Author Topic: SpaceX F9 : SES-10 with reuse of CRS-8 Booster SN/1021 : 2017-03-30 : DISCUSSION  (Read 323566 times)

Offline saliva_sweet

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 493
  • Liked: 377
  • Likes Given: 1196
They were clear it was the first case.  "Good enough", in the tone used, meant under the nominal value, but within the range.

Please clarify 'within the expected range' or 'within the acceptable range'

The main clue for me is that NROL-76 is not postponed. Meaning no anomalous underperformance of the 2nd stage. And the fact that first stage landed seems to indicate there was no underperformance there either.

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8526
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1028
  • Likes Given: 235
I am seriously wondering if the pause we saw in webcast was nothing more than trying to interpret complex data. It just took a few seconds to process, which may look like something is wrong, but really is the strain of doing the complex math.
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Offline cscott

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2539
  • Liked: 1751
  • Likes Given: 656
They were clear it was the first case.  "Good enough", in the tone used, meant under the nominal value, but within the range.

Please clarify 'within the expected range' or 'within the acceptable range'

The main clue for me is that NROL-76 is not postponed. Meaning no anomalous underperformance of the 2nd stage. And the fact that first stage landed seems to indicate there was no underperformance there either.
Also, SpaceX told us directly on L2 there was no anomaly? As we keep repeating?
« Last Edit: 04/06/2017 05:02 PM by cscott »

Offline saliva_sweet

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 493
  • Liked: 377
  • Likes Given: 1196
They were clear it was the first case.  "Good enough", in the tone used, meant under the nominal value, but within the range.

Please clarify 'within the expected range' or 'within the acceptable range'

The main clue for me is that NROL-76 is not postponed. Meaning no anomalous underperformance of the 2nd stage. And the fact that first stage landed seems to indicate there was no underperformance there either.
Also, SpaceX told us directly on L2 there was no anomaly? As we keep repeating?

Not quite. They reiterated that the orbit was good, no shortfall, contract fulfilled, mission success. This is known and not debated. But it's perfectly possible to have a serious anomaly (failure almost) and still make "good enough" or even perfect orbit. Some ULA launches have been this way.

Online abaddon

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1514
  • Liked: 948
  • Likes Given: 768
This is getting ridiculous.  Please stop.

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8693
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 5424
  • Likes Given: 3579
This is getting ridiculous.  Please stop.

Yes. Let's draw a line under this and move on. Don't make me make sure my delete button still works.

Edit: it does... Sigh.
« Last Edit: 04/06/2017 07:25 PM by Lar »
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Online AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4969
  • Liked: 2965
  • Likes Given: 4190
Substantially less than half the cost of a new stage... their cost for a first stage is $35-40 M at most.

In absolute dollar terms, that's something between $15M and $20M.  How does this compare to the absolute cost to refurbish a shuttle? (not the first one, but after they'd done a hundred...)

That's about $1M per week as a thumbrule, assuming manpower costs predominate. 
« Last Edit: 04/06/2017 09:38 PM by AncientU »
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline manoweb

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 204
  • Tracer of rays
  • Hayward CA
  • Liked: 85
  • Likes Given: 83
SES-10 is now in GEO

Already? Is it common for satellites to get into this orbit so quickly?

Online Jarnis

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1085
  • Liked: 550
  • Likes Given: 143
SES-10 is now in GEO

Already? Is it common for satellites to get into this orbit so quickly?

Yes, for sats that use chemical propulsion.

All-Electric sats take longer.

Offline watermod

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 372
  • Liked: 94
  • Likes Given: 109
They were clear it was the first case.  "Good enough", in the tone used, meant under the nominal value, but within the range.

Please clarify 'within the expected range' or 'within the acceptable range'

The main clue for me is that NROL-76 is not postponed. Meaning no anomalous underperformance of the 2nd stage. And the fact that first stage landed seems to indicate there was no underperformance there either.

Now that NROL-76 and the next launch are postponed it gets interesting.

Online Welsh Dragon

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 207
  • Liked: 208
  • Likes Given: 27
Unless you have publicly available information this is due to an anomaly of some sorts during SES-10, it means nothing in the context of this discussion.

Offline chad1011

  • Member
  • Posts: 79
  • Anderson, SC
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 238
Please see Lars post above... The orbit was acceptable to SpaceX and SES.  NROL-76 is most likely a payload delay.

Yep, we've been waiting for the new date to become documented and now it is via L2 KSC/Cape scheduling.

NET April 30, same window.

Static Fire on April 26.

No reasons given, so likely the payload (which isn't talkative as we're talking about a NROL bird).

Edit: Add Chris's post
« Last Edit: 04/07/2017 01:53 PM by chad1011 »

Offline baldusi

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7436
  • Buenos Aires, Argentina
  • Liked: 1434
  • Likes Given: 4475
SES-10 is now in GEO

Already? Is it common for satellites to get into this orbit so quickly?

Yes, for sats that use chemical propulsion.

All-Electric sats take longer.
For highly experienced operators with experience on the platform, 10 days is normal. New platform or new operators usually take longer. 60 to 90 days is not unheard of.

Offline cscott

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2539
  • Liked: 1751
  • Likes Given: 656
Yeah: F9=not classified, payload=classified. We've got good sources inside SpaceX. If we're not hearing anything about the reason, even in L2, it's because it's payload-related, as Chris suggests.

Online Zed_Noir

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2241
  • Canada
  • Liked: 287
  • Likes Given: 452
It just dawn on me. That core 1021 is quite unique.

It might be the only piece of hardware to launched from both KSC & CCAFS to orbit along with 2 "carrier landings".


Offline MP99

It just dawn on me. That core 1021 is quite unique.

It might be the only piece of hardware to launched from both KSC & CCAFS to orbit along with 2 "carrier landings".
KSC + CCFAS - that's neat. Good spotting.

Cheers, Martin

Offline vanoord

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 479
  • Liked: 287
  • Likes Given: 38
The first two pairs of FH side boosters are - apparently - recycled F9 cores, so B1021 won't be alone in launching from both pads.

There's also potential for one of the Pad 39a F9 cores relaunching from LC40.



Edit: correct speling
« Last Edit: 04/09/2017 08:19 AM by vanoord »

Offline yokem55

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 443
  • Oregon (Ore-uh-gun dammit)
  • Liked: 247
  • Likes Given: 12
The first two pairs of FH side boosters are - apparently - recycled F9 cores, so B1021 won't be alone in launching from both pads.

There's also potential for one of the Pad 39a F9?cores relaunching from LC40.
The booster from Iridium flight 1 might top them all - launch from both coasts.

Offline meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7759
  • N. California
  • Liked: 4052
  • Likes Given: 830
It just dawn on me. That core 1021 is quite unique.

It might be the only piece of hardware to launched from both KSC & CCAFS to orbit along with 2 "carrier landings".
Booster recruitment:

Joins SpaceX, sail the seas, see the world!
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Tags: