Author Topic: Pad 39A - Transition to SpaceX Falcon Heavy debut - Thread 1  (Read 196477 times)

Online Chris Bergin

A round up on the latest for Falcon Heavy's debut from KSC's 39A:

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/11/pad-39a-spacex-groundwork-falcon-heavy-debut/

Includes overview and history. L2 info. SpaceX comments to us. L2 graphics and photos and general excitement about a new rocket being added to the family! :)

Special thanks to Okan170 and Jdeshetler for their continued efforts on the visuals. Remember, these aren't SpaceX renderings, they are created in L2 via data (although we've been showing them to SpaceX - right to the top - and they really like them too!)

Giving this a standalone thread and we'll start another new FH general thread later.

Offline sigil

  • rapid unplanned disassembler
  • Member
  • Posts: 12
  • Portland, Oregon
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 107
Great article! Im glad to see Orkan170's amazing renders accompanied it!
We can lick gravity, but sometimes the paperwork is overwhelming.

Offline tesla

  • Member
  • Posts: 97
  • Germany
  • Liked: 38
  • Likes Given: 75
WOW This article took my breath away...  ;D Thank you!!! I will be there next summer to see the launch and I will bring my telescope with optical tracking. I should be able to capture some nice videos. ;)

Btw. "Related Articles"..... "SpaceX reveals Falcon 1 Halloween date"

This is from 2005. Maybe it's time to update this related articles section. xD
...or is this already a tradition ;)

Offline nimbostratus

  • Member
  • Posts: 99
  • Mainland, China
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 13
It seems that the tower is not needed either, since the TEL can provide the function.

And can some one tell me what is Boca Chica launch site intended for? Forgive me if this question has beem asked.
« Last Edit: 11/17/2014 03:53 PM by nimbostratus »
Wonders in the desert

Offline douglas100

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2120
  • Liked: 193
  • Likes Given: 91
I'm surprised that the hangar is so close to the pad again. Since they are going to be laying new rails for the TEL and there seems to be plenty of space available, you might think it would be prudent to build it further back along the causeway to protect it from a (hopefully unlikely) failure like Antares.
Douglas Clark

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7625
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 1991
  • Likes Given: 4558
This article is a "tour de force" Chris... Thank you! :)
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"

Offline clongton

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10218
  • Connecticut
    • Direct Launcher
  • Liked: 1870
  • Likes Given: 587
Great article Chris - thanks.
Looking forward to continuing updates on the pad and Falcon Heavy.
:)
Chuck - DIRECT co-founder
I started my career on the Saturn-V F-1A engine

Offline hpras

  • Member
  • Posts: 57
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 3
I wonder if the rail system have some kind of leveling feature like the crawlers did, or will the FH be dragged up the ramp in a 'head down' position.

Offline Hog

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1009
  • Woodstock
  • Liked: 222
  • Likes Given: 483
This article is a "tour de force" Chris... Thank you! :)
Tour de Force"
an impressive performance or achievement that has been accomplished or managed with great skill

Excellent summation.

As always Chris, great work.
Paul

Offline MTom

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 378
  • EU / Hungary
  • Liked: 107
  • Likes Given: 433
Is this thread only for discussing about construction of Pad39A, or generally about FH maiden flight?

Offline JasonAW3

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2357
  • Claremore, Ok.
  • Liked: 364
  • Likes Given: 10
Is this thread only for discussing about construction of Pad39A, or generally about FH maiden flight?

It appears to be a combination of the two.

Although, if SpaceX is planning on sharing the pad, what other modifications will be needed to accommidate other launcher types than the Falcon Heavy and the BFR?
My God!  It's full of universes!

Offline Ben the Space Brit

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6835
  • A spaceflight fan
  • London, UK
  • Liked: 469
  • Likes Given: 533
It is my understanding that LC-39A will also be used for NASA-funded Falcon-9 v.1.1 launches too, including Dragon cargo and crew. I'm sure there are lots of folk at KSC who are glad that ISS crews will launch from their side of the island rather than from CCAFS.

It occurs to me that the RSS could be re-purposed too, some structural modifications so it folds around the Falcon-9 to allow on-pad servicing rather than having to roll back to the HIF. From the article, I got the impression that this isn't in SpaceX's plans right now but it might be at least a Powerpoint proposal somewhere in the organisation.
« Last Edit: 11/17/2014 04:43 PM by Ben the Space Brit »
"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!!!

Offline MattMason

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 909
  • Space Enthusiast
  • Indiana
  • Liked: 619
  • Likes Given: 1053
Excellent article. With stuff like that, I'm this close to looking to an L2 membership for my Christmas present.  8)
"Why is the logo on the side of a rocket so important?"
"So you can find the pieces." -Jim, the Steely Eyed

Offline Orbiter

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2152
  • Florida
  • Liked: 346
  • Likes Given: 890
It is my understanding that LC-39A will also be used for NASA-funded Falcon-9 v.1.1 launches too, including Dragon cargo and crew. I'm sure there are lots of folk at KSC who are glad that ISS crews will launch from their side of the island rather than from CCAFS.

It occurs to me that the RSS could be re-purposed too, some structural modifications so it folds around the Falcon-9 to allow on-pad servicing rather than having to roll back to the HIF. From the article, I got the impression that this isn't in SpaceX's plans right now but it might be at least a Powerpoint proposal somewhere in the organisation.

That's my understanding, too. I wonder when the first CRS launch will be from LC-39A.
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.

Offline butters

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1632
  • Liked: 255
  • Likes Given: 55
It seems that the tower is not needed either, since the TEL can provide the function.

And can some one tell me what is Boca Chica launch site intended for? Forgive me if this question has beem asked.

The FSS tower will be used for crew access to Dragon 2 (and emergency egress facilities). It also provides lightning protection.

Boca Chica will be for commercial GEO missions. LC-39A will be for NASA missions and manned missions. SLC-4W will be for SSO and other high-inclination missions. LC-40 will be for DoD/NRO missions and any unmanned commercial missions to orbits unsuitable for Boca Chica or Vandenberg.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 30518
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 8838
  • Likes Given: 286
It is my understanding that LC-39A will also be used for NASA-funded Falcon-9 v.1.1 launches too, including Dragon cargo and crew. I'm sure there are lots of folk at KSC who are glad that ISS crews will launch from their side of the island rather than from CCAFS.

It occurs to me that the RSS could be re-purposed too, some structural modifications so it folds around the Falcon-9 to allow on-pad servicing rather than having to roll back to the HIF. From the article, I got the impression that this isn't in SpaceX's plans right now but it might be at least a Powerpoint proposal somewhere in the organisation.

No, they are just delaying its destruction.  It is not a good idea to reuse it.

Also, there is no difference whether ISS crews launch from KSC or CCAFS.

Offline Ben the Space Brit

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6835
  • A spaceflight fan
  • London, UK
  • Liked: 469
  • Likes Given: 533
Also, there is no difference whether ISS crews launch from KSC or CCAFS.

In engineering and operational terms? Quite correct. However, this is about politics, perceptions and managerial turf. In that environment, it matters very much.
"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!!!

Offline rcoppola

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1939
  • USA
  • Liked: 1178
  • Likes Given: 445
I would think the mentioned "reinforcements" to the FSS is future proofing for when they eventually detach the RSS and add a level or two when preparing for their first Commercial Crew launch in 2017.

We'll probably see that Phase 2 of the Pad Mods in early to mid-2016?
Sail the oceans of space and set foot upon new lands!
www.linkedin.com/in/rvcoppola/

Offline rcoppola

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1939
  • USA
  • Liked: 1178
  • Likes Given: 445
Also, there is no difference whether ISS crews launch from KSC or CCAFS.

In engineering and operational terms? Quite correct. However, this is about politics, perceptions and managerial turf. In that environment, it matters very much.
In this case, I'm not sure about that. After all Boeing is launching CST from the CCAFS side. SpaceX wanted 39A primarily because it's a time/cost saving, pre-existing infrastructure they can economically modify to use for their Dragon2 Crewed Service Contracts as well as FH.
Sail the oceans of space and set foot upon new lands!
www.linkedin.com/in/rvcoppola/

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 30518
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 8838
  • Likes Given: 286
Also, there is no difference whether ISS crews launch from KSC or CCAFS.

In engineering and operational terms? Quite correct. However, this is about politics, perceptions and managerial turf. In that environment, it matters very much.

No, they are subject to the same range constraints.  There is no oversight by the USAF at either site and there is no oversight by NASA at either site.   NASA has no more control on KSC than on CCAFS for commercial launches.

Tags: