Author Topic: SpaceX Falcon 9 : SES 11/Echostar 105 : Oct 11, 2017 : Discussion  (Read 50209 times)

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1828
  • US
  • Liked: 1245
  • Likes Given: 935
DISCUSSION thread for SES 11/Echostar 105 mission.

NSF Threads for SES 11/Echostar 105 : Discussion / Updates / L2 Coverage September-October / ASDS / Party
NSF Articles for SES 11/Echostar 105 :
   SpaceX realign near-term manifest ahead of double launch salvo
   SES-11 Static Fire Article
   SES-11 Launch Article

Successful launch October 11, 2017 at 6:53pm EDT (2253 UTC) on Falcon 9 with a reused booster (1031.2) from LC-39A at KSC.  Successful landing on ASDS.

Other SpaceX resources on NASASpaceflight:
   SpaceX News Articles (Recent)  /   SpaceX News Articles from 2006 (Including numerous exclusive Elon interviews)
   SpaceX Dragon Articles  /  SpaceX Missions Section (with Launch Manifest and info on past and future missions)
   L2 SpaceX Section




SES AND ECHOSTAR TO BOOST STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP AT 105 DEGREES WEST WITH NEW SATELLITE
Quote
Luxembourg, September 4, 2014 – SES S.A. (NYSE Euronext Paris and Luxembourg Stock Exchange: SESG) announces a new cornerstone in its strategic partnership with EchoStar Corporation (NASDAQ: SATS) at the orbital position of 105 degrees West with the procurement of the new SES-11 satellite, also to be known as EchoStar 105.

SES-11 will be manufactured by Airbus Defence and Space based on the highly reliable Eurostar E3000 platform. The satellite will be launched into space in Q4 2016.

SES-11 will carry 24 Ku-band transponders as well as 24 C-band transponders (36 MHz equivalent).The spacecraft will have a separated mass of approximately 5,400 kg and an end of life budget for the payloads of approximately 12 kW.

The spacecraft's Ku-band capacity will replace the existing SES satellite AMC-15 at 105 degrees West, an orbital position where Echostar has been SES's anchor customer since 2006. The spacecraft's C-band capacity will also allow SES to provide replacement capacity for AMC-18 at 105 degrees West.

"The market for 50-state transponder capacity in North America has demonstrated significant growth for EchoStar Satellite Services over the past five years - the acquisition of EchoStar 105 renews our commitment to the fixed satellite services market in North America," EchoStar Satellite Services President Anders Johnson said. "The replacement of AMC-15, with the increased capability offered by EchoStar 105, will allow us to meet the evolving demand from our customers for enterprise, broadcast, and government services applications. We are pleased to work with Airbus Defence and Space to provide our customers with new, high power satellite capacity at this established orbital slot."

Stated Martin Halliwell, Chief Technology Officer of SES: "SES-11 is the 6th large satellite contract with our longstanding partner EchoStar. The new spacecraft will offer comprehensive coverage of the Americas, including Hawaii, Mexico, and the Caribbean, from a well-established orbital position. Together with EchoStar we look forward to a successful mission in collaboration with our reliable industry partner Airbus Defence."

For further information please contact:
Yves Feltes
Media Relations
Tel. +352 710 725 311
Yves.Feltes@ses.com

Follow us on:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/SES_Satellites
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/SES.YourSatelliteCompany
YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/SESVideoChannel
Blog: http://en.ses.com/4243715/blog
Find pictures and videos under:http://www.ses.com/4245221/library

SES 11 Page on SES.com

Echostar 105/SES 11 on Gunter's Space Page
« Last Edit: 10/11/2017 11:34 PM by gongora »

Offline deruch

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1452
  • California
  • Liked: 1120
  • Likes Given: 1526
I was a bit confused, because it doesn't state in the release that SpaceX will be launching this one.  But, SES's pdf overview for the S/C lists the Falcon 9 as the launch vehicle.  So, if anyone else is wondering where the official info for that was, I'm linking a copy below.

Original found at: http://www.ses.com/20044733/ses-11
Shouldn't reality posts be in "Advanced concepts"?  --Nomadd

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1828
  • US
  • Liked: 1245
  • Likes Given: 935
SAT-LOA-20160512-00047
Grant of Authority Effective Date: 12/07/2016
Launch and Operating Authority
SES Americom, Inc.
Nature of Service: Direct to Home Fixed Satellite, Fixed Satellite Service

On December 7, 2016, the Satellite Division granted, with conditions, authority to SES Americom, Inc. to construct and deploy the SES-11 space station at the 104.95° W.L. orbital location...

Offline zubenelgenubi

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1071
  • Arc to Arcturus, then Spike to Spica
  • Commonwealth of Virginia
  • Liked: 222
  • Likes Given: 615
Cross posting from the Arianespace launch schedule thread:

Arianspace launch schedule shows EchoStar XX launch as TBD in 2017.  But EchoStar website (including investor documents) shows no info on EchoStar XX.  Is it known by another name?
EchoStar XX satellite became EchoStar 105 / SES-11 and switched to Falcon-9 after an agreement to share the 105 West orbital slot with a single joint satellite. EchoStar XX designation could be reused in the future since the original EchoStar XX satellite was renamed.
Support your local planetarium!

Offline Norm38

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 968
  • Liked: 368
  • Likes Given: 492
Launch date for this could be only two months away now, 4th in line at the cape. Should get some payload news soon.

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2581
  • Liked: 1158
  • Likes Given: 731
Did SES ever confirm that this is going on a used booster?

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1828
  • US
  • Liked: 1245
  • Likes Given: 935
Did SES ever confirm that this is going on a used booster?

Last we heard (during the SES-10 press conferences), they said it was going on a new booster.  The other two SES payloads this year were going to be candidates for reused boosters.

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1828
  • US
  • Liked: 1245
  • Likes Given: 935
With Intelsat 35e slipping a little and August dates for CRS-12 and OTV-5, the timing of this launch could get interesting.

Online Orbiter

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2182
  • Florida
  • Liked: 385
  • Likes Given: 908
https://spaceflightnow.com/2017/08/04/ses-agrees-to-launch-another-satellite-on-a-previously-flown-falcon-9-booster/

Announced today that SES-11 will also be launching on a used Falcon 9 rocket, likely on the F9 booster that launched CRS-10.
« Last Edit: 08/04/2017 06:25 PM by Orbiter »
Attended space missions: STS-114, STS-124, STS-128, STS-135, Atlas V "Curiosity", Delta IV Heavy NROL-15, Atlas V MUOS-2, Delta IV Heavy NROL-37, SpaceX CRS-9, SpaceX JCSAT-16, Atlas V GOES-R, SpaceX SES-11.

Online vaporcobra

https://spaceflightnow.com/2017/08/04/ses-agrees-to-launch-another-satellite-on-a-previously-flown-falcon-9-booster/

Announced today that SES-11 will also be launching on a used Falcon 9 rocket, likely on the F9 booster that launched CRS-10.

I wouldn't go so far as to say "announced", given that it wasn't a direct confirmation from SES or SpaceX. But Stephen Clark is a highly reliable source of info, so it's certainly very likely to be the case.

Quote
Peter B. de Selding‏
@pbdes
Launch of @EchoStar-105/@SES_Satellites-11 C/Ku/Ka-band sat on @SpaceX Falcon 9 now scheduled for "early 4th quarter," EchoStar says.

https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/895353459347570688

Online vaporcobra

Quote
Peter B. de Selding‏
@pbdes
Launch of @EchoStar-105/@SES_Satellites-11 C/Ku/Ka-band sat on @SpaceX Falcon 9 now scheduled for "early 4th quarter," EchoStar says.

https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/895353459347570688

While arguably a bit optimistic, that could literally interpreted to mean October 1st, relating to the 4 day delay of CRS-12.

Offline Ronsmytheiii

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 22307
  • Liked: 578
  • Likes Given: 239
Quote
Your first falcon should be core 1031-2. First mission: CRS-10. Next mission: SES-11.

https://www.reddit.com/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/6usrub/decided_to_stop_in_mcgregor_on_the_way_home_from/?st=j6kifg4m&sh=72161ff2
"Every vision is a joke until the first man accomplishes it; once realized, it becomes commonplace." - Robert Goddard

Offline SmallKing

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 284
  • Zhejiang, China
  • Liked: 119
  • Likes Given: 164
Quote
Your first falcon should be core 1031-2. First mission: CRS-10. Next mission: SES-11.

https://www.reddit.com/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/6usrub/decided_to_stop_in_mcgregor_on_the_way_home_from/?st=j6kifg4m&sh=72161ff2
I think it was 1041 for iridium
Some are bound for happiness, some are bound to glory, some are bound to live with less, who can tell your story?

Offline deruch

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1452
  • California
  • Liked: 1120
  • Likes Given: 1526
Quote
Your first falcon should be core 1031-2. First mission: CRS-10. Next mission: SES-11.

https://www.reddit.com/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/6usrub/decided_to_stop_in_mcgregor_on_the_way_home_from/?st=j6kifg4m&sh=72161ff2

Too clean for previously flown, no?
Shouldn't reality posts be in "Advanced concepts"?  --Nomadd

Offline intrepidpursuit

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 437
  • Orlando, FL
  • Liked: 265
  • Likes Given: 187
The last previously flown stage never went back to McGregor but was refurbished at the Cape if I remember correctly. I would assume the same would be true for SES-11.

Offline old_sellsword

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 550
  • Liked: 441
  • Likes Given: 401
The last previously flown stage never went back to McGregor but was refurbished at the Cape if I remember correctly. I would assume the same would be true for SES-11.

Your assumption makes sense, but we did have someone claiming to be an employee state that 1035.2 stopped back in McGregor a while ago. I'm having trouble finding the post (to r/SpaceXLounge), and I'm thinking it was deleted by the submitter.

Offline clegg78

  • I play KSP, so I know things about rockets and stuff... :)
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 120
  • Denver, CO
  • Liked: 88
  • Likes Given: 15
So if ULA keeps their new launch date of Sept 28th, what does this mean for the NET of Sept 27th for SpaceX?

One of the key reasons I am asking is I will be in Orlando for a conference that week so the potential of 2 launches while I am there is awesome ;)
Buy the Ticket, Take the Ride - Hunter S Thompson

Offline wannamoonbase

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2686
  • Denver, CO
    • U.S. Metric Association
  • Liked: 531
  • Likes Given: 897
So if ULA keeps their new launch date of Sept 28th, what does this mean for the NET of Sept 27th for SpaceX?

One of the key reasons I am asking is I will be in Orlando for a conference that week so the potential of 2 launches while I am there is awesome ;)

Have a look at the Manifest thread.  It's showing October now.
Excited to be finally into the first Falcon Heavy flow, we are getting so close!

Offline zubenelgenubi

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1071
  • Arc to Arcturus, then Spike to Spica
  • Commonwealth of Virginia
  • Liked: 222
  • Likes Given: 615
So if ULA keeps their new launch date of Sept 28th, what does this mean for the NET of Sept 27th for SpaceX?

One of the key reasons I am asking is I will be in Orlando for a conference that week so the potential of 2 launches while I am there is awesome ;)

Crossposting:
Interesting that SpaceX is NET than 27th.  Guessing SpaceX is going to have to move their date since I didn't think the eastern range could recycle between launch providers in under 24 hours?
No conflict--check the most recent iteration of the US Launch Schedule thread.

SES-11/Falcon 9 launch has been delayed to early October.
Support your local planetarium!

Online Chris Bergin

Well, well. Apparently from 39A, which means 40 isn't close to ready and there's no chance of FH in November. Unless this is a default position and they can change it to 40.

SpaceX Opens Media Accreditation for EchoStar 105/SES-11 Mission

HAWTHORNE, Calif. – Aug. 31, 2017. Media accreditation is now open for SpaceX's EchoStar 105/SES-11 mission from Launch Complex 39A (LC-39A) at Kennedy Space Center in Florida. The launch is targeted for no earlier than October.

A flight-proven Falcon 9 will deliver EchoStar 105/SES-11 to a geostationary transfer orbit (GTO).

Members of the media who are interested in covering the launch must fill out this media accreditation form by 3:00 p.m. EDT on Tuesday, September 5.


More details on the mission and pre-launch media activities will be made available on a date closer to launch.

 


 

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1828
  • US
  • Liked: 1245
  • Likes Given: 935
[SpaceNews] SpaceX to launch shared EchoStar, SES satellite in October
Quote
Both satellite operators originally anticipated the spacecraft launching in late 2016, but SpaceX’s September 2016 Falcon 9 explosion set the mission back about a year.

This is one of a couple late-2016 payloads that haven't flown yet.  Every time SpaceX has a gap in their launch schedule some people seem to think they're waiting on payloads.  They're not waiting on payloads, quite the opposite.

Offline rockets4life97

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 367
  • Liked: 166
  • Likes Given: 104
This is one of a couple late-2016 payloads that haven't flown yet.  Every time SpaceX has a gap in their launch schedule some people seem to think they're waiting on payloads.  They're not waiting on payloads, quite the opposite.

Does that mean this payload has been in storage for a year?

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1828
  • US
  • Liked: 1245
  • Likes Given: 935
This is one of a couple late-2016 payloads that haven't flown yet.  Every time SpaceX has a gap in their launch schedule some people seem to think they're waiting on payloads.  They're not waiting on payloads, quite the opposite.

Does that mean this payload has been in storage for a year?

We don't normally see any information on when a satellite is completed, but in May of last year they were still expecting a Q4 2016 launch, so it's probably been in storage at least 9 months if they didn't hit any production snags with it.

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1828
  • US
  • Liked: 1245
  • Likes Given: 935
I wonder where this is now.  We need to get some of our ship trackers interested in Antonovs  :)

Offline Galactic Penguin SST

Spaceflight Now currently reports the launch date to be on October 2nd.  ;)
Chinese spaceflight is a cosmic riddle wrapped in a galactic mystery inside an orbital enigma... - (not) Winston Churchill

Online AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4687
  • Liked: 2806
  • Likes Given: 3927
Spaceflight Now currently reports the launch date to be on October 2nd.  ;)

2nd and 4th of October (SES-11 and Iridium #3, respectively). 
Could be start of something big...
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline whitelancer64

Spaceflight Now currently reports the launch date to be on October 2nd.  ;)

2nd and 4th of October (SES-11 and Iridium #3, respectively). 
Could be start of something big...

There were also 2 days between BulgariaSat-1 (6/23/17) and Iridium Next 2 (6/25/17)
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Online AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4687
  • Liked: 2806
  • Likes Given: 3927
Spaceflight Now currently reports the launch date to be on October 2nd.  ;)

2nd and 4th of October (SES-11 and Iridium #3, respectively). 
Could be start of something big...

There were also 2 days between BulgariaSat-1 (6/23/17) and Iridium Next 2 (6/25/17)

Was referring to the fact that the 4th quarter is just beginning, and they have 8-10 launches potentially on manifest for rest of 2017.  Starting with two launches in first four days makes reaching 20 for the year fairly realistic.
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1828
  • US
  • Liked: 1245
  • Likes Given: 935
Spaceflight Now currently reports the launch date to be on October 2nd.  ;)

Then it should be at the Cape already?  I wonder which cleanroom it's in.  Their main PPF got some damage from the last hurricane.

Online vaporcobra

Spaceflight Now currently reports the launch date to be on October 2nd.  ;)

Then it should be at the Cape already?  I wonder which cleanroom it's in.  Their main PPF got some damage from the last hurricane.

And Hurricane Matthew was downright mild compared to predictions for Irma... Fingers crossed.

Offline whitelancer64

Spaceflight Now currently reports the launch date to be on October 2nd.  ;)

2nd and 4th of October (SES-11 and Iridium #3, respectively). 
Could be start of something big...

There were also 2 days between BulgariaSat-1 (6/23/17) and Iridium Next 2 (6/25/17)

Was referring to the fact that the 4th quarter is just beginning, and they have 8-10 launches potentially on manifest for rest of 2017.  Starting with two launches in first four days makes reaching 20 for the year fairly realistic.

Of those 8-10, I think only 6 have a reasonable chance of launching, that would give us a total of 18, which is still very good. Right now there's nothing for the rest of the month, and then it looks like it might be a two-launch October. We'll see how the schedule (and more importantly, the Florida winter weather) shapes up.

I see SES-11 / EchoStar 105, Iridium Next 3, Falcon Heavy Demo, Iridium Next 4, Koreasat 5A, Hispasat 30W-6, Paz, SES-16 / GovSat-1, Bangabandhu 1, and CRS-13 on the schedule, but I think the last 4 are very likely to bump to early 2018, but most likely a lot will depend on the weather.
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Offline Comga

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3886
  • Liked: 1213
  • Likes Given: 1037
There is a Manifest thread for this kind of discussion and the 2017 SpaceX launches poll thread for endless discussion about how many more SpaceX can squeeze in before Pope Gregory XIII's chosen end of the year.
What kind of wastrels would dump a perfectly good booster in the ocean after just one use?

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1828
  • US
  • Liked: 1245
  • Likes Given: 935
[Spaceflight Now] Launch operators expect minimal delays from Hurricane Irma
Quote
SES officials said the SES 11/EchoStar 105 satellite weathered the storm without damage inside a SpaceX-owned clean room in a hangar near pad 40. If ground crews can resume work on the satellite within a few days, the payload could still be ready for liftoff in early October.

Offline Ben the Space Brit

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6960
  • A spaceflight fan
  • London, UK
  • Liked: 535
  • Likes Given: 610
You started an update thread that seemed to strongly suggest an NET date of 20th October.

Quote
October 2?, 2017 on Falcon 9 with a reused booster (1031.2) from LC-39A at KSC.  Probably an ASDS landing.

If I misread that, then my apologies.
"Oops! I left the silly thing in reverse!" - Duck Dodgers

~*~*~*~

The Space Shuttle Program - 1981-2011

The time for words has passed; The time has come to put up or shut up!
DON'T PROPAGANDISE, FLY!!!

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1828
  • US
  • Liked: 1245
  • Likes Given: 935
You started an update thread that seemed to strongly suggest an NET date of 20th October.

Quote
October 2?, 2017 on Falcon 9 with a reused booster (1031.2) from LC-39A at KSC.  Probably an ASDS landing.

If I misread that, then my apologies.

October 2 (question mark).  October 2 has been previously reported but there's that whole hurricane cleanup thing going on...

Online vaporcobra

You started an update thread that seemed to strongly suggest an NET date of 20th October.

Quote
October 2?, 2017 on Falcon 9 with a reused booster (1031.2) from LC-39A at KSC.  Probably an ASDS landing.

If I misread that, then my apologies.

October 2 (question mark).  October 2 has been previously reported but there's that whole hurricane cleanup thing going on...

FWIW: "45th Space Wing Cdr Monteith expects launches to resume early Oct. with SpaceX/SES-11. Wing hosted Army 101st Airborne after Irma." courtesy of James Dean.

https://twitter.com/flatoday_jdean/status/907984047128944640

Offline John Alan

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 482
  • Central IL - USA - Earth
  • Liked: 228
  • Likes Given: 1146
Am I correct in saying... No official confirmation yet this will not be an expendable S1 flight?...  ???

My thinking is the barns are full and this payload is nearly at weight limit...  so expendable it will be...  :P
« Last Edit: 09/19/2017 08:49 PM by John Alan »

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1828
  • US
  • Liked: 1245
  • Likes Given: 935
Am I correct in saying... No official confirmation yet this will not be an expendable S1 flight?...  ???

My thinking is the barns are full and this payload is nearly at weight limit...  so expendable it will be...  :P

It's probably ASDS (but I'd like to see some official word of that), I guess we'll find out if Block 4 makes any difference.

Online vaporcobra

I'm with Gongora here. 5400kg vs 5300kg for SES-10, so I would be surprised if SpaceX didn't at least attempt an ASDS recovery.
« Last Edit: 09/19/2017 09:00 PM by vaporcobra »

Offline Steven Pietrobon

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12574
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 2750
  • Likes Given: 410
I'm with Gongora here. 5400kg vs 5300kg for SES-10, so I would be surprised if SpaceX didn't at least attempt an ASDS recovery.

Link below says 5200 kg, so looks like ASDS for sure.

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=43728.msg1725004#msg1725004
Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #1:  Engineering is done with numbers.  Analysis without numbers is only an opinion.

Offline rpapo

  • Cybernetic Mole
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1037
  • Michigan, USA
  • Liked: 467
  • Likes Given: 382
I'm with Gongora here. 5400kg vs 5300kg for SES-10, so I would be surprised if SpaceX didn't at least attempt an ASDS recovery.

Link below says 5200 kg, so looks like ASDS for sure.

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=43728.msg1725004#msg1725004
Titanium grid fins, anyone?  Sounds like a good flight for them, as it should be hotter than the last few.
An Apollo fanboy . . . fifty years ago.

Offline John Alan

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 482
  • Central IL - USA - Earth
  • Liked: 228
  • Likes Given: 1146
Thanks to all for the replies...  :)

My thinking though... is S1#1031 is an almost year old block ?3? stage...yes?
SO... while putting Ti fins on it and trying to burn it down on an ASDS try makes some sense...
It's just as likely to be surplus and headed for scrap as the Block 5's start crowding the barns...
I guess we will find out soon enough...  :P

Online AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4687
  • Liked: 2806
  • Likes Given: 3927
Thanks to all for the replies...  :)

My thinking though... is S1#1031 is an almost year old block ?3? stage...yes?
SO... while putting Ti fins on it and trying to burn it down on an ASDS try makes some sense...
It's just as likely to be surplus and headed for scrap as the Block 5's start crowding the barns...
I guess we will find out soon enough...  :P

Headed for scrap after re-flight wear and tear is analyzed... got to get the booster back for that.

ASDS is my bet.
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Online 2megs

  • Member
  • Posts: 13
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 4
Here’s SES press release:

Quote
Echostar 105/SES-11 Shipped from Toulouse to the Cape for SpaceX Launch

Written on 20 Sep 2017

With 12 days to go until the NET, I have to think that either:

1. The satellite was already there, and the press release just is late, or...

2. SpaceX+SES have gotten much faster at integration than the SpaceX payload guide suggests, or...

3. October 2 isn't realistic.

Anyone have any idea which?
« Last Edit: 09/20/2017 03:22 PM by 2megs »

Offline IntoTheVoid

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 183
  • USA
  • Liked: 128
  • Likes Given: 52
Here’s SES press release:

Quote
Echostar 105/SES-11 Shipped from Toulouse to the Cape for SpaceX Launch

Written on 20 Sep 2017

With 12 days to go until the NET, I have to think that either:

1. The satellite was already there, and the press release just is late, or...

2. SpaceX+SES have gotten much faster at integration than the SpaceX payload guide suggests, or...

3. October 2 isn't realistic.

Anyone have any idea which?

From this very thread, only 11 posts ago...

[Spaceflight Now] Launch operators expect minimal delays from Hurricane Irma
Quote
SES officials said the SES 11/EchoStar 105 satellite weathered the storm without damage inside a SpaceX-owned clean room in a hangar near pad 40. If ground crews can resume work on the satellite within a few days, the payload could still be ready for liftoff in early October.

Offline crandles57

  • Member
  • Posts: 18
  • Sychdyn
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 8
Quote
10 days (Sept. 29) to SpaceX Falcon 9 (SES-11) Static Fire...at 39A. Oct. 2 launch, then all hands on deck to prep 39A TEL for Falcon Heavy.

https://twitter.com/NASASpaceflight/status/910239656779943937

dated 19 Sep 2017

Seems suggestive of move to SLC-40 even if followed by
Quote
You know I dare not call 40 until I see it on a schedule :)

Offline macpacheco

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 804
  • Vitoria-ES-Brazil
  • Liked: 315
  • Likes Given: 2327
There's a distinct possibility that SES required an expendable full performance launch for this launch.
I'd say its 50/50 between ASDS recovery and expendable for full performance.
Looking for companies doing great things for much more than money

Online ZachS09

There's a distinct possibility that SES required an expendable full performance launch for this launch.
I'd say its 50/50 between ASDS recovery and expendable for full performance.

I thought that SES-11/EchoStar 105 weighed 5,200 kilograms and Falcon 9's maximum payload to GTO while recovering the first stage was 5,500 kilograms.
"Liftoff of Falcon 9: the world's first reflight of an orbital-class rocket."

Offline macpacheco

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 804
  • Vitoria-ES-Brazil
  • Liked: 315
  • Likes Given: 2327
There's a distinct possibility that SES required an expendable full performance launch for this launch.
I'd say its 50/50 between ASDS recovery and expendable for full performance.

I thought that SES-11/EchoStar 105 weighed 5,200 kilograms and Falcon 9's maximum payload to GTO while recovering the first stage was 5,500 kilograms.

That depends on which orbit SpaceX will target for the launch.
5,500 Kg is for recovery on a standard GTO-1800 m/s mission.
Target GTO-1600 m/s (or better) and recovery might not be possible.
That's what full performance means for a launch like that.
Looking for companies doing great things for much more than money

Offline zubenelgenubi

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1071
  • Arc to Arcturus, then Spike to Spica
  • Commonwealth of Virginia
  • Liked: 222
  • Likes Given: 615
Cross-posting a re-post from the NROL-52 thread:
Re-posting some information re: time-proximate launches, originally from the TDRS-M thread.
Thank you again to Jim.
***

48 hours or less to re-configure the Eastern range.
Launches on October 5 and 7, both from KSC/Canaveral, are possible.

Re: TDRSS use/possible conflict of use as part of launch ops.
Atlas V and Delta IV use TDRSS; Falcon 9 does not.

NSF experts, please correct if I'm wrong:

1.  Currently, it takes approximately 3 days to reconfigure the launch range between Canaveral/KSC launches.  Correct?

2.  Some, but not all United States launches use TDRSS during launch.  Atlas V/Delta IV: yes; Falcon 9: no?
***

3.  Launching TDRS-M from Canaveral on 8/10, followed by NROL-42 from Vandenberg, both on Atlas V's, is eminently do-able, yes?

4. Launching NROL-42 on Atlas V, from Vandenberg on 8/14, followed by launching Dragon, on Falcon 9, from KSC later on the same day--also possible?  No interference between the launch assets?

5. Are there any personnel that will work 2, or all 3, of these launches?

Thank you in advance!

1. 48 or less

2. correct

3. yes, but not going to happen

4. yes

5.  yes
« Last Edit: 09/22/2017 05:47 PM by zubenelgenubi »
Support your local planetarium!

Online ZachS09

I haven't done this in 14 months, but I'll be recording video of the launch of SES-11/EchoStar 105 from one of Embry-Riddle's observation decks instead of covering the whole thing from start to finish.

Should be a picturesque view given that the university is 48.22 miles (77.6 kilometers) away from LC-39A.
"Liftoff of Falcon 9: the world's first reflight of an orbital-class rocket."

Offline obi-wan

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 260
  • Liked: 574
  • Likes Given: 3
Since it's only a few days until flight, have we gotten any definitive word on whether SES-11 is going to be an ASDS recovery or full expendable?

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1828
  • US
  • Liked: 1245
  • Likes Given: 935
Since it's only a few days until flight, have we gotten any definitive word on whether SES-11 is going to be an ASDS recovery or full expendable?

It should be ASDS based on the mass (5200kg), and the FCC permit we think corresponds to this flight has ASDS landing.  It's a similar mass to SES-10.

Offline Flying Beaver

Since it's only a few days until flight, have we gotten any definitive word on whether SES-11 is going to be an ASDS recovery or full expendable?

It should be ASDS based on the mass (5200kg), and the FCC permit we think corresponds to this flight has ASDS landing.  It's a similar mass to SES-10.

Also Elon says so.

elonmusk Aiming for two rocket landings in 48 hours this weekend
« Last Edit: 10/04/2017 04:02 AM by Flying Beaver »
Saw OG-2 Booster Land in person 21/12/2015.

Offline Eagandale4114

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 158
  • Liked: 163
  • Likes Given: 259
Since it's only a few days until flight, have we gotten any definitive word on whether SES-11 is going to be an ASDS recovery or full expendable?

It should be ASDS based on the mass (5200kg), and the FCC permit we think corresponds to this flight has ASDS landing.  It's a similar mass to SES-10.

Also Elon says so.

elonmusk Aiming for two rocket landings in 48 hours this weekend

Direct link to the post: https://www.instagram.com/p/BZzchfKg07f/?taken-by=elonmusk

Online vaporcobra

And FWIW, per Musk's 48 hours, the current schedule actually points to 36 38 hour back-to-back landings if schedules hold. Weather for the rest of the week at KSC is looking rainy and somewhat stormy, so upper level winds may be a bit rowdy. We'll see.
« Last Edit: 10/04/2017 05:58 PM by vaporcobra »

Offline Comga

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3886
  • Liked: 1213
  • Likes Given: 1037
And FWIW, per Musk's 48 hours, the current schedule actually points to sub-36 hour back-to-back landings if schedules hold. Weather for the rest of the week at KSC is looking rainy and somewhat stormy, so upper level winds may be a bit rowdy. We'll see.
Nit: Because of the time zone difference it's less than 38 hours
What kind of wastrels would dump a perfectly good booster in the ocean after just one use?

Offline Mike_1179

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 541
  • New Jersey
  • Liked: 215
  • Likes Given: 46
Hope this slows down or track on the western side of the cone.

Online spacenut

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2120
  • East Alabama
  • Liked: 297
  • Likes Given: 191
When will SpaceX post the webcast information?

Offline Grendal

  • Member
  • Posts: 7
  • Liked: 7
  • Likes Given: 5
When will SpaceX post the webcast information?

About 18 to 24 hours prior to launch.

Offline HVM

  • Member
  • Posts: 87
  • Finland
  • Liked: 84
  • Likes Given: 71
Weather seems bad for tomorrow's launch of NROL-52. Which one get the launch day, if Friday is scrub too?

Offline SmallKing

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 284
  • Zhejiang, China
  • Liked: 119
  • Likes Given: 164
Weather seems bad for tomorrow's launch of NROL-52. Which one get the launch day, if Friday is scrub too?
Both I thought ;)
Quote
Bill Nelson‏Verified account @SenBillNelson  12h12 hours ago
More
 Good news for Florida’s Space Coast. Just spoke w/ Air Force Gen. Monteith - he confirmed the Cape is ready to handle two launches in a day.
https://twitter.com/SenBillNelson/status/915671776356691969
« Last Edit: 10/05/2017 08:10 AM by SmallKing »
Some are bound for happiness, some are bound to glory, some are bound to live with less, who can tell your story?

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3926
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 2590
  • Likes Given: 861
Weather seems bad for tomorrow's launch of NROL-52. Which one get the launch day, if Friday is scrub too?

I was wondering too. I don't know what it means, but the 45th have removed the link to the SES-11 weather forecast form their webpage (although the file is still accessable via direct link).

Online ClayJar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 300
  • Baton Rouge, LA, USA
  • Liked: 613
  • Likes Given: 59
Hope this slows down or track on the western side of the cone.
Well, maybe not *directly* at Baton Rouge, if you don't mind.

Offline toruonu

Weather seems bad for tomorrow's launch of NROL-52. Which one get the launch day, if Friday is scrub too?
Both I thought ;)
Quote
Bill Nelson‏Verified account @SenBillNelson  12h12 hours ago
More
 Good news for Florida’s Space Coast. Just spoke w/ Air Force Gen. Monteith - he confirmed the Cape is ready to handle two launches in a day.
https://twitter.com/SenBillNelson/status/915671776356691969

Wait, two launches from different providers? That'd be news.

Offline SmallKing

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 284
  • Zhejiang, China
  • Liked: 119
  • Likes Given: 164
Wait, two launches from different providers? That'd be news.
I'm afraid not. 45SW just updated the NROL52 weather forecast for the second attempt and deleted SES11s
Some are bound for happiness, some are bound to glory, some are bound to live with less, who can tell your story?

Offline philw1776

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 826
  • Seacoast NH
  • Liked: 466
  • Likes Given: 237
Delayed till NET Wednesday per update post.  "Engine issue"  Possibly revealed in static fire.
“When it looks more like an alien dreadnought, that’s when you know you’ve won.”

Offline Wolfram66

Delayed till NET Wednesday per update post.  "Engine issue"  Possibly revealed in static fire.

SFN Has updated their story:
Quote
Story updated at 9:50 a.m. EDT (1350 GMT) to remove engine reference.
https://spaceflightnow.com/2017/10/05/spacex-delays-falcon-9-launch-of-tv-broadcast-satellite/

Online Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3396
  • California
  • Liked: 2635
  • Likes Given: 1664
Yes NROL52 seems to be the reason here.

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2581
  • Liked: 1158
  • Likes Given: 731
Yes NROL52 seems to be the reason here.

SFN still says "a potential technical issue on the rocket."

Online KaiFarrimond

  • Member
  • Posts: 45
  • England, United Kingdom
  • Liked: 13
  • Likes Given: 116
When will SpaceX post the webcast information?
Usually a day before launch
Of Course I Still Love You; We Have A Falcon 9 Onboard!

Offline vandersons

  • Member
  • Posts: 56
  • Ireland
  • Liked: 45
  • Likes Given: 108
Yes NROL52 seems to be the reason here.

The L2 thread has more info on it.

Offline king1999

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 234
  • F-Niner Fan
  • Atlanta, GA
  • Liked: 140
  • Likes Given: 345
Yes NROL52 seems to be the reason here.

SFN still says "a potential technical issue on the rocket."

Maybe it has something to do with being a reuse booster?

Offline ChrisC

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1410
  • Liked: 244
  • Likes Given: 244
Assuming they stick with Oct 11th, would the launch window still be the same 6:53-8:53 p.m. EDT?
NASA TV in HD:  history, FAQ and latest status

Offline ChrisGebhardt

  • Assistant Managing Editor
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5188
  • ad astra scientia
  • ~1 AU
  • Liked: 1773
  • Likes Given: 311
Assuming they stick with Oct 11th, would the launch window still be the same 6:53-8:53 p.m. EDT?

Generally speaking, yes.  It will be the same approximate time.  Probably a window open 4 or so minutes earlier -- based on the window moving 5mins earlier when the launch moved from 2 Oct to 7 Oct.
« Last Edit: 10/05/2017 08:13 PM by ChrisGebhardt »

Offline zubenelgenubi

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1071
  • Arc to Arcturus, then Spike to Spica
  • Commonwealth of Virginia
  • Liked: 222
  • Likes Given: 615
Re: NROL-52 and this launch

If the Atlas V roll-back to the VIF for removal, replacement, and retesting of the LV telemetry transmitter, followed by rolling the Atlas V back again to the pad, takes more than 3 or 4 days,

And if there are no further changes to the SES 11 launch campaign,

Then this Falcon 9 will launch first.
« Last Edit: 10/07/2017 10:14 AM by zubenelgenubi »
Support your local planetarium!

Offline Stranger

  • Member
  • Posts: 31
  • Liked: 7
  • Likes Given: 9
"The company did not disclose a reason for the four-day slip, but one source said SpaceX needed to conduct some “minor engine rework” on the Falcon 9."
https://spaceflightnow.com/2017/10/05/spacex-delays-falcon-9-launch-of-tv-broadcast-satellite/

reused problem?

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3926
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 2590
  • Likes Given: 861
Re: NROL-52 and this launch

If the Atlas V roll-back to the VIF for removal, replacement, and retesting of the LV telemetry transmitter, followed by rolling the Atlas V back again to the pad, takes more than 3 or 4 days,

And if there are no further changes to the SES 11 launch campaign,

Then this Falcon 9 will launch first.

This now appears to be confirmed - revised weather forecast for SES-11 launch tomorrow, with new NROL-52 forecast for Saturday.

Offline EspenU

  • Newbie Spacegeek
  • Member
  • Posts: 37
  • Norway
  • Liked: 21
  • Likes Given: 1
I noticed that the time from MECO to second engine start is 5 seconds. Iridium-3 was 13 seconds and SES-10 was 11 seconds.
The benefits of reduced coast time between stages is obvious, but I'm surprised they have managed to reduce the coast by more than 50% compared to the last SES mission.

Note that all numbers are taken from the mission press kits's.

Online wardy89

  • Member
  • Posts: 66
  • UK
  • Liked: 65
  • Likes Given: 40
I noticed that the time from MECO to second engine start is 5 seconds. Iridium-3 was 13 seconds and SES-10 was 11 seconds.
The benefits of reduced coast time between stages is obvious, but I'm surprised they have managed to reduce the coast by more than 50% compared to the last SES mission.

Note that all numbers are taken from the mission press kits's.

I might be totally wrong on this but i thought that the "long" coasts we have been seeing between MECO and 2nd stage ignition recently is purposely done so that the 1st stage has a chance to begin its flip, so that when the 2nd stage ignites the exhaust plume does less dames to the interstage and all the electronics housed within.

Offline EspenU

  • Newbie Spacegeek
  • Member
  • Posts: 37
  • Norway
  • Liked: 21
  • Likes Given: 1
I noticed that the time from MECO to second engine start is 5 seconds. Iridium-3 was 13 seconds and SES-10 was 11 seconds.
The benefits of reduced coast time between stages is obvious, but I'm surprised they have managed to reduce the coast by more than 50% compared to the last SES mission.

Note that all numbers are taken from the mission press kits's.

I might be totally wrong on this but i thought that the "long" coasts we have been seeing between MECO and 2nd stage ignition recently is purposely done so that the 1st stage has a chance to begin its flip, so that when the 2nd stage ignites the exhaust plume does less dames to the interstage and all the electronics housed within.

I understand the reasoning. However, this flight has an ASDS landing, so it involves a flip.
In addition, the last expendable launch (Intelsat 35e) also had an 11 sec coast (again, the time is from the press kit, not from web cast measurements).

Offline deruch

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1452
  • California
  • Liked: 1120
  • Likes Given: 1526
I at one time tracked the amount of time allowed for stage separation from a bunch of press kits and I found that there was a large amount of variability in the listed times from one mission to the next.  None of which seemed to agree with those observed in the actual webcasts.  I don't think you can take the press kit timings as being accurate for that particular interval.
« Last Edit: 10/11/2017 01:41 PM by deruch »
Shouldn't reality posts be in "Advanced concepts"?  --Nomadd

Online wardy89

  • Member
  • Posts: 66
  • UK
  • Liked: 65
  • Likes Given: 40
I noticed that the time from MECO to second engine start is 5 seconds. Iridium-3 was 13 seconds and SES-10 was 11 seconds.
The benefits of reduced coast time between stages is obvious, but I'm surprised they have managed to reduce the coast by more than 50% compared to the last SES mission.

Note that all numbers are taken from the mission press kits's.

I might be totally wrong on this but i thought that the "long" coasts we have been seeing between MECO and 2nd stage ignition recently is purposely done so that the 1st stage has a chance to begin its flip, so that when the 2nd stage ignites the exhaust plume does less dames to the interstage and all the electronics housed within.

I understand the reasoning. However, this flight has an ASDS landing, so it involves a flip.
In addition, the last expendable launch (Intelsat 35e) also had an 11 sec coast (again, the time is from the press kit, not from web cast measurements).

The press kit does say that they are approximate timings you would have to check the webcasts to see what the actual timing are. This flight will require a flip yes but because there is no boost back burn for this mission they aren't is so much of a rush to get it done perhaps?

As for Intelsat 35e perhaps flying expendable with that mission they ended up with more margin.

The other possibility is that it is a typo in the press Kit.

Offline Crispy

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 563
  • London
  • Liked: 31
  • Likes Given: 6
Just realised the launch window opens at 3 minutes to sunset.
https://www.timeanddate.com/sun/usa/cape-canaveral
Should make for some beautiful launch footage and photos :)

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2581
  • Liked: 1158
  • Likes Given: 731
Looks pretty clean for a used rocket.

Offline jpo234

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 546
  • Liked: 353
  • Likes Given: 52


LD giving the abort instructions. 

If urgent, call "HOLD HOLD HOLD" over the net.

If non-urgent, brief the LD and a decision whether or not to abort will then be made.

Was this just an explanation of the abort procedure or was there an abort called?
You want to be inspired by things. You want to wake up in the morning and think the future is going to be great. That's what being a spacefaring civilization is all about. It's about believing in the future and believing the future will be better than the past. And I can't think of anything more exciting than being out there among the stars.

Offline Rebel44

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 281
  • Liked: 132
  • Likes Given: 678


LD giving the abort instructions. 

If urgent, call "HOLD HOLD HOLD" over the net.

If non-urgent, brief the LD and a decision whether or not to abort will then be made.

Was this just an explanation of the abort procedure or was there an abort called?

Just an explanation

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1828
  • US
  • Liked: 1245
  • Likes Given: 935
For all those who think SpaceX is waiting on payloads...

Quote
[SpaceflightNow] SES-11 Coverage

Halliwell said SES did not receive a significant financial discount from SpaceX in switching the SES 11/EchoStar 105 launch to a reused booster, but the agreement did result in an earlier launch date.
...
"We should have launched a year ago, Halliwell said. "We've been waiting for a launch for a long, long time."
...
Without taking the opportunity to fly on a reused rocket, Halliwell said it's likely the launch of SES 11/EchoStar 105 "would have been somewhat delayed because we would have had to wait for hardware to become available for us."

Offline Craig_VG

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 116
  • Liked: 240
  • Likes Given: 337
Some interesting yellow beams added to the T/E

Offline mvpel

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1117
  • New Hampshire
  • Liked: 1280
  • Likes Given: 1674
I was wondering about those too. I wonder if it might be FH-related.
"Ugly programs are like ugly suspension bridges: they're much more liable to collapse than pretty ones, because the way humans (especially engineer-humans) perceive beauty is intimately related to our ability to process and understand complexity. A language that makes it hard to write elegant code makes it hard to write good code." - Eric S. Raymond

Offline clegg78

  • I play KSP, so I know things about rockets and stuff... :)
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 120
  • Denver, CO
  • Liked: 88
  • Likes Given: 15
Back to using the aluminum grid fins?  I thought for high energy entries like this they would be using Ti for all of them.   These popped out much faster too so I am assuming block 3 mechanisms and such behind the fins?
Buy the Ticket, Take the Ride - Hunter S Thompson

Offline clegg78

  • I play KSP, so I know things about rockets and stuff... :)
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 120
  • Denver, CO
  • Liked: 88
  • Likes Given: 15
Whoa that sucker was coming in HOT... never seen plasma come off the base like that!
Buy the Ticket, Take the Ride - Hunter S Thompson

Offline jimbowman

  • Member
  • Posts: 86
  • Liked: 51
  • Likes Given: 32
Scared me for a minute as well haha. All good.
« Last Edit: 10/11/2017 11:02 PM by jimbowman »

Offline Jdeshetler

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 531
  • Silicon Valley, CA
  • Liked: 1579
  • Likes Given: 1064
Boy, it's time for Block 5 booster......

Offline clegg78

  • I play KSP, so I know things about rockets and stuff... :)
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 120
  • Denver, CO
  • Liked: 88
  • Likes Given: 15
That is amazing...  that sucker was burning up coming in and still nailed it!  I wonder how much of the gridfins were left?!
Buy the Ticket, Take the Ride - Hunter S Thompson

Offline Joffan

  • NSF Irregular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1241
  • Liked: 257
  • Likes Given: 737
Wow, I thought that SpaceX had overcooked that one. But yet another great landing.
When I say "Jump!", you say "To which orbital inclination?"

Offline whitelancer64

Some interesting yellow beams added to the T/E

Those held a strap for supporting the fairing for the X-37B launch. It may be used again for large or heavy payloads.
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Online catdlr

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4508
  • Marina del Rey, California, USA
  • Liked: 1397
  • Likes Given: 841
This mark's the first time two 1st stage Falcon's are on barges out on the ocean at the same time.
« Last Edit: 10/11/2017 11:04 PM by catdlr »
Tony De La Rosa

Offline clevelas

  • Member
  • Posts: 47
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 0
I thought for sure they'd lost it when telemetry cut out.  Glad to see it on deck.

Offline mvpel

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1117
  • New Hampshire
  • Liked: 1280
  • Likes Given: 1674
Must have roasted the video downlink! Maybe that's what one of those sparks flying was. Wow! I can't wait to see what it looks like in daylight.
"Ugly programs are like ugly suspension bridges: they're much more liable to collapse than pretty ones, because the way humans (especially engineer-humans) perceive beauty is intimately related to our ability to process and understand complexity. A language that makes it hard to write elegant code makes it hard to write good code." - Eric S. Raymond

Offline gideonlow

  • Member
  • Posts: 8
  • Capitola, CA
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 475
Wow, I thought that SpaceX had overcooked that one. But yet another great landing.

White-hot/glowing Grid Fins right when the video cut out!  Another perfect landing.  Great job SpaceX!!!

Offline Jdeshetler

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 531
  • Silicon Valley, CA
  • Liked: 1579
  • Likes Given: 1064
Just like Ironman Movie without CGI......
« Last Edit: 10/11/2017 11:05 PM by Jdeshetler »

Offline jimbowman

  • Member
  • Posts: 86
  • Liked: 51
  • Likes Given: 32
Was it just because it was dark out the heat on the grin fins was more visible? Was the Iridium launch using titanium?
« Last Edit: 10/11/2017 11:06 PM by jimbowman »

Offline clegg78

  • I play KSP, so I know things about rockets and stuff... :)
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 120
  • Denver, CO
  • Liked: 88
  • Likes Given: 15
Must have roasted the video downlink! Maybe that's what one of those sparks flying was. Wow! I can't wait to see what it looks like in daylight.
Could also be the amount of plasma that was wrapping around the stage probably caused the dropout...  I am impressed the hardware on the bottom of the stage handled that... I wonder if they were doing some kind of different entry profile to test the edge scenarios of what these stages can handle in the build up to the Block 5?  That definitely looked different than past high energy entries.
Buy the Ticket, Take the Ride - Hunter S Thompson

Online Pete

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 126
  • Cubicle
  • Liked: 101
  • Likes Given: 55
I have the vague feeling that those gridfins are NOT going to be reusable!
That was the hottest entry I've seen yet.

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3926
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 2590
  • Likes Given: 861
This mark's the first time two 1st stage Falcon's are on barges out on the ocean at the same time.

I think it’s the second time - there was BulgariaSat-1 and Iridium 2 in late June, also only 2 days apart.

Offline andrewsdanj

  • Member
  • Posts: 77
  • Liked: 40
  • Likes Given: 20
Holy glowing gridfins, batman! Sheesh that looked toasty.

Online catdlr

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4508
  • Marina del Rey, California, USA
  • Liked: 1397
  • Likes Given: 841
This mark's the first time two 1st stage Falcon's are on barges out on the ocean at the same time.

I think it’s the second time - there was BulgariaSat-1 and Iridium 2 in late June, also only 2 days apart.

Ah, yes, thanks, FutureSpaceTourist.
« Last Edit: 10/11/2017 11:10 PM by catdlr »
Tony De La Rosa

Offline mvpel

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1117
  • New Hampshire
  • Liked: 1280
  • Likes Given: 1674
Could also be the amount of plasma that was wrapping around the stage probably caused the dropout...  I am impressed the hardware on the bottom of the stage handled that... I wonder if they were doing some kind of different entry profile to test the edge scenarios of what these stages can handle in the build up to the Block 5?  That definitely looked different than past high energy entries.

I was thinking the same thing about the plasma, but then got worried when it didn't pick up again. Held my breath until I started hearing the descent callouts.

I was really amazed to see that it was showing 6,000 km/h when the entry burn ended, is that a record?
"Ugly programs are like ugly suspension bridges: they're much more liable to collapse than pretty ones, because the way humans (especially engineer-humans) perceive beauty is intimately related to our ability to process and understand complexity. A language that makes it hard to write elegant code makes it hard to write good code." - Eric S. Raymond

Offline Bargemanos

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 316
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 93
  • Likes Given: 575
Wow, thought this one was lost.
Glad it landed..


One for the "i love space(x) and have no life books" (take no offend, i don't)wife))
« Last Edit: 10/11/2017 11:11 PM by Bargemanos »

Offline ehb

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 166
  • Liked: 137
  • Likes Given: 365
Was it just because it was dark out the heat on the grin fins was more visible? Was the Iridium launch using titanium?
Iridium was also aluminum
Was stated during the launch webcast due to lower energy trajectory.

This SES-11 was obviously not a lower energy trajectory, so we can assume they are using (or rather burning) up their stock of aluminum ones.

Offline HVM

  • Member
  • Posts: 87
  • Finland
  • Liked: 84
  • Likes Given: 71
Yeah, those gridfins were bright as f@*k! And visible plasma.

Offline clegg78

  • I play KSP, so I know things about rockets and stuff... :)
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 120
  • Denver, CO
  • Liked: 88
  • Likes Given: 15


I was thinking the same thing about the plasma, but then got worried when it didn't pick up again. Held my breath until I started hearing the descent callouts.

I was really amazed to see that it was showing 6,000 km/h when the entry burn ended, is that a record?
I am sure some of the spacex stats geeks around here will have that info soon!   But yeah 6000 seems pretty quick.  Also since they arent doing 3 engine landing burn attempts anymore (for now) They could be hunting for ways to trim down on the entry burn requirements by seeing how little they need to slow the stage down :) "This one wasnt burned up that badly?  Hmmm, cut the burn off another 2 seconds early and see what happens!  Its just a block 3!"
Buy the Ticket, Take the Ride - Hunter S Thompson

Offline gideonlow

  • Member
  • Posts: 8
  • Capitola, CA
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 475
Must have roasted the video downlink! Maybe that's what one of those sparks flying was. Wow! I can't wait to see what it looks like in daylight.
Could also be the amount of plasma that was wrapping around the stage probably caused the dropout...  I am impressed the hardware on the bottom of the stage handled that... I wonder if they were doing some kind of different entry profile to test the edge scenarios of what these stages can handle in the build up to the Block 5?  That definitely looked different than past high energy entries.

The heating also seemed asymmetric, with the right-hand fin heating first.  I haven't seen this level of detail in a GTO/ASDS launch/landing before, so maybe that wasn't new, but I think you're on to something.

Offline Rebel44

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 281
  • Liked: 132
  • Likes Given: 678
Could also be the amount of plasma that was wrapping around the stage probably caused the dropout...  I am impressed the hardware on the bottom of the stage handled that... I wonder if they were doing some kind of different entry profile to test the edge scenarios of what these stages can handle in the build up to the Block 5?  That definitely looked different than past high energy entries.

I was thinking the same thing about the plasma, but then got worried when it didn't pick up again. Held my breath until I started hearing the descent callouts.

I was really amazed to see that it was showing 6,000 km/h when the entry burn ended, is that a record?

During BulgariaSat-1 launch 1st stage was traveling at 6600km/h hen the entry burn ended.

Offline ulm_atms

  • Rocket Junky
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 103
  • To boldly go where no government has gone before.
  • Calhoun, LA
  • Liked: 74
  • Likes Given: 38
Ready for a scary thought....BulgariaSat-1 was going ~600km/h faster at the end of the entry burn then this one!!




Offline Bargemanos

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 316
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 93
  • Likes Given: 575
Correct me if i'm wrong but the deployment of the fins was rather early not?

Offline HankinNM

  • Member
  • Posts: 28
  • Mountainair, NM
  • Liked: 17
  • Likes Given: 26
Did anyone have the audio on the livestream go out for a few minutes?
Not an engineer or a mathematician.  Just a rabid space/astronomy freak and Spacex 'groupie'.

Offline Galactic Penguin SST

It seems that telemetry (not just video) from the 1st stage was lost towards the end of the entry burn (?) and those monitoring had to use external sources to keep track of it (??).
Had that happened before AFTS on that stage had been safe, would it blew the stage up?  :-\
Chinese spaceflight is a cosmic riddle wrapped in a galactic mystery inside an orbital enigma... - (not) Winston Churchill

Offline ddeflyer

  • Member
  • Posts: 17
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 9
The sight as the video cut out really looked at first like things were going wrong, but I just watched the BulgariaSat-1 launch and it did about the same thing (lots of glowing and then video cutout) though with much much more lighting so it didn't look at absurdly crazy.

Imagine what it would look like on a pre-dawn launch; you could write a poem about "landing by plasma light"!

Offline rockets4life97

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 367
  • Liked: 166
  • Likes Given: 104
SES is one of SpaceX's most important commercial customers. They also seem fully on board the reused booster bandwagon. I expect SpaceX will be winning a large share of most future SES launches and most (if not all) will be un re-used boosters.

Offline skyguy

  • Enthusiast
  • Member
  • Posts: 27
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 6
From 8:45 to 8:52 of this video, I think I'm seeing the landing burn at the horizon.  Is that right?

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=43728.msg1735564#msg1735564

Offline Norm38

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 968
  • Liked: 368
  • Likes Given: 492
No, that's orbital sunset. The second stage popped up into sunlight but then the sun fell back down below the horizon.
« Last Edit: 10/12/2017 12:08 AM by Norm38 »

Online vaporcobra

An absolutely exceptional landing, IMHO. The plasma and white-hot grid fins were hard to believe.

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12668
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 3461
  • Likes Given: 578
Looks like another stage that won't fly again.  There have been 12 first stage recovery flights this year, but only three of them were GTO missions and all three were first stage reflights (using "used" first stages).  My guess is that these are R&D flights on the reuse side that won't see their stages used again (the SES-10 and Bulgariasat stages have been retired or mothballed).  They would have been expendable flights otherwise.  The other three GTO missions this year were expendable missions.

A bit of a weenie roast after this landing!

 - Ed Kyle 
« Last Edit: 10/12/2017 12:25 AM by edkyle99 »

Offline ulm_atms

  • Rocket Junky
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 103
  • To boldly go where no government has gone before.
  • Calhoun, LA
  • Liked: 74
  • Likes Given: 38
On the bright side...this one doesn't seem to be leaning...

Looks like another stage that won't fly again.

Would be interesting if one of these 2x cores were used for the abort test of the dragon 2.  If i remember right, only three engines are needed for the test.  I think this core might make a good core for the abort test....and show a "sort of" third reuse.

Edit: Typo
« Last Edit: 10/12/2017 12:34 AM by ulm_atms »

Offline ddeflyer

  • Member
  • Posts: 17
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 9
If you think about it, the control algorithms must be awfully impressive to deal with the rapidly changing flight dynamics! They deal with essentially no atmosphere, supersonic thin through thicker atmosphere, transonic, and subsonic with three different control methods of varying power all of which substantially change over time. I mean, the rocket flies beautifully with the grid fins vaporizing during flight! Imagine how the system must deal with some fins producing more drag (but not predictable before hand) from worse and worse flow properties (due to some parts no longer being there). I mean, adaptive controls have been in flight systems for ages but its still amazing just how controlled these flights are with so much changing!

(Edited because autocorrect was having too much fun)
« Last Edit: 10/12/2017 04:40 AM by ddeflyer »

Offline Chris_Pi

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 176
  • Wisconsin
  • Liked: 74
  • Likes Given: 80
That looked awfully toasty. Was wondering for a bit if the stage could handle losing a gridfin, But apparently either it didn't or can - It got back to the barge fine. Will definitely be interesting when it's back in port to see closer-up photos of the stage, Gridfins in particular.

Offline punder

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 416
  • Liked: 326
  • Likes Given: 190
Correct me if i'm wrong but the deployment of the fins was rather early not?

Seemed that way to me too.

Sorry, I know you all see this question way too much  :D  but were these fins aluminum or titanium? I'm having a hard time believing aluminum would glow like a klieg light without utterly disintegrating.

Offline ulm_atms

  • Rocket Junky
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 103
  • To boldly go where no government has gone before.
  • Calhoun, LA
  • Liked: 74
  • Likes Given: 38
Correct me if i'm wrong but the deployment of the fins was rather early not?

Seemed that way to me too.

Sorry, I know you all see this question way too much  :D  but were these fins aluminum or titanium? I'm having a hard time believing aluminum would glow like a klieg light without utterly disintegrating.

Aluminum 100%

Offline Chris_Pi

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 176
  • Wisconsin
  • Liked: 74
  • Likes Given: 80
The titanium fins are slightly longer and cover the bottom-of-fin attach point protrusion on the body completely, Have a scalloped front face, And for the moment are unpainted and dark grayish instead of white.

As far as the glow, I'm halfway surprised I never saw big chunks blowing by the camera. Whatever ablative coating is used on them earned it's pay today.

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7837
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 2108
  • Likes Given: 4962
I must say when I saw chunks flying off and then losing the down-link I thought we lost the stage but the tough old bird came through... 8)
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob, Physics instructor, aviator, vintage auto racer

Offline rickl

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 853
  • Pennsylvania, USA
  • Liked: 97
  • Likes Given: 124
Yes, when I saw the grid fins glowing so bright and then they lost telemetry, I thought they might have lost the stage.

It seems like they are experimenting with various entry and landing profiles to learn what they can get away with, and why not?  They have plenty of stages to work with.  It makes sense to me.

As an aside, on their webcasts, I wish they would show the Stage 1 telemetry on the left side of the screen and the Stage 2 telemetry on the right.
Nominal now means "Yeehah!!"

Online meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7622
  • N. California
  • Liked: 3942
  • Likes Given: 816
Correct me if i'm wrong but the deployment of the fins was rather early not?

Seemed that way to me too.

Sorry, I know you all see this question way too much  :D  but were these fins aluminum or titanium? I'm having a hard time believing aluminum would glow like a klieg light without utterly disintegrating.

The grid fins were not "White hot", since Aluminum, even when "red hot", is already without any strength.

There are two options:

A very over-exposed image show with a filter-less camera that picks up near infra-red, and so even the slightest glow in human-invisible wavelengths shows up as "white hot".

A thermal coating ablating while protecting the Aluminum underneath.

ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline Norm38

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 968
  • Liked: 368
  • Likes Given: 492
So when do they start introducing Inconel heat shields on these R&D flights?  Like the titanium grid fins?

Online meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7622
  • N. California
  • Liked: 3942
  • Likes Given: 816
Looks like another stage that won't fly again.  There have been 12 first stage recovery flights this year, but only three of them were GTO missions and all three were first stage reflights (using "used" first stages).  My guess is that these are R&D flights on the reuse side that won't see their stages used again (the SES-10 and Bulgariasat stages have been retired or mothballed).  They would have been expendable flights otherwise.  The other three GTO missions this year were expendable missions.

A bit of a weenie roast after this landing!

 - Ed Kyle

People have been saying that on every core that comes down a little stressed.

Remember Thaicom 8? 

Not sure what the point is, but it's a popular refrain.
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Online yokem55

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 433
  • Oregon (Ore-uh-gun dammit)
  • Liked: 234
  • Likes Given: 12
Looks like another stage that won't fly again.  There have been 12 first stage recovery flights this year, but only three of them were GTO missions and all three were first stage reflights (using "used" first stages).  My guess is that these are R&D flights on the reuse side that won't see their stages used again (the SES-10 and Bulgariasat stages have been retired or mothballed).  They would have been expendable flights otherwise.  The other three GTO missions this year were expendable missions.

A bit of a weenie roast after this landing!

 - Ed Kyle

People have been saying that on every core that comes down a little stressed.

Remember Thaicom 8? 

Not sure what the point is, but it's a popular refrain.
Regardless of if it can be reflown, they won't do any 3rd flights for anything as long as they have single flight cores hanging around everywhere or it makes more sense to fly/refly block 5 cores.

Online ZachS09

Having arrived at one of Embry Riddle University's observation decks at 5:40 PM, I stayed there for over an hour while the Falcon 9 rocket launched the SES-11/EchoStar 105 satellite from 48 miles away.

Below this post is a video I made based on the footage I shot, using two royalty-free songs from incompetech, audio made from a mixture of previous SpaceX technical webcasts, footage from the SES-11/EchoStar 105 webcast, and stock footage from the JCSat 14 landing in May 2016.

Also took a few photos of the sunlit contrail afterwards.

« Last Edit: 10/12/2017 03:13 AM by ZachS09 »
"Liftoff of Falcon 9: the world's first reflight of an orbital-class rocket."

Offline georgegassaway

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 164
    • George's Rockets
  • Liked: 172
  • Likes Given: 61
Grid fins seemed to be extra-bright due to the camera exposure having adjusted for the very low ambient light levels (launched near sunset, coming down into mostly darkness).

And not  "white hot" either. Overexposure of what in previous launches (re-entries) like this, looked to be red-hot to orange-hot when there was lots of background lighting of the sun-illuminated Earth.

Online meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7622
  • N. California
  • Liked: 3942
  • Likes Given: 816
Looks like another stage that won't fly again.  There have been 12 first stage recovery flights this year, but only three of them were GTO missions and all three were first stage reflights (using "used" first stages).  My guess is that these are R&D flights on the reuse side that won't see their stages used again (the SES-10 and Bulgariasat stages have been retired or mothballed).  They would have been expendable flights otherwise.  The other three GTO missions this year were expendable missions.

A bit of a weenie roast after this landing!

 - Ed Kyle

People have been saying that on every core that comes down a little stressed.

Remember Thaicom 8? 

Not sure what the point is, but it's a popular refrain.
Regardless of if it can be reflown, they won't do any 3rd flights for anything as long as they have single flight cores hanging around everywhere or it makes more sense to fly/refly block 5 cores.
With that I agree. Just got tired of all the internet experts declaring with such confidence (and no evidence) that "this landing was so rough, clearly the stage will never fly again".

These are the same people that also claim how uneconomical the whole endevour is.

So, you know, had to point out the obvious.
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline llanitedave

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2087
  • Nevada Desert
  • Liked: 1267
  • Likes Given: 1465
If you think about it, the control algorithms must be awfully impressive to deal with the rapidly changing flight dynamics! They deal with essentially no atmosphere, supersonic thin through thicker atmosphere, transoceanic, and subsonic with three different control methods of varying power all of which substantially change over time. I mean, the rocket flies beautifully with the grid fins vaporizing during flight! Imagine how the system must deal with some fins producing more drag (but not predictable before hand drag) from worse and worse flow properties (due to some parts no longer being there). I mean, adaptive controls have been in flight systems for ages but its still amazing just how controlled these flights are with so much changing!

Somebody did their calculus homework in school!
"I've just abducted an alien -- now what?"

Offline deruch

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1452
  • California
  • Liked: 1120
  • Likes Given: 1526
It seems that telemetry (not just video) from the 1st stage was lost towards the end of the entry burn (?) and those monitoring had to use external sources to keep track of it (??).
Had that happened before AFTS on that stage had been safe, would it blew the stage up?  :-\
No, that's exactly one of the benefits of AFTS.  It doesn't matter if the ground receives zero telemetry from the rocket so long as the rocket can still "compute" its position.  Then the AFTS just determines that the rocket's position and vectors aren't violating any of the preloaded safety rules. 
Shouldn't reality posts be in "Advanced concepts"?  --Nomadd

Online yokem55

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 433
  • Oregon (Ore-uh-gun dammit)
  • Liked: 234
  • Likes Given: 12
42967/2017-063A: 309 x 40519 km x 27.89 deg
42968/2017-063B: 313 x 40517 km x 27.88 deg
Using this calculator I get a detla-v to GEO of 1773m/s. Right on target.

Offline Kaputnik

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2768
  • Liked: 430
  • Likes Given: 364


I was thinking the same thing about the plasma, but then got worried when it didn't pick up again. Held my breath until I started hearing the descent callouts.

I was really amazed to see that it was showing 6,000 km/h when the entry burn ended, is that a record?
I am sure some of the spacex stats geeks around here will have that info soon!   But yeah 6000 seems pretty quick.  Also since they arent doing 3 engine landing burn attempts anymore (for now) They could be hunting for ways to trim down on the entry burn requirements by seeing how little they need to slow the stage down :) "This one wasnt burned up that badly?  Hmmm, cut the burn off another 2 seconds early and see what happens!  Its just a block 3!"

I'm sure Chris G's article said this was a three engine landing burn.
Waiting for joy and raptor

Offline joncz

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 357
  • Atlanta, Georgia
  • Liked: 47
  • Likes Given: 124
The titanium fins are slightly longer and cover the bottom-of-fin attach point protrusion on the body completely, Have a scalloped front face, And for the moment are unpainted and dark grayish instead of white.

As far as the glow, I'm halfway surprised I never saw big chunks blowing by the camera. Whatever ablative coating is used on them earned it's pay today.

The aluminum fins also have these longitudinal ribs:



Offline vanoord

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 453
  • Liked: 275
  • Likes Given: 31
I'm sure Chris G's article said this was a three engine landing burn.

I don't think we saw the landing burn, but my understanding has been that the stage lands on a single engine, even if three have been lit during the burn - they are ramped up and down 1 engine / 3 engines / 1 engine, hence the description as a 1-3-1 burn.

To me, that makes sense as a change in throttle level on a single engine gives a less aggressive thrust change, particularly at the point of touch-down - and from memory, the attempts to touch down with three engines lit haven't been particularly easy viewing.

That said, a quick skip through the recent landings is pretty inconclusive, as the moment of landing is either not seen either due to video drop-out on the ASDS - or from too far away for RTLS.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26876
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 6780
  • Likes Given: 4808
Looks like another stage that won't fly again.  There have been 12 first stage recovery flights this year, but only three of them were GTO missions and all three were first stage reflights (using "used" first stages).  My guess is that these are R&D flights on the reuse side that won't see their stages used again (the SES-10 and Bulgariasat stages have been retired or mothballed).  They would have been expendable flights otherwise.  The other three GTO missions this year were expendable missions.

A bit of a weenie roast after this landing!

 - Ed Kyle

People have been saying that on every core that comes down a little stressed.

Remember Thaicom 8? 

Not sure what the point is, but it's a popular refrain.
Regardless of if it can be reflown, they won't do any 3rd flights for anything as long as they have single flight cores hanging around everywhere or it makes more sense to fly/refly block 5 cores.
Exactly.

Doesn't make sense to reuse this stage, perhaps, but doesn't mean it can't be done.
« Last Edit: 10/12/2017 11:43 AM by Robotbeat »
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 hans_ober

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 100
  • Somewhere
  • Liked: 52
  • Likes Given: 1
I'm sure Chris G's article said this was a three engine landing burn.

I don't think we saw the landing burn, but my understanding has been that the stage lands on a single engine, even if three have been lit during the burn - they are ramped up and down 1 engine / 3 engines / 1 engine, hence the description as a 1-3-1 burn.

To me, that makes sense as a change in throttle level on a single engine gives a less aggressive thrust change, particularly at the point of touch-down - and from memory, the attempts to touch down with three engines lit haven't been particularly easy viewing.

That said, a quick skip through the recent landings is pretty inconclusive, as the moment of landing is either not seen either due to video drop-out on the ASDS - or from too far away for RTLS.

IIRC the callout from landing burn start to us seeing the booster exhaust on the barge was ~10s, which makes it a 3 engine landing burn.
Single engine landing burns take around 30 seconds, 3 engine ones take around 10-15.

I'm guessing the reason for starting with one engine (1-3-1) is to decrease the jerk on the stage, but more importantly improve stability. The 2 side engines are off axis, and if one starts faster than the other (or even fails to start), you've got a large off axis thrust that would require a quick gimbal correction, and result in the rocket veering off course. While this might be tolerable for the boost back and reentry burns (since they can always correct), it will be close to impossible to correct when dealing with the very tight margins of a 3 engine burn: they've gotta deal with vertical velocity, horizontal velocity, pitch and position the stage over the ASDS in ~10 seconds. Any off axis thrust will make it veer off course and require additional fuel to correct - something that do not have.
They probably shutdown the 2 outer engines at the end of the 1-3-1 for accuracy. It's difficult to do a suicide burn when accelerating at 4.5Gs (since distance is the double integral of acceleration.. at 4.5Gs, a fraction of a second puts them off by a couple of meters - so they crash hard, or end up hovering).

Offline hans_ober

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 100
  • Somewhere
  • Liked: 52
  • Likes Given: 1
Ready for a scary thought....BulgariaSat-1 was going ~600km/h faster at the end of the entry burn then this one!!

Bulgariasat entered at ~1.8kms. Normal GTO MECO velocity is usually around 2.3km/s, split between ~2.1km/s horizontal & 1 km/s vertical components.
Any idea what the velocities were on the early experimental flights they did with F9 where the stage broke up as soon as it hit the atmosphere (early recovery days)? Bulgariasat reentry points to them being able to do >2km/s reentries with Ti gridfins.

The main factor here is the vertical velocity: prior to the reentry burn they're probably doing >1km/s which makes the stage hit the atmosphere too quickly. Reduce that, and they'll be able to use the larger grid fins to make F9 a lifting body and bleed off even >2.5km/s horizontal velocity.

They'll need this for FH. Core will probably MECO >3km/s, so as long as they reduce vertical velocity during the reentry burn, they'll manage to bleed off the horizontal velocity without any problem.

Online Herb Schaltegger

... so as long as they reduce vertical velocity during the reentry burn, they'll manage to bleed off the horizontal velocity without any problem.
I don’t know that that follows axiomatically. The longer the stage is bleeding off velocity through the atmosphere, the longer it’s exposed to heating; that can affect the bulk prop temps and the overall temp regime inside the octoweb, which affect startup of the engine for landing. Further, the longer the stage is being heated by high speed atmospheric flight, the more net heat load the structure is exposed to; you don’t want your composites and grid fin hydraulics to get too hot either.

So yeah, core landings will be a balancing act of many factors and will almost certainly be pretty sporty, aside from very light payloads when SpaceX trajectory designers have lots of prop to burn for slower entry and longer landing burns.
Ad astra per aspirin ...

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12668
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 3461
  • Likes Given: 578
Looks like another stage that won't fly again.  There have been 12 first stage recovery flights this year, but only three of them were GTO missions and all three were first stage reflights (using "used" first stages).  My guess is that these are R&D flights on the reuse side that won't see their stages used again (the SES-10 and Bulgariasat stages have been retired or mothballed).  They would have been expendable flights otherwise.  The other three GTO missions this year were expendable missions.

A bit of a weenie roast after this landing!

 - Ed Kyle

People have been saying that on every core that comes down a little stressed.

Remember Thaicom 8? 

Not sure what the point is, but it's a popular refrain.
Thaicom 8 weighed only 3 tonnes.  The other reused boosters flew LEO missions first, then launched heavier-than-Thiacom 8 satellites to GTO.

Remember NROL 76?  LEO mission, stage reportedly mothballed after LZ 1 landing.  What about JCSAT 16's stage, scrapped after a GTO launch?  I count at least five stages retired, mothballed, or scrapped to date out of 15 stages recovered to date, six if B1031.2 ends up retired.

 - Ed Kyle
« Last Edit: 10/12/2017 06:42 PM by edkyle99 »

Offline dedead

  • Member
  • Posts: 24
  • Liked: 9
  • Likes Given: 0
Hello,

I'm here for the 1st time at Cape Canaveral.
Do you know when the drone ship is planned to go back at the port with the first stage ? :)

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2581
  • Liked: 1158
  • Likes Given: 731
Hello,

I'm here for the 1st time at Cape Canaveral.
Do you know when the drone ship is planned to go back at the port with the first stage ? :)

It usually takes 3 or 4 days IIRC, so I'd expect it Saturday or Sunday.

Online abaddon

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1443
  • Liked: 887
  • Likes Given: 704
Hello,

I'm here for the 1st time at Cape Canaveral.
Do you know when the drone ship is planned to go back at the port with the first stage ? :)
Welcome to the forum!  I'd suggest following this thread: https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=39766, which is specific to tracking the ASDSs (ASDI?).

Offline dedead

  • Member
  • Posts: 24
  • Liked: 9
  • Likes Given: 0
Thank you :)

Offline Prettz

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 131
  • Atlanta, GA
  • Liked: 63
  • Likes Given: 12
Was it just because it was dark out the heat on the grin fins was more visible? Was the Iridium launch using titanium?
Iridium was also aluminum
Was stated during the launch webcast due to lower energy trajectory.

This SES-11 was obviously not a lower energy trajectory, so we can assume they are using (or rather burning) up their stock of aluminum ones.
I got the impression that they reeeally didn't care too much if they got this old booster back or not.

Or, that there was a risk of not getting the booster back anyway, and they didn't want to risk losing the titanium fins for no reason.

Offline nacnud

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1872
  • Liked: 140
  • Likes Given: 122
Oh come on, don't be daft. The stage is worth $$$, just the engines alone are probably worth the recovery attempt. So they didn't use the titanium fins, well if they have the aluminum fins knocking around and they're good for one used only at these entry velocities then why not use them?

Online Orbiter

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2182
  • Florida
  • Liked: 385
  • Likes Given: 908
My shot from Playalinda Beach
Attended space missions: STS-114, STS-124, STS-128, STS-135, Atlas V "Curiosity", Delta IV Heavy NROL-15, Atlas V MUOS-2, Delta IV Heavy NROL-37, SpaceX CRS-9, SpaceX JCSAT-16, Atlas V GOES-R, SpaceX SES-11.

Online meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7622
  • N. California
  • Liked: 3942
  • Likes Given: 816
Looks like another stage that won't fly again.  There have been 12 first stage recovery flights this year, but only three of them were GTO missions and all three were first stage reflights (using "used" first stages).  My guess is that these are R&D flights on the reuse side that won't see their stages used again (the SES-10 and Bulgariasat stages have been retired or mothballed).  They would have been expendable flights otherwise.  The other three GTO missions this year were expendable missions.

A bit of a weenie roast after this landing!

 - Ed Kyle

People have been saying that on every core that comes down a little stressed.

Remember Thaicom 8? 

Not sure what the point is, but it's a popular refrain.
Thaicom 8 weighed only 3 tonnes.  The other reused boosters flew LEO missions first, then launched heavier-than-Thiacom 8 satellites to GTO.

Remember NROL 76?  LEO mission, stage reportedly mothballed after LZ 1 landing.  What about JCSAT 16's stage, scrapped after a GTO launch?  I count at least five stages retired, mothballed, or scrapped to date out of 15 stages recovered to date, six if B1031.2 ends up retired.

 - Ed Kyle

Maybe, but the re-entry was hot, and all the experts lined up and declared it a total loss because of the rough touch-down.

It wasn't.

There's no argument that early recovered F9s are less likely to refly.  That's obvious.  If only because there are more recovered stages that options to re-fly.

But this will clearly change - SpaceX has only re-flown 3 times this year. The direction it's heading, especially with more advanced revisions of F9, is clear...
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline cambrianera

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1403
  • Liked: 276
  • Likes Given: 231

Any idea what the velocities were on the early experimental flights they did with F9 where the stage broke up as soon as it hit the atmosphere (early recovery days)?


MECO for v1.0 was something like 10 M, while for v1.1 was given as 6 M.
Someone can chime in with better number for specific cases.
Oh to be young again. . .

Offline Comga

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3886
  • Liked: 1213
  • Likes Given: 1037
(snip)
But this will clearly change - SpaceX has only re-flown 3 times this year. The direction it's heading, especially with more advanced revisions of F9, is clear...

You realize, surely, how amusing it is that you can even make this statement "only re-flown 3 times".
The direction is clear, as you say.

An unrelated observation and question:
The bright grid fins are too uniform and white to be glowing.  They are most likely illuminated and overexposed.
The second stage flew into sunset around 8 minutes after launch, with the last of the refracted sunlight at ~8:18.
Does anyone know at what time stamp the first stage went back into shadow/sunset?
The video cuts out when the stage was at 19.4 km altitude, according to the display.  Was it sunlit?
What kind of wastrels would dump a perfectly good booster in the ocean after just one use?

Offline saliva_sweet

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 442
  • Liked: 356
  • Likes Given: 1120
Remember NROL 76?  LEO mission, stage reportedly mothballed after LZ 1 landing.

I doubt that one was mothballed due to excessive wear.

The bright grid fins are too uniform and white to be glowing.  They are most likely illuminated and overexposed.

Certainly looks like they're glowing to me. It's looks more intense than previous flights and they are indeed overexposed because it's dark.

Offline cscott

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2466
  • Liked: 1688
  • Likes Given: 656
(snip)
But this will clearly change - SpaceX has only re-flown 3 times this year. The direction it's heading, especially with more advanced revisions of F9, is clear...

You realize, surely, how amusing it is that you can even make this statement "only re-flown 3 times".
The direction is clear, as you say.

An unrelated observation and question:
The bright grid fins are too uniform and white to be glowing.  They are most likely illuminated and overexposed.
The second stage flew into sunset around 8 minutes after launch, with the last of the refracted sunlight at ~8:18.
Does anyone know at what time stamp the first stage went back into shadow/sunset?
The video cuts out when the stage was at 19.4 km altitude, according to the display.  Was it sunlit?
I thought this, too, based on the sunset we saw in the stage 2 video, but I did some mental geometry and realized that the stage 2 camera was pointing west (at the setting sun) while the stage 1 camera during the re-entry burn was almost certainly pointing east (away from the sun).  So it's possible we were seeing illumination, but we certainly weren't seeing the glare from the sun itself.

I look forward to seeing photos of the stage in port.  Since the landing was successful, I expect that the fireworks were a combination of overexposure, glowing plasma, and ablated-as-designed thermal protection.  But we'll soon find out!

Online Herb Schaltegger

(snip)
But this will clearly change - SpaceX has only re-flown 3 times this year. The direction it's heading, especially with more advanced revisions of F9, is clear...

You realize, surely, how amusing it is that you can even make this statement "only re-flown 3 times".
The direction is clear, as you say.

An unrelated observation and question:
The bright grid fins are too uniform and white to be glowing.  They are most likely illuminated and overexposed.
The second stage flew into sunset around 8 minutes after launch, with the last of the refracted sunlight at ~8:18.
Does anyone know at what time stamp the first stage went back into shadow/sunset?
The video cuts out when the stage was at 19.4 km altitude, according to the display.  Was it sunlit?

They looked glowing AND over-exposed to me, what with the visible plasma and sparks flying off the base of the rocket right around that time. But what do I know? :) It'll be interesting to see some high-res photos of the fins during stage off-loading at the port.
Ad astra per aspirin ...

Offline georgegassaway

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 164
    • George's Rockets
  • Liked: 172
  • Likes Given: 61
If I was given the task of trying to get a 3rd flight out of the existing Falcons, my choice would be to use boosters that had "gentler" re-entries both times such as RTLS and SOME ASDS landings that had a better/softer r-re-entry phase than some others.   

Is there even a twice-flown Falcon that has had a gentle re-entry on both flights?

I take the re-flown boosters that have been used for GTO launches for flight #2, with the "hot" re-entries, to be a huge indication they do not intend to fly those a third time.

IIRC, none of the one-flight Falcons that flew GTO and had a hot re-entry, has even been used twice.

Admittedly the word "yet" has a small percentage of being applicable.   :)

Given the change to Block 5 coming "soon" (tm), not looking too likely they have much incentive (or intent) to refly the existing previously Falcons beyond twice, given the ones left unprotected outdoors. 
« Last Edit: 10/12/2017 11:43 PM by georgegassaway »

Online vaporcobra

(snip)
But this will clearly change - SpaceX has only re-flown 3 times this year. The direction it's heading, especially with more advanced revisions of F9, is clear...

You realize, surely, how amusing it is that you can even make this statement "only re-flown 3 times".
The direction is clear, as you say.

An unrelated observation and question:
The bright grid fins are too uniform and white to be glowing.  They are most likely illuminated and overexposed.
The second stage flew into sunset around 8 minutes after launch, with the last of the refracted sunlight at ~8:18.
Does anyone know at what time stamp the first stage went back into shadow/sunset?
The video cuts out when the stage was at 19.4 km altitude, according to the display.  Was it sunlit?

They looked glowing AND over-exposed to me, what with the visible plasma and sparks flying off the base of the rocket right around that time. But what do I know? :) It'll be interesting to see some high-res photos of the fins during stage off-loading at the port.

Yep. We ought to hold judgement until we've seen how the fins fared. We already have BulgariaSat-1 to compare with, so there can be little doubt that closeups will likely determine just how roasted 1031's fins got.

Online Jcc

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 788
  • Liked: 166
  • Likes Given: 67
If I was given the task of trying to get a 3rd flight out of the existing Falcons, my choice would be to use boosters that had "gentler" re-entries both times such as RTLS and SOME ASDS landings that had a better/softer r-re-entry phase than some others.   

Is there even a twice-flown Falcon that has had a gentle re-entry on both flights?

I take the re-flown boosters that have been used for GTO launches for flight #2, with the "hot" re-entries, to be a huge indication they do not intend to fly those a third time.

IIRC, none of the one-flight Falcons that flew GTO and had a hot re-entry, has even been used twice.

Admittedly the word "yet" has a small percentage of being applicable.   :)

Given the change to Block 5 coming "soon" (tm), not looking too likely they have much incentive (or intent) to refly the existing previously Falcons beyond twice, given the ones left unprotected outdoors.

I suspect that the reason they have not reused stages from GTO missions it that they have not had to, because they have more recovered stages than customers willing to fly on one so far. They are still gathering data, and building up confidence. Probably some of the GTO stages could be reused, buy why do it if you have enough low energy stages? Soon they will be flying Block 5, which presumably will take the heat better and provide more confidence in reuse, even from GTO, and also more customers will opt for reused stages.

Online meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7622
  • N. California
  • Liked: 3942
  • Likes Given: 816
(snip)
But this will clearly change - SpaceX has only re-flown 3 times this year. The direction it's heading, especially with more advanced revisions of F9, is clear...

You realize, surely, how amusing it is that you can even make this statement "only re-flown 3 times".
The direction is clear, as you say.

An unrelated observation and question:
The bright grid fins are too uniform and white to be glowing.  They are most likely illuminated and overexposed.
The second stage flew into sunset around 8 minutes after launch, with the last of the refracted sunlight at ~8:18.
Does anyone know at what time stamp the first stage went back into shadow/sunset?
The video cuts out when the stage was at 19.4 km altitude, according to the display.  Was it sunlit?

They looked glowing AND over-exposed to me, what with the visible plasma and sparks flying off the base of the rocket right around that time. But what do I know? :) It'll be interesting to see some high-res photos of the fins during stage off-loading at the port.
You can't make aluminum glow while still maintaining any semblance of strength..

Either there's a hefty amount if insulation and ablative shielding (and then the aluminum is fine), or the cameras don't have IR filters, and we're seeing a faint glow in NIR, since it is so dark.

And, fins are interchangeable.

We have no evidence as to how rough the landing was.



   
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Online Herb Schaltegger


They looked glowing AND over-exposed to me, what with the visible plasma and sparks flying off the base of the rocket right around that time. But what do I know? :) It'll be interesting to see some high-res photos of the fins during stage off-loading at the port.
You can't make aluminum glow while still maintaining any semblance of strength..

Either there's a hefty amount if insulation and ablative shielding (and then the aluminum is fine), or the cameras don't have IR filters, and we're seeing a faint glow in NIR, since it is so dark.

Well, wait just a minute - we've seen similar "glow" from aluminum fins on other GTO landings and then recovery photos have shown localized charring and even complete burn-through of some web segments when they got back to port. So, whatever the source of the glow seen on the camera (ablating coatings, aluminum heating, IR filter removed from camera, all of the above in varying proportion ...) until we see photos, we're all talking out of our asses. :)

Quote
And, fins are interchangeable.

We have no evidence as to how rough the landing was.

No dispute on either one of those things, nor did I even mention them.

Your argument about whether or not this core COULD be reused (not to be confused with WILL it be reused) isn't with me. For the record though, I'm in the camp of "won't be" simply because SpaceX has more recovered cores than they have customers for, with Block 5 coming RealSoonNow®
« Last Edit: 10/13/2017 01:02 AM by Herb Schaltegger »
Ad astra per aspirin ...

Offline cscott

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2466
  • Liked: 1688
  • Likes Given: 656
There is an ablative coating on the aluminum grid fins.

Online meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7622
  • N. California
  • Liked: 3942
  • Likes Given: 816

They looked glowing AND over-exposed to me, what with the visible plasma and sparks flying off the base of the rocket right around that time. But what do I know? :) It'll be interesting to see some high-res photos of the fins during stage off-loading at the port.
You can't make aluminum glow while still maintaining any semblance of strength..

Either there's a hefty amount if insulation and ablative shielding (and then the aluminum is fine), or the cameras don't have IR filters, and we're seeing a faint glow in NIR, since it is so dark.

Well, wait just a minute - we've seen similar "glow" from aluminum fins on other GTO landings and then recovery photos have shown localized charring and even complete burn-through of some web segments when they got back to port. So, whatever the source of the glow seen on the camera (ablating coatings, aluminum heating, IR filter removed from camera, all of the above in varying proportion ...) until we see photos, we're all talking out of our asses. :)

Quote
And, fins are interchangeable.

We have no evidence as to how rough the landing was.

No dispute on either one of those things, nor did I even mention them.

Your argument about whether or not this core COULD be reused (not to be confused with WILL it be reused) isn't with me. For the record though, I'm in the camp of "won't be" simply because SpaceX has more recovered cores than they have customers for, with Block 5 coming RealSoonNow
I was mostly saying that an aluminum fin that is as white as it appeared will basically melt away.

It takes very low temps to render aluminum useless.
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2581
  • Liked: 1158
  • Likes Given: 731
I was mostly saying that an aluminum fin that is as white as it appeared will basically melt away.

It takes very low temps to render aluminum useless.

That isn't aluminum glowing white... it's SPAM burning off.

Online meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7622
  • N. California
  • Liked: 3942
  • Likes Given: 816
Which was my point, responding to posts about "white hot fins".

ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline Prettz

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 131
  • Atlanta, GA
  • Liked: 63
  • Likes Given: 12
Oh come on, don't be daft. The stage is worth $$$,
Is it? After they tear it down, how many parts can they reuse in a new block 5 booster?

My bet is that, getting this one back, the additional data points after inspection will be more valuable than the hardware. I would be pleased to be proven wrong on that, though.

just the engines alone are probably worth the recovery attempt.
My impression was block 5 will only use the new improved engines. They want to fly the complete system several times before it flies Dragon 2. Is this not the case?

Offline Treasurer

  • Member
  • Posts: 4
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 3
Descent into Hell (reentry burn music video) :-)


Online Patchouli

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4193
  • Liked: 117
  • Likes Given: 208
Looks like another stage that won't fly again.  There have been 12 first stage recovery flights this year, but only three of them were GTO missions and all three were first stage reflights (using "used" first stages).  My guess is that these are R&D flights on the reuse side that won't see their stages used again (the SES-10 and Bulgariasat stages have been retired or mothballed).  They would have been expendable flights otherwise.  The other three GTO missions this year were expendable missions.

A bit of a weenie roast after this landing!

 - Ed Kyle

People have been saying that on every core that comes down a little stressed.

Remember Thaicom 8? 

Not sure what the point is, but it's a popular refrain.
Thaicom 8 weighed only 3 tonnes.  The other reused boosters flew LEO missions first, then launched heavier-than-Thiacom 8 satellites to GTO.

Remember NROL 76?  LEO mission, stage reportedly mothballed after LZ 1 landing.  What about JCSAT 16's stage, scrapped after a GTO launch?  I count at least five stages retired, mothballed, or scrapped to date out of 15 stages recovered to date, six if B1031.2 ends up retired.

 - Ed Kyle

I wonder if they'll implement some sort of third stage for GTO launches so they can avoid running the first stages as hard?

I remember reading the F9 upper stage weighs close to four metric tons dry so even a simple third stage could make a big difference.

Online ZachS09

I wonder if they'll implement some sort of third stage for GTO launches so they can avoid running the first stages as hard?

I remember reading the F9 upper stage weighs close to four metric tons dry so even a simple third stage could make a big difference.

Probably never going to happen. The second stage has enough energy to take a small payload beyond Earth's gravity.
"Liftoff of Falcon 9: the world's first reflight of an orbital-class rocket."

Offline John Alan

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 482
  • Central IL - USA - Earth
  • Liked: 228
  • Likes Given: 1146
I wonder if they'll implement some sort of third stage for GTO launches so they can avoid running the first stages as hard?

I remember reading the F9 upper stage weighs close to four metric tons dry so even a simple third stage could make a big difference.

Probably never going to happen. The second stage has enough energy to take a small payload beyond Earth's gravity.
The fix for that need is SpaceX charge more for edge of recovery GTO with a hefty discount (incentive) if the customer would just put bigger tanks on the Kick motor of the satellite...
Put another way... take whatever payload mass Block 5 can comfortably put to GTO with ASDS recovery that gives back a S1 in reusable condition... And then incentivize with the launch price sheet that if they want heavier, then they have got to take on more and more of the delta/v to reach final station on orbit...

Instead of Geo-1800m/s typical, and for the same price, we will loft your heavier bird to GEO-2000... or 2200 or 2400, or 2600... Each is a heavier bird at each delta/v point...
End result is the customer puts an integrated "third stage" on the payload and away we go...

I don't have the Quote handy... But GS of SpaceX was quoted in the recent past, saying that inquiries to do just that are ongoing, in discussing new future launches on F9... 

IF the customer decides later to take their bird and launch with someone else instead (contract opt out)
Then they just adjust the prop fill to fit the other carrier (A5 was what I was thinking when I wrote that)...
« Last Edit: 10/13/2017 06:11 PM by John Alan »

Online yokem55

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 433
  • Oregon (Ore-uh-gun dammit)
  • Liked: 234
  • Likes Given: 12
Looks like another stage that won't fly again.  There have been 12 first stage recovery flights this year, but only three of them were GTO missions and all three were first stage reflights (using "used" first stages).  My guess is that these are R&D flights on the reuse side that won't see their stages used again (the SES-10 and Bulgariasat stages have been retired or mothballed).  They would have been expendable flights otherwise.  The other three GTO missions this year were expendable missions.

A bit of a weenie roast after this landing!

 - Ed Kyle

People have been saying that on every core that comes down a little stressed.

Remember Thaicom 8? 

Not sure what the point is, but it's a popular refrain.
Thaicom 8 weighed only 3 tonnes.  The other reused boosters flew LEO missions first, then launched heavier-than-Thiacom 8 satellites to GTO.

Remember NROL 76?  LEO mission, stage reportedly mothballed after LZ 1 landing.  What about JCSAT 16's stage, scrapped after a GTO launch?  I count at least five stages retired, mothballed, or scrapped to date out of 15 stages recovered to date, six if B1031.2 ends up retired.

 - Ed Kyle

I wonder if they'll implement some sort of third stage for GTO launches so they can avoid running the first stages as hard?

I remember reading the F9 upper stage weighs close to four metric tons dry so even a simple third stage could make a big difference.
It's unlikely to pencil out money wise. The cost of developing and flying a 3rd stage just to avoid hot  reentries would be better spent improving the resilience of the first stage in hot reentries.

Offline Comga

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3886
  • Liked: 1213
  • Likes Given: 1037


Looks like they caught the reentry burn at 1:14 into the video.

A really cool view of the plumes.
The first stage is remarkably visible for almost the duration. 
(Edited: Thanks mod!)
There is a woman in the background confidently stating that the first stage is going to burn up after releasing the second stage. 
I think that if the videographer had understood what he was seeing, the view of both stages for such a duration, he would have focused more on the two small objects instead of the static smoke trail.
Still all in all, pretty nice view.
« Last Edit: 10/13/2017 11:49 PM by Comga »
What kind of wastrels would dump a perfectly good booster in the ocean after just one use?

Offline Alastor

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 228
  • Liked: 110
  • Likes Given: 265
On this last picture, we can see that the hydrolic lines from the thruster have been disconnected.
We are witnessing them preparing the removal of the container.

The operations that are likely to follow IMO are cleaning of the area, replacing of damaged hydrolic lines and other auxiliary equipment, probably removal of crispy Octograber and only then placing the new containers and reconnecting everything to go back to operational status.
Time depending, we may see improvements made to mitigate the risks of such an incident happening again (or maybe we won't see them, but I'm pretty sure they don't want their ASDSes catching on fire (more than reasonable whan you land a freaking candle like an F9 on it I mean ... :P ), even if it's a rare occurrence and fairly limited damage).

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12668
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 3461
  • Likes Given: 578
Containers of this type typically stand 8.5 feet.  There were burn patterns all the way up the side of the big container that sat above the Roomba garage.  It looks to have topped out at 14 feet or more above deck, and other burn patterns extend below deck level to the waterline, which gives a scale for the size of this fire.  There was a rocket presumably with some 100s of kg of kerosene still aboard standing several tens of feet distant from these flames.  You've got hydraulic fluid and whatever fuel the hydraulic pumps used potentially fueling the fire, among other things.  Some fire fighting pucker factor, I would expect.     

 - Ed Kyle
« Last Edit: 10/17/2017 08:12 PM by edkyle99 »

Offline Targeteer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3577
  • near hangar 18
  • Liked: 770
  • Likes Given: 363
42967  ECHOSTAR 105/SES 11   2017-063A  1554.82min   0.59deg   40493km   35667km
Best quote heard during an inspection, "I was unaware that I was the only one who was aware."

Offline Raul

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 132
  • Ústí nad Orlicí, CZECH
  • Liked: 167
  • Likes Given: 23
Epoch time: Tue Oct 17 2017 17:16:45 GMT   
42967   ECHOSTAR 105/SES 11      2017-063A   1436.41min   0.0819deg   35655km   35929km
Quote
0 ECHOSTAR 105/SES 11
1 42967U 17063A   17290.71997064  .00000092  00000-0  00000+0 0  9997
2 42967   0.0819 247.0706 0032501 124.8499 131.8904  1.00250004    88

Tags: