Author Topic: SpaceX F9 : SES-10 with reuse of CRS-8 Booster SN/1021 : 2017-03-30 : DISCUSSION  (Read 291110 times)

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3329
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 2200
  • Likes Given: 740
Will this coming launch be able to utilize the new AFTS fully?

Here's what the 45th said after the Echostar 23 launch:

Quote
This launch marks the last SpaceX Falcon 9 launch utilizing ground-based mission flight control personnel and equipment in the mission control center.  All future SpaceX rockets will utilize an Autonomous Flight Safety System which replaces the ground-based mission flight control personnel and equipment with on-board Positioning, Navigation and Timing sources and decision logic.

http://www.patrick.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/1120143/45th-sw-supports-successful-falcon-9-echostar-xxiii-launch

We know F9 rockets have had AFTS hardware for a while, but not operating as primary. Given SpaceX have spend several months refurbishing the booster to be re-used for SES-10, I guess that did whatever else they needed to make AFTS primary too.

Offline BabaORileyUSA

  • Member
  • Posts: 66
  • Liked: 21
  • Likes Given: 17
They tried to recover SES-9, which was 5,271 Kg (twins with 10?) ...

SES-9 (Boeing) and SES-10 (Airbus) are not twins.

SES-10 is 5300kg into a GTO orbit
SES-9 was 5270kg into a GTO orbit

That seems close enough!

Except that SES-10 is *NOT* going into a GTO.  It is going into a sub-synchronous transfer orbit (i.e. - the apogee is significantly below GEO altitude).  SES-10 will probably use on-board propulsion to raise its apogee to GEO altitude before beginning the usual perigee-raising maneuvers to transition to GEO.  To quote Gunter Krebs: "As the satellite's mass is higher than the nominal GTO capacity, it will be put into a sub-geostationary transfer orbit by the launch vehicle."

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3329
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 2200
  • Likes Given: 740
OA-7 CRS launch appears to have moved back to Saturday 25th.

Suggests to me that SpaceX will have the range for an SES-10 static fire before then, so maybe a launch early next week is still on?

Edit: just realised, is reference to 25th UTC rather than local?
« Last Edit: 03/20/2017 11:56 AM by FutureSpaceTourist »

Online spacenut

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1995
  • East Alabama
  • Liked: 265
  • Likes Given: 181
Someone let us know if SES-10 is still on for March 27th.  That is only 7 days from now. 

Offline Chris Bergin

Someone let us know if SES-10 is still on for March 27th.  That is only 7 days from now. 

When we know, you'll know. There's no need to ask in the style of "If I don't ask, they won't tell me" ;) Next update will be later today.

Also, the thread title is the subject, so to other people, please keep on topic.

Offline ChrisGebhardt

  • Assistant Managing Editor
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4807
  • ad astra scientia
  • Daytona Beach, FL
  • Liked: 1398
  • Likes Given: 242
OA-7 CRS launch appears to have moved back to Saturday 25th.

Suggests to me that SpaceX will have the range for an SES-10 static fire before then, so maybe a launch early next week is still on?

Edit: just realised, is reference to 25th UTC rather than local?

As we saw with Delta IV and Echostar XXIII, SpaceX might be able to static fire on the 23rd with Atlas V going on the 24th.  I say *might* because SLC-41 is a lot closer to LC-39A than SLC-37 is.  Also, Atlas will be rolled out on the morning of the 22nd, so there might be constraints present between an Atlas V on the 41 pad and a Falcon 9 static fire on 39A that weren't present for WGS-9 (when F9 static fire was roughly 24hrs before WGS-9 launch).

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1483
  • US
  • Liked: 961
  • Likes Given: 786
They tried to recover SES-9, which was 5,271 Kg (twins with 10?) ...

SES-9 (Boeing) and SES-10 (Airbus) are not twins.

SES-10 is 5300kg into a GTO orbit
SES-9 was 5270kg into a GTO orbit

That seems close enough!

Except that SES-10 is *NOT* going into a GTO.  It is going into a sub-synchronous transfer orbit (i.e. - the apogee is significantly below GEO altitude).  SES-10 will probably use on-board propulsion to raise its apogee to GEO altitude before beginning the usual perigee-raising maneuvers to transition to GEO.  To quote Gunter Krebs: "As the satellite's mass is higher than the nominal GTO capacity, it will be put into a sub-geostationary transfer orbit by the launch vehicle."

I'd like to see how recent the source is for that.  If you look at the two GTO commsat campaigns (including AMOS-6) before and two (expected) after SES-10, you might notice SES-10 is the lightest of those 5 payloads.

OA-7 has been delayed until March 27, so this date seemingly will not hold.

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=41564.msg1656595#msg1656595
« Last Edit: 03/20/2017 07:21 PM by Chris Bergin »

Offline smoliarm

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 479
  • Moscow, Russia
  • Liked: 164
  • Likes Given: 55
They tried to recover SES-9, which was 5,271 Kg (twins with 10?) ...

SES-9 (Boeing) and SES-10 (Airbus) are not twins.

SES-10 is 5300kg into a GTO orbit
SES-9 was 5270kg into a GTO orbit

That seems close enough!

Except that SES-10 is *NOT* going into a GTO.  It is going into a sub-synchronous transfer orbit (i.e. - the apogee is significantly below GEO altitude).  SES-10 will probably use on-board propulsion to raise its apogee to GEO altitude before beginning the usual perigee-raising maneuvers to transition to GEO.  To quote Gunter Krebs: "As the satellite's mass is higher than the nominal GTO capacity, it will be put into a sub-geostationary transfer orbit by the launch vehicle."

I'd like to see how recent the source is for that.  If you look at the two GTO commsat campaigns (including AMOS-6) before and two (expected) after SES-10, you might notice SES-10 is the lightest of those 5 payloads.

According to WebArchive, the statement
Quote
"As the satellite's mass is higher than the nominal GTO capacity, it will be put into a sub-geostationary transfer orbit by the launch vehicle."
was on that page ("SES-10") from the very beginning. The first archived copy
https://web.archive.org/web/20140304234825/http://space.skyrocket.de/doc_sdat/ses-10.htm
is dated March 4, 2014.
At that time Falcon 9 v1.1 was flying, and its GTO performance was about 4.8 t (IIRC).

So, my guess is that this note on Gunter's page is outdated.


Offline Skyrocket

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2023
  • Frankfurt am Main, Germany
  • Liked: 253
  • Likes Given: 59
They tried to recover SES-9, which was 5,271 Kg (twins with 10?) ...

SES-9 (Boeing) and SES-10 (Airbus) are not twins.

SES-10 is 5300kg into a GTO orbit
SES-9 was 5270kg into a GTO orbit

That seems close enough!

Except that SES-10 is *NOT* going into a GTO.  It is going into a sub-synchronous transfer orbit (i.e. - the apogee is significantly below GEO altitude).  SES-10 will probably use on-board propulsion to raise its apogee to GEO altitude before beginning the usual perigee-raising maneuvers to transition to GEO.  To quote Gunter Krebs: "As the satellite's mass is higher than the nominal GTO capacity, it will be put into a sub-geostationary transfer orbit by the launch vehicle."

I'd like to see how recent the source is for that.  If you look at the two GTO commsat campaigns (including AMOS-6) before and two (expected) after SES-10, you might notice SES-10 is the lightest of those 5 payloads.

According to WebArchive, the statement
Quote
"As the satellite's mass is higher than the nominal GTO capacity, it will be put into a sub-geostationary transfer orbit by the launch vehicle."
was on that page ("SES-10") from the very beginning. The first archived copy
https://web.archive.org/web/20140304234825/http://space.skyrocket.de/doc_sdat/ses-10.htm
is dated March 4, 2014.
At that time Falcon 9 v1.1 was flying, and its GTO performance was about 4.8 t (IIRC).

So, my guess is that this note on Gunter's page is outdated.



Yep, indeed, i have to admit, that this entry is outdated. It refers to v1.1 version, which was flying at the time of the launch contract. v1.2 has enough performance for a 5.3 t satellite. I will update my page to avoid confusion.
« Last Edit: 03/20/2017 07:31 PM by Skyrocket »

Offline IanThePineapple

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 365
  • NaN
  • Liked: 88
  • Likes Given: 50
OA-7 is now the 27th, we lost the launch date boys.
Proud creator of Ian's Paper Model Rocket Collection:
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=42383.0

Offline jpo234

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 415
  • Liked: 256
  • Likes Given: 39
OA-7 is now the 27th, we lost the launch date boys.
Is this a NET date or a range reservation? Chris said earlier that SpaceX has reserved the range for the 27th.

Offline IanThePineapple

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 365
  • NaN
  • Liked: 88
  • Likes Given: 50
OA-7 is now the 27th, we lost the launch date boys.
Is this a NET date or a range reservation? Chris said earlier that SpaceX has reserved the range for the 27th.

NET March 27th, SES-10 is now NET the 29th.
Proud creator of Ian's Paper Model Rocket Collection:
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=42383.0

Offline Hankelow8

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 154
  • UK
  • Liked: 112
  • Likes Given: 38
Who decides if there is a launch day clash ?

Offline mn

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 192
  • United States
  • Liked: 86
  • Likes Given: 29
From earlier in the update thread

Per L2, SpaceX has March 27 (Window 1658-2058 Eastern) *Range Approved* for the SES-10 launch on the historic Falcon 9R 1021 (re-)launch!

So either the range approval was contingent on OA-7 launching earlier, or SpaceX informed the range that they were not going to be ready for the 27th and gave up the date. Or something else entirely...

Offline IntoTheVoid

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 174
  • USA
  • Liked: 106
  • Likes Given: 52
...And I suppose, even if SES-10 is range approved for the 27th, that if OA-7 is delayed past the 25th, NASA might bump SpaceX for ISS scheduling purposes. No?

If your primary customer asks you to defer the range for them to meet their complex schedule, I expect you do it. Especially if your launch is from their property.

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2234
  • Liked: 973
  • Likes Given: 644
The mission patch has a sooty booster under a bright white upper stage. That's awesome  :D

Offline old_sellsword

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 484
  • Liked: 394
  • Likes Given: 327
The mission patch has a sooty booster under a bright white upper stage. That's awesome  :D

I like the B1021-2 label.

Where do you see that label?

Offline Herb Schaltegger

The mission patch has a sooty booster under a bright white upper stage. That's awesome  :D

I like the B1021-2 label.

Where do you see that label?

Since envy887 mentioned sooty booster I assumed he was referring to this one.
https://spacexnow.com/patches/ezekiel-10-3-17/SES-10.png
But I could be wrong.

That's not the patch posted in the Updates thread (which looks a lot more like prior SpaceX mission patches than the one you linked to).
Ad astra per aspirin ...

Offline Joffan

  • NSF Irregular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1215
  • Liked: 241
  • Likes Given: 698
Since envy887 mentioned sooty booster I assumed he was referring to this one.
https://spacexnow.com/patches/ezekiel-10-3-17/SES-10.png
But I could be wrong.

I think everyone else was looking at the update thread.


We've got the patch!
When I say "Jump!", you say "To which orbital inclination?"

Tags: