The Air Force has announced the award of an Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) launch service contract. Space Exploration Technologies Corporation (SpaceX) has been awarded a $130 million firm-fixed price contract for launch services to deliver Air Force Space Command (AFSPC)-52 satellite to the intended orbit. The contract provides the Government with a total launch solution for this mission, which includes launch vehicle production, mission integration and launch operations. This mission is planned to be launched from Kennedy Space Center, Florida.This is the fifth competitive procurement under the current Phase 1A strategy. These launch service contract awards strike a balance between meeting operational needs and lowering launch costs through reintroducing competition for National Security Space missions.“The competitive award of this EELV launch service contract directly supports Space and Missile Systems Center’s (SMC) mission of delivering resilient and affordable space capabilities to our Nation while maintaining assured access to space,” said Lt. Gen. John Thompson, Air Force program executive officer for Space and SMC commander.AFSPC-52 is a classified mission projected to launch in late Fiscal Year 2020.The Air Force Space Command's Space and Missile Systems Center, located at the Los Angeles Air Force Base, California, is the U.S. Air Force's center of excellence for acquiring and developing military space systems. Its portfolio includes the Global Positioning System, military satellite communications, defense meteorological satellites, space launch and range systems, satellite control networks, space based infrared systems, and space situational awareness capabilities.
Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (SpaceX), Hawthorne, California, has been awarded a $130,000,000 firm-fixed-price contract, for launch services to deliver the Air Force Space Command-52 satellite to its intended orbit. This launch service contract will include launch vehicle production and mission, as well as integration, launch operations and spaceflight worthiness activities. Work will be performed in Hawthorne, California; Kennedy Space Center, Florida; and McGregor, Texas, and is expected to be completed by September 2020. This award is the result of a competitive acquisition, and two proposals were received. Fiscal 2018 space procurement funds in the amount of $130,000,000 will be obligated at the time of award. The Contracting Division, Launch Systems Enterprise Directorate, Space and Missile Systems Center, Los Angeles Air Force Base, California, is the contracting activity (FA8811-18-C-0003). (Awarded June 20, 2018)
What was the alternative? Atlas 5 or a Delta IV?
So the question is, what kind of Falcon Heavy flight does $130 million buy? All 3 cores recovered, or exended core?
Quote from: yokem55 on 06/21/2018 10:41 pmSo the question is, what kind of Falcon Heavy flight does $130 million buy? All 3 cores recovered, or exended core?The requirements seem to suggest that this was borderline doable on a Falcon 9 expendable. Therefore, I am guessing that this will be a fully recoverable Falcon Heavy launch. However, all three of the cores will be brand new plus the other AF requirements (thus the higher price).
Previous discussion here :https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=43266.msg1728038#msg1728038Interesting choice, the requirements seemed borderline for F9. Good win for SpaceX.
Quote from: gongora on 06/21/2018 10:56 pmPrevious discussion here :https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=43266.msg1728038#msg1728038Interesting choice, the requirements seemed borderline for F9. Good win for SpaceX. originally i think it was to be a transfer orbit and could now be direct insertion
originally i think it was to be a transfer orbit and could now be direct insertion
Quote from: russianhalo117 on 06/22/2018 02:11 amQuote from: gongora on 06/21/2018 10:56 pmPrevious discussion here :https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=43266.msg1728038#msg1728038Interesting choice, the requirements seemed borderline for F9. Good win for SpaceX. originally i think it was to be a transfer orbit and could now be direct insertionCould be, but I doubt it for $130 million.
So the USAF certified the FH for EELV payloads after only one flight? SpaceX hasn't even flown the launch the USAF procured as a FH demo yet.
Quote from: Brovane on 06/22/2018 03:08 amSo the USAF certified the FH for EELV payloads after only one flight? SpaceX hasn't even flown the launch the USAF procured as a FH demo yet. By the time AFSPC-52 is scheduled to launch FH will have flown at least three times.Also, at least two recent missions (FH maiden launch and a F9 mission) had test objectives to satisfy USAF certification requirements.
Quote from: woods170 on 06/22/2018 07:46 amQuote from: Brovane on 06/22/2018 03:08 amSo the USAF certified the FH for EELV payloads after only one flight? SpaceX hasn't even flown the launch the USAF procured as a FH demo yet. By the time AFSPC-52 is scheduled to launch FH will have flown at least three times.Also, at least two recent missions (FH maiden launch and a F9 mission) had test objectives to satisfy USAF certification requirements.The statement from Shotwell indicated that FH was already certified, not that certification was pending. So that would mean the USAF certified the FH after only one flight if we take Shotwell's statement at face value."On behalf of all of our employees, I want to thank the Air Force for certifying Falcon Heavy"
Quote from: Brovane on 06/22/2018 12:07 pmThe statement from Shotwell indicated that FH was already certified, not that certification was pending. So that would mean the USAF certified the FH after only one flight if we take Shotwell's statement at face value."On behalf of all of our employees, I want to thank the Air Force for certifying Falcon Heavy"It can be read both ways, but it really doesn't matter, they've got the contract and by launch time the paperwork will be in order. That's what's important.
The statement from Shotwell indicated that FH was already certified, not that certification was pending. So that would mean the USAF certified the FH after only one flight if we take Shotwell's statement at face value."On behalf of all of our employees, I want to thank the Air Force for certifying Falcon Heavy"
The Falcon Heavy beat United Launch Alliance’s Delta 4 in a competition under the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle program. The launch will take place at Kennedy Space Center, Florida.
Quote from: Brovane on 06/22/2018 12:07 pmQuote from: woods170 on 06/22/2018 07:46 amQuote from: Brovane on 06/22/2018 03:08 amSo the USAF certified the FH for EELV payloads after only one flight? SpaceX hasn't even flown the launch the USAF procured as a FH demo yet. By the time AFSPC-52 is scheduled to launch FH will have flown at least three times.Also, at least two recent missions (FH maiden launch and a F9 mission) had test objectives to satisfy USAF certification requirements.The statement from Shotwell indicated that FH was already certified, not that certification was pending. So that would mean the USAF certified the FH after only one flight if we take Shotwell's statement at face value."On behalf of all of our employees, I want to thank the Air Force for certifying Falcon Heavy"It can be read as "being in the process of being certified" as well.Yes, I know, semantics. But concluding that FH is already certified, based on the ambiguous statement from Gwynne alone, is far-fetched.
From SpaceNews:QuoteThe Falcon Heavy beat United Launch Alliance’s Delta 4 in a competition under the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle program. The launch will take place at Kennedy Space Center, Florida.This seems to answer the question as to which LV ULA bid. I would have to think that further implies that the requirements were out of spec for an Atlas V launch, so a direct injection seems likely.
Quote from: envy887 on 06/22/2018 02:23 amQuote from: russianhalo117 on 06/22/2018 02:11 amQuote from: gongora on 06/21/2018 10:56 pmPrevious discussion here :https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=43266.msg1728038#msg1728038Interesting choice, the requirements seemed borderline for F9. Good win for SpaceX. originally i think it was to be a transfer orbit and could now be direct insertionCould be, but I doubt it for $130 million. Why? Would they have to give up the core? They advertise four times that payload to GTO.
The current stated contracting policy for the AF which has not changed is that prior to contract award the LV must be AF certified. This is only excepted by demo's and some experimental payload waivers: example STP-2.The AF may have delayed the award to gain the time to complete certification of FH since that was the LV that the source selection favored.
Quote from: oldAtlas_Eguy on 06/22/2018 07:58 pmThe current stated contracting policy for the AF which has not changed is that prior to contract award the LV must be AF certified. This is only excepted by demo's and some experimental payload waivers: example STP-2.The AF may have delayed the award to gain the time to complete certification of FH since that was the LV that the source selection favored. It will have the required flights by September 2020.
The FH is a configuration of the F9. It only requires a review of what is different from that of the F9. It does not really require 3 flights.
Wow,what kind of payload needs the lifting power of FalconHeavy?That must be a very large satellite.
Quote from: russianhalo117 on 06/22/2018 11:18 pmQuote from: oldAtlas_Eguy on 06/22/2018 07:58 pmThe current stated contracting policy for the AF which has not changed is that prior to contract award the LV must be AF certified. This is only excepted by demo's and some experimental payload waivers: example STP-2.The AF may have delayed the award to gain the time to complete certification of FH since that was the LV that the source selection favored. It will have the required flights by September 2020.You are confusing AF contracting policy with NASA. If the LV has not been certified it cannot be awarded a contract (AF contracting policy). If AF did not follow this policy then ULA can sue and probably win and be awarded the contract by the courts.
We have high confidence (higher than I could portray in this article) that FH beat out Atlas V 551, not Delta.https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2018/06/falcon-9-static-fire-test-crs-15/
It's 6350 kg. I believe SpaceX going forward will not be expending rockets unless absolutely necessary and Elon intimated at the press conferences surrounding the FH demo launch that going forward the price for an expendable Falcon 9 is the same as the price for a reusable Falcon Heavy.Falcon 9 is capable of this launch - its largest GTO launch was 6761 kg with Intelsat-35e - but it would have to be expended. Therefore, SpaceX bid Falcon Heavy.There's probably also some measure of wanting to establish the market for Falcon Heavy.
How does ULA ever win another contract?
How does ULA ever win another contract? If FH can beat the Atlas, there is nothing ULA can do but cut their price and their profit. I guess we'll find out what their profit margin has been all these years.
Quote from: marsbase on 06/23/2018 07:17 pmHow does ULA ever win another contract? If FH can beat the Atlas, there is nothing ULA can do but cut their price and their profit. I guess we'll find out what their profit margin has been all these years.DOD will spread the contracts around regardless of price difference. They can't afford to have ULA go out of business and lose an alternative supplier.
Aren't there multiple providers aiming for the next round of EELV? The DoD doesn't have enough launches to spread around to float that many companies. They said as much in the hearing.
Quote from: marsbase on 06/23/2018 07:17 pmHow does ULA ever win another contract?They're hoping to do so with Vulcan. Whether that will be too little, too late is another question entirely. For another forum thread, not this one.
DOD will spread the contracts around regardless of price difference. They can't afford to have ULA go out of business and lose an alternative supplier.
Quote from: TrevorMonty on 06/23/2018 07:49 pmQuote from: marsbase on 06/23/2018 07:17 pmHow does ULA ever win another contract? If FH can beat the Atlas, there is nothing ULA can do but cut their price and their profit. I guess we'll find out what their profit margin has been all these years.DOD will spread the contracts around regardless of price difference. They can't afford to have ULA go out of business and lose an alternative supplier.Aren't there multiple providers aiming for the next round of EELV? The DoD doesn't have enough launches to spread around to float that many companies. They said as much in the hearing.
“It would need to be certified by the time that we awarded the contract,” Leon said. “We want to see one flight, and before we would actually fly a mission we would want to see three flights.”
Quote from: TrevorMonty on 06/23/2018 07:49 pmDOD will spread the contracts around regardless of price difference. They can't afford to have ULA go out of business and lose an alternative supplier.If that's true The Air Force is not going to save much money, which is their other stated goal. Unlike commercial launches, government contracts are public record. When SpaceX loses to ULA, they then know the price to charge for the next contract bid. That is exactly what SpaceX did in the most recent round of contracts for CRS supply missions. SpaceX suddenly discovered that they had not been charging enough.
But there is Blue and Orbital that could come into the mix if the price was right. Who else?
After the AFSPC-44 launch, the Air Force plans another Falcon Heavy mission with SpaceX in the spring 0f 2021, Bongiovi said. That launch, designated AFSPC-52, was previously planned to lift off by September 2020, but in a briefing with reporters earlier this month, Bongiovi twice said the AFSPC-44 mission is the Air Force’s next Falcon Heavy mission.
Now that the government has agreed to do GPS missions on reflown stages, I'm curious to see if this mission will still use new side boosters.
Quote from: Nate_Trost on 09/27/2020 02:36 pmNow that the government has agreed to do GPS missions on reflown stages, I'm curious to see if this mission will still use new side boosters.That will be interesting to see. They've already tested reused side boosters on a DoD launch (although it wasn't under the NSSL program).
The following Falcon Heavy mission, another classified payload named USSF-52, will also require three new stages. That mission is expected to enable the recovery of all three stages: both side boosters and the center core.
Quote from: Jansen on 12/21/2020 11:17 pmQuoteThe following Falcon Heavy mission, another classified payload named USSF-52, will also require three new stages. That mission is expected to enable the recovery of all three stages: both side boosters and the center core.https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2020/09/spacex-manifest-falcon-heavy-arrives-mcgregor/Just wanted to point out that since all three boosters will be recovered, they must use three ASDS for this mission.Therefore A Shortfall Of Gravitas *must* enter service before this mission.
QuoteThe following Falcon Heavy mission, another classified payload named USSF-52, will also require three new stages. That mission is expected to enable the recovery of all three stages: both side boosters and the center core.https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2020/09/spacex-manifest-falcon-heavy-arrives-mcgregor/
I think this flight might be in October now.https://fcc.report/IBFS/SES-STA-INTR2021-01859
The spacecraft will be launched on or about October 9th, 2021 on a Falcon Heavy from the Kennedy Space Center. USUVL will rideshare on the vehicle with an unspecified US military spacecraft. USUVL will be injected into super-sync orbit on or about November 27th thru December 8th at which time USN will begin S- band support. The spacecraft is inclined at 2.8 degrees as to minimize potential interference with other geo spacecraft. The operators of USUVL have begun and will coordinate with other operators as to not cause interference as it moves around the geo-belt.
Quote from: gongora on 05/13/2021 01:31 amI think this flight might be in October now.https://fcc.report/IBFS/SES-STA-INTR2021-01859Here’s the relevant bit if you don’t want to dig:QuoteThe spacecraft will be launched on or about October 9th, 2021 on a Falcon Heavy from the Kennedy Space Center. USUVL will rideshare on the vehicle with an unspecified US military spacecraft. USUVL will be injected into super-sync orbit on or about November 27th thru December 8th at which time USN will begin S- band support. The spacecraft is inclined at 2.8 degrees as to minimize potential interference with other geo spacecraft. The operators of USUVL have begun and will coordinate with other operators as to not cause interference as it moves around the geo-belt.Looks like launch targeting 09 October 2021.
Multiple USA launch updates from SFN Launch Schedule, updated June 7Falcon Heavy / USSF-52Launch date: Early 2022Launch time: TBDLaunch site: LC-39A, Kennedy Space Center, Florida
The Space Systems Command spokesperson said the USSF-52 mission, the next national security launch on a Falcon Heavy, is scheduled for the second quarter of 2022.
Quote from: Alexphysics on 02/22/2022 08:16 pmQuote from: oldAtlas_Eguy on 02/22/2022 07:51 pmWith JRTI back in the que. The FH mission can go forward if the payload is ready. But once you get past the mid Mar for a launch date. All of the Crew Dragon and cargo Dragon flights one right after another would mean that it is either now (after the 3 Mar flight) or mid to late May.Is there info as to if the payload is ready or not?USSF-44 is not happening until next quarter [Q2 2022] at the earliest.Assuming USSF-52 still follows USSF-44, it would now be NET June [2022]?How long is a Falcon Heavy launch campaign?Edit: 40 days from Crew DM1 to Arabsat-6A, in 2019, is the minimum thus far.I assume/hope it will take less time now?
Quote from: oldAtlas_Eguy on 02/22/2022 07:51 pmWith JRTI back in the que. The FH mission can go forward if the payload is ready. But once you get past the mid Mar for a launch date. All of the Crew Dragon and cargo Dragon flights one right after another would mean that it is either now (after the 3 Mar flight) or mid to late May.Is there info as to if the payload is ready or not?USSF-44 is not happening until next quarter [Q2 2022] at the earliest.
With JRTI back in the que. The FH mission can go forward if the payload is ready. But once you get past the mid Mar for a launch date. All of the Crew Dragon and cargo Dragon flights one right after another would mean that it is either now (after the 3 Mar flight) or mid to late May.Is there info as to if the payload is ready or not?
Cross-post:Quote from: zubenelgenubi on 02/23/2022 09:03 pmQuote from: Alexphysics on 02/22/2022 08:16 pmQuote from: oldAtlas_Eguy on 02/22/2022 07:51 pmWith JRTI back in the que. The FH mission can go forward if the payload is ready. But once you get past the mid Mar for a launch date. All of the Crew Dragon and cargo Dragon flights one right after another would mean that it is either now (after the 3 Mar flight) or mid to late May.Is there info as to if the payload is ready or not?USSF-44 is not happening until next quarter [Q2 2022] at the earliest.Assuming USSF-52 still follows USSF-44, it would now be NET June [2022]?How long is a Falcon Heavy launch campaign?Edit: 40 days from Crew DM1 to Arabsat-6A, in 2019, is the minimum thus far.I assume/hope it will take less time now?
https://spaceflightnow.com/2021/10/04/payload-issue-delays-spacexs-next-falcon-heavy-launch-to-early-2022/QuoteThe Space Systems Command spokesperson said the USSF-52 mission, the next national security launch on a Falcon Heavy, is scheduled for the second quarter of 2022.
This contradicts the “next national security launch” statement from October. Quote from: scr00chy on 10/04/2021 06:38 pmhttps://spaceflightnow.com/2021/10/04/payload-issue-delays-spacexs-next-falcon-heavy-launch-to-early-2022/QuoteThe Space Systems Command spokesperson said the USSF-52 mission, the next national security launch on a Falcon Heavy, is scheduled for the second quarter of 2022.From where was it learned that the order has been reversed?
The Space Systems Command spokesperson said the USSF-52 mission, the next national security launch on a Falcon Heavy after USSF-44, is scheduled for the second quarter of 2022.
I wouldn't even be surprised if they move it after Psyche if -44 keeps being delayed.
https://twitter.com/nextspaceflight/status/1498494197183041538
https://spaceflightnow.com/launch-schedule/[March 9 update]Quote<snip>2nd Quarter • Falcon Heavy • USSF 44Launch time: TBDLaunch site: LC-39A, Kennedy Space Center, Florida...Mid-2022 • Falcon Heavy • USSF 52Launch time: TBDLaunch site: LC-39A, Kennedy Space Center, Florida
<snip>2nd Quarter • Falcon Heavy • USSF 44Launch time: TBDLaunch site: LC-39A, Kennedy Space Center, Florida...Mid-2022 • Falcon Heavy • USSF 52Launch time: TBDLaunch site: LC-39A, Kennedy Space Center, Florida
Cross-post re: next two Falcon Heavy launches:Quote from: Salo on 03/10/2022 05:05 pmhttps://spaceflightnow.com/launch-schedule/[March 9 update]Quote<snip>2nd Quarter • Falcon Heavy • USSF 44Launch time: TBDLaunch site: LC-39A, Kennedy Space Center, Florida...Mid-2022 • Falcon Heavy • USSF 52Launch time: TBDLaunch site: LC-39A, Kennedy Space Center, FloridaUSSF-52 launching before or after Psyche?
NextSpaceFlight indicates the following configuration for the Falcon Heavy boosters:B1064: Side BoosterB1070: Center CoreB1065: Side Booster
Quote from: Conexion Espacial on 04/23/2022 07:59 amNextSpaceFlight indicates the following configuration for the Falcon Heavy boosters:B1064: Side BoosterB1070: Center CoreB1065: Side BoosterFurthermore it says, in the nomenclature from the Manifest:B1064: Side Booster 1064-2 ?B1070: Center Core 1070-1 XB1065: Side Booster 1065-2 ?We may have known all this but it helps to be explicit. B1070One and doneHow 20th century
.....B1070One and doneHow 20th century
Quote from: Comga on 04/23/2022 06:09 pm.....B1070One and doneHow 20th century No, it just means the Falcon upper stage isn't big enough to enable downrange recovery for the center core for high energy launches.Yes, saying the Falcon Heavy, the world's more powerful operational launcher is under performing is amusing.
Quote from: Zed_Noir on 04/23/2022 10:55 pmQuote from: Comga on 04/23/2022 06:09 pm.....B1070One and doneHow 20th century No, it just means the Falcon upper stage isn't big enough to enable downrange recovery for the center core for high energy launches.Yes, saying the Falcon Heavy, the world's more powerful operational launcher is under performing is amusing. Weren't there people who claimed there was no point to having the Falcon Heavy? That it was too big for any currently foreseeable payloads? I expect to see this same thing happen within a couple of years of Starship being available for launches. Build it bigger, somebody will make a payload for it. Just ask the ghost of the AN-225...
Does the indefinite USSF-44 delay mean that USSF-52 will launch first, possibly with the boosters that were originally meant to fly first on USSF-44?
Weren't there people who claimed there was no point to having the Falcon Heavy? That it was too big for any currently foreseeable payloads? I expect to see this same thing happen within a couple of years of Starship being available for launches. Build it bigger, somebody will make a payload for it. Just ask the ghost of the AN-225...
Quote from: Josh_from_Canada on 08/15/2022 05:19 pmQuote from: Alexphysics on 08/15/2022 04:08 pmYeah it was previously planned for them to use the same side boosters on all [the upcoming USSF] missions but back then the order was 44, 52, and 67. Now it appears to be the opposite so [USSF-67] will likely fly those side boosters as new boosters and then proceed with 52 and 44 reusing themHas the center core assignments changed for these missions?Not aware of that, not sure they would care about changing those since they're all expendable anyways
Quote from: Alexphysics on 08/15/2022 04:08 pmYeah it was previously planned for them to use the same side boosters on all [the upcoming USSF] missions but back then the order was 44, 52, and 67. Now it appears to be the opposite so [USSF-67] will likely fly those side boosters as new boosters and then proceed with 52 and 44 reusing themHas the center core assignments changed for these missions?
Yeah it was previously planned for them to use the same side boosters on all [the upcoming USSF] missions but back then the order was 44, 52, and 67. Now it appears to be the opposite so [USSF-67] will likely fly those side boosters as new boosters and then proceed with 52 and 44 reusing them
Another Space Force satellite delivery mission booked on a Falcon Heavy, codenamed USSF-52, is now planned to launch in the second quarter of 2023 — between April 1 and June 30.
Next Spaceflight now shows NET Apr 10, 2023 launch.Is that just April 1 with a typo?
There are two more Falcon Heavy missions scheduled for launch in the spring. One will launch the first ViaSat 3 internet satellite to beam broadband service over the Americas for Viasat, and the other will launch the USSF-52 mission for the Space Force.
Falcon Heavy | USSF-52NET: Jun, 2023 UTChttps://nextspaceflight.com/launches/details/110
What is the current thinking on whether the boosters on this mission will be RTLS, going to (dual) ASDS, or fully expended?
Quote from: ChrisC on 04/30/2023 04:30 amWhat is the current thinking on whether the boosters on this mission will be RTLS, going to (dual) ASDS, or fully expended?We can guess this is going direct to GEO. If it was just GTO, then Arabsat-6 shows they could easily do this with side RLTS and recovered core.But even if it it's going direct to GEO, that does not narrow the options much. RTLS sides + expended core is *guessed* to be able to put about 6000kg to GEO. USSF-52 is though to be about 6350 kg, possibly within the margin of error. ASDS sides or fully expended can do this without trouble.Given the military likes to have lots of margin, I'm guessing they paid for ASDS sides or fully expended. If two droneships are not available, SpaceX could chose to save one side booster and let the other fall into the ocean. Even wilder, given their recent landing accuracy, SpaceX could try to land both boosters on the same ASDS, but I doubt they will try this, cool as it would be.So overall my guess is all expended, or ASDS of one or both side boosters. Likely not RTLS. However this is all speculation, none of this is known.
Quote from: LouScheffer on 04/30/2023 03:54 pmQuote from: ChrisC on 04/30/2023 04:30 amWhat is the current thinking on whether the boosters on this mission will be RTLS, going to (dual) ASDS, or fully expended?We can guess this is going direct to GEO. If it was just GTO, then Arabsat-6 shows they could easily do this with side RLTS and recovered core.But even if it it's going direct to GEO, that does not narrow the options much. RTLS sides + expended core is *guessed* to be able to put about 6000kg to GEO. USSF-52 is though to be about 6350 kg, possibly within the margin of error. ASDS sides or fully expended can do this without trouble.Given the military likes to have lots of margin, I'm guessing they paid for ASDS sides or fully expended. If two droneships are not available, SpaceX could chose to save one side booster and let the other fall into the ocean. Even wilder, given their recent landing accuracy, SpaceX could try to land both boosters on the same ASDS, but I doubt they will try this, cool as it would be.So overall my guess is all expended, or ASDS of one or both side boosters. Likely not RTLS. However this is all speculation, none of this is known.Expending one side booster, and landing the other one seems unlikely to me. Just like landing both side boosters on a single drone ship seems unlikely to me. We will know for sure when SpaceX' files the STA Request. Recent STA Requests are for launches NET Late-May, so hopefully we won't have to wait much longer.
This site claims ASDS for side cores, on two separate droneships, core will be expended.
Quote from: LouScheffer on 04/30/2023 04:32 pmThis site claims ASDS for side cores, on two separate droneships, core will be expended.The cores have no legs.
Is there any source at all for this mission being to GEO?
Quote from: Alexphysics on 04/30/2023 05:37 pmIs there any source at all for this mission being to GEO? No, it's an inference. We know the core is to be expended, but the sides are not RTLS. FH with RTLS sides and expended center already put a heavier satellite (Arabsat-6) into a quite super-synchronous orbit. This implies the target orbit for USSF-52 is higher energy than even a very aggressive GTO. The guess is GEO, but presumably it could be some other type of high-energy orbit.
Quote from: Alexphysics on 04/30/2023 05:37 pmIs there any source at all for this mission being to GEO? No, it's an inference. We know the core is to be expended, but the sides are not RTLS. FH with RTLS sides and expended center already put a heavier satellite (Arabsat 6A) into a quite super-synchronous orbit. This implies the target orbit for USSF-52 is higher energy than even a very aggressive GTO. The guess is GEO, but presumably it could be some other type of high-energy orbit.
I must have missed the source for side boosters not being RTLS.
Quote from: LouScheffer on 04/30/2023 05:55 pmQuote from: Alexphysics on 04/30/2023 05:37 pmIs there any source at all for this mission being to GEO? No, it's an inference. We know the core is to be expended, but the sides are not RTLS. FH with RTLS sides and expended center already put a heavier satellite (Arabsat-6) into a quite super-synchronous orbit. This implies the target orbit for USSF-52 is higher energy than even a very aggressive GTO. The guess is GEO, but presumably it could be some other type of high-energy orbit.I must have missed the source for side boosters not being RTLS. There's not even an FCC permit for the mission yet. We got surprised by Viasat-3 being all expendable, I think it's wise to just wait for that to drop and then make assumptions cause otherwise we might get surprised again.
1005-EX-ST-2023Falcon Heavy, Mission 1491NET JuneRTLS side cores, expendable center core
The next Falcon Heavy will launch the USSF-52 mission for the U.S. Space Force from pad 39A on July 7. The two side boosters will land back at the Cape about eight minutes after launch.
Ben Cooper's Launch Photography Viewing Guide, updated June 18:Quote<snip>The next Falcon Heavy will launch the USSF-52 mission for the U.S. Space Force from pad 39A on July 7 at the earliest.<snip>
<snip>The next Falcon Heavy will launch the USSF-52 mission for the U.S. Space Force from pad 39A on July 7 at the earliest.<snip>
NextSpaceflight, updated June 22:NET SeptemberCenter core = 1074.1Swapping launch slot and center core with Jupiter 3.
Quote from: zubenelgenubi on 06/23/2023 02:59 amNextSpaceflight, updated June 22:NET SeptemberCenter core = 1074.1Swapping launch slot and center core with Jupiter 3.Does this have implications for Psyche too, since they are supposedly using the same side boosters? Would possibly be a <1 month turnaround as Psyche is NET Oct 5th. Also NXSF has 1064 and 1065 listed for their 3rd flight on both USSF-52 and Psyche, probably a mistake.
NextSpaceflight (Updated July 19th)Launch NET October 2023https://nextspaceflight.com/launches/details/110
Tonight's launch will be the third of five Falcon Heavy missions scheduled this year. NASA's Psyche mission is slated to launch no earlier than Oct. 5.The Space Force confirmed this week that the USSF-52 mission, originally slated for this month, is now in Q4.
Quote from: GewoonLukas_ on 07/26/2023 07:47 pmNextSpaceflight now has B1074 as the Center Core.Number on center core says 74 per close up photos from the pad remotes.
NextSpaceflight now has B1074 as the Center Core.
Quote from: zubenelgenubi on 08/11/2023 09:29 pmB1079.1 instead of B1084.1? Has B1084 been transported from McGregor to the Cape?Quote from: GewoonLukas_ on 08/11/2023 08:00 pmB1064 and B1065 for this mission (confirmed again), will also be reused (and expended) on the Europa Clipper launch:QuoteEverything is coming together for launch of NASA’s mission to a metal asteroid8/11/2023[...]All of the major components for SpaceX's Falcon Heavy rocket are undergoing launch preparations at the Kennedy Space Center or Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, according to Jim Hall, a senior mission manger for NASA's Launch Services Program, which brokers rides for NASA spacecraft on commercial rockets.The Falcon Heavy's two reusable side boosters for the Psyche mission returned from their previous launch on July 28 with a commercial communications satellite. SpaceX is refurbishing those boosters—each with three flights on their record—for the Psyche launch. The side-mounted rockets will be recovered again at SpaceX's Cape Canaveral landing zones after the Psyche launch, and they'll be reused and expended on the launch of NASA's Europa Clipper mission in October 2024.The center core of the Falcon Heavy rocket slated to launch Psyche is also in Florida for final launch preps, as are the two new aeroshells for the rocket's payload fairing. This will be the eighth flight of a Falcon Heavy rocket, but the first Falcon Heavy with a payload heading for another planetary body.[...]NextSpaceflight, updated August 11?:Expendable center core B1079.1B1084 is still vertical at McGregor --> https://nsf.live/mcgregor
B1079.1 instead of B1084.1? Has B1084 been transported from McGregor to the Cape?Quote from: GewoonLukas_ on 08/11/2023 08:00 pmB1064 and B1065 for this mission (confirmed again), will also be reused (and expended) on the Europa Clipper launch:QuoteEverything is coming together for launch of NASA’s mission to a metal asteroid8/11/2023[...]All of the major components for SpaceX's Falcon Heavy rocket are undergoing launch preparations at the Kennedy Space Center or Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, according to Jim Hall, a senior mission manger for NASA's Launch Services Program, which brokers rides for NASA spacecraft on commercial rockets.The Falcon Heavy's two reusable side boosters for the Psyche mission returned from their previous launch on July 28 with a commercial communications satellite. SpaceX is refurbishing those boosters—each with three flights on their record—for the Psyche launch. The side-mounted rockets will be recovered again at SpaceX's Cape Canaveral landing zones after the Psyche launch, and they'll be reused and expended on the launch of NASA's Europa Clipper mission in October 2024.The center core of the Falcon Heavy rocket slated to launch Psyche is also in Florida for final launch preps, as are the two new aeroshells for the rocket's payload fairing. This will be the eighth flight of a Falcon Heavy rocket, but the first Falcon Heavy with a payload heading for another planetary body.[...]NextSpaceflight, updated August 11?:Expendable center core B1079.1
B1064 and B1065 for this mission (confirmed again), will also be reused (and expended) on the Europa Clipper launch:QuoteEverything is coming together for launch of NASA’s mission to a metal asteroid8/11/2023[...]All of the major components for SpaceX's Falcon Heavy rocket are undergoing launch preparations at the Kennedy Space Center or Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, according to Jim Hall, a senior mission manger for NASA's Launch Services Program, which brokers rides for NASA spacecraft on commercial rockets.The Falcon Heavy's two reusable side boosters for the Psyche mission returned from their previous launch on July 28 with a commercial communications satellite. SpaceX is refurbishing those boosters—each with three flights on their record—for the Psyche launch. The side-mounted rockets will be recovered again at SpaceX's Cape Canaveral landing zones after the Psyche launch, and they'll be reused and expended on the launch of NASA's Europa Clipper mission in October 2024.The center core of the Falcon Heavy rocket slated to launch Psyche is also in Florida for final launch preps, as are the two new aeroshells for the rocket's payload fairing. This will be the eighth flight of a Falcon Heavy rocket, but the first Falcon Heavy with a payload heading for another planetary body.[...]
Everything is coming together for launch of NASA’s mission to a metal asteroid8/11/2023[...]All of the major components for SpaceX's Falcon Heavy rocket are undergoing launch preparations at the Kennedy Space Center or Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, according to Jim Hall, a senior mission manger for NASA's Launch Services Program, which brokers rides for NASA spacecraft on commercial rockets.The Falcon Heavy's two reusable side boosters for the Psyche mission returned from their previous launch on July 28 with a commercial communications satellite. SpaceX is refurbishing those boosters—each with three flights on their record—for the Psyche launch. The side-mounted rockets will be recovered again at SpaceX's Cape Canaveral landing zones after the Psyche launch, and they'll be reused and expended on the launch of NASA's Europa Clipper mission in October 2024.The center core of the Falcon Heavy rocket slated to launch Psyche is also in Florida for final launch preps, as are the two new aeroshells for the rocket's payload fairing. This will be the eighth flight of a Falcon Heavy rocket, but the first Falcon Heavy with a payload heading for another planetary body.[...]
NextSpaceflight (Updated August 3rd)Launch NET 30 November 2023https://nextspaceflight.com/launches/details/110
QuoteIntuitive Machines says their first lunar lander mission, IM-1, is scheduled for launch on Nov. 15, the start of a six-day launch window.https://investors.intuitivemachines.com/news-releases/news-release-details/intuitive-machines-reports-second-quarter-2023-financial-results/
Intuitive Machines says their first lunar lander mission, IM-1, is scheduled for launch on Nov. 15, the start of a six-day launch window.
QuoteCEO Steve Altemus says the Falcon 9 has a window from Nov. 15-Nov. 20. If there's bad weather, or a high priority NASA or DOD mission takes precedence, there is a backup launch opportunity in December. Going to be close with Astrobotic's Peregrine, which is NET December launch.
CEO Steve Altemus says the Falcon 9 has a window from Nov. 15-Nov. 20. If there's bad weather, or a high priority NASA or DOD mission takes precedence, there is a backup launch opportunity in December. Going to be close with Astrobotic's Peregrine, which is NET December launch.
I know there's been quite a lot of confusing jumps on the schedule of certain classified missions for SpaceX. This is not just for them but also ULA and such and if you remember it's also been a problem for a while as well (see USSF-44 being delayed 2 years). Not sure what's going on but it doesn't look like military payloads have had the best of luck lately trying to be on schedule. This is in relation with the USSF-124 mission jumping back and forth on nextspaceflight from NET November to NET October 31st, etc. We'll see what happens with that mission - same with USSF-52 and friends.
