Author Topic: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 1  (Read 424512 times)

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site
« Reply #420 on: 05/30/2012 01:14 am »
They already integrate the first and second stages of Falcon 9 at the launch hangar. Falcon Heavy will be even bigger, so no doubt will also be integrated in the launch hangar.
Just to be sure I have this right: I've heard SpaceX leases a separate payload processing site at the cape, so I assume they prep the payload there, and then transport that to the pad, where it's mated to the stages. 

Is this correct?

Not yet.  They haven't had any payloads other than Dragon

Offline ChefPat

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1055
  • Earth, for now
  • Liked: 125
  • Likes Given: 1022
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site
« Reply #421 on: 05/30/2012 02:27 am »

They haven't had any payloads other than Dragon
SpaceX Launches 6 P-PODs
SpaceX made history on December 8, 2010 as the first commercial company to re-enter a spacecraft from orbiting the Earth.  It was also a big day for the CubeSat community - the Falcon 9's second stage carried up six P-PODs along with the Dragon spacecraft.
Playing Politics with Commercial Crew is Un-American!!!

Offline Zed_Noir

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5490
  • Canada
  • Liked: 1809
  • Likes Given: 1302
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site
« Reply #422 on: 05/30/2012 02:49 am »
Wonder how many cores SpaceX is planning to handle at the inland  preparatory facility. Maybe one F9 and one FH simultaneously.

Could they get a fully assembled FH from the processing site to the launch site?  Or would they have to assemble FH first stages in the launch hangar?  Could they haul a fully assembled FH on a truck? Could they ship a fully assembled FH over water?

I doubt that SpaceX will assemble a whole LV in the preparatory hangar. IMO they will assemble stages to be tractor over to the pad ready hangar (AKA HIF) for final assembly and payload integration using highway 4.

AFAIK highway 4 is two lanes wide. So might only capable of accommodating one single wide load trailer for LV stages only. Unless they widen the highway with an extra lane from the preparatory hangar to the ready hangar adjacent to a wildness reserve. Unlikely.

My previous post is speculation on how many cores will be store at the preparatory hangar. My guess is four F9 1st stages and two F9 upper stages.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site
« Reply #423 on: 05/30/2012 03:02 am »

They haven't had any payloads other than Dragon
SpaceX Launches 6 P-PODs
SpaceX made history on December 8, 2010 as the first commercial company to re-enter a spacecraft from orbiting the Earth.  It was also a big day for the CubeSat community - the Falcon 9's second stage carried up six P-PODs along with the Dragon spacecraft.
Which have absolutely brain-dead simple processing requirements (i.e. no propellants, etc).
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site
« Reply #424 on: 05/30/2012 03:05 am »

They haven't had any payloads other than Dragon
SpaceX Launches 6 P-PODs
SpaceX made history on December 8, 2010 as the first commercial company to re-enter a spacecraft from orbiting the Earth.  It was also a big day for the CubeSat community - the Falcon 9's second stage carried up six P-PODs along with the Dragon spacecraft.
Which have absolutely brain-dead simple processing requirements (i.e. no propellants, etc).

Yeah, might as well count Scotty's ashes as a payload.
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline ChefPat

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1055
  • Earth, for now
  • Liked: 125
  • Likes Given: 1022
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site
« Reply #425 on: 05/30/2012 03:44 am »

They haven't had any payloads other than Dragon
SpaceX Launches 6 P-PODs
SpaceX made history on December 8, 2010 as the first commercial company to re-enter a spacecraft from orbiting the Earth.  It was also a big day for the CubeSat community - the Falcon 9's second stage carried up six P-PODs along with the Dragon spacecraft.
Which have absolutely brain-dead simple processing requirements (i.e. no propellants, etc).
First it's no payload, then, well, it's a payload, but it's not a "hard" payload. Yawn.
Playing Politics with Commercial Crew is Un-American!!!

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site
« Reply #426 on: 05/30/2012 05:03 am »

They haven't had any payloads other than Dragon
SpaceX Launches 6 P-PODs
SpaceX made history on December 8, 2010 as the first commercial company to re-enter a spacecraft from orbiting the Earth.  It was also a big day for the CubeSat community - the Falcon 9's second stage carried up six P-PODs along with the Dragon spacecraft.
Which have absolutely brain-dead simple processing requirements (i.e. no propellants, etc).
First it's no payload, then, well, it's a payload, but it's not a "hard" payload. Yawn.
Context matters. The context was extra rented payload processing facilities, not really needed with ppods.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline ChileVerde

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1176
  • La frontera
  • Liked: 4
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site
« Reply #427 on: 05/30/2012 01:59 pm »

AFAIK highway 4 is two lanes wide. So might only capable of accommodating one single wide load trailer for LV stages only. Unless they widen the highway with an extra lane from the preparatory hangar to the ready hangar adjacent to a wildness reserve. Unlikely.

The video linked in #403 shows that, as of May 2010, SH 4 was a pretty modest road.

Edit: And as of April 2011, Sanchez Gas & Oil had moved some largish trucks on SH 4 to its property.
« Last Edit: 05/30/2012 02:15 pm by ChileVerde »
"I can’t tell you which asteroid, but there will be one in 2025," Bolden asserted.

Offline simonbp

  • Science Guy
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7138
  • Liked: 314
  • Likes Given: 183
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site
« Reply #428 on: 05/30/2012 04:07 pm »
So, you close down the road and use both lanes when you need to move big objects. Nothing special there.

Offline ChileVerde

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1176
  • La frontera
  • Liked: 4
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site
« Reply #429 on: 05/30/2012 09:51 pm »
So, you close down the road and use both lanes when you need to move big objects. Nothing special there.

Agree, the evidence is that SH 4 can stand the necessary traffic for a while and few-hour closures every month or so shouldn't be a problem.

I'd guess that maintenance would be needed for sustained operations. Probably something for SpaceX, Texas and Sanchez to work out.
"I can’t tell you which asteroid, but there will be one in 2025," Bolden asserted.

Offline corrodedNut

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1542
  • Liked: 216
  • Likes Given: 133
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site
« Reply #430 on: 05/30/2012 10:12 pm »
If you go into Google Earth, then drag the street view icon over to Boca Chica/Kopernic Shores, you can cruise down the main drag. Every house has an above-ground water cistern in their front yard. There are quite a few houses (the agave and palm trees really give it that feel of "Old Poland", some are for sale!) Falcon Heavy is gonna blow out every window in the neigborhood 2 seconds after liftoff, 'cause it'll only be 10,000ft away.

Offline ChileVerde

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1176
  • La frontera
  • Liked: 4
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site
« Reply #431 on: 05/31/2012 05:55 pm »

Just picked up this, which is probably well-known to everybody except me:

Quote
http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2012/may/HQ_12-179_SpaceX_Splashdown.html
 
HOUSTON -- SpaceX's Dragon capsule splashed down in the Pacific Ocean at 11:42 a.m. EDT a few hundred miles west of Baja California, Mexico, marking a successful end to the first mission by a commercial company to resupply the International Space Station.

(snip)

The Dragon capsule will be taken by boat to a port near Los Angeles, where it will be prepared for a return journey to SpaceX's test facility in McGregor, Texas, for processing. Some cargo will be removed at the port in California and returned to NASA within 48 hours. The remainder will be returned to Texas with the capsule.

So, if the idea is to (re)process stuff in McGregor and to have a fairly sporty operational tempo, geography would seem to favor Texas-Gulf of Mexico-Texas over Florida-Pacific-Texas, no?  Maybe not by much, as the land routes involved in both cases are almost all on interstate highways, but there would still be some difference.

Just a thought.

"I can’t tell you which asteroid, but there will be one in 2025," Bolden asserted.

Offline Jorge

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6404
  • Liked: 529
  • Likes Given: 67
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site
« Reply #432 on: 06/01/2012 07:27 pm »
Environmental group starts petition drive to stop SpaceX Texas launch site:

http://www.environmenttexas.org/news/txe/spacex-attempting-launch-rockets-texas-wildlife-refuge

Quote
But launching big, loud, smelly rockets from the middle of a wildlife refuge will scare the heck out of every creature within miles...

KSC launched much larger rockets from the middle of the Merritt Island wildlife refuge and their creatures seem to be fine with it.
JRF

Offline mr. mark

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1996
  • Liked: 172
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site
« Reply #433 on: 06/01/2012 07:34 pm »
This is a completely unreasonable argument in my view. NASA and the US Airforce has been launching rockets for years with wildlife nearby with little or no problems. In fact, KSC even plays up the wildlife angle promoting the interaction of technology and the local ecosystem. KSC is a reminder that Mankind can reach for the heavens while keeping an eye on the local environment.
« Last Edit: 06/01/2012 07:35 pm by mr. mark »

Offline sdsds

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7201
  • “With peace and hope for all mankind.”
  • Seattle
  • Liked: 2050
  • Likes Given: 1962
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site
« Reply #434 on: 06/01/2012 07:54 pm »
In the world of wildlife management they use the phrase "taking by harassment" when an activity, intentionally or not, harms a population of animals. I hope that, compared to Vandenberg, Boca Chica has relatively few pinnipeds.  See:
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/permits/vafb_ea.pdf
— 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 —

Offline simonbp

  • Science Guy
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7138
  • Liked: 314
  • Likes Given: 183
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site
« Reply #435 on: 06/01/2012 08:11 pm »
KSC launched much larger rockets from the middle of the Merritt Island wildlife refuge and their creatures seem to be fine with it.

Indeed. And considering most of the industry on the gulf coast is of a chemical processing nature, I doubt that a hydrocarbon rocket launch site is going to be a real concern for EPA or the state (after the due diligence is satisfied, of course).

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8823
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1318
  • Likes Given: 306
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site
« Reply #436 on: 06/01/2012 08:13 pm »
If I understand correctly, you can haze to change behavior, but not harass wildlife. At least that is the rule when dealing with our local coyote population.
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Offline peter-b

  • Dr. Peter Brett
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 651
  • Oxford, UK
  • Liked: 18
  • Likes Given: 74
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site
« Reply #437 on: 06/01/2012 09:14 pm »
Environmental group starts petition drive to stop SpaceX Texas launch site:

http://www.environmenttexas.org/news/txe/spacex-attempting-launch-rockets-texas-wildlife-refuge
Well, that was predictable.  ::)
Research Scientist (Sensors), Sharp Laboratories of Europe, UK

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site
« Reply #438 on: 06/01/2012 10:02 pm »
There are no other sites available for polar launches and KSC/CCAFS was set up for the Cold war. The issue here is that there are other alternatives to this site.  Spacex is going to have to try really hard to justify its flight rate predictions that necessitate another launch site.  Just because the USAF might be a little difficult to deal with and a few times a year, other launches may interrupt ops at CCAFS is not enough justification to "take" wildlife.

When doing an EA, one of the steps in the process is to describe what are the alternatives if no action is taken.  For example, MSL would not launch and there would be a limited ability to explore Mars without the use of RTGs.  NASA science missions have done a 10 year EA, and the impact of no action would be that NASA would no longer do space, climate, and planetary science.

In Spacex's case, a no action would mean Spacex would continue to launch from CCAFS at a possible slower rate (not a give).  That in the eyes of those who embrace conifers is the preferred outcome of an assessment.

Offline peter-b

  • Dr. Peter Brett
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 651
  • Oxford, UK
  • Liked: 18
  • Likes Given: 74
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site
« Reply #439 on: 06/01/2012 10:06 pm »
In Spacex's case, a no action would mean Spacex would continue to launch from CCAFS at a possible slower rate (not a give).  That in the eyes of those who embrace conifers is the preferred outcome of an assessment.

What's going on with LC36A/B at the moment? As far as I can tell they're currently inactive.

Edit: And LC 17A/B? It seems like there are several pads at the Cape that SpaceX could in principle make use of...
« Last Edit: 06/01/2012 10:09 pm by peter-b »
Research Scientist (Sensors), Sharp Laboratories of Europe, UK

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0