Author Topic: SpaceX Falcon 9 - Inmarsat 5 F4 - May 15, 2017 - DISCUSSION  (Read 206912 times)

Offline nicfit

  • Member
  • Posts: 18
  • Europe
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - Inmarsat 5 F4 - May 15, 2017 - DISCUSSION
« Reply #380 on: 05/19/2017 03:51 pm »
Regarding the decay of Stage 2: The perigee height won't stay there for long. It will be perturbed higher or lower by the Moon etc. when nearer to apogee. This should be even more marker on a super-synchronous transfer orbit. Next question being, which way will it be perturbed and by how much...?


Stages 2 re-entered in less than half a year for the SES8 et Thaicom 6, both supersync injection orbits --> the moon effect

Offline stcks

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 252
  • Liked: 266
  • Likes Given: 312
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - Inmarsat 5 F4 - May 15, 2017 - DISCUSSION
« Reply #381 on: 05/19/2017 04:38 pm »
It is left as an exercise for the reader to figure out which ones have decayed and any typos.

Here is what I have gathered:


Offline Dante80

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 893
  • Athens : Greece
  • Liked: 835
  • Likes Given: 539
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - Inmarsat 5 F4 - May 15, 2017 - DISCUSSION
« Reply #382 on: 05/19/2017 04:42 pm »
The rather dramatic effect on the Abs-2/Eut-117 orbit comes from the moon too, right?

Offline Comga

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6466
  • Liked: 4572
  • Likes Given: 5136
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - Inmarsat 5 F4 - May 15, 2017 - DISCUSSION
« Reply #383 on: 05/19/2017 08:42 pm »
This thread is drifting from discussing the May 15 Inmarsat 5 F4 launch.  These are interesting enough topics but there are dedicated threads for them elsewhere.  (I would love to see a single plot of the second stage apogee heights vs calendar days, but except for THIS second stage, it would go in a general discussion thread.)
What kind of wastrels would dump a perfectly good booster in the ocean after just one use?

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13463
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 11864
  • Likes Given: 11086
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - Inmarsat 5 F4 - May 15, 2017 - DISCUSSION
« Reply #384 on: 05/19/2017 10:45 pm »
This thread is drifting from discussing the May 15 Inmarsat 5 F4 launch.  These are interesting enough topics but there are dedicated threads for them elsewhere.  (I would love to see a single plot of the second stage apogee heights vs calendar days, but except for THIS second stage, it would go in a general discussion thread.)

Yes please... let's find a home for some of this.... interesting but off topic.... (PM me and I'll try to move stuff to the thread identified) Thanks!
"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 macpacheco

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 891
  • Vitoria-ES-Brazil
  • Liked: 368
  • Likes Given: 3041
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - Inmarsat 5 F4 - May 15, 2017 - DISCUSSION
« Reply #385 on: 05/23/2017 01:45 am »
42698   INMARSAT 5-F4   2017-025A      1401.67min   24.50deg   69839km   381km      
42699   FALCON 9 R/B   2017-025B           1410.43min   24.47deg   70181km   384km

I believe these are identified backwards: the payload is in the 384 x 70,181 km orbit; and the Falcon-9 upper stage rocket body is in the 381 x 69,839 km orbit.   Expect 18 SPCS to swap these in the next couple of days.
Swap has taken place:
42698   INMARSAT 5-F4  2017-025A      1409.24 min    24.52deg    70134km    385km
42699   FALCON 9 R/B    2017-025B      1401.51 min   24.47deg    69835km    378km


Still no maneuvers detected...

Would those be explained by timing so that once they start their burns they get to the right GEO slot, and right now with each orbit the get closer to that proper timing faster than if they did some substantial burns prior ?
Looking for companies doing great things for much more than money

Offline Semmel

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2178
  • Germany
  • Liked: 2433
  • Likes Given: 11916
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - Inmarsat 5 F4 - May 15, 2017 - DISCUSSION
« Reply #386 on: 05/23/2017 09:02 am »
42698   INMARSAT 5-F4   2017-025A      1401.67min   24.50deg   69839km   381km      
42699   FALCON 9 R/B   2017-025B           1410.43min   24.47deg   70181km   384km

I believe these are identified backwards: the payload is in the 384 x 70,181 km orbit; and the Falcon-9 upper stage rocket body is in the 381 x 69,839 km orbit.   Expect 18 SPCS to swap these in the next couple of days.
Swap has taken place:
42698   INMARSAT 5-F4  2017-025A      1409.24 min    24.52deg    70134km    385km
42699   FALCON 9 R/B    2017-025B      1401.51 min   24.47deg    69835km    378km


Still no maneuvers detected...

Would those be explained by timing so that once they start their burns they get to the right GEO slot, and right now with each orbit the get closer to that proper timing faster than if they did some substantial burns prior ?

I dont think so. With two burns, one that parks perigee somewhere between where it is now and GEO height and an other one for the final perigee raise they can get to almost any point within 2 or 3 orbits. By now, they must have at least 10 orbits.

Offline jpo234

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2021
  • Liked: 2280
  • Likes Given: 2184
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - Inmarsat 5 F4 - May 15, 2017 - DISCUSSION
« Reply #387 on: 05/23/2017 10:25 am »
I dont think so. With two burns, one that parks perigee somewhere between where it is now and GEO height and an other one for the final perigee raise they can get to almost any point within 2 or 3 orbits. By now, they must have at least 10 orbits.

The satellite is supposed to be a spare. Would it make sense to leave it in the current transfer orbit until it is actually needed?
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 edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15391
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 8565
  • Likes Given: 1356
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - Inmarsat 5 F4 - May 15, 2017 - DISCUSSION
« Reply #388 on: 05/23/2017 02:13 pm »
I dont think so. With two burns, one that parks perigee somewhere between where it is now and GEO height and an other one for the final perigee raise they can get to almost any point within 2 or 3 orbits. By now, they must have at least 10 orbits.

The satellite is supposed to be a spare. Would it make sense to leave it in the current transfer orbit until it is actually needed?
Not in my opinion (GEO is a better location), but then again this transfer orbit was given a higher than typical perigee, perhaps to allow for more time before starting ascent. 

 - Ed Kyle

Offline karanfildavut

  • Member
  • Posts: 18
  • USA
  • Liked: 40
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - Inmarsat 5 F4 - May 15, 2017 - DISCUSSION
« Reply #389 on: 05/23/2017 06:35 pm »
I dont think so. With two burns, one that parks perigee somewhere between where it is now and GEO height and an other one for the final perigee raise they can get to almost any point within 2 or 3 orbits. By now, they must have at least 10 orbits.

The satellite is supposed to be a spare. Would it make sense to leave it in the current transfer orbit until it is actually needed?

Generally, I was under the impression this is a bad idea due to the repeated transits through the Van Allen belts. Those tend to be hard on satellite electronics. My wager is that the satellite checkout is continuing in some form and that they will start the orbital changes as soon as they are satisfied. I'm sure they can use it to decongest bandwidth in their high demand areas (europe was mentioned before).

Also, AFAIK it's actually not that energetically expensive to change orbital slots in GSO since you can do a racetrack maneuver or something similar. Just raise or lower your orbit by a few km, drift till you get to the correct slot and re-enter. Low total dV expenditure.

Offline macpacheco

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 891
  • Vitoria-ES-Brazil
  • Liked: 368
  • Likes Given: 3041
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - Inmarsat 5 F4 - May 15, 2017 - DISCUSSION
« Reply #390 on: 05/23/2017 07:56 pm »
I dont think so. With two burns, one that parks perigee somewhere between where it is now and GEO height and an other one for the final perigee raise they can get to almost any point within 2 or 3 orbits. By now, they must have at least 10 orbits.

The satellite is supposed to be a spare. Would it make sense to leave it in the current transfer orbit until it is actually needed?

Generally, I was under the impression this is a bad idea due to the repeated transits through the Van Allen belts. Those tend to be hard on satellite electronics. My wager is that the satellite checkout is continuing in some form and that they will start the orbital changes as soon as they are satisfied. I'm sure they can use it to decongest bandwidth in their high demand areas (europe was mentioned before).

