Author Topic: SpaceX Falcon 9 : PAZ : SLC-4E Vandenberg : Jan. 30, 2018  (Read 12395 times)

Offline Ronsmytheiii

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 22300
  • Liked: 569
  • Likes Given: 239
Quote
Hisdesat, the Spanish government satellite services company, has signed an agreement with U.S. company SpaceX to launch the Earth Observation Radar satellite, PAZ, on board a Falcon 9 rocket. The launch is targeted to take place during the last quarter of 2017, from Space Launch Complex 4E at Vandenberg Air Force Base, California. The numerous successes of Falcon 9 have been a driving factor for the election of Hisdesat to launch on board this rocket, which already has the confidence of other great companies.

http://www.hisdesat.es/eng/noticias_notas.php

Edit to use original press release
« Last Edit: 10/10/2017 05:14 PM by gongora »
"Every vision is a joke until the first man accomplishes it; once realized, it becomes commonplace." - Robert Goddard

Offline wannamoonbase

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2684
  • Denver, CO
    • U.S. Metric Association
  • Liked: 529
  • Likes Given: 895
Quote
Launching of the Spanish PAZ satellite will be carried out with the help of the Falcon 9 rocket from SpaceX company instead of the Russian Dnepr rocket, as planned initially, according to the website of the customer - the Spanish state-owned company Hisdesat.

"Hisdesat signed an agreement with the US company SpaceX to launch the PAZ Earth observation radar on board the Falcon 9 rocket," the report said.

The launch is scheduled for the last quarter of 2017 at the cosmodrome on the territory of the air base Vandenberg in California.

https://www.gazeta.ru/science/news/2017/03/07/n_9768869.shtml

There's going to be a Cosmodrome at VAFB now, cool!
Excited to be finally into the first Falcon Heavy flow, we are getting so close!

Offline WmThomas

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 119
  • An objective space fan
  • Liked: 48
  • Likes Given: 813
The Spanish text doesn't call it a cosmodrome. The English page has a funky translation, I guess.

Offline WmThomas

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 119
  • An objective space fan
  • Liked: 48
  • Likes Given: 813
How did Hisdesat get a launch lined up for 2017, given SpaceX's backlog?

Is this going to rideshare with Formosat, maybe?

Offline Ragmar

  • Member
  • Posts: 71
  • Space is the Place
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 29
Peter Selding reported that PAZ will have a co-passenger, but doesn't know who yet:

https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/839102717591158784


Offline Jcc

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 785
  • Liked: 165
  • Likes Given: 66
How did Hisdesat get a launch lined up for 2017, given SpaceX's backlog?

Is this going to rideshare with Formosat, maybe?

Can we speculate that it will use a reflown S1?
« Last Edit: 03/08/2017 01:34 AM by Jcc »

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3885
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 2564
  • Likes Given: 847
Hisdesat attempting to recover deposit for the cancelled Dnepr launch:

http://spacenews.com/hisdesat-demanding-refund-as-it-dumps-dnepr-for-falcon-9/


Offline wannamoonbase

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2684
  • Denver, CO
    • U.S. Metric Association
  • Liked: 529
  • Likes Given: 895
How did Hisdesat get a launch lined up for 2017, given SpaceX's backlog?

Is this going to rideshare with Formosat, maybe?

Can we speculate that it will use a reflown S1?

With Shotwell stating 5 more flights with reused boosters this year I wouldn't bet against it.
Excited to be finally into the first Falcon Heavy flow, we are getting so close!

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4685
  • Liked: 2806
  • Likes Given: 3919
How did Hisdesat get a launch lined up for 2017, given SpaceX's backlog?

Is this going to rideshare with Formosat, maybe?

Can we speculate that it will use a reflown S1?

With Shotwell stating 5 more flights with reused boosters this year I wouldn't bet against it.

If true, second stages are not/will not be the pacing item -- otherwise, this payload would have to wait in queue for its second stage.  Launch pad slots seem to be pacing today.  After the next handful of flights, or at least by LC-40 return to service, they drop back to first stages being limiting.  Reflights can then become fillers between new cores.
"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: 1786
  • US
  • Liked: 1207
  • Likes Given: 920
Speculation about whether the flight could reuse a booster is really not appropriate in every mission thread that gets created.  If we get any actual indication that the flight will reuse a booster then you can discuss it here.  Otherwise, maybe stick to a general reuse thread.

Offline DaveJes1979

  • Member
  • Posts: 96
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
This is a very likely candidate to be the first RTLS (Return to Launch Site) for F9 at Vandenberg.  With only 1400 kg to sun synchronous orbit, it seems it would have the propellant to do so.
« Last Edit: 08/31/2017 10:09 PM by DaveJes1979 »

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1786
  • US
  • Liked: 1207
  • Likes Given: 920
[SpaceNews] Spire, 40 cubesats in orbit, competing more directly in space-based ship-tracking market
Quote
exactEarth has 65 hosted payloads launching on Iridium Next satellites, spokesperson Nicole Schill told SpaceNews Aug. 31...The company has one more first-generation payload awaiting launch on the long-delayed PAZ satellite that investor Hisdesat of Spain recently shifted from Kosmotras to SpaceX. Schill said PAZ is expected to launch in December 2017;

I don't see how all of these launches set for December 2017 are actually going to launch in December 2017.  Who knows, maybe SpaceX can pull it off.  It would be nice if this launched in December, Vandenberg is gonna get busy next year.

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4685
  • Liked: 2806
  • Likes Given: 3919
Speculation about whether the flight could reuse a booster is really not appropriate in every mission thread that gets created.  If we get any actual indication that the flight will reuse a booster then you can discuss it here.  Otherwise, maybe stick to a general reuse thread.

When the award announcement to launch interval is this short, and the well-established* queue is jumped, I think the reality is that a reuse core is indicated.  Not random speculation, unless there is a better explanation...

* I'm assuming that queue published in this section is well-sourced and reasonably reliable.
"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: 1786
  • US
  • Liked: 1207
  • Likes Given: 920
Speculation about whether the flight could reuse a booster is really not appropriate in every mission thread that gets created.  If we get any actual indication that the flight will reuse a booster then you can discuss it here.  Otherwise, maybe stick to a general reuse thread.

When the award announcement to launch interval is this short, and the well-established* queue is jumped, I think the reality is that a reuse core is indicated.  Not random speculation, unless there is a better explanation...

* I'm assuming that queue published in this section is well-sourced and reasonably reliable.

When I wrote that 5 1/2 months ago people were asking that question in every mission thread created, no matter how far in the future it was.

Offline rockets4life97

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 365
  • Liked: 166
  • Likes Given: 103
I think this has a good shot of launching in December because there isn't another flight out of Vandy scheduled for that month. The 5th Iridium launch is almost certainly January 2018 now with the slip of the 3rd Iridium to October (if that wasn't clear earlier).

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4685
  • Liked: 2806
  • Likes Given: 3919
Speculation about whether the flight could reuse a booster is really not appropriate in every mission thread that gets created.  If we get any actual indication that the flight will reuse a booster then you can discuss it here.  Otherwise, maybe stick to a general reuse thread.

When the award announcement to launch interval is this short, and the well-established* queue is jumped, I think the reality is that a reuse core is indicated.  Not random speculation, unless there is a better explanation...

* I'm assuming that queue published in this section is well-sourced and reasonably reliable.

When I wrote that 5 1/2 months ago people were asking that question in every mission thread created, no matter how far in the future it was.

Sorry, missed the date line.
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Online IanThePineapple

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 398
  • NaN
  • Liked: 94
  • Likes Given: 57
This is a very likely candidate to be the first RTLS (Return to Launch Site) for F9 at Vandenberg.  With only 1400 kg to sun synchronous orbit, it seems it would have the propellant to do so.

Formosat was about 450kg to SSO and it didn't even do a boostback ASDS landing. Unless they just decided "Why not, let's just do a crazy entry burn with no boostback", this will likely not be RTLS.
Proud creator of Ian's Paper Model Rocket Collection:
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=42383.0

Online cppetrie

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 347
  • Liked: 172
  • Likes Given: 3
This is a very likely candidate to be the first RTLS (Return to Launch Site) for F9 at Vandenberg.  With only 1400 kg to sun synchronous orbit, it seems it would have the propellant to do so.

Formosat was about 450kg to SSO and it didn't even do a boostback ASDS landing. Unless they just decided "Why not, let's just do a crazy entry burn with no boostback", this will likely not be RTLS.
RTLS was not done because they have not been approved to use the LZ. Somebody with more knowledge will have to say whether it was possible had LZ use been approved, but either way it wasn't going to happen.

Offline DaveJes1979

  • Member
  • Posts: 96
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
See the final 5 paragraphs of this article:  https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/08/spacex-static-fire-formosat-5-falcon-9-asds-landing/

That means that, unless the landing facilities are still incomplete, they could theoretically do RTLS for any launch that has the excess performance to do so.

Online cppetrie

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 347
  • Liked: 172
  • Likes Given: 3
See the final 5 paragraphs of this article:  https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/08/spacex-static-fire-formosat-5-falcon-9-asds-landing/

That means that, unless the landing facilities are still incomplete, they could theoretically do RTLS for any launch that has the excess performance to do so.
Based on the brief glimpses of the landing pad from various Formosat-5 launch videos and pictures, it appeared to not yet be painted indicating it is not yet ready to go.

Edit: typo
« Last Edit: 09/01/2017 10:02 PM by cppetrie »

Offline guckyfan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6307
  • Germany
  • Liked: 1576
  • Likes Given: 1378

Based on the brief glimpses of the landing pad from various Formosat-5 launch videos and pictures, it appeared to not yet be painted indicating it is not yet ready to go.

Yes, but what is the holdup? Not finishing the landing pad, that's a quick job. What seems mostly missing is the stand to put the Falcon core on for safing. But that too is a quick job.

Offline DaveJes1979

  • Member
  • Posts: 96
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Step 1:  pour concrete.
Step 2: Paint a big, stylized "X" on it.
Step 3: ???

Unless there is some ground support equipment I'm not thinking of, you'd think the project would be simple.

Online Joffan

  • NSF Irregular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1238
  • Liked: 255
  • Likes Given: 733
Step 1:  pour concrete.
Step 2: Paint a big, stylized "X" on it.
Step 3: ???

Unless there is some ground support equipment I'm not thinking of, you'd think the project would be simple.

Step 3: Get permission to drop a giant flying blowtorch from a great height onto an Air Force base.
When I say "Jump!", you say "To which orbital inclination?"

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7158
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 2768
  • Likes Given: 825
Step 1:  pour concrete.
Step 2: Paint a big, stylized "X" on it.
Step 3: ???

Unless there is some ground support equipment I'm not thinking of, you'd think the project would be simple.

Step 3: Get permission to drop a giant flying blowtorch from a great height onto an Air Force base.
What do you think CCAFS is?

Online Joffan

  • NSF Irregular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1238
  • Liked: 255
  • Likes Given: 733
Step 1:  pour concrete.
Step 2: Paint a big, stylized "X" on it.
Step 3: ???

Unless there is some ground support equipment I'm not thinking of, you'd think the project would be simple.

Step 3: Get permission to drop a giant flying blowtorch from a great height onto an Air Force base.
What do you think CCAFS is?
I think CCAFS is... much more interested in public approval than Vandenberg. But more seriously, I'm certain that Vandenberg would not grant permission simply because CCAFS did.
When I say "Jump!", you say "To which orbital inclination?"

Online cscott

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2465
  • Liked: 1688
  • Likes Given: 656
There is also the hugely expensive SLC-6 you have to overfly in order to RTLS to SLC-4W at Vandenberg.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vandenberg_AFB_Space_Launch_Complex_6
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vandenberg_AFB_Space_Launch_Complex_4
« Last Edit: 09/07/2017 01:40 PM by cscott »

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7158
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 2768
  • Likes Given: 825
There is also the hugely expensive SLC-6 you have to overfly in order to RTLS to SLC-4W at Vandenberg.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vandenberg_AFB_Space_Launch_Complex_6
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vandenberg_AFB_Space_Launch_Complex_4

What do you think flies straight over SLC-6 when SpaceX launches due-south from SLC-4? They don't perform a mini-dogleg around SLC-6 during ascent.

Online cscott

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2465
  • Liked: 1688
  • Likes Given: 656
Sure, they've approved 1x the risk for launch, but it's entirely reasonable they may be dragging their feet on approving an additional 1x the risk (or more) for landing.  SpaceX deliberately keeps calling its landings "experimental", but launches are operational.  The overflight risks for the different phases of flight are different.
« Last Edit: 09/07/2017 02:15 PM by cscott »

Online abaddon

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1428
  • Liked: 877
  • Likes Given: 697
SpaceX deliberately keeps calling its landings "experimental"
They stopped doing that some time ago.  They are considered a secondary objective (rightly so) but are no longer considered "experimental".  (And who would believe them if they did use that terminology at this point?)
« Last Edit: 09/07/2017 02:34 PM by abaddon »

Offline watermod

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 359
  • Liked: 86
  • Likes Given: 105
SpaceX deliberately keeps calling its landings "experimental"
They stopped doing that some time ago.  They are considered a secondary objective (rightly so) but are no longer considered "experimental".  )And who would believe them if they did use that terminology at this point?)

Today's X37B launch landed right near the center of the landing X again.   Video was provided all the way down.   It looked perfect.   At what point will Vandenberg's decision makers consider it safe and proven?
This was the 16th successful one.

Offline russianhalo117

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3723
  • AR USA / Berlin, DE / Moscow, RF
  • Liked: 685
  • Likes Given: 431
SpaceX deliberately keeps calling its landings "experimental"
They stopped doing that some time ago.  They are considered a secondary objective (rightly so) but are no longer considered "experimental".  )And who would believe them if they did use that terminology at this point?)

Today's X37B launch landed right near the center of the landing X again.   Video was provided all the way down.   It looked perfect.   At what point will Vandenberg's decision makers consider it safe and proven?
This was the 16th successful one.

In a brief nutshell, whenever SpaceX installs the required post-landing GSE and Hardware and VAFB, FAA, and FCC sign off and give approval allowing "LZ-4W" landings to commence.
« Last Edit: 09/07/2017 05:01 PM by russianhalo117 »

Offline DreamyPickle

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 103
  • Home
  • Liked: 48
  • Likes Given: 5
It's very interesting that SpaceX signed a 1400kg to SSO launch in 2017. They've done lighter launches before but those were originally signed up for the Falcon 1. This contract shows that SpaceX is profitably competing in the lower end of the market.

Maybe this is what reduced costs from reusability look like in practice?

Online vaporcobra

It's very interesting that SpaceX signed a 1400kg to SSO launch in 2017. They've done lighter launches before but those were originally signed up for the Falcon 1. This contract shows that SpaceX is profitably competing in the lower end of the market.

Maybe this is what reduced costs from reusability look like in practice?

Allllllso, it appears extremely likely that SpaceX intends to launch its first two test satellites for their LEO constellation as passengers on this launch. Tim Farrar made the extremely astute observation that the publicly released orbits for both Microsats and PAZ are virtually identical, "a sun-synchronous orbit at 514 km altitude with an inclination of 97.44 degrees".

2200ish kg to SSO is marginally less crazy than 1400 kg for a Falcon 9, but it's something.

http://tmfassociates.com/blog/2017/09/08/me-first-no-me/

Offline russianhalo117

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3723
  • AR USA / Berlin, DE / Moscow, RF
  • Liked: 685
  • Likes Given: 431
It's very interesting that SpaceX signed a 1400kg to SSO launch in 2017. They've done lighter launches before but those were originally signed up for the Falcon 1. This contract shows that SpaceX is profitably competing in the lower end of the market.

Maybe this is what reduced costs from reusability look like in practice?

Allllllso, it appears extremely likely that SpaceX intends to launch its first two test satellites for their LEO constellation as passengers on this launch. Tim Farrar made the extremely astute observation that the publicly released orbits for both Microsats and PAZ are virtually identical, "a sun-synchronous orbit at 514 km altitude with an inclination of 97.44 degrees".

2200ish kg to SSO is marginally less crazy than 1400 kg for a Falcon 9, but it's something.

http://tmfassociates.com/blog/2017/09/08/me-first-no-me/
That doest currently have any confirmation other than coincidence at this point.

Online vaporcobra

It's very interesting that SpaceX signed a 1400kg to SSO launch in 2017. They've done lighter launches before but those were originally signed up for the Falcon 1. This contract shows that SpaceX is profitably competing in the lower end of the market.

Maybe this is what reduced costs from reusability look like in practice?

Allllllso, it appears extremely likely that SpaceX intends to launch its first two test satellites for their LEO constellation as passengers on this launch. Tim Farrar made the extremely astute observation that the publicly released orbits for both Microsats and PAZ are virtually identical, "a sun-synchronous orbit at 514 km altitude with an inclination of 97.44 degrees".

2200ish kg to SSO is marginally less crazy than 1400 kg for a Falcon 9, but it's something.

http://tmfassociates.com/blog/2017/09/08/me-first-no-me/
That doest currently have any confirmation other than coincidence at this point.

Unless it's just an absurdly unusual placeholder, it's quite the improbable coincidence. SpaceX's constellation as currently planned has no use for DSP satellites, whereas SSO for a testbed for new comms tech would allow greater flexibility than an operational orbit.

Offline DreamyPickle

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 103
  • Home
  • Liked: 48
  • Likes Given: 5
That doesn't currently have any confirmation other than coincidence at this point.

Yes, but it's the closest thing we've seen to a launch date for CommX. It would be great is somebody else could confirm or deny this.
« Last Edit: 09/09/2017 11:41 AM by DreamyPickle »

Online Semmel

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1079
  • Germany
  • Liked: 768
  • Likes Given: 2205
SpaceX said that they would only operate the sats when above the control center to limit radio interference with other sats in orbit. A sun synchronous orbit might maximise the number of overpasses as compared to an operational orbit. Also for the rideshare, what other payloads are there that make a rideshare possible? Maybe the specifically selected PAZ because there are little to no other rideshare options available in the near future. I am not saying that is the case, but it is a possibility.

Offline russianhalo117

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3723
  • AR USA / Berlin, DE / Moscow, RF
  • Liked: 685
  • Likes Given: 431
That doesn't currently have any confirmation other than coincidence at this point.

Yes, but it's the closest thing we've seen to a launch date for CommX. It would be great is somebody else could confirm or deny this.
First Comm-X prototypes MicroSat-2A/2B are not expected to fly until 2018 at this point and will have a final test orbit of 1125 km circular at roughly 98° inclination. Deployment orbit will depend on Primary payload and Delta-v capability being high enough to also allow the second stage to deorbit.

Offline su27k

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 639
  • Liked: 387
  • Likes Given: 38
Peter Selding reported that PAZ will have a co-passenger, but doesn't know who yet:

https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/839102717591158784

This tweet is worth revisiting given the new speculation...

Online vaporcobra

That doesn't currently have any confirmation other than coincidence at this point.

Yes, but it's the closest thing we've seen to a launch date for CommX. It would be great is somebody else could confirm or deny this.
First Comm-X prototypes MicroSat-2A/2B are not expected to fly until 2018 at this point and will have a final test orbit of 1125 km circular at roughly 98° inclination. Deployment orbit will depend on Primary payload and Delta-v capability being high enough to also allow the second stage to deorbit.

Interesting, do you have a source? I'm mainly just concluding that it's highly likely because the evidence we currently have is far too specific to be a coincidence. Of course, things can change over several months. But it's the best public info we currently have.

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1786
  • US
  • Liked: 1207
  • Likes Given: 920
It's worth noting that the Microsat 1a/1b application listed the same inclination as Iridium, and the Microsat 2a/2b application did not.  The 2a/2b application was filed a couple of months before the Paz contract was publicly announced, but they were probably already working on it at the time (and may well have had it already negotiated).  There are also other potential SSO opportunities coming up such as SSO-A.  The only SSO flights that would really fit the timing are PAZ, SSO-A (which has slipped a little), and SAOCOM-1A (which has also slipped a bit, and the old date didn't really line up that well).

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1786
  • US
  • Liked: 1207
  • Likes Given: 920
This is also being discussed in the SpaceX satellite thread starting at
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=41634.msg1721067#msg1721067
which may be a better place for it.

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1786
  • US
  • Liked: 1207
  • Likes Given: 920
[ La Opinión de Murcia] The first Spanish high-resolution satellite to be launched at the end of December
Quote
[Google translation] The Paz satellite, which is the first Spanish high-resolution radar sensor, will launch into space in the last week of this year. This was confirmed yesterday by HisdeSAT, the company that owns and manages the satellite - 30% owned by the Ministry of Defense - in the technical demonstration presented at the XVII Congress of the Spanish Association of Remote Sensing (AET2017), held in Murcia from yesterday until tomorrow.

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3885
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 2564
  • Likes Given: 847
Quote
Owner #hisdesat Spain: @SpaceX sets Jan 30 VAFB launch of 1400-kg @AirbusDefence-built Paz high-res SAR Earth obs sat to 514-km polar orbit.

https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/917451649177739264

Offline rockets4life97

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 365
  • Liked: 166
  • Likes Given: 103
Quote
Owner #hisdesat Spain: @SpaceX sets Jan 30 VAFB launch of 1400-kg @AirbusDefence-built Paz high-res SAR Earth obs sat to 514-km polar orbit.

https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/917451649177739264

Jan 30 was when Iridium 5 was expected to launch. Can the Iridium launches be closer than 2 months apart? Any word on the co-passenger?

Edit: Could PAZ fit on the adapter with with 5 Iridium sats and Grace FO 1 and 2? That would explain this change.
« Last Edit: 10/09/2017 07:16 PM by rockets4life97 »

Offline Galactic Penguin SST

Quote
Owner #hisdesat Spain: @SpaceX sets Jan 30 VAFB launch of 1400-kg @AirbusDefence-built Paz high-res SAR Earth obs sat to 514-km polar orbit.

https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/917451649177739264

Jan 30 was when Iridium 5 was expected to launch. Can the Iridium launches be closer than 2 months apart? Any word on the co-passenger?

Edit: Could PAZ fit on the adapter with with 5 Iridium sats and Grace FO 1 and 2? That would explain this change.

The target orbits are too far apart for that to happen.  ???
Chinese spaceflight is a cosmic riddle wrapped in a galactic mystery inside an orbital enigma... - (not) Winston Churchill

Online envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2546
  • Liked: 1133
  • Likes Given: 719
Quote
Owner #hisdesat Spain: @SpaceX sets Jan 30 VAFB launch of 1400-kg @AirbusDefence-built Paz high-res SAR Earth obs sat to 514-km polar orbit.

https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/917451649177739264

Jan 30 was when Iridium 5 was expected to launch. Can the Iridium launches be closer than 2 months apart? Any word on the co-passenger?

Edit: Could PAZ fit on the adapter with with 5 Iridium sats and Grace FO 1 and 2? That would explain this change.

The target orbits are too far apart for that to happen.  ???

??? indeed. PAZ and GRACE-FO are both going to 500 km SSO. The Iridium payload is only ~4800 kg, the remaining performance is more than enough for the F9 US to do a ~12 degree inclination change and lower the orbit by 125 km, even while carrying both PAZ and GRACE-FO.

Offline Rik ISS-fan

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 603
  • the Netherlands
  • Liked: 115
  • Likes Given: 13
Edit: Could PAZ fit on the adapter with with 5 Iridium sats and Grace FO 1 and 2? That would explain this change.
I think that this stack doesn't work.
If I'm not mistaken, both the Iridium Next and Grace FO satellites are roughly the same shape and size. Aka: 3m high, 2m wide and ~1m deep. They are side mounted to a carrying structure. Grace was planned to use a structure like the one used for dual galileo sat (soyuz) launches.
PAZ is a larger satellite. It's a hexegonal satellite 5m long and 2.4m in (outer) diameter. (6x1.2m sides)
(This is to large for the Vega fairing) It wants a axial (in line/ standard) deployment.
I think it will be very difficult to mount the Grace-FO on a structure around PAZ. The F9 Fairing is to short to stack all sats on top of each other. (3 + 3 + 5 = 11m D2.4m | 3 + 5 =8m D5m)

Online envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2546
  • Liked: 1133
  • Likes Given: 719
Edit: Could PAZ fit on the adapter with with 5 Iridium sats and Grace FO 1 and 2? That would explain this change.
I think that this stack doesn't work.
If I'm not mistaken, both the Iridium Next and Grace FO satellites are roughly the same shape and size. Aka: 3m high, 2m wide and ~1m deep. They are side mounted to a carrying structure. Grace was planned to use a structure like the one used for dual galileo sat (soyuz) launches.
PAZ is a larger satellite. It's a hexegonal satellite 5m long and 2.4m in (outer) diameter. (6x1.2m sides)
(This is to large for the Vega fairing) It wants a axial (in line/ standard) deployment.
I think it will be very difficult to mount the Grace-FO on a structure around PAZ. The F9 Fairing is to short to stack all sats on top of each other. (3 + 3 + 5 = 11m D2.4m | 3 + 5 =8m D5m)

It might be possible. Here's a roughly to-scale sketch of the PAZ envelope mounted atop the stacked GRACE-FO and Iridium dispenser envelopes:

Offline Rik ISS-fan

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 603
  • the Netherlands
  • Liked: 115
  • Likes Given: 13
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 : PAZ : SLC-4E Vandenberg : Jan. 30, 2018
« Reply #49 on: 10/14/2017 01:26 PM »
envy887; I think your sketch is a bit deceiving. The stack of 5x Iridium Next + 2x Grace-FO the same length as two 5x Iridium Next on top of each other. ~6m. In your sketch the lower block looks to be ~5m high (6.6m - ~1.5m).

I found out that the Grace-FO satellites will be mounted to a cilindrical structure instead of the Galileo dual structure.
source Nasa JPL
I think that if PAZ is placed on top of this structure, the sides of PAZ and the two Grace-FO will line up. (Same width)
« Last Edit: 10/14/2017 01:29 PM by Rik ISS-fan »

Tags: