Author Topic: Rebuilding SLC-40  (Read 176260 times)

Offline wannamoonbase

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2644
  • Denver, CO
    • U.S. Metric Association
  • Liked: 513
  • Likes Given: 880
Re: Rebuilding SLC-40
« Reply #20 on: 09/02/2016 02:31 PM »
A big question for me is how much damage the flame trench (exhaust duct) suffered.  Much of SLC 40 is (or was) underground.

 - Ed Kyle

I've walked through it's twin, SLC 41, years ago and that would be the very least of my concerns.  The size and thickness is very significant (feet thick) a 45 minute fire won't damage it. 

The rest of the pad looks thoroughly scorched. 

Yesterday I was thinking a best case would be 6 months, today I'm with holding estimates.

Perhaps, like the Six Million Dollar Man, they can rebuild it so that pad is better, stronger, faster than it use to be.
Excited to be finally into the first Falcon Heavy flow, we are getting so close!

Offline Kansan52

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 845
  • Hutchinson, KS
  • Liked: 252
  • Likes Given: 292
Re: Rebuilding SLC-40
« Reply #21 on: 09/02/2016 03:32 PM »
Maybe not rebuilt? Have 39a and Boca handle everything? They always seem to adapt to conditions as they exist. Plus, this may mean the back log will shrink so they will not have as many launches reducing the need for two pads on the East Coast.

39a should be ready by the time the investigation is over. Boca in 2018. If 40 reconstruction takes a year, waiting on Boca may be reasonable.

Online StuffOfInterest

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 368
  • Just interested in space
  • McLean, Virginia, USA
  • Liked: 78
  • Likes Given: 55
Re: Rebuilding SLC-40
« Reply #22 on: 09/02/2016 03:40 PM »
Assuming that the TEL is a loss, rather than just the top section needing replacement, I wonder if we'll see the LC-39A TEL style on the next iteration?  All three existing TEL (and the first one at LC-40) are open latice design but the 39A TEL just has a different look to it with the flat panels.

Offline gordo

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 680
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Rebuilding SLC-40
« Reply #23 on: 09/02/2016 03:46 PM »
I would very surprised is the team did not focus all efforts on 39a now.  They have a significant backlog to launch, which would be significantly affected by what I would expect to be significant damage to a lot of the systems at 40.

Offline John Alan

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 392
  • Central IL - USA - Earth
  • Liked: 176
  • Likes Given: 1006
Re: Rebuilding SLC-40
« Reply #24 on: 09/02/2016 03:54 PM »
SLC-40 may have launched it's last rocket with JCSAT-16 earlier in August...  :o
They will finish 39A and get it online first...
Decide if Boca can be done sooner then later...
THEN make a choice... as to IF SLC-40 is worth repairing... or not...

MY 'gut' is telling me the damage is extensive to GSE piping and equipment...  :'(

Just my opinion on topic...  ???
« Last Edit: 09/02/2016 04:06 PM by John Alan »

Offline Mark S

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2104
  • Dallas, TX
  • Liked: 143
  • Likes Given: 33
Re: Rebuilding SLC-40
« Reply #25 on: 09/02/2016 03:54 PM »
Here are some aerials looking at the complex.

Can you give some details on the source of those photos, when they were taken, etc? They look photoshopped beyond all reason. Were they taken before SpX took over the site? Thanks.

Offline SWGlassPit

  • I break space hardware
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 432
  • Liked: 248
  • Likes Given: 35
Re: Rebuilding SLC-40
« Reply #26 on: 09/02/2016 03:58 PM »
Here are some aerials looking at the complex.

Can you give some details on the source of those photos, when they were taken, etc? They look photoshopped beyond all reason. Were they taken before SpX took over the site? Thanks.

They're just screencaps from Google Earth.

Offline launchwatcher

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 283
  • Liked: 195
  • Likes Given: 213
Re: Rebuilding SLC-40
« Reply #27 on: 09/02/2016 04:17 PM »
There are some eyewitness reports from a CCAFS firefighter at the scene here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/50rr9v/falcon_9_amos6_static_fire_anomaly_faq_summary/d76pjdb

Online envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2324
  • Liked: 1008
  • Likes Given: 676
Re: Rebuilding SLC-40
« Reply #28 on: 09/02/2016 04:31 PM »
There are some eyewitness reports from a CCAFS firefighter at the scene here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/50rr9v/falcon_9_amos6_static_fire_anomaly_faq_summary/d76pjdb
From the link:
Quote
The hangar actually doesn't appear damaged but I'm sitting on the opposite side of the pad right now and can't see it close up. As for concrete, I'm not sure yet but plumbing and piping leading into/out of the pad definitely is.

That sounds about right. Anything that's not concrete and is closer than the lightening towers most likely has to be replaced, IMO.

Offline AS-503

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 420
  • Orion Fab Team
  • Colorado USA
  • Liked: 143
  • Likes Given: 105
Re: Rebuilding SLC-40
« Reply #29 on: 09/02/2016 04:34 PM »
Here are some aerials looking at the complex.

Can you give some details on the source of those photos, when they were taken, etc? They look photoshopped beyond all reason. Were they taken before SpX took over the site? Thanks.

Before SpaceX took over the site?

SLC-40 had the Titan IV mobile launch tower and other support infrastructure/buildings that are not in those "photoshoped" images.

In the third photo you can see Elon himself breaking ground for the "new" SLC-40 with the old Titan launch tower in the background.

Online envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2324
  • Liked: 1008
  • Likes Given: 676
Re: Rebuilding SLC-40
« Reply #30 on: 09/02/2016 04:37 PM »
Before SpaceX took over the site?

SLC-40 had the Titan IV mobile launch tower and other support infrastructure/buildings that are not in those "photoshoped" images.

In the third photo you can see Elon himself breaking ground for the "new" SLC-40 with the old Titan launch tower in the background.

Yeah, SLC-40 looks very different now than it did pre-SpaceX.

They're just screencaps from Google Earth.

Exactly. They are aerials that are digitally composited onto a detailed terrain map to give a 3D view. Not sure how old they are, but they a post-SpaceX upgrades. That's the SpaceX TEL in on the pad.
« Last Edit: 09/02/2016 05:12 PM by envy887 »

Offline wannamoonbase

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2644
  • Denver, CO
    • U.S. Metric Association
  • Liked: 513
  • Likes Given: 880
Re: Rebuilding SLC-40
« Reply #31 on: 09/02/2016 04:52 PM »
SLC-40 may have launched it's last rocket with JCSAT-16 earlier in August...  :o
They will finish 39A and get it online first...
Decide if Boca can be done sooner then later...
THEN make a choice... as to IF SLC-40 is worth repairing... or not...

MY 'gut' is telling me the damage is extensive to GSE piping and equipment...  :'(

Just my opinion on topic...  ???


Doubtful, I thought LC39A was intended to be the FH, NASA and DoD pad.  Crew, Cargo, defense payloads.  That would be 6+ launches a year for customers that have pretty fixed launch windows.

They may not need it for a year or so, but if they really want to get to 40-50 launches a year they will need SLC 40.

Certainly a change up to whatever their plans were before yesterday morning.  But as others have said, they have proven flexible.

IMHO, SLC40 will be back.
Excited to be finally into the first Falcon Heavy flow, we are getting so close!

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31144
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 9395
  • Likes Given: 297
Re: Rebuilding SLC-40
« Reply #32 on: 09/02/2016 05:03 PM »
No more talk of SLC-40 seeing its last launch.  It is too important in Spacex plans

Offline PahTo

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1487
  • Seattle
  • Liked: 136
  • Likes Given: 379
Re: Rebuilding SLC-40
« Reply #33 on: 09/02/2016 05:15 PM »

Thanks Jim--good words.  I'm reposting part of a post from yesterday, as it pertains to this thread:


Bummer--my thoughts with SpX and the spaceflight community.

Having said that, and in keeping with my career at a project manager, a couple thoughts:

Based on the MARS experience, it would appear SLC40 will be out of commission for quite some time (a year?).  This would indicate ramping up pad 39A completion to get back to launch capability asap.  However, as padrat and others would attest, the skills required to get a pad flight ready are somewhat specialized, so the conundrum:  get 39A ready at the expense of repairing SLC40?  If the team(s) is split, that slows down both efforts.  This is a tough one for sure!

(edit:  I think it safe to say they'll focus effort on 39A before SLC40, but the clean up should proceed with alacrity so the site is ready when they have the staff to effect repairs.)

Offline rockets4life97

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 338
  • Liked: 164
  • Likes Given: 87
Re: Rebuilding SLC-40
« Reply #34 on: 09/02/2016 05:21 PM »
Are there folks around with the experience of building pads that SpaceX could quickly increase their pad construction team(s)?

From a financial perspective, it seems like SpaceX needs to get an East Coast pad up and running as soon as they can (and they probably need both pads) to have any chance of making up the backlog on their manifest in the coming 2 years. So, if there are people to be hired than it seems like SpaceX would hire them.

Offline jak Kennedy

  • Member
  • Posts: 84
  • Liked: 13
  • Likes Given: 28
Re: Rebuilding SLC-40
« Reply #35 on: 09/02/2016 05:28 PM »
Perhaps they can divert some of the GSE that was destined for Boca Chica to SLC-40? Have SpaceX already started on building the Boca Chica TEL?

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12571
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 3370
  • Likes Given: 560
Re: Rebuilding SLC-40
« Reply #36 on: 09/02/2016 05:38 PM »
Based on the MARS experience, it would appear SLC40 will be out of commission for quite some time (a year?).  T
A year at least and likely longer.  After AC-5 did something similar to LC 36A in 1965 nearly 16 months passed before another launch took place from that pad. 

 - ED Kyle

Offline Zed_Noir

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2148
  • Canada
  • Liked: 271
  • Likes Given: 417
Re: Rebuilding SLC-40
« Reply #37 on: 09/02/2016 05:47 PM »
SLC-40 may have launched it's last rocket
...
Doubtful, I thought LC39A was intended to be the FH, NASA and DoD pad.  Crew, Cargo, defense payloads.  That would be 6+ launches a year for customers that have pretty fixed launch windows.

They may not need it for a year or so, but if they really want to get to 40-50 launches a year they will need SLC 40.
...
IMHO, SLC40 will be back.

No more talk of SLC-40 seeing its last launch.  It is too important in Spacex plans

If SpaceX have to do major rebuild of the GSE to get LC-40 back into service.

Should they just put up a new hangar and redo the fire trench to be compatible with the Falcon Heavy also?

Online spacenut

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2071
  • East Alabama
  • Liked: 284
  • Likes Given: 184
Re: Rebuilding SLC-40
« Reply #38 on: 09/02/2016 05:50 PM »
They will probably figure which can be completed 1st, 2nd, and 3rd time wise, then concentrate on the first one, say 39a.  Then if Boca Chica can be completed before 40, then concentrate on it, or if 40 can be rebuilt before Boca Chica, then concentrate of 40.  Simple.  Like someone said, they have a huge launch manifest.  However, they have to get the 2nd stage problems fixed also and fast. 

Offline whitelancer64

Re: Rebuilding SLC-40
« Reply #39 on: 09/02/2016 05:51 PM »
SLC-40 may have launched it's last rocket
...
Doubtful, I thought LC39A was intended to be the FH, NASA and DoD pad.  Crew, Cargo, defense payloads.  That would be 6+ launches a year for customers that have pretty fixed launch windows.

They may not need it for a year or so, but if they really want to get to 40-50 launches a year they will need SLC 40.
...
IMHO, SLC40 will be back.

No more talk of SLC-40 seeing its last launch.  It is too important in Spacex plans

If SpaceX have to do major rebuild of the GSE to get LC-40 back into service.

Should they just put up a new hangar and redo the fire trench to be compatible with the Falcon Heavy also?

"Redo[ing] the [flame] trench" would mean demolishing the entire pad. They're not going to do that.
« Last Edit: 09/02/2016 05:51 PM by whitelancer64 »
"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

Tags: