 105
payload mass: 5,200 kilograms, orbit: GTO [149]
delivered orbit: 309 x 40519 km x 27.89° [150]
core number: B1031.2 - Droneship landing - Pad 39A
  F) 2017-10-02, Successful static fire (5 second burn) [148]
  D) 2017-10-07, Mission delay in order to resolve an issue with a first stage engine [149]
  L) 2017-10-11, Successful launch (the one with the sparks and glowing gridfins on reentry) [149]
  BR) 2017-10-11, Successful landing on OCISLY [149]

Offline smoliarm

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 496
  • Moscow, Russia
  • Liked: 200
  • Likes Given: 66
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #102 on: 10/26/2017 11:13 AM »
Here is my first try to visualize Falcon-9 flight history.
Vertical axis represents sequential flight number, so that any unlabeled point can be identified with table of launches.
On the graph I labeled only failures and some "firsts" which seem significant.

Suggestions and corrections are greatly welcome :)

Edit: corrected typo on the graph
« Last Edit: 10/26/2017 03:17 PM by smoliarm »

Offline deruch

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1517
  • California
  • Liked: 1155
  • Likes Given: 1627
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #103 on: 10/26/2017 03:40 PM »
Here is my first try to visualize Falcon-9 flight history.
Vertical axis represents sequential flight number, so that any unlabeled point can be identified with table of launches.
On the graph I labeled only failures and some "firsts" which seem significant.

Suggestions and corrections are greatly welcome :)

Edit: corrected typo on the graph

Nice.  Would be nice to have some way to distinguish between failed landing attempts, few as there have been, and expended cores (i.e. no landing attempted).  Maybe a yellow ring around failed attempts?  Or a black slash/X through expended launches? 
« Last Edit: 10/26/2017 03:40 PM by deruch »
Shouldn't reality posts be in "Advanced concepts"?  --Nomadd

Offline JBF

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1296
  • Liked: 343
  • Likes Given: 486
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #104 on: 10/26/2017 03:55 PM »
Here is my first try to visualize Falcon-9 flight history.
Vertical axis represents sequential flight number, so that any unlabeled point can be identified with table of launches.
On the graph I labeled only failures and some "firsts" which seem significant.

Suggestions and corrections are greatly welcome :)

Edit: corrected typo on the graph

It's an interesting graph, but the vertical axis does not really add any additional information, since we already know that the flight number increases as you go right.
"In principle, rocket engines are simple, but that’s the last place rocket engines are ever simple." Jeff Bezos

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #105 on: 10/26/2017 03:55 PM »
Wow, that's a very pretty graph. Thanks for posting it! One thing it shows is that the more SpaceX launches the faster they get. Let's see what happens when they catch up to their manifest.

Online abaddon

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1506
  • Liked: 938
  • Likes Given: 752
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #106 on: 10/26/2017 05:25 PM »
It's an interesting graph, but the vertical axis does not really add any additional information, since we already know that the flight number increases as you go right.
As flight rate increases, vertical spacing is necessary to prevent it from just turning into a big blob.  It also gives space for textual descriptions of special events.  Unless you prefer a line, I'm not sure what the alternative is?  It also makes comparisons with other launches possible; I have my own spreadsheet which compares flight rates of a subset of similar EELV class launchers (although it's a little out of date right now) in a similar way.
« Last Edit: 10/26/2017 05:28 PM by abaddon »

Offline JBF

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1296
  • Liked: 343
  • Likes Given: 486
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #107 on: 10/26/2017 05:48 PM »
It's an interesting graph, but the vertical axis does not really add any additional information, since we already know that the flight number increases as you go right.
As flight rate increases, vertical spacing is necessary to prevent it from just turning into a big blob.  It also gives space for textual descriptions of special events.  Unless you prefer a line, I'm not sure what the alternative is?  It also makes comparisons with other launches possible; I have my own spreadsheet which compares flight rates of a subset of similar EELV class launchers (although it's a little out of date right now) in a similar way.

I'd probably log the horizontal line and then use the vertical for something else, say successful landings or perhaps time between launches.
"In principle, rocket engines are simple, but that’s the last place rocket engines are ever simple." Jeff Bezos

Offline smoliarm

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 496
  • Moscow, Russia
  • Liked: 200
  • Likes Given: 66
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #108 on: 10/26/2017 10:56 PM »
It's an interesting graph, but the vertical axis does not really add any additional information, since we already know that the flight number increases as you go right.
As flight rate increases, vertical spacing is necessary to prevent it from just turning into a big blob.  It also gives space for textual descriptions of special events.  Unless you prefer a line, I'm not sure what the alternative is?  It also makes comparisons with other launches possible; I have my own spreadsheet which compares flight rates of a subset of similar EELV class launchers (although it's a little out of date right now) in a similar way.

I'd probably log the horizontal line and then use the vertical for something else, say successful landings or perhaps time between launches.

I agree, there are different ways to present launch cadence (or any other sequential events) on a graph.
This particular type (*Flight Number vs Date*) is useful to show the actual Flight Rate, as it appears as SLOPE - increasing or decreasing.
Below is another example: comparison of launch rate for Atlas 5 with Falcon 9.
In this particular graph I used [Number of days since the first flight] instead of regular [Date of launch]
But the graph type remains the same - # of flights vs Date.

In my view, this graph illustrates
first:
higher flight rate for Falcons - which was achieved in shorter time compared to Atlas;
second:
both data sets (for Falcon and for Atlas) are in reasonably good agreement with polynomial least-square fits (thin curves).
These approximations show that SpaceX did achieve HIGHER flight rate DESPITE failures and associated long "no-flight" periods.
third:
So far there is a good indication of potential for even higher launch cadence. I would not bet on "30 Falcon launches in 2018", but this graph at least hints that such rate is actually feasible.

Quote
...I'd probably log the horizontal line and then use the vertical for something else, say successful landings or perhaps time between launches.
- that's coming  :)
« Last Edit: 10/26/2017 10:57 PM by smoliarm »

Offline ClayJar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 319
  • Baton Rouge, LA, USA
  • Liked: 656
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #109 on: 10/27/2017 02:46 PM »
Out of curiosity, I wanted to bodge the data to see what the Falcon 9 graph would look like in an "alternate history" where the two failures didn't happen (perhaps replacing the stand down periods with the average of the cadence of the missions just before and after each).  It wouldn't exactly reflect reality, but it would make an interesting altered data set, and I wanted to see what the curve fit would look like.  Since I don't have the launch dates, I went to grab them from the launch log, and I noticed that incomplete entry way back at COTS-2+.   Well, we can't have that, now, can we?  ;D
Quote
Falcon 9 flight 03 - COTS Demo flight 2
  F) 2012-04-30, Successful static fire [#]
  C) 2012-05-19, High pressure reading in engine 5 chamber due to a faulty check valve T-0:01[42]
  L) 2012-05-22, Successful launch [#]

Not sure whether article or thread links are preferred, so have one of each, choose your own adventure style, for the static fire and launch.

Static Fire links:
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2012/05/falcon-9s-merlin-engines-for-may-7-target/ (NSF article the day after)
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=28764.msg893862#msg893862 (SpaceX's tweet confirming success, with photo)

Launch links:
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2012/05/spacexs-dragon-achieving-milestones-falcon-9-ride/ (NSF article on the launch, etc.)
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=28942.msg901491#msg901491 (Launch thread at the moment of launch.)

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #110 on: 10/28/2017 10:19 AM »
Thanks again ClayJar! i will update the log once I get back to a desktop computer as I am traveling right now

Offline deruch

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1517
  • California
  • Liked: 1155
  • Likes Given: 1627
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #111 on: 10/29/2017 05:22 PM »
Since I don't have the launch dates, I went to grab them from the launch log, and I noticed that incomplete entry way back at COTS-2+.   Well, we can't have that, now, can we?  ;D
Quote
Falcon 9 flight 03 - COTS Demo flight 2
  F) 2012-04-30, Successful static fire [#]
  C) 2012-05-19, High pressure reading in engine 5 chamber due to a faulty check valve T-0:01[42]
  L) 2012-05-22, Successful launch [#]

Not sure whether article or thread links are preferred, so have one of each, choose your own adventure style, for the static fire and launch.

<links>

Good idea ClayJar, but your data is incomplete.
 

Falcon 9 flight 03 - COTS Demo flight 2+
payload mass: Dragon + 620 kilograms delivered to ISS, orbit: LEO [5]
S) 2012-04-30, Improperly set criteria limit (overly restrictive redline on second stage engine position) at T-0:47 [1]
F) 2012-04-30, Successful static fire[1]
D) 2012-05-04, Delay for ongoing Dragon Rendezvous/Prox. software testing and ISS VV schedule [2]
C) 2012-05-19, Scub at T-0:00.5 due to high pressure reading in center engine chamber due to a faulty check valve [3]
L) 2012-05-22, Successful launch (the one with the first commercial vehicle to visit the ISS) [4]


[1] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2012/05/falcon-9s-merlin-engines-for-may-7-target/
[2] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2012/05/iss-schedule-dragon-launch-19-may-future-manifest-outlook/
[3] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2012/05/spacex-falcon-9-send-dragon-to-iss/
[4] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2012/05/spacexs-dragon-achieving-milestones-falcon-9-ride/
[5] https://www.nasa.gov/pdf/649910main_cots2_presskit_051412.pdf
Shouldn't reality posts be in "Advanced concepts"?  --Nomadd

Offline ClayJar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 319
  • Baton Rouge, LA, USA
  • Liked: 656
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #112 on: 10/29/2017 08:00 PM »
Good idea ClayJar, but your data is incomplete.
 

Falcon 9 flight 03 - COTS Demo flight 2+
payload mass: Dragon + 620 kilograms delivered to ISS, orbit: LEO [5]
S) 2012-04-30, Improperly set criteria limit (overly restrictive redline on second stage engine position) at T-0:47 [1]
F) 2012-04-30, Successful static fire[1]
D) 2012-05-04, Delay for ongoing Dragon Rendezvous/Prox. software testing and ISS VV schedule [2]
C) 2012-05-19, Scub at T-0:00.5 due to high pressure reading in center engine chamber due to a faulty check valve [3]
L) 2012-05-22, Successful launch (the one with the first commercial vehicle to visit the ISS) [4]


[1] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2012/05/falcon-9s-merlin-engines-for-may-7-target/
[2] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2012/05/iss-schedule-dragon-launch-19-may-future-manifest-outlook/
[3] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2012/05/spacex-falcon-9-send-dragon-to-iss/
[4] https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2012/05/spacexs-dragon-achieving-milestones-falcon-9-ride/
[5] https://www.nasa.gov/pdf/649910main_cots2_presskit_051412.pdf

The delay I'll grant you, but I hadn't considered the first an unsuccessful static fire, since it was just a recycle during the window that ended in a a successful static fire.  It looks like flights 2 and 6 (COTS-1 and CASSIOPE) did have same-day entries for unsuccessful and successful static fires; and flights 1, 2, 7, 11, and perhaps 22 had same-day entries relating to launch recycles.

I suppose way back then, we got more information about the particulars of static fire attempts.  With no webcasts and only third-party static fire observations, marking successful static fire campaigns without additional notations may simply be due to less information being available these days, and if so, having the recycle on COTS-2+ would not be illogical.

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #113 on: 10/29/2017 11:48 PM »
I'm back at my desktop computer so i made a few changes and added everything to the log. As always, i would like to thank you for your great work!

Quote
Falcon 9 flight 03 - COTS Demo flight 2+
payload mass: Dragon + 620 kilograms delivered to ISS, orbit: LEO [155]
core number: Unknown - Expendable - Pad 40
  S) 2012-04-30, Improperly set criteria limit (overly restrictive redline on second stage engine position) at T-0:47 [151]
  F) 2012-04-30, Successful static fire [151]
  D) 2012-05-04, Delay for ongoing Dragon Rendezvous/Prox. software testing and ISS VV schedule [152]
  C) 2012-05-19, Scrub at T-0:00.5 due to high pressure reading in center engine chamber due to a faulty check valve [42][153]
  L) 2012-05-22, Successful launch (the one with the first commercial vehicle to visit the ISS) [154]

« Last Edit: 10/29/2017 11:54 PM by cartman »

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8618
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 5370
  • Likes Given: 3552
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #114 on: 10/29/2017 11:53 PM »
Out of curiosity, I wanted to bodge the data to see what the Falcon 9 graph would look like in an "alternate history" where the two failures didn't happen (perhaps replacing the stand down periods with the average of the cadence of the missions just before and after each).  It wouldn't exactly reflect reality, but it would make an interesting altered data set, and I wanted to see what the curve fit would look like. 

Please share this whenever you are done "bodging" as it sounds very fascinating (not sure where best, maybe a new thread?)
« Last Edit: 10/30/2017 07:34 PM by Lar »
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline cscott

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2515
  • Liked: 1711
  • Likes Given: 656
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #115 on: 10/30/2017 07:17 PM »
So is koreasat-5a "the one which landed with its pants on fire"?  Or just "the toasty one"?

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8618
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 5370
  • Likes Given: 3552
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #116 on: 10/30/2017 07:31 PM »
"toastiest yet" maybe, there have been other toasty ones...
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline cscott

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2515
  • Liked: 1711
  • Likes Given: 656
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #117 on: 10/30/2017 08:03 PM »
Congratulations SpaceX for another routine looking launch, topped off by smoking the bullseye in a 12 ft swell.

Inspired by this, perhaps "the one that smoked the bullseye"?  That pre-relight shot of the ASDS deck smoking was quite memorable (to me at least).

Offline ClayJar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 319
  • Baton Rouge, LA, USA
  • Liked: 656
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #118 on: 10/30/2017 08:27 PM »
Okay, I saw that the "Falcon 9 flight 01 - Test flight 1" entry was also marked incomplete, and since I was all the way at the top of the log, I couldn't help but see the Falcon 1 flights sitting up there without any of the love they deserve.  Well, I couldn't leave it at that, could I?  ;D

I had to rewrite URLs, use Google searches of NSF article titles, and even pull up the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine to try to collect as many details as I could find.  I just relived several years of history by running through untold hundreds of posts, but there may bits that were not posted about (either because SpaceX never mentioned them or because nobody got around to saying it in textual form here).  For the RazakSAT flight, I had to sleuth out exactly when the static fire occurred, as nobody mentioned the date.  Finally found it in a dead link, thankfully.  I don't have dates for the first two Falcon 1 static fire attempts at Vandenberg, but I can infer they were sometime in May 2005, according to the successful static fire link.

All dates should be SpaceX HQ time, meaning some events may have been tomorrow on Omelek, but given the decade-old references, I could at least have consistency that way.


Falcon 1 flight 01 - FalconSAT-2
  S) 2005-05-?? (Vandenberg SLC-3W), Igniter sensor failure
http://www.spacex.com/news/2005/february-2005-may-2005
  S) 2005-05-?? (Vandenberg SLC-3W), Incorrectly closed helium ground supply valve
http://www.spacex.com/news/2005/february-2005-may-2005
  F) 2005-05-27 (Vandenberg SLC-3W), Successful Static Fire
https://spaceflightnow.com/falcon/050527frf/
  C) 2005-11-26, Manual vent valve incorrectly set to vent
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=918.msg10654#msg10654
  C) 2005-12-19, Draining tank during weather hold, valve caused vacuum, deforming the tank
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=1043.msg12801#msg12801
  S) 2006-02-09, Various technical issues
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=1431.msg19956#msg19956
  F) 2006-02-10, Successful Static Fire
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=1431.msg20078#msg20078
  LF) 2006-03-25, Launch failure (the one with a corroded nut)
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=3533.msg52550#msg52550


Falcon 1 flight 02 - DemoFlight 2
  D) 2007-01-19, Second stage TVC pitch actuator issue
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=5101.msg104272#msg104272
  D) 2007-02-07, Delay due to range availability
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=5101.msg109976#msg109976
  D) 2007-03-07, Installing upgraded TVC boards
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=5101.msg117933#msg117933
  F) 2007-03-15, Successful static fire
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=5101.msg121395#msg121395
  C) 2007-03-19, Aborted during range source telemetry switchover
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=5101.msg122306#msg122306
  C) 2007-03-20, Abort on chamber pressure 1% low
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=7169.msg122640#msg122640
  LF) 2007-03-20, Launch failure (the one with too much slosh)
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=7169.msg1037430#msg1037430


Falcon 1 flight 03 - Trailblazer, NanoSail-D, PRESat, Explorers
  D) 2008-06-23, Range availability after finding weld defect
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=13179.msg292907#msg292907 (Range availability)
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=13179.msg293795#msg293795 (Weld defect)
  F) 2008-06-25, Successful Static Fire
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=13179.msg293428#msg293428
  C) 2008-08-02, Parameter about 1% out of range (turbopump purge pressure)
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=13939.msg303651#msg303651
  LF) 2008-08-02, Launch failure (the one that hit itself for lack of a few seconds' delay)
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2008/09/live-space-xs-falcon-i-to-make-fourth-attempt-for-success/ (Flight 4 article has summary of Flight 3 issue)


Falcon 1 flight 04 - RatSat
  F) 2008-09-20, Successful Static Fire
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=13507.msg316895#msg316895
  D) 2008-09-23, Replacing a 2nd stage LOX supply line component
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=13507.msg317354#msg317354
  L) 2008-09-28, Successful launch (the one that finally made it to orbit)
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2008/09/live-space-xs-falcon-i-to-make-fourth-attempt-for-success/


Falcon 1 flight 05 - RazakSAT
  F) 2009-04-15, Successful static fire
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=16054.msg393844#msg393844 (post's link is dead, original blog entry copied below)
  D) 2009-04-20, Delay for "Potential impact of predicted vehicle environments on the satellite"
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=16054.msg393169#msg393169
  L) 2009-07-13, Successful launch (the one that orbited the first real satellite)
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2009/07/live-falcon-1-razaksat-for-malaysias-atsb/


Falcon 9 flight 01 - Test flight 1
  S) 2010-03-09, Abort at spin start T-0:02[44]
  X) 2010-03-11, Weather Scrub of Static Fire Attempt
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=20799.msg559044#msg559044
  F) 2010-03-13, Successful Static Fire
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=20799.msg559800#msg559800
  C) 2010-06-04, Out of range engine parameter, sensor error T-0:01[43]
  L) 2010-06-04, Successful launch (the one with the rolling second stage) [144]


Quote
SPACEX: No rocket damage link to Razaksat delay
By Rob Coppinger on April 22, 2009 12:19 AM

Space Exploration Technologies has responded to Hyperbola's enquiry about the last minute announcement of the delay to the company's first commercial launch with its Falcon 1 rocket, scheduled for 20 April, and denied there is any damage to the rocket:

We are re-evaluating predicted launch vehicle environments on the satellite to ensure all systems are ready to support a successful launch. As for this being a "late" find, flushing out this type of potential issue is exactly why we do pre-launch tests and checkouts. Contrary to other reports, there is no damage to the launch vehicle (all prelaunch checks were accomplished successfully, including the successful static test fire of the vehicle last Wednesday). We are evaluating the extent of the delay, and I will let you know as soon as we have a new date for both RazakSAT and Falcon 9.

(From http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/hyperbola/2009/04/spacex-no-rocket-damage-link-t.html via the Wayback Machine)

Feel free to check my work and provide updates or more info as appropriate.  I'm sure I could've missed things, since I only spent about eight hours putting this all together.  ;D

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #119 on: 10/30/2017 08:54 PM »
Wow, I cannot thank ClayJar enough for the great work he did here! As for today's launch, I think i like "the one which landed with its pants on fire" the most. Log will be updated in ~12 hours

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Greece
  • Liked: 458
  • Likes Given: 2064
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #120 on: 10/31/2017 08:14 AM »
First post updated.
Quote
Falcon 9 Flight 45 - Koreasat-5A
payload mass: 3,700 kilograms, orbit: GTO [186]
delivered orbit: 285 x 50185 km x 22.0° [158]
core number: B1042 - Droneship landing - Pad 39A
  F) 2017-10-26, Successful static fire (5 second burn) [156]
  L) 2017-10-30, Successful launch (the one which landed with its pants on fire) [157]
  BR) 2017-10-30, Successful landing on OCISLY [157]

I have also incorporated ClayJar's Falcon 1 contribution:

Quote
Falcon 1 flight 01 - FalconSAT-2
  S) 2005-05-?? (Vandenberg SLC-3W), Igniter sensor failure [159]
  S) 2005-05-?? (Vandenberg SLC-3W), Incorrectly closed helium ground supply valve [160]
  F) 2005-05-27 (Vandenberg SLC-3W), Successful Static Fire [161]
  C) 2005-11-26, Manual vent valve incorrectly set to vent [162]
  C) 2005-12-19, Draining tank during weather hold, valve caused vacuum, deforming the tank [163]
  S) 2006-02-09, Various technical issues [164]
  F) 2006-02-10, Successful Static Fire [165]
  LF) 2006-03-25, Launch failure (the one with the corroded nut) [166]

Falcon 1 flight 02 - DemoFlight 2
  D) 2007-01-19, Second stage TVC pitch actuator issue [167]
  D) 2007-02-07, Delay due to range availability [168]
  D) 2007-03-07, Installing upgraded TVC boards [169]
  F) 2007-03-15, Successful static fire [170]
  C) 2007-03-19, Aborted during range source telemetry switchover [171]
  C) 2007-03-20, Abort on chamber pressure 1% low [172]
  LF) 2007-03-20, Launch failure (the one with too much slosh) [173]

Falcon 1 flight 03 - Trailblazer, NanoSail-D, PRESat, Explorers
  D) 2008-06-23, Range availability after finding weld defect [174][175]
  F) 2008-06-25, Successful Static Fire [176]
  C) 2008-08-02, Parameter about 1% out of range (turbopump purge pressure) [177]
  LF) 2008-08-02, Launch failure (the one that hit itself for lack of a few seconds' delay at stage sep) [178]

Falcon 1 flight 04 - RatSat
  F) 2008-09-20, Successful Static Fire [179]
  D) 2008-09-23, Replacing a 2nd stage LOX supply line component [180]
  L) 2008-09-28, Successful launch (the one that finally made it to orbit) [178]

Falcon 1 flight 05 - RazakSAT
  F) 2009-04-15, Successful static fire [181]
  D) 2009-04-20, Delay for "Potential impact of predicted vehicle environments on the satellite" [182]
  L) 2009-07-13, Successful launch (the one that orbited the first real satellite) [183]


->Falcon 9 v1.0
Falcon 9 flight 01 - Test flight 1
  S) 2010-03-09, Abort at spin start T-0:02[44]
  X) 2010-03-11, Weather Scrub of Static Fire Attempt [184]
  F) 2010-03-13, Successful Static Fire [185]
  C) 2010-06-04, Out of range engine parameter, sensor error T-0:01[43]
  L) 2010-06-04, Successful launch (the one with the rolling second stage) [144]
« Last Edit: 10/31/2017 08:30 AM by cartman »

Online abaddon

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1506
  • Liked: 938
  • Likes Given: 752
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #121 on: 11/02/2017 03:34 PM »
I have my own spreadsheet which compares flight rates of a subset of similar EELV class launchers (although it's a little out of date right now) in a similar way.
I've updated my version of this to be up to date with the latest launches, and attached the chart here for funzies.

Falcon 9 tied Delta IV in number of launches with its May 15th launch this year of Inmarsat-5, and passed it June 3rd with the launch of CRS-11.  Next up is HII, which it should pass sometime early next year.

Notes:
- I picked these launchers because I was interested to compare them.  I know I left lots out.
- HII includes -A and -B
- Delta IV includes Heavy
- ULA* is the EELV-class launches, so just Atlas V and Delta IV, and includes only those launches that were under the auspices of ULA.  Atlas V and Delta IV individually cover their entire launch history.
- My charts grow horizontally instead of vertically, maybe because it makes them look like rocket launches...
- Lots of manual data entry here, so there are probably some errors, which are all mine.
« Last Edit: 11/02/2017 04:18 PM by abaddon »

Offline ATPTourFan

  • Member
  • Posts: 28
  • Liked: 12
  • Likes Given: 213
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #122 on: 11/08/2017 05:12 PM »
Possible to flip the X and Y axes on that one? I don't know if it's me but my brain usually does time on the horizontal left->right and quantity on vertical. Thanks for these great infographics.

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8618
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 5370
  • Likes Given: 3552
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #123 on: 11/08/2017 05:32 PM »
Possible to flip the X and Y axes on that one? I don't know if it's me but my brain usually does time on the horizontal left->right and quantity on vertical. Thanks for these great infographics.
Agreed. I think it shows the trends better that way. But even if not, THANKS for doing that, great work
« Last Edit: 11/08/2017 05:33 PM by Lar »
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Online abaddon

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1506
  • Liked: 938
  • Likes Given: 752
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #124 on: 11/08/2017 09:38 PM »
I'm open to trying... IFF someone can explain how to do this in Excel.  My data is really quite simple... a first set of rows for each line of dates (not important here) and then a second set for the days starting at zero for each, e.g.:

HII   0   206   408   926   1393 ...
Ariane 5   0   513   869   1284   1386 ...
Atlas V   0   265   330   849   933 ...
Delta IV   0   111   282   762   1281 ...
ULA*   0   98   216   247   276 ...
Falcon 9   0   187   718   857   1001 ...

Generating the chart I have is as simple as selecting the rows and inserting a Line chart.  Swapping the X and Y axis has so far proven to be as elusive as finding a Unicorn :(.  Swapping row/column data is not the answer... it's not a scatter plot so I can't swap X and Y axes...

As usual with M$ software trying to do the simplest and most obvious things is sometimes hair-pullingly frustrating.

Online envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2705
  • Liked: 1245
  • Likes Given: 777
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #125 on: 11/08/2017 11:15 PM »
I'm open to trying... IFF someone can explain how to do this in Excel.  My data is really quite simple... a first set of rows for each line of dates (not important here) and then a second set for the days starting at zero for each, e.g.:

HII   0   206   408   926   1393 ...
Ariane 5   0   513   869   1284   1386 ...
Atlas V   0   265   330   849   933 ...
Delta IV   0   111   282   762   1281 ...
ULA*   0   98   216   247   276 ...
Falcon 9   0   187   718   857   1001 ...

Generating the chart I have is as simple as selecting the rows and inserting a Line chart.  Swapping the X and Y axis has so far proven to be as elusive as finding a Unicorn :(.  Swapping row/column data is not the answer... it's not a scatter plot so I can't swap X and Y axes...

As usual with M$ software trying to do the simplest and most obvious things is sometimes hair-pullingly frustrating.

Excel isn't set up well to easily plot multiple sets of independent variables; usually datasets have a single independent variable and multiple dependent variables. This is a complex selection and Excel doesn't recognize it automatically.

Anyway, plotting this set with time on the horizontal axis isn't hard, just:

1) Insert a line below your HII data
2) Fill this line with the launch number, going left to right (just 1   2   3   4   5 ....)
3) Select the HII data and the launch number data and go to Insert -> Scatterplot. You have to use scatterplot to add the other lines later.
4) Right click on the plot and go to "Select Data".
5) Go to "Add"
6) Select the next vehicle as the series name, the launch date as the X variable, and the launch number line as the Y variable; hit OK
7) Repeat steps 5-7 until you have all the vehicles on the plot.

Edit: realized that I might as well just attach the spreadsheet with the plot already set up so you can just copy your data in :)
« Last Edit: 11/08/2017 11:28 PM by envy887 »

Online abaddon

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1506
  • Liked: 938
  • Likes Given: 752
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #126 on: 11/09/2017 02:07 PM »
Thanks much @envy887 for the detailed directions - very helpful!  Here's my second go at it, with some slightly snazzier formatting.  I'm also attaching a different view that attempts to show comparative launch cadences for the different launchers.  It's not quite what I wanted (I'd like the smaller values to overlap the larger values) but it's close enough for a first shot.  I think for this one it makes sense to have days as the vertical axis... but we'll see :).

Notes:
- I picked these launchers because I was interested to compare them.  I know I left lots out.
- HII includes -A and -B
- Delta IV includes Heavy (and Falcon 9 will include FH launches)
- ULA* is the EELV-class launches, so just Atlas V and Delta IV, and includes only those launches that were under the auspices of ULA.  Atlas V and Delta IV individually cover their entire launch history.
- Falcon 9 launches include the AMOS launch campaign. 
- Lots of manual data entry here, so there are probably some errors, which are all mine.
« Last Edit: 11/09/2017 02:15 PM by abaddon »

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1973
  • US
  • Liked: 1386
  • Likes Given: 991
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #127 on: 11/09/2017 02:19 PM »
The ULA data on that graph really doesn't fit with the rest of the data.  ULA already had mature launch vehicles, and all of the other lines start from first launch.
« Last Edit: 11/09/2017 02:21 PM by gongora »

Online abaddon

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1506
  • Liked: 938
  • Likes Given: 752
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #128 on: 11/09/2017 02:25 PM »
The ULA data on that graph really doesn't fit with the rest of the data.  ULA already had mature launch vehicles, and all of the other lines start from first launch.
Yes, I'm aware of that.  That's why I graphed Atlas V and Delta IV separately as well.  I think it is interesting to have both sets of data.  You can really see what an advantage it is to start with mature launchers.

Offline ClayJar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 319
  • Baton Rouge, LA, USA
  • Liked: 656
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #129 on: 11/09/2017 06:06 PM »
Since everyone is playing with the data, I figured I'd play a little during lunch today.  Attached is a chart showing two versions of the launch cadence of Falcon 9.  The blue data is actual reality, and the orange data replaces the two long periods of standing down (CRS-7 and AMOS-6) with delays only equal to the average of the launch before and after each one.  I let Excel do a completely naive exponential trendline on each, and I noted the slopes at the top end of each trendline (a launch every 15 days at this point in the adjusted reality).  It may not reflect actual reality or have much statistical vigor, but the trendline on the adjusted reality does look nice, eh?  ;D

And to make things easier for anyone wanting to play around with the data, I took the launch log and parsed it into a more easily usable tab-delimited text form.  I tried to find a balance between ease of use and efficiency so you can use basic tools to simply select relevant lines and have what you need.  (It doesn't have all the payload and orbit data, but I did include a column for style -- Dragon vs. fairing -- as that seemed likely to be useful to someone.)  Anyway, it's attached.

Offline mikelepage

Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #130 on: 11/14/2017 03:09 AM »
Quick note re nomenclature: seems like we stopped keeping track of block 4/5, even though we noted 1.0, 1.1, and 1.2 FT.

The way I understand it, in terms of version number, we've had/we're expecting:
F9 1.0
F9 1.1
F9 FT (1.2)
F9 Block 4 (1.3)
F9 Block 5 (1.4)

Falcon 9 Flight 40 - CRS-12 was the debut of Block 4
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/08/falcon-9-block-4-debut-success-dragon-station-berthing/

but I don't know what rocket was used for
Falcon 9 Flight 41 - Formosat-5
Falcon 9 Flight 42 - OTV-5 (X-37B Spaceplane)
Falcon 9 Flight 43 - Iridium NEXT-3
Falcon 9 Flight 44 - SES 11/Echostar 105
Falcon 9 Flight 45 - Koreasat-5A

Side note to Cartman: I know the last 1.1 flew after the first 1.2, so that was why those flights are out of order in the log, but I think it's probably just better to keep the flights in order and note which block was used once we find out.  Especially once Falcon Heavy (&BFR!) start flying, it's worth keeping it in flight order imho.

Offline old_sellsword

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 581
  • Liked: 461
  • Likes Given: 427
The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #131 on: 11/14/2017 03:58 AM »
Quick note re nomenclature: seems like we stopped keeping track of block 4/5, even though we noted 1.0, 1.1, and 1.2 FT.

The way I understand it, in terms of version number, we've had/we're expecting:
F9 1.0
F9 1.1
F9 FT (1.2)
F9 Block 4 (1.3)
F9 Block 5 (1.4)

The nomenclature (to the best of our knowledge) is as follows:

F9 v1.0 (Block 1)
F9 v1.1
F9 v1.2 (Blocks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5)

So everything after Orbcomm OG2 M2 (except Jason 3) is F9 v1.2, there is no v1.3 or v1.4. Within the “version” nomenclature, it would be easiest to represent Blocks with another decimal (ie Block 5 is F9 v1.2.5).


Falcon 9 Flight 40 - CRS-12 was the debut of Block 4
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/08/falcon-9-block-4-debut-success-dragon-station-berthing/

but I don't know what rocket was used for
Falcon 9 Flight 41 - Formosat-5
Falcon 9 Flight 42 - OTV-5 (X-37B Spaceplane)
Falcon 9 Flight 43 - Iridium NEXT-3
Falcon 9 Flight 44 - SES 11/Echostar 105
Falcon 9 Flight 45 - Koreasat-5A

NROL-76 used the first Block 4 S2, but CRS-11 and BulgariaSat-1 used the last two Block 3 S2s after the introduction of Block 4 S2.

CRS-12 used the first Block 4 S1, but FORMOSAT-5, SES-11/EchoStar 105, Iridium-4, and maybe Iridium-5 used a Block 3 S1 after that (a couple of those are reflights of Block 3 S1s).

Block 5 S1 should be leaving Hawthorne relatively soon, within a month or two.
« Last Edit: 11/14/2017 04:00 AM by old_sellsword »

Offline mikelepage

Re: The SpaceX Launch Log
« Reply #132 on: 11/14/2017 04:19 AM »
So everything after Orbcomm OG2 M2 (except Jason 3) is F9 v1.2, there is no v1.3 or v1.4. Within the “version” nomenclature, it would be easiest to represent Blocks with another decimal (ie Block 5 is F9 v1.2.5).

...

NROL-76 used the first Block 4 S2, but CRS-11 and BulgariaSat-1 used the last two Block 3 S2s after the introduction of Block 4 S2.

CRS-12 used the first Block 4 S1, but FORMOSAT-5, SES-11/EchoStar 105, Iridium-4, and maybe Iridium-5 used a Block 3 S1 after that (a couple of those are reflights of Block 3 S1s).

Block 5 S1 should be leaving Hawthorne relatively soon, within a month or two.

Aha, thanks.  That makes much more sense.

Out of curiosity, does this make SpaceX fairly unusual in the rocket industry (to be "mixing and matching" different block stages)?  Or is this standard practice when rolling out new improvements?

Tags: