The comment that caught my attention the most was the addition of the AFTS would eliminate 96 people.“So we came down 96 people that don’t have to be sitting on console. And the cost to the customer is cut in half. "Why did it take 96 people to do the flight termination? What did all 96 of them do?Steve
Quote from: Steve D on 03/20/2017 04:58 pmThe comment that caught my attention the most was the addition of the AFTS would eliminate 96 people.“So we came down 96 people that don’t have to be sitting on console. And the cost to the customer is cut in half. "Why did it take 96 people to do the flight termination? What did all 96 of them do?SteveComm, radar, transmitter, receiver, backup power generation, software, tracking cameras, console maintenance, etc They would be located at the MOCC, JDMTA, Antigua, Cape command antenna site, camera sites, etc
“When pad 40 is up and operating, [it will] give us the capability of launching a Falcon from both pad 39A and pad 40 on the same day,” stated the Brig. Gen.
Looks like we could be in for some exciting times.Quote“When pad 40 is up and operating, [it will] give us the capability of launching a Falcon from both pad 39A and pad 40 on the same day,” stated the Brig. Gen.
Comm, radar, transmitter, receiver, backup power generation, software, tracking cameras, console maintenance, etc They would be located at the MOCC, JDMTA, Antigua, Cape command antenna site, camera sites, etc
Quote from: Jim on 03/20/2017 05:08 pmComm, radar, transmitter, receiver, backup power generation, software, tracking cameras, console maintenance, etc They would be located at the MOCC, JDMTA, Antigua, Cape command antenna site, camera sites, etcHow would AFTS eliminate tracking cameras? I thought those were diagnostic.
Quote from: mme on 03/20/2017 05:16 pmLooks like we could be in for some exciting times.Quote“When pad 40 is up and operating, [it will] give us the capability of launching a Falcon from both pad 39A and pad 40 on the same day,” stated the Brig. Gen.This is kind of what I'm wondering about. If SpaceX gets the launch cadence down to two weeks turnaround time per pad, that means basically 4 launches a month from 39A and 40 combined. That's 48 launches just from SpaceX.So I'm wondering if 48 is just an intermediate target, which can be increased as demand increases, or is it some kind of hard limit?
How would AFTS eliminate tracking cameras? I thought those were diagnostic.
Unless I'm mistaken, tracking cameras for diagnostic was really just a Shuttle thing. They're not needed in that way for Atlas V, Delta IV, and Falcon 9.
It's got me wondering if the launch rate could be increased further if there was more standardisation between launch vehicles.
Quote from: Lee Jay on 03/20/2017 05:43 pmHow would AFTS eliminate tracking cameras? I thought those were diagnostic.Maybe not now, but originally radars couldn't see the vehicle until it was above the ground clutter. Back in the day, there were observers looking through a wire screens to make sure the rocket didn't go outside of the limits. It was later replaced with cameras with overlays on the monitor screen.GPS Metric tracking probably eliminated this.
Quote from: Barrie on 03/20/2017 06:19 pmIt's got me wondering if the launch rate could be increased further if there was more standardisation between launch vehicles.What kind of standardization?
Quote from: Jim on 03/20/2017 06:35 pmQuote from: Barrie on 03/20/2017 06:19 pmIt's got me wondering if the launch rate could be increased further if there was more standardisation between launch vehicles.What kind of standardization?Er, I don't know! I'm just thinking that if they could launch two F9s on the same day, then they could launch two of anything on the same day if all rockets were alike in whatever ways matter as far as reconfiguring the range goes.