Also, AFAIK it's actually not that energetically expensive to change orbital slots in GSO since you can do a racetrack maneuver or something similar. Just raise or lower your orbit by a few km, drift till you get to the correct slot and re-enter. Low total dV expenditure.
Not energetically expensive, but how long it would take to go half way around the globe that way ? How many months ? Timing can be very important in several situations.
Looking for companies doing great things for much more than money

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8144
  • Liked: 6801
  • Likes Given: 2965
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - Inmarsat 5 F4 - May 15, 2017 - DISCUSSION
« Reply #391 on: 05/23/2017 09:50 pm »
Not energetically expensive, but how long it would take to go half way around the globe that way ? How many months ? Timing can be very important in several situations.
For 30 m/s it can drift at least 180 degrees in 35 days. That's with circular orbits but it might be cheaper and faster to use elliptical orbits to drift.

Offline psionedge

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 102
  • Liked: 74
  • Likes Given: 10
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - Inmarsat 5 F4 - May 15, 2017 - DISCUSSION
« Reply #392 on: 05/24/2017 06:25 pm »
I dont think so. With two burns, one that parks perigee somewhere between where it is now and GEO height and an other one for the final perigee raise they can get to almost any point within 2 or 3 orbits. By now, they must have at least 10 orbits.

The satellite is supposed to be a spare. Would it make sense to leave it in the current transfer orbit until it is actually needed?
They will probably have to go to Geo to check out the satellite before the manufacturer hands it over to the customer. You aren't going to be verifying link budgets and channel performance in GTO.

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8823
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1318
  • Likes Given: 306
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - Inmarsat 5 F4 - May 15, 2017 - DISCUSSION
« Reply #393 on: 05/25/2017 12:52 am »
I dont think so. With two burns, one that parks perigee somewhere between where it is now and GEO height and an other one for the final perigee raise they can get to almost any point within 2 or 3 orbits. By now, they must have at least 10 orbits.

The satellite is supposed to be a spare. Would it make sense to leave it in the current transfer orbit until it is actually needed?
They will probably have to go to Geo to check out the satellite before the manufacturer hands it over to the customer. You aren't going to be verifying link budgets and channel performance in GTO.

It will also last longer in GSO, GTO does multiple passes through the Van Allen each day.
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Offline friendly3

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 271
  • Liege. BELGIUM.
  • Liked: 306
  • Likes Given: 8567
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - Inmarsat 5 F4 - May 15, 2017 - DISCUSSION
« Reply #394 on: 05/26/2017 12:11 am »
Tweeted, but when I went to RT, it said action unavailable and that's because they deleted it.....sorry, which I could have grabbed the pics, but at least screenshot the deleted tweet.

Oh, they deleted it because they typoed. Proton 9 ;D

Anyway, they haven't tweeted the correction.....we get the message and the milestone.



Well you can't blame them, even to this day NASA's website says Inmarsat 5 F4 was launched from the Cape on a Proton-M ::) :

https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/spacecraftOrbit.do?id=2017-025A

https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/spacecraftDisplay.do?id=2017-025A

EDIT: they fixed this in less than 24 hours, so the links now show a Falcon 9 Full Thrust as the launcher :D
« Last Edit: 07/17/2017 02:18 pm by friendly3 »

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8823
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1318
  • Likes Given: 306
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - Inmarsat 5 F4 - May 15, 2017 - DISCUSSION
« Reply #395 on: 05/26/2017 12:27 am »
That's one funny looking Proton.
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Offline Antares

  • ABO^2
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5181
  • Done arguing with amateurs
  • Liked: 371
  • Likes Given: 228
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - Inmarsat 5 F4 - May 15, 2017 - DISCUSSION
« Reply #396 on: 05/27/2017 01:41 am »
A 541 at much less than half the cost.  If I were ULA or OrbTK,
late career: buy survival bunker
mid career: cushy job with GovSpace
early career: leave the industry or demand better options from SpaceX.
If I like something on NSF, it's probably because I know it to be accurate.  Every once in a while, it's just something I agree with.  Facts generally receive the former.

Offline Dante80

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 893
  • Athens : Greece
  • Liked: 835
  • