Author Topic: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities  (Read 31012 times)

Offline acsawdey

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 385
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 232
  • Likes Given: 428
SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« on: 06/03/2016 05:26 PM »
I found some interesting stuff pertaining to SpaceX's plans for landing first stages at VAFB, so others suggested I should start a separate thread for this.

The application (second link below) has some details about boostback and landing including 3-D trajectory back to the landing pad or the ASDS offshore, noise impact from sonic boom and rocket engines, what debris was recovered from the failed landings, and probably other things I didn't recognize as significant.

Quote
In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as amended, notification is hereby given that we have issued an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to Space Explorations Technology Corporation (SpaceX), to incidentally harass, by Level B harassment only, marine mammals incidental to boost-backs and landings of Falcon 9 rockets at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California, and at a contingency landing location approximately 30 miles offshore.

Federal Register: Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Boost-Backs and Landings of Rockets at Vandenberg Air Force Base

And this time I found the application materials as well:

SpaceX Falcon 9 Rocket Recovery in California and the Pacific Ocean (2016)

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10629
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 7486
  • Likes Given: 5249
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #1 on: 06/03/2016 06:03 PM »
Great find... thanks for starting this thread. The federal register thing dates back a bit though, does it not? Or was there a similar notice in the past for something else SpaceX related?
"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

Offline yokem55

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 547
  • Oregon (Ore-uh-gun dammit)
  • Liked: 311
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #2 on: 06/03/2016 06:52 PM »
Do other launch providers that just drop their stages into the ocean have to file such things? Seems to me dropping a whole atlas v or delta stage into the ocean would pose more risk to the whales than trying to recover them....

In other news, I want a "Save the whales, fly SpaceX" t-shirt .
« Last Edit: 06/03/2016 06:53 PM by yokem55 »

Offline acsawdey

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 385
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 232
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #3 on: 06/03/2016 07:25 PM »
Great find... thanks for starting this thread. The federal register thing dates back a bit though, does it not? Or was there a similar notice in the past for something else SpaceX related?

I believe I had noticed and posted the preliminary government response earlier, which was also in the federal register. This is the final ruling, and this time there was enough information to find SpaceX's application that was submitted which is where the interesting stuff is.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32419
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 11158
  • Likes Given: 331
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #4 on: 06/03/2016 08:24 PM »
Do other launch providers that just drop their stages into the ocean have to file such things? Seems to me dropping a whole atlas v or delta stage into the ocean would pose more risk to the whales than trying to recover them....

In other news, I want a "Save the whales, fly SpaceX" t-shirt .

It isn't whales, it is pinnipeds.

Offline rpapo

  • Cybernetic Mole
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1192
  • Michigan, USA
  • Liked: 627
  • Likes Given: 479
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #5 on: 06/03/2016 08:32 PM »
Do other launch providers that just drop their stages into the ocean have to file such things? Seems to me dropping a whole atlas v or delta stage into the ocean would pose more risk to the whales than trying to recover them....

In other news, I want a "Save the whales, fly SpaceX" t-shirt .

It isn't whales, it is pinnipeds.
Even less to worry about, then.  Pinnipeds (seals) stick relatively close to shore.
An Apollo fanboy . . . fifty years ago.

Offline acsawdey

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 385
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 232
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #6 on: 06/03/2016 08:38 PM »
Even less to worry about, then.  Pinnipeds (seals) stick relatively close to shore.

One of the inputs to the calculation is the average number of pinnipeds per square kilometer of open ocean for a whole bunch of species likely to be found in the area of the ASDS. As you say, not very many.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32419
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 11158
  • Likes Given: 331
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #7 on: 06/03/2016 10:35 PM »
Do other launch providers that just drop their stages into the ocean have to file such things? Seems to me dropping a whole atlas v or delta stage into the ocean would pose more risk to the whales than trying to recover them....

In other news, I want a "Save the whales, fly SpaceX" t-shirt .

It isn't whales, it is pinnipeds.
Even less to worry about, then.  Pinnipeds (seals) stick relatively close to shore.

it isn't a threat from debris, it is the sonic booms that make them rush to the water trampling the pups.

Offline llanitedave

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2153
  • Nevada Desert
  • Liked: 1332
  • Likes Given: 1563
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #8 on: 06/03/2016 11:04 PM »
The solution is obvious:  require the sea lions to wear hearing protection.
"I've just abducted an alien -- now what?"

Offline hamerad

  • Member
  • Posts: 67
  • South Australia
  • Liked: 31
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #9 on: 06/04/2016 01:01 AM »
The solution is obvious:  require the sea lions to wear hearing protection.

That just reminded me of this tweet.
https://mobile.twitter.com/talulahriley/status/320421724644573184

And the followup

https://mobile.twitter.com/talulahriley/status/320422298618302464

Sorry if offtopic

Offline Zed_Noir

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2480
  • Canada
  • Liked: 370
  • Likes Given: 581
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #10 on: 06/04/2016 01:21 AM »
The solution is obvious:  require the sea lions to wear hearing protection.
Better solution is to play music gradually louder prior to the launch so as not to startle the sea lions. My suggestion is Wagner's Ride of the Valkyries. :) Yes, from loudhailers mounted in helos like in  the Apocalypse Now movie.

Quite sure the sea lions will get use to the noise. After all the Rocket Cows of McGreger take the SpaceX engine tests as non-events.
« Last Edit: 06/04/2016 01:31 AM by Zed_Noir »

Offline chalz

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 193
  • Austrangia
  • Liked: 96
  • Likes Given: 1279
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #11 on: 06/04/2016 01:23 AM »
This post first mentioned the EIS for the Vandenberg pad. Some discussion and seal jokes followed.
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36513.msg1511192#msg1511192

Offline WizZifnab

  • Member
  • Posts: 33
  • Kentucky
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #12 on: 06/04/2016 04:56 AM »
And this time I found the application materials as well:

SpaceX Falcon 9 Rocket Recovery in California and the Pacific Ocean (2016)

Typo on the effective date?  I assume thats meant to be a full year 6/30/2016-6/29/2017.

Offline acsawdey

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 385
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 232
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #13 on: 11/10/2016 06:18 PM »
Looks like SpaceX has now got the all-clear to do both ASDS and RTLS from SLC-4W at Vandenberg AFB. Or, at least they've cleared the environmental hurdles and can now ask FAA for licenses to do so.

Quote
After reviewing and analyzing available data and information on existing conditions and potential
impacts, including the 2016 EA, the FAA has determined the issuance of licenses to SpaceX to conduct
Falcon 9 boost-backs and landings at SLC-4W or on a barge would not significantly affect the quality of
the human environment within the meaning of NEPA. Therefore, the preparation of an environmental
impact statement is not required, and the FAA is independently issuing this FONSI. The FAA has made
this determination in accordance with applicable environmental laws and FAA regulations. The 2016 EA
is incorporated by reference into this FONSI.

https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/licenses_permits/media/ea_fonsi_f9_boostback_vafb.pdf

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32419
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 11158
  • Likes Given: 331
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #14 on: 11/10/2016 06:40 PM »
Looks like SpaceX has now got the all-clear to do both ASDS and RTLS from SLC-4W at Vandenberg AFB.

Still need Air Force clearance

Offline Brovane

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1110
  • United States
  • Liked: 605
  • Likes Given: 1136
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #15 on: 01/04/2017 09:33 AM »
Looks like SpaceX has now got the all-clear to do both ASDS and RTLS from SLC-4W at Vandenberg AFB.

Still need Air Force clearance

Anybody know the hang-up in getting USAF approval?
"Look at that! If anybody ever said, "you'll be sitting in a spacecraft naked with a 134-pound backpack on your knees charging it", I'd have said "Aw, get serious". - John Young - Apollo-16

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6534
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 6234
  • Likes Given: 1876
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #16 on: 09/11/2017 06:30 AM »
Doesn't give a timeframe for FAA approval but claims most steps in the approval process are completed:

Quote
SpaceX close to landing rocket boosters next to its Southern California launch site

By: Sandy Mazza ([email protected])

POSTED: Sunday, Sept. 10, 2017 - 3:14 p.m.
UPDATED: A DAY AGO

http://www.dailybreeze.com/business/20170910/spacex-close-to-landing-rocket-boosters-next-to-its-southern-california-launch-site

Also talks about something else interesting I've missed:

Quote
While SpaceX hopes to rely on it for most West Coast landings, it also proposed to operate a second Pacific Ocean landing barge 31 miles off the Santa Barbara County coastline to recover boosters diverted from the ground by sensitive base operations.

Some more details in the article (including feedback from NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service).

Offline Rebel44

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 345
  • Liked: 180
  • Likes Given: 887
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #17 on: 09/11/2017 11:24 AM »
Doesn't give a timeframe for FAA approval but claims most steps in the approval process are completed:

Quote
SpaceX close to landing rocket boosters next to its Southern California launch site

By: Sandy Mazza ([email protected])

POSTED: Sunday, Sept. 10, 2017 - 3:14 p.m.
UPDATED: A DAY AGO

http://www.dailybreeze.com/business/20170910/spacex-close-to-landing-rocket-boosters-next-to-its-southern-california-launch-site

Also talks about something else interesting I've missed:

Quote
While SpaceX hopes to rely on it for most West Coast landings, it also proposed to operate a second Pacific Ocean landing barge 31 miles off the Santa Barbara County coastline to recover boosters diverted from the ground by sensitive base operations.

Some more details in the article (including feedback from NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service).

Why would they need a second barge? Flight rate on west coast isnt high enough to need 2nd ASDS there.

Offline Kabloona

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4319
  • Velocitas Eradico
  • Fortress of Solitude
  • Liked: 2552
  • Likes Given: 529
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #18 on: 09/11/2017 12:38 PM »
They don't need two Pacific barges.

Maybe the SpaceX documentation for VAFB referred to JRtI as their "second Pacific barge" (OCISLY at the Cape being their first Atlantic barge) and the reporter got confused and thought they meant two barges in the Pacific, rather than a second SpaceX barge, which is based the Pacific.
« Last Edit: 09/11/2017 12:54 PM by Kabloona »

Offline cscott

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2949
  • Liked: 2054
  • Likes Given: 664
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #19 on: 09/11/2017 03:01 PM »
Yeah, kabloona's interpretation matches mine as well.  The original article itself is very ambiguous about what it means by "second barge"; there's no clear statement they mean anything other than "first is Atlantic, second is Pacific".

Offline DOCinCT

Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #20 on: 09/11/2017 04:23 PM »
Maybe I missed something but isn't a launch with 9 Merlin engines firing a lot louder than a single Merlin engine during final approach and landing? (Ignoring the issue of the double sonic boom here).

Offline Comga

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4302
  • Liked: 1555
  • Likes Given: 1281
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #21 on: 09/11/2017 04:55 PM »
Quote
While SpaceX hopes to rely on it for most West Coast landings, it also proposed to operate a second Pacific Ocean landing barge 31 miles off the Santa Barbara County coastline to recover boosters diverted from the ground by sensitive base operations.


Yeah, kabloona's interpretation matches mine as well.  The original article itself is very ambiguous about what it means by "second barge"; there's no clear statement they mean anything other than "first is Atlantic, second is Pacific".

Perhaps he meant "second, Pacific Ocean, landing barge"
Punctuation is really important.
And we all know the "31 km" stuff is just nonsense.  The ASDS goes where it needs to go.
Now the "diverted from the ground by sensitive base operations" is really interesting.  Where, I wonder, did he get that?

The gist seems to be
Quote
Federal regulators, still poring over the companyís Vandenberg landing-license application, declined to release any time line for the process....

but it doesn't seem possible to
Quote
do some mitigating preparations to protect ocean life from sonic booms
other than to put helmets with ear covers on the seals.
What kind of wastrels would dump a perfectly good booster in the ocean after just one use?

Offline deruch

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2301
  • California
  • Liked: 1836
  • Likes Given: 3992
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #22 on: 09/12/2017 01:00 AM »
Now the "diverted from the ground by sensitive base operations" is really interesting.  Where, I wonder, did he get that?
It's directly from the NOAA Fisheries Environmental Assessment report.
Quote
The contingency action is necessary to provide for an alternative landing location if the Western Range deems that the first stage overflight of south VAFB is unacceptable due to potential impacts to critical assets or weather conditions or mission parameters do not permit for a successful landing attempt.  In this case,  the First Stage would be landed on an autonomous drone ship, no less than 31 mi. (50 km) offshore of VAFB.

The full EA can be found at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/research/spacex_2016iha_ea.pdf
Shouldn't reality posts be in "Advanced concepts"?  --Nomadd

Offline Kabloona

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4319
  • Velocitas Eradico
  • Fortress of Solitude
  • Liked: 2552
  • Likes Given: 529
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #23 on: 09/12/2017 03:48 AM »

but it doesn't seem possible to
Quote
do some mitigating preparations to protect ocean life from sonic booms
other than to put helmets with ear covers on the seals.

Or give them headphones playing Barry White.

https://mobile.twitter.com/TalulahRiley/status/320421724644573184/photo/1


Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6534
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 6234
  • Likes Given: 1876
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #24 on: 10/09/2017 03:14 PM »
Nice photo from Shorealone Films flickr shots prior to the Iridium 3 launch

Offline old_sellsword

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 632
  • Liked: 531
  • Likes Given: 463
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #25 on: 10/09/2017 05:15 PM »
Nice photo from Shorealone Films flickr shots prior to the Iridium 3 launch

Looks like they are prepping to test post landing servicing of S1 at west coast landing facility

That first stage is F9R Dev 2 and it has nothing to do with SLC-4W except that the area itís sitting on was unused space. Itís been at VAFB for a long time, and outdoors in that exact same location for almost a year now; it got kicked out of the HIF as Iridium-1 approached in late 2016.

Offline Wolfram66

Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #26 on: 10/09/2017 05:27 PM »
Nice photo from Shorealone Films flickr shots prior to the Iridium 3 launch

Looks like they are prepping to test post landing servicing of S1 at west coast landing facility

That first stage is F9R Dev 2 and it has nothing to do with SLC-4W except that the area itís sitting on was unused space. Itís been at VAFB for a long time, and outdoors in that exact same location for almost a year now; it got kicked out of the HIF as Iridium-1 approached in late 2016.

Revised:Looks like they are prepping to test post landing servicing of S1 at west coast landing facility

Offline biosehnsucht

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 292
  • Liked: 100
  • Likes Given: 169
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #27 on: 10/10/2017 02:30 AM »
At this point, is the hardware F9R Dev2 sits on (the wheel truck or whatever) worth more than F9R Dev2 itself?

Offline SweetWater

  • Member
  • Posts: 58
  • Wisconsin, USA
  • Liked: 31
  • Likes Given: 13
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #28 on: 10/10/2017 03:15 AM »
At this point, is the hardware F9R Dev2 sits on (the wheel truck or whatever) worth more than F9R Dev2 itself?

It is hard to know exactly where the F9R Dev2 vehicle fits in the development of Falcon 9, especially given the different block versions, etc. However, we know that SpaceX will be using previously flown Falcon 9 1st stages as the boosters for (at least) the first Falcon Heavy.

This is total speculation on my part. However, they have known for some time that they will never be using the F9R Dev2 vehicle for its intended purpose. It seems to me that if this vehicle could have been modified into a usable booster - block 3, 4, FH booster, etc. - they would have done so.

Online vanoord

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 606
  • Liked: 357
  • Likes Given: 71
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #29 on: 10/10/2017 09:35 AM »
Slightly OT, but F9R Dev 2 is a Falcon 9 v1.1 - probably built in late 2013 and something like the 7th 'Octaweb' Falcon off the production line (but it's a bit unclear).

IIRC the pads / TELs were modified for v1.2 Falcons (B1019 upwards), so it can't easily be launched.

If they do need a core stage for testing the in-flight abort of Dragon 2, then there are plenty of recovered cores lying around they could use - with a lot less hassle than re-working this one.

Presumably at some point it'll be scrapped, but whether doing so is worth the hassle is perhaps debatable.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32419
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 11158
  • Likes Given: 331
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #30 on: 10/10/2017 01:02 PM »
At this point, is the hardware F9R Dev2 sits on (the wheel truck or whatever) worth more than F9R Dev2 itself?

no, they are likely wooden cradles like seen on the east coast

Offline stcks

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 217
  • Liked: 207
  • Likes Given: 257
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #31 on: 10/10/2017 01:32 PM »
no, they are likely wooden cradles like seen on the east coast

They're not. If you look closely you can see wheels on the rear section and the front has the older booster cap attached.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32419
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 11158
  • Likes Given: 331
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #32 on: 10/10/2017 03:37 PM »
no, they are likely wooden cradles like seen on the east coast

They're not. If you look closely you can see wheels on the rear section and the front has the older booster cap attached.

They could be out dated and only useful for V1

Online vanoord

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 606
  • Liked: 357
  • Likes Given: 71
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #33 on: 10/10/2017 05:51 PM »
They could be out dated and only useful for V1

Might be crossed wires, but F9R Dev 2 is a v1.1 core, so very close to current version spec..

Any cradle may not, of course, be compatible on a technical / services level (which may be your point?).

Or, it's a v1.0 spec cradle which isn't used because it's not compatible with v1.2 or v1.3 (Block 4), so it's not an issue parking a v1.1 core on it.
« Last Edit: 10/10/2017 05:53 PM by vanoord »

Online vaporcobra

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1099
  • Tacoma, WA
  • Liked: 1920
  • Likes Given: 2346
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #34 on: 10/10/2017 07:39 PM »
Definitely looks like VIP guests were given a tour of LZ-2! https://www.instagram.com/p/BaDepS4Fwsy/

Offline Tomness

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 243
  • Into the abyss will I run
  • Liked: 60
  • Likes Given: 316
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #35 on: 10/10/2017 08:01 PM »
Definitely looks like VIP guests were given a tour of LZ-2! https://www.instagram.com/p/BaDepS4Fwsy/

So Chris G, and other VIP NSFer that got this nugget, can you comment yet? :D

Offline acsawdey

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 385
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 232
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #36 on: 10/25/2017 06:49 PM »
The NOAA notice of the public comment period on F9 boostback and landing at SLC-4W and on the ASDS and its affects on marine mammals.

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/10/25/2017-23134/takes-of-marine-mammals-incidental-to-specified-activities-taking-marine-mammals-incidental-to

[edit: deruch pointed out it's not final]
« Last Edit: 10/26/2017 04:18 PM by acsawdey »

Offline deruch

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2301
  • California
  • Liked: 1836
  • Likes Given: 3992
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #37 on: 10/26/2017 02:44 PM »
The final NOAA judgement on F9 boostback and landing at SLC-4W and on the ASDS and its affects on marine mammals.

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/10/25/2017-23134/takes-of-marine-mammals-incidental-to-specified-activities-taking-marine-mammals-incidental-to

Technically, that's not the final judgement.  That's the notice to publicize the public comment period on the proposed grant, which ends on November 24th.  After which point, they will issue their final grant.  By the way, this is just for the next year after which they'll have to renew.

Quote
Dates and Duration

The planned project would occur from December 1, 2017 through November 30, 2018. Up to twelve Falcon 9 First Stage recovery activities would occur per year. Precise dates of Falcon 9 First Stage recovery activities are not known. Falcon 9 First Stage recovery activities may take place at any time of year and at any time of day. The IHA, if issued, would be valid from December 1, 2017 through November 30, 2018.

Quote
Mitigation

Unless constrained by other factors including human safety or national security concerns, launches would be scheduled to avoid boost-backs and landings during the harbor seal pupping season of March through June, when practicable.

The full SpaceX application documentation should be (but isn't as of the time of writing this comment) available at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/research.htm
« Last Edit: 10/26/2017 03:02 PM by deruch »
Shouldn't reality posts be in "Advanced concepts"?  --Nomadd

Offline cscott

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2949
  • Liked: 2054
  • Likes Given: 664
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #38 on: 10/26/2017 03:56 PM »
FWIW the document indicates no significant harrassment of marine mammals from ASDS landings.  So even if landings are limited during harbor pup season, it would only be RTLS that would be affected. The core wouldn't be expended.

Offline deruch

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2301
  • California
  • Liked: 1836
  • Likes Given: 3992
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #39 on: 10/26/2017 04:35 PM »
FWIW the document indicates no significant harrassment of marine mammals from ASDS landings.  So even if landings are limited during harbor pup season, it would only be RTLS that would be affected. The core wouldn't be expended.

Yeah, the harassment occurs mainly to animals that are on the beach and scared into the water by the sonic booms and landing burn noise.
Shouldn't reality posts be in "Advanced concepts"?  --Nomadd

Offline StuffOfInterest

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 415
  • Just interested in space
  • McLean, Virginia, USA
  • Liked: 134
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #40 on: 10/27/2017 06:27 PM »
FWIW the document indicates no significant harrassment of marine mammals from ASDS landings.  So even if landings are limited during harbor pup season, it would only be RTLS that would be affected. The core wouldn't be expended.

Yeah, the harassment occurs mainly to animals that are on the beach and scared into the water by the sonic booms and landing burn noise.

I thought the harassment was mainly in the form of capturing seals, strapping them to boards, putting headphones on them, and playing boom sounds to see how they react.
« Last Edit: 10/27/2017 06:29 PM by StuffOfInterest »

Offline Jdeshetler

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 646
  • Silicon Valley, CA
  • Liked: 2097
  • Likes Given: 1501
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #41 on: 10/28/2017 05:42 AM »
During our remote camera setup next to the Iridium launch pad two weeks ago, we noticed a team down the slope, setting up 6 microphones stands.

Not sure if this is part of ongoing sound data collection for RSTL...

Offline catdlr

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5502
  • Viewed launches since the Redstones
  • Marina del Rey, California, USA
  • Liked: 2116
  • Likes Given: 1477
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #42 on: 10/28/2017 05:53 AM »
During our remote camera setup next to the Iridium launch pad two weeks ago, we noticed a team down the slope, setting up 6 microphones stands.

Not sure if this is part of ongoing sound data collection for RSTL...

maybe similar to this project a few years back:  http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/permits/vafb_report.pdf
Tony De La Rosa

Offline deruch

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2301
  • California
  • Liked: 1836
  • Likes Given: 3992
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #43 on: 10/28/2017 07:07 AM »
During our remote camera setup next to the Iridium launch pad two weeks ago, we noticed a team down the slope, setting up 6 microphones stands.

Not sure if this is part of ongoing sound data collection for RSTL...

Part of the harassment grant is that SpaceX is required to undertake certain monitoring actions during launch campaigns (this  is in addition to mitigation various efforts).  The grant lays out all the stuff they have to do.
Shouldn't reality posts be in "Advanced concepts"?  --Nomadd

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6534
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 6234
  • Likes Given: 1876
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #44 on: 12/21/2017 11:23 AM »
VAFB have just posted findings of no significant impact for SpaceX landing boosters at VAFB (attached). The  FONSI assessment is dated April 2016, with a supplemental Iridium update dated September 2016.

I tried searching the forum to see if they've been posted before, but didn't find them. Apologies if these are here and I missed them!

Edit to clarify: the Iridium supplemental EA appears to relate to the area where boosters on Iridium missions would land on ASDS, if a land landing were not possible.
« Last Edit: 12/21/2017 11:39 AM by FutureSpaceTourist »

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6534
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 6234
  • Likes Given: 1876
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #45 on: 12/22/2017 06:36 AM »
Nice photo from Shorealone Films flickr shots prior to the Iridium 3 launch

And hereís their shot prior to the Iridium 4 launch, no real change.

Offline hootowls

  • Member
  • Posts: 43
  • Liked: 26
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #46 on: 01/03/2018 08:22 PM »
VAFB have just posted findings of no significant impact for SpaceX landing boosters at VAFB (attached). The  FONSI assessment is dated April 2016, with a supplemental Iridium update dated September 2016.

Good catch on the posting!  The public comment period on the final draft SEA/FONSI closes out on 21 Jan 2018.

Offline pospa

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 159
  • Pardubice, CZ
  • Liked: 134
  • Likes Given: 503
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #47 on: 05/28/2018 12:07 PM »
Dear NSF photoreporters, do you have any publicly available hi-res pictures of SLC-4W langing pad from the latest lauch of F9 / Iridium-6 & Grace-FO that you could share with us and document the current status in May 2018?
« Last Edit: 05/28/2018 12:23 PM by pospa »

Offline ChrisC

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1518
  • Liked: 391
  • Likes Given: 475
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #48 on: 05/28/2018 04:23 PM »
Look in the public thread for that mission, and if you don't find what you want, subscribe to L2 because I know we have some excellent high res shots somewhere here.
« Last Edit: 05/28/2018 04:24 PM by ChrisC »
How to embed photos from outside sources (e.g. Twitter)
NASA TV in HD:  history and FAQ (from 2007-2010 startup period)

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6534
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 6234
  • Likes Given: 1876
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #49 on: 07/06/2018 03:47 PM »
RTLS AT VANDENBERG!!!!!

WOOHOO!

1202-EX-ST-2018   
https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/els/reports/STA_Print.cfm?mode=current&application_seq=85873&RequestTimeout=1000

Here's an article picking up on that FCC application:

Quote
SpaceX may finally land one of its rockets on the California coast later this year
Finally: a land landing at Vandenberg
By Loren [email protected] Jul 6, 2018, 11:42am EDT

After mastering its rocket landings on the Florida coast, SpaceX wants to try the same trick in California. The company recently filed an application with the Federal Communications Commission to land one of its Falcon 9 rockets on ground at Vandenberg Air Force Base in southern California, following a launch from the facility there. If that happens, itíll be the first time that SpaceX has done a land landing on the West Coast.

https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/6/17540058/spacex-falcon-9-rocket-ground-landing-vandenberg-air-force-base-california


Offline Fly_or_Boom

Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #51 on: 07/07/2018 03:45 AM »
Dear VAFB launch photographers, it will be really cool to have a shot of Falcon 9 pre-launch superimposed in front of a shot of the landed 1st stage.

Offline kenlaws

Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #52 on: 07/09/2018 07:41 PM »
Hiya. Sorry for the level 10 newb question, but is the new VAFB landing zone visible from a publicly accessible location (on the off-chance there's no fog?) Any permits or permissions needed or does one just show up? Thanks!

Offline ChrisC

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1518
  • Liked: 391
  • Likes Given: 475
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #53 on: 07/09/2018 08:39 PM »
Hiya. Sorry for the level 10 newb question, but is the new VAFB landing zone visible from a publicly accessible location (on the off-chance there's no fog?) Any permits or permissions needed or does one just show up? Thanks!

You can get a LOT of the basic viewing information from the Vandenberg viewing thread, which is a sticky thread at the top of the SpaceX missions group here.
« Last Edit: 07/09/2018 08:40 PM by ChrisC »
How to embed photos from outside sources (e.g. Twitter)
NASA TV in HD:  history and FAQ (from 2007-2010 startup period)

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4222
  • California
  • Liked: 3644
  • Likes Given: 2248
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #54 on: 07/10/2018 02:47 AM »
Hiya. Sorry for the level 10 newb question, but is the new VAFB landing zone visible from a publicly accessible location (on the off-chance there's no fog?) Any permits or permissions needed or does one just show up? Thanks!

No. You'll be able to see it coming down, but it will dip below the hills before it lands.

Offline deruch

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2301
  • California
  • Liked: 1836
  • Likes Given: 3992
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #55 on: 07/11/2018 03:45 PM »
Hiya. Sorry for the level 10 newb question, but is the new VAFB landing zone visible from a publicly accessible location (on the off-chance there's no fog?) Any permits or permissions needed or does one just show up? Thanks!

It's basically coming down right next to the launch pad, so public views of the landing will be pretty much exactly the same as those of the upward portion of flight (i.e. obscured for the actual touchdown as the rocket isn't actually viewable on the pad but only after gaining a little altitude).  There may be better viewing locations available for those with access to the military base but that is restricted to those with passes/permissions and not open to the public.  As others have commented, check out the VAFB Launch Viewing thread stickied at the top of the SpaceX Missions section for more concrete viewing guidance.
« Last Edit: 07/11/2018 03:46 PM by deruch »
Shouldn't reality posts be in "Advanced concepts"?  --Nomadd

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3763
  • US
  • Liked: 3126
  • Likes Given: 1839
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #56 on: 08/17/2018 12:58 PM »
SpaceX has an FCC experimental permit that gets renewed annually for launch vehicle RF checkouts.  They added the new landing zone to the permit this time:

0   Vandenberg AFB   California   North  34  38  0   West  120  36  57      LZ-4   SANTA BARBARA   

I don't know if "LZ-4" is official or if someone needed to get their paperwork done and made it up on the fly.
« Last Edit: 08/17/2018 01:00 PM by gongora »

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4608
  • Liked: 2531
  • Likes Given: 1389
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #57 on: 08/17/2018 01:15 PM »
SpaceX has an FCC experimental permit that gets renewed annually for launch vehicle RF checkouts.  They added the new landing zone to the permit this time:

0   Vandenberg AFB   California   North  34  38  0   West  120  36  57      LZ-4   SANTA BARBARA   

I don't know if "LZ-4" is official or if someone needed to get their paperwork done and made it up on the fly.

Are both landing pads at the Cape considered LZ-1, or are they separately LZ-1 and LZ-2?

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6534
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 6234
  • Likes Given: 1876
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #58 on: 08/17/2018 01:47 PM »
Are both landing pads at the Cape considered LZ-1, or are they separately LZ-1 and LZ-2?

During FH side core landings SpaceX countdown net referred to them as LZ-1 & LZ-2.

Offline ajmarco

  • Member
  • Posts: 15
  • Liked: 9
  • Likes Given: 21
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #59 on: 08/17/2018 01:48 PM »
SpaceX has an FCC experimental permit that gets renewed annually for launch vehicle RF checkouts.  They added the new landing zone to the permit this time:

0   Vandenberg AFB   California   North  34  38  0   West  120  36  57      LZ-4   SANTA BARBARA   

I don't know if "LZ-4" is official or if someone needed to get their paperwork done and made it up on the fly.

Could it be since SLC-4W became the landing zone it was easier to just call it LZ-4?

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4608
  • Liked: 2531
  • Likes Given: 1389
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #60 on: 08/17/2018 01:53 PM »
Are both landing pads at the Cape considered LZ-1, or are they separately LZ-1 and LZ-2?

During FH side core landings SpaceX countdown net referred to them as LZ-1 & LZ-2.

Then the 3rd planned (south) pad at the Cape would be LZ-3, which would make the SLC-4W pad LZ-4 if SpaceX wanted them sequential to avoid confusion.

Offline cscott

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2949
  • Liked: 2054
  • Likes Given: 664
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #61 on: 08/17/2018 02:38 PM »
Are both landing pads at the Cape considered LZ-1, or are they separately LZ-1 and LZ-2?

During FH side core landings SpaceX countdown net referred to them as LZ-1 & LZ-2.

Then the 3rd planned (south) pad at the Cape would be LZ-3, which would make the SLC-4W pad LZ-4 if SpaceX wanted them sequential to avoid confusion.
It's possible LZ-4 has been SpaceX's internal name for a while, since the idea of a Vandenberg LZ is at least as old as the three-landing-site renders at the Cape.  So even though (as I understand it) there's no current plan for an LZ-3 at the Cape now, LZ-4 is keeping its original designation.

Offline docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4973
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 2086
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #62 on: 10/02/2018 11:47 PM »
If, per the below NSF tweet, SLC-4W is now Landing Zone-4, and Landing Zones-1&2 are at KSC, where is Landing Zone-3?

Hmmmm...Texas?

https://twitter.com/NASASpaceflight/status/1047240539257692161?s=19

https://twitter.com/NASASpaceflight/status/1047240539257692161
« Last Edit: 10/03/2018 12:35 AM by gongora »
DM

Offline Alexphysics

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 187
  • Spain
  • Liked: 125
  • Likes Given: 108
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #63 on: 10/03/2018 12:22 AM »
As far as we are aware, LZ-3 doesn't exist and there's no SpaceX public plan to build a pad named like that. LZ-4 appeared first on FCC applications and permits and it's now on official statements from the 30th Space Wing. My thoughts when I saw it on the FCC permits were that it was named LZ-4 to keep the "4" on the name of the place (remember it was SLC-4W).

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3763
  • US
  • Liked: 3126
  • Likes Given: 1839
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #64 on: 10/03/2018 12:33 AM »
If, per the below NSF tweet, SLC-4W is now Landing Zone-4, and Landing Zones-1&2 are at KSC, where is Landing Zone-3?

Hmmmm...Texas?

At one time there seemed to be a planned Landing Zone 3 at the Cape, so the number may have been reserved.
« Last Edit: 10/03/2018 12:38 AM by gongora »

Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #65 on: 10/03/2018 01:29 AM »
If, per the below NSF tweet, SLC-4W is now Landing Zone-4, and Landing Zones-1&2 are at KSC, where is Landing Zone-3?

Hmmmm...Texas?

At one time there seemed to be a planned Landing Zone 3 at the Cape, so the number may have been reserved.
Could be a BFS Landing Zone, so it will be larger than LZ-1, LZ-2, & LZ-4

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3763
  • US
  • Liked: 3126
  • Likes Given: 1839
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #66 on: 10/03/2018 01:47 AM »
There were originally plans for three landing pads for FH at the existing landing complex, but they scaled it back to two (there really isn't much of a market for FH with 3-core RTLS now that the performance of F9 has increased.)

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32419
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 11158
  • Likes Given: 331
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #67 on: 10/03/2018 01:05 PM »
Come on, it's simple.  It is LZ-4 because it is part of SLC-4.  It isn't LZ-4 because it is the 4th one.

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4608
  • Liked: 2531
  • Likes Given: 1389
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #68 on: 10/03/2018 02:23 PM »
Trying to make sense of SpaceX naming conventions?  ::)

Why aren't LZ-1 and LZ-2 instead called LZ-13A and LZ-13B, or something like that?
« Last Edit: 10/03/2018 02:25 PM by envy887 »

Offline tleski

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 380
  • Washington, DC
  • Liked: 268
  • Likes Given: 363
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #69 on: 10/03/2018 02:25 PM »
Come on, it's simple.  It is LZ-4 because it is part of SLC-4.  It isn't LZ-4 because it is the 4th one.
Are you sure on this since if we followed that convention the LZ-1 should be called LZ-13 because it is located at the site of the former LC-13 complex.
I am also not sure about if LZ-2/3 are designations used by Space X, since there is another LZ-2 planned at KSC
 (north of LC39B) according to this post. It would not be unthinkable to refer to two/three different pads in a single landing zone LZ-1.

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4608
  • Liked: 2531
  • Likes Given: 1389
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #70 on: 10/03/2018 02:33 PM »
Come on, it's simple.  It is LZ-4 because it is part of SLC-4.  It isn't LZ-4 because it is the 4th one.
Are you sure on this since if we followed that convention the LZ-1 should be called LZ-13 because it is located at the site of the former LC-13 complex.
I am also not sure about if LZ-2/3 are designations used by Space X, since there is another LZ-2 planned at KSC
 (north of LC39B) according to this post. It would not be unthinkable to refer to two/three different pads in a single landing zone LZ-1.

SpaceX called out LZ-1 and LZ-2 over the radio net after the Falcon Heavy booster landings. That's what they call the CCAFS pads.

Offline tleski

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 380
  • Washington, DC
  • Liked: 268
  • Likes Given: 363
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #71 on: 10/03/2018 02:57 PM »
Apparently Space X needs to talk to Space Florida about the landing zone naming. Here is a quote from the James Dean's story published in Florida Today on August 5th:
Quote
Space Florida hopes the pads, now referred to as Landing Zone 2, could be available by mid-2020, anticipating more landings by SpaceX and the companyís goal to launch and land missions twice within 24 hours, which might require multiple landing sites.
And the image:
« Last Edit: 10/03/2018 02:59 PM by tleski »

Offline kessdawg

  • Member
  • Posts: 8
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 16
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #72 on: 10/03/2018 06:33 PM »
Also: shouldn't it be landing pads 1 and 2 at LZ-1?

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32419
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 11158
  • Likes Given: 331
Re: SpaceX VAFB landing facilities
« Reply #73 on: 10/03/2018 06:33 PM »
Come on, it's simple.  It is LZ-4 because it is part of SLC-4.  It isn't LZ-4 because it is the 4th one.
Are you sure on this since if we followed that convention the LZ-1 should be called LZ-13 because it is located at the site of the former LC-13 complex.


No, because naming conventions have never been the same for both coasts.


Tags: