Author Topic: SpaceX Falcon 9 : Formosat-5 : SLC-4E Vandenberg : Aug 24, 2017 : DISCUSSION  (Read 276537 times)

Offline manoweb

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 204
  • Tracer of rays
  • Hayward CA
  • Liked: 85
  • Likes Given: 84
Translated in simple English...???

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8078
  • Liked: 6707
  • Likes Given: 2943
Translated in simple English...???

FORMOSAT 5/SHERPA is delayed (to 2018?). All their customers that want to launch sooner are rebooked on other launchers.

Offline russianhalo117

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8499
  • Liked: 4339
  • Likes Given: 766
Translated in simple English...???

FORMOSAT 5/SHERPA is delayed (to 2018?). All their customers that want to launch sooner are rebooked on other launchers.
NET June 2017. Only high priority payloads that couldn't wait any longer were rebooked.

Offline OnWithTheShow

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 348
  • Philadelphia, PA
  • Liked: 153
  • Likes Given: 27
Translated in simple English...???

FORMOSAT 5/SHERPA is delayed (to 2018?). All their customers that want to launch sooner are rebooked on other launchers.
NET June 2017. Only high priority payloads that couldn't wait any longer were rebooked.

Thats not what the press release says:

Quote
we made the decision to rebook all our customers

Offline old_sellsword

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 632
  • Liked: 531
  • Likes Given: 470
Translated in simple English...???

FORMOSAT 5/SHERPA is delayed (to 2018?). All their customers that want to launch sooner are rebooked on other launchers.
NET June 2017. Only high priority payloads that couldn't wait any longer were rebooked.

Thats not what the press release says:

Quote
we made the decision to rebook all our customers

It says both things actually:

Quote
...the team hustled to have all customers who wanted to be rebooked confirmed on other launches!

There's some conflicting information coming from this press release, hopefully this can be cleared up.
« Last Edit: 03/03/2017 12:32 am by old_sellsword »

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9619
  • US
  • Liked: 12541
  • Likes Given: 5471
Does this make it more clear?  (and this really doesn't surprise me at all)

edit: It appears SHERPA was cancelled from this flight.
« Last Edit: 03/03/2017 01:57 am by gongora »

Offline stcks

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 252
  • Liked: 266
  • Likes Given: 312
So, what happens to Formosat-5 then? Is it going to get a new rideshare partner from somewhere? If not, would SpaceX actually consider launching it alone? I hope not, it would be one cheap F9 flight if so...

Offline rockets4life97

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 789
  • Liked: 535
  • Likes Given: 359
This is a holdover from the Falcon 1 days right? I can't imagine SpaceX was going to make too much money on this launch. Unfortunately, that meant it was a low priority over their other major customers (Iridium, SES, etc.)

Offline macpacheco

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 891
  • Vitoria-ES-Brazil
  • Liked: 368
  • Likes Given: 3037
SpaceX top priority right now is fulfilling delayed launches that are accumulating fines/discounts, for customers that are in the most financial pain due to their payloads not in orbit generating revenue. For commercial customers fines normally don't come even close to compensating for half of their losses. There's always the risk of loosing a customer for future launches and/or expensive lawsuits. After an unexpected stand down, putting an extra effort towards the most important customers is essential, The only not for profit customer that commands that treatment is NASA. All other scientific customers will end up waiting.

Even if SpaceX had 3 complete F9s ready to go today (including the SES-10 booster reuse), doesn't mean any launches should be allocated to payloads not in the most critical criteria. SpaceX likely can launch payloads faster than it can replenish with new F9s.

Once reuse becomes routine and commercial customers accept flying on reused boosters, then the whole thing changes.

That's the kind of headaches Ms. Shotwell has to contend with in such situations.
« Last Edit: 03/03/2017 05:11 am by macpacheco »
Looking for companies doing great things for much more than money

Offline manoweb

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 204
  • Tracer of rays
  • Hayward CA
  • Liked: 85
  • Likes Given: 84
OK but one can argue that it is really the pad that took time, that was the bottleneck. There is evidence 39A needed and still needs more work than nominal, while SLC4 is idle, why not launch as much as possible from what has been accumulated on the West coast?
I know SpaceX has reasons for this. I would genuinely like to understand the answer.

Offline rockets4life97

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 789
  • Liked: 535
  • Likes Given: 359
OK but one can argue that it is really the pad that took time, that was the bottleneck. There is evidence 39A needed and still needs more work than nominal, while SLC4 is idle, why not launch as much as possible from what has been accumulated on the West coast?
I know SpaceX has reasons for this. I would genuinely like to understand the answer.

My guess is that second stages are a bottleneck. Both failures in the last 2 years were do 2nd stage issues. I doubt SpaceX restarted building 2nd stages until quite late in the Amos-6 investigation.

Another piece of the story I think is that towards the end of March, ULA won't launch from the Cape for about 3 months. I think you are going to see SpaceX try and pack in as many launches as possible in those 3 months.

Offline manoweb

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 204
  • Tracer of rays
  • Hayward CA
  • Liked: 85
  • Likes Given: 84
Well my observation wasn't about the future (ULA not launching at the Cape) but the missed launch opportunities from Vandenberg. A shortage of second stages might partially explain that...

Offline soltasto

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 623
  • Italy, Earth
  • Liked: 1076
  • Likes Given: 40
I guess this mission now becomes one of the best candidates for the SpaceX Internet constellation test satellites. Lot of volume to fill and plenty of mass left too. 

This is pure speculation thought.

Online jpo234

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1983
  • Liked: 2206
  • Likes Given: 1958
I guess this mission now becomes one of the best candidates for the SpaceX Internet constellation test satellites. Lot of volume to fill and plenty of mass left too. 

This is pure speculation thought.
Would the CommX satellites go into a polar orbit? The iridium sats do, so this seems possible.
You want to be inspired by things. You want to wake up in the morning and think the future is going to be great. That's what being a spacefaring civilization is all about. It's about believing in the future and believing the future will be better than the past. And I can't think of anything more exciting than being out there among the stars.

Online Jarnis

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1302
  • Liked: 809
  • Likes Given: 197
I guess this mission now becomes one of the best candidates for the SpaceX Internet constellation test satellites. Lot of volume to fill and plenty of mass left too. 

This is pure speculation thought.
Would the CommX satellites go into a polar orbit? The iridium sats do, so this seems possible.

For the test sats, I'm fairly sure only the altitude really matters.

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9619
  • US
  • Liked: 12541
  • Likes Given: 5471
The SpaceX test sats haven't gotten their FCC license yet.  (If you look at the application they are getting some requests for clarification from the FCC, so it is at least getting processed.)  What flight they could launch on kinda depends on when they're approved for launch...

Iridium is launched into 86.6 degrees, 625km circular orbit.  Formosat-5 is 97.4 degrees, 720km circular.  The application for the SpaceX test sats says deployment at 97.44 degrees, 514-km circular orbit (they could always file an amendment to change that).  I don't know what the orbits for SSO-A or SAOCOM-1A are going to be? 

Offline baldusi

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8354
  • Buenos Aires, Argentina
  • Liked: 2537
  • Likes Given: 8123
SAOCOM are 700km SSO

Online smoliarm

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 826
  • Moscow, Russia
  • Liked: 708
  • Likes Given: 590
The SpaceX test sats haven't gotten their FCC license yet.  (If you look at the application they are getting some requests for clarification from the FCC, so it is at least getting processed.)  What flight they could launch on kinda depends on when they're approved for launch...

Iridium is launched into 86.6 degrees, 625km circular orbit.  Formosat-5 is 97.4 degrees, 720km circular.  The application for the SpaceX test sats says deployment at 97.44 degrees, 514-km circular orbit (they could always file an amendment to change that).  I don't know what the orbits for SSO-A or SAOCOM-1A are going to be?

FormoSat-5
https://directory.eoportal.org/web/eoportal/satellite-missions/f/formosat-5
Quote
Orbit of primary payload: Sun-synchronous near-circular orbit of FormoSat-5, altitude = 720 km, inclination = 98.28, period = 99.19 minutes, LTDN (Local Time on Descending Node) at ~ 10 hours.

SAOCOM 1A
http://database.eohandbook.com/database/missionsummary.aspx?missionID=405
Quote
Orbit Type   Sun-synchronous   
Orbit Period   97.2 minutes
Orbit Sense   Ascending   
Orbit Inclination   97.89 deg
Orbit Altitude   620 km   
Orbit Longitude   Repeat Cycle   16 days
Orbit LST   6:12   
« Last Edit: 03/04/2017 10:10 pm by smoliarm »

Online Comga

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6292
  • Liked: 4322
  • Likes Given: 4425
The difference between a 720 km high sun synchronize orbit and a 514 km SSO is 155 m/s including plane changes.

If it matters.
What kind of wastrels would dump a perfectly good booster in the ocean after just one use?

Offline Greg Hullender

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 503
  • Seattle
    • Rocket Stack Rank
  • Liked: 361
  • Likes Given: 283
Iridium is launched into 86.6 degrees, 625km circular orbit.  Formosat-5 is 97.4 degrees, 720km circular.  The application for the SpaceX test sats says deployment at 97.44 degrees, 514-km circular orbit (they could always file an amendment to change that).  I don't know what the orbits for SSO-A or SAOCOM-1A are going to be? 

If a polar orbit is inclined 90 degrees, what does it mean for an orbit to be inclined 97.4 degrees? Isn't that just the same as one inclined 82.6 degrees?

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1