Author Topic: SpaceX Eastern Range Landing Facilities  (Read 158005 times)

Offline tleski

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 327
  • Washington, DC
  • Liked: 210
  • Likes Given: 249
Re: SpaceX Eastern Range Landing Facilities
« Reply #380 on: 01/04/2017 04:13 PM »

Online guckyfan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6245
  • Germany
  • Liked: 1547
  • Likes Given: 1325
Re: SpaceX Eastern Range Landing Facilities
« Reply #381 on: 01/04/2017 04:54 PM »
The statement was retracted according to reddit. It means they seek permission to build two more landing pads.

Added link:

https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/5lzzvy/seemangel_spacex_recently_leased_2_more_pads_at/dbzt8b3/?st=ixj8u2jp&sh=85005ed7
« Last Edit: 01/04/2017 04:55 PM by guckyfan »

Offline Orbiter

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2178
  • Florida
  • Liked: 379
  • Likes Given: 908
Re: SpaceX Eastern Range Landing Facilities
« Reply #382 on: 01/04/2017 04:57 PM »
Tweet for clarification. The user meant that SpaceX was seeking approval for two additional LZ's at LC-13.

Robin Seemangal ‏@nova_road  9m9 minutes ago
Clarification: @SpaceX is speaking approval to build two more landing pads within current Landing Zone and have NOT leased two more pads.
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 Herb Schaltegger

Re: SpaceX Eastern Range Landing Facilities
« Reply #383 on: 01/04/2017 10:29 PM »
Tweet for clarification. The user meant that SpaceX was seeking approval for two additional LZ's at LC-13.

Robin Seemangal ‏@nova_road  9m9 minutes ago
Clarification: @SpaceX is speaking approval to build two more landing pads within current Landing Zone and have NOT leased two more pads.

Is this our cue to keep an eye open for an updated EIS for multiple simultaneous stage landings?

FH preparations are looking more serious on all fronts, not just some publicity shots on SpaceX's Instagram feed.
Ad astra per aspirin ...

Offline sghill

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1284
  • United States
  • Liked: 1416
  • Likes Given: 1945
Re: SpaceX Eastern Range Landing Facilities
« Reply #384 on: 01/09/2017 06:40 PM »
Is this our cue to keep an eye open for an updated EIS for multiple simultaneous stage landings?

FH preparations are looking more serious on all fronts, not just some publicity shots on SpaceX's Instagram feed.


Ask and Ye shall receive!  I just received a message from the environmental officer at Patrick.  The new EA (EIS) is finally out!!!

Tons of delicious trainspotting goodies. Start reading and discussing!

First up, here is the FONSI notice.

"In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act, the United States Air Force, 45th Space Wing (45 SW), as the Executing Agency for Air Force Space Command, offers for public comment the Draft Supplemental Environmental Assessment (EA)/Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI)/ Finding of No Practical Alternative (FONPA) for activities occurring on Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS) property for expanded Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) operations at Launch Complex 13 (also known as Landing Zone 1). The Draft SEA assessed potential impacts to land use/visual resources (which includes coastal resources), noise, biological resources, cultural resources, air quality, climate, hazardous materials/hazardous waste (which includes solid waste and pollution prevention), orbital debris, water resources, geology and soils, transportation, utilities, health and safety, socioeconomics, environmental justice, and Section 4(f) properties. The Draft FONSI/ FONPA is based on the findings in the Draft SEA. Copies of the Draft SEA/FONSI/FONPA are available for public review through February 4, 2017 at the 45 SW Public Affairs Office, Bldg 423, Rm C-129, PAFB, Florida; in the public libraries in Satellite Beach and Cocoa Beach, Florida; and online at www.patrick.af.mil (at the “Environmental Office” page)."

Next, some summary quotes from the supplemental EA (see the attached copy):

"The Proposed Action would include constructing two additional concrete landing pads, each with an approximate
diameter of 282 feet surrounded by an approximate 50 foot-wide hard-packed soil “apron”, which would bring the
diameter of each pad area to approximately 400 feet. These two additional landing pads would be in a north and a
south area as shown in Figure 2-4 of the SEA. The pads would be approximately 18 inches thick and designed to
support the weight and thrust energy of the Falcon booster vehicle; they would comply with all CCAFS and other
relevant construction requirements, the same requirements as for the original main landing pad. These new pads
would be constructed on previously undisturbed land. Two short access crane paths would be constructed from the
existing crane path to those contingency pads for the retrieval crane movement following a landing event. Pedestals similar to what was constructed for the main pad may also be constructed at each pad. Additionally, the Proposed Action would include constructing a Dragon capsule processing facility including an approximately 130ft X 100ft 30-foot-tall building and related utilities. The Proposed Action would also include the operation of LZ-1 which would support preparations for, and the landing of up to three booster stage vehicles. It would also support the post-flight landing and safing. Should one of the booster’s land on the droneship, it would be safed at sea, then the droneship would be brought back to a local port. The original EA estimated that 12 landings would take place per year for the initial five-year license, of a single stage vehicle. SpaceX estimates there may be up to 6 events per year for a Falcon Heavy launch, and therefore up to 18 landings (12 Falcon 9 single core landings and 6 Falcon Heavy triple core landings) at LZ-1 or on the droneship. Operations at the LZ-1 area would also include Dragon Capsule processing and testing."


So two new pads for simultaneous first stage landings.  We also know how thick the concrete has to be to survive landings- 18 inches.


(Don't hot link attachments on other sites. Link to the post, but linking directly to the upload is uncontrolled drain on bandwidth. I've reuploaded the attachments with a different download url. People can download as much as they want if they are on the site. "Blind" downloading from other sites is naughty - Carl, Mod).
« Last Edit: 01/09/2017 10:15 PM by Carl G »
Bring the thunder Elon!

Offline sghill

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1284
  • United States
  • Liked: 1416
  • Likes Given: 1945
Re: SpaceX Eastern Range Landing Facilities
« Reply #385 on: 01/09/2017 06:43 PM »
From pg. 2.2

"While the additional clearing for this Proposed Action is also needed for the radar altimeter system on the Falcon 9 boosters to work properly, much less is needed because the landing navigation system is more advanced and has become more accurate."

"Two short crane access paths would be constructed from the existing crane path to the landing pads. To simplify operations, SpaceX may install a set of pedestals within the compacted apron around each landing pads, similar to what exists now at the LZ-1 main pad. This would allow parallel processing of landed boosters,"

Pg. 2-4
"The detailed sequence of events for booster stage landings along with trajectory data would be provided in the Flight Safety Data Plan (FSDP) once it is finalized. Although most of the on-board propellant volumes would be expended during flight, there is a potential for a relatively small amount of LOX (less than 5,840 lbs) and RP-1 fuel (less than 2,160 lbs) to remain in the Falcon booster stages upon landing. Final volumes of fuel would also be included in the FSDP."

pg. 2-5
"The original EA estimated that 12 landings would take place per year for the initial five-year FAA launch license, of a single stage vehicle. SpaceX estimates there may be up to 6 events per year for a Falcon Heavy launch, and
therefore up to 18 landings (12 Falcon 9 single core landings and 6 Falcon Heavy triple core landings) at LZ-1.
SpaceX prefers to conduct all of their launch operations during daylight hours, but, based on mission needs, there is a possibility that some of the additional fly-back missions could be performed during the night. Accordingly, up to two Falcon Heavy night landings (3 stages each time) are assumed for this SEA."


Pg. 2-5
"SpaceX initiated a facility assessment process with the Air Force in May of 2016 in an attempt to locate an existing site capable of accommodating Dragon capsule processing requirements. In coordination with 45 SW it was determined that locating the processing facility at LZ-1 would allow immediate mission requirements to be met. Long –term CCAFS real estate planning efforts are underway; that effort may result in the development of a new facility at a different location. In this instance, a new location facility would be evaluated under a separate study.
LZ-1 provides a location to perform propellant servicing operations and post-flight refurbishment for Dragon capsule missions. Following space flight operations, the Dragon capsule would splashdown off the coast of Florida where vehicle recovery would occur. The Dragon capsule would be transported back to the processing facility for post-flight processing and refurbishment. In order to support pre- and post-flight operations, the Dragon capsule would require a processing facility to perform various vehicle checkouts, final flight closeouts, propellant load, propellant unload and propellant servicing operations.

The Dragon capsule would also require a location to perform periodic vehicle static fires in order to test the
SuperDraco launch abort and landing system. The Capsule would be fastened to a portable mechanical stand than
can be configured to varying heights. The mobile static fire stand would be integrated to the northern edge of the
North Pad, and would not be permanently installed. The un-fueled Dragon capsule would be trucked to the LZ-1
facility. The transport method would follow the approved Department of Transportation methods for transporting the Dragon capsule; the transport fixture would be the same fixture used for recovery and transport of Dragon capsule in the past. Road slopes, grades, and turn radii are all consistent with current methods of transporting Dragon. At this time, the planned facility would be a temporary location.
In addition to the vehicle propellant loading, propulsion system servicing and pre- and post- static fire preparation the facility would also serve as the home for Dragon refurbishment. The facility would incorporate the experience that SpaceX has gained from the Dragon post-flight processing building at the SpaceX Rocket Development Facility in McGregor, Texas. The Texas facility is currently used to process all flown Dragon capsule vehicles and is also the
home to all Dragon capsule propulsive landing tests.

Planned activities at the LZ-1 Hypergol Processing Facility therefore include:
• Hypergolic Propellant (MMH and NTO) Load and Offload
• Post Flight and Static Fire Helium and Prop Tank Ullage Venting
• System and/or component decontamination
• Non-Hazardous component removal, inspection, repair and replacement
• Integrated vehicle checkouts"


Pg. 4-3
"Recently SpaceX performed a sonic
noise study for the Falcon 9 RLV landing at LZ-13, CCAFS that indicated sonic booms may be heard off shore and in areas north and south of the landing pad. The maximum focus boom would be 3psf or less and occur beyond over the ocean 30 miles from the coast. CCAFS and the Daytona Beach area may experience a slight over pressure of up to 1 psf, but generally about 0.4 psf or less. Based on the discussion above, sonic boom effects from landing operations at LC-13 would be less than other launch actions and would not cause a significant noise impact in sensitive areas. Based on the study at that time, sonic boom effects from landing operations at LZ-1 would be less than other launch actions and would not cause a significant noise impact in sensitive areas or to wildlife."


Pg. 4-10
"According to Air Force modeling, a loud sonic boom could be expected from the current SpaceX Falcon9 flyback design trajectories, peaking at approximately 5-7 PSF in the near-field (on CCAFS property) and reaching dozens of miles beyond with over 0.5 PSF. These peak “modeled” values (5-7 PSF) exceed the historical sonic boom vehicles (Space Shuttle, Concorde, Apollo capsule, etc.; typically below 2 PSF), however as shown in the CRS-9 landing data in Appendix C, the highest value actually measured was only 5.48 at LZ-1 during the July 18, 2016 landing event. At a distance of 10.13 miles the measurement was 1.45 PSF, which is less than the generally accepted potential damage threshold of about 2 psf.

With up to three first stage boosters returning, the same sonic boom effects would be expected, but would occur
once for each returning stage, several seconds apart. Two sonic boom events may occur for each returning stage,
for a total of up to six for the returning three booster stages may be generated. In situations where multiple launch vehicles are returning to CCAFS simultaneously (e.g. the Falcon Heavy side boosters returning to CCAFS) it is possible that the pressure waves from the two (or three) vehicles could interact and cause localized regions of
increased sonic boom overpressures, down track. These local interactions would change the signature of the
pressure waves in small regions on the ground affected by the coalesced waves; however, those small areas are not expected to significantly increase the overpressure magnitudes. Elsewhere, a dual, or triple-vehicle fly back would result in similar overpressure signatures and magnitudes to that of a single vehicle re-entry but with two sets of booms - one set for each vehicle (e.g. 6 sonic booms would possibly be audible when the Falcon Heavy side
boosters return: 2 for each booster)."
« Last Edit: 01/09/2017 07:37 PM by sghill »
Bring the thunder Elon!

Offline tleski

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 327
  • Washington, DC
  • Liked: 210
  • Likes Given: 249
Re: SpaceX Eastern Range Landing Facilities
« Reply #386 on: 01/09/2017 07:00 PM »
No mention of Dragon propulsive landings in LZ1? Just testing and processing after a splashdown?

Offline dglow

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 713
  • California
  • Liked: 523
  • Likes Given: 1241
Re: SpaceX Eastern Range Landing Facilities
« Reply #387 on: 01/09/2017 07:11 PM »
Quote
Following space flight operations, the Dragon capsule would splashdown off the coast of Florida where vehicle recovery would occur. The Dragon capsule would be transported back to the processing facility for post-flight processing and refurbishment.

So they're planning to land Dragon off the coast of FL instead of in the Pacific? Interesting. And that processing facility will be conveniently located when propulsive landings of Dragon 2 commence.

I presume they'll need another supplemental EIS to clear the D2 landings?

Offline acsawdey

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 266
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 135
  • Likes Given: 273
Re: SpaceX Eastern Range Landing Facilities
« Reply #388 on: 01/09/2017 07:21 PM »
Numerous references to "Falcon 9 (Block 1)" which establish that it means what we have called v1.0.

Offline dglow

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 713
  • California
  • Liked: 523
  • Likes Given: 1241
Re: SpaceX Eastern Range Landing Facilities
« Reply #389 on: 01/09/2017 08:07 PM »
It's unfortunate that Google Maps does not have up-to-date photography of LZ-1, as usually they're pretty good about that sort of thing. But it is an Air Force base, and many govt. facilities have restrictions on the use of aerial/satellite photography, alas.

So imagine my astonishment to find that Apple's maps app is more current than Google! Go figure. Please allow me to share that with you now:


Offline Comga

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3856
  • Liked: 1204
  • Likes Given: 1031
Re: SpaceX Eastern Range Landing Facilities
« Reply #390 on: 01/09/2017 08:13 PM »
I am a bit surprised that the "Conceptual Heavy Landing Pad Layout" dated 10/24/2016 put the illustrated pads over a satellite image from before the first landing pad was created and the old hardware cleared.

In fact, Figure 1-4 of the EIS, labeled "LZ-1 LANDING AREA – EXISTING CONDITION", and 1-5 posted above, both use the same background image as Figure 1-3 which is labeled "PROPOSED LZ-1 LANDING AREA – ORIGINAL CONCEPTUAL PLAN (ORIGINAL EA)"

Why would "Gator Engineering and Aquifer Restoration, Inc." do that?
We have good, post pad-construction images on this thread, and they can buy them for a few dollars.
« Last Edit: 01/09/2017 08:15 PM by Comga »
What kind of wastrels would dump a perfectly good booster in the ocean after just one use?

Offline old_sellsword

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 517
  • Liked: 419
  • Likes Given: 373
Re: SpaceX Eastern Range Landing Facilities
« Reply #391 on: 01/09/2017 09:06 PM »
Numerous references to "Falcon 9 (Block 1)" which establish that it means what we have called v1.0.

We've known this since they published the original Falcon 9 Users's Guide.

Offline mme

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 976
  • Santa Barbara, CA, USA, Earth, Solar System, Milky Way Galaxy, Virgo Supercluster
  • Liked: 1201
  • Likes Given: 2942
Re: SpaceX Eastern Range Landing Facilities
« Reply #392 on: 01/09/2017 09:27 PM »
No mention of Dragon propulsive landings in LZ1? Just testing and processing after a splashdown?
I think they're are trying to keep the complexity of the EIS down.  Just like the original EIS was for one pad, no simultaneous booster landings.  Dragon landings are next year's problem, FH is (hopefully) this year.

I was surprised they included Dragon processing at all, but I guess they want to make it more efficient now.
« Last Edit: 01/09/2017 09:36 PM by mme »
Space is not Highlander.  There can, and will, be more than one.

Online launchwatcher

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 283
  • Liked: 195
  • Likes Given: 213
Re: SpaceX Eastern Range Landing Facilities
« Reply #393 on: 01/09/2017 10:05 PM »
So two new pads for simultaneous first stage landings. 

Looks like separation, center-to-center, of around 1000 feet?   


Offline tleski

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 327
  • Washington, DC
  • Liked: 210
  • Likes Given: 249
Re: SpaceX Eastern Range Landing Facilities
« Reply #394 on: 01/09/2017 10:08 PM »
(...)
So imagine my astonishment to find that Apple's maps app is more current than Google! Go figure. Please allow me to share that with you now:

There was information on updated Apple map's images of the LZ1 area posted on the previous page of this thread:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36513.msg1603165#msg1603165

And even the Apple's imagery is a few months old. See another post on this thread, which shows a hangar not visible on Apple map images:
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36513.msg1603367#msg1603367

Offline oiorionsbelt

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1166
  • Liked: 353
  • Likes Given: 887
Re: SpaceX Eastern Range Landing Facilities
« Reply #395 on: 01/09/2017 10:34 PM »
 Landing ITS back on the launch mount will probably entail interim steps before it works.
What will those steps look like?
Are scale tests with F9 family possible? Maybe an F9 gets it legs removed and then it attempts to land in a similar launch/land mount cradle, set up on the landing pads? This way the launch pad is sparred the inevitable early fails.
 

Offline Barrie

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 369
  • Planets are a waste of space
  • Liked: 166
  • Likes Given: 2147
Re: SpaceX Eastern Range Landing Facilities
« Reply #396 on: 01/09/2017 10:56 PM »
Landing ITS back on the launch mount will probably entail interim steps before it works.
What will those steps look like?
Are scale tests with F9 family possible? Maybe an F9 gets it legs removed and then it attempts to land in a similar launch/land mount cradle, set up on the landing pads? This way the launch pad is sparred the inevitable early fails.

My gut feeling is one would use an F9RDev for this rather than fold it into a live launch

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31142
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 9393
  • Likes Given: 297
Re: SpaceX Eastern Range Landing Facilities
« Reply #397 on: 01/09/2017 11:35 PM »
Landing ITS back on the launch mount will probably entail interim steps before it works.
nch/land mount cradle, set up on the landing pads? This way the launch pad is sparred the inevitable early fails.
 

if it is even going to happen at all
« Last Edit: 01/09/2017 11:36 PM by Jim »

Online meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7492
  • N. California
  • Liked: 3822
  • Likes Given: 803
Re: SpaceX Eastern Range Landing Facilities
« Reply #398 on: 01/09/2017 11:53 PM »


Landing ITS back on the launch mount will probably entail interim steps before it works.
nch/land mount cradle, set up on the landing pads? This way the launch pad is sparred the inevitable early fails.
 

if it is even going to happen at all

I too am skeptical of there being early failures.
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9035
  • Liked: 1106
  • Likes Given: 747
Re: SpaceX Eastern Range Landing Facilities
« Reply #399 on: 01/10/2017 12:02 AM »
Quote
Following space flight operations, the Dragon capsule would splashdown off the coast of Florida where vehicle recovery would occur. The Dragon capsule would be transported back to the processing facility for post-flight processing and refurbishment.

So they're planning to land Dragon off the coast of FL instead of in the Pacific? Interesting.

I suspect that this relates to crewed Dragon2 (but not Dragon1).
« Last Edit: 01/10/2017 12:02 AM by yg1968 »

Tags: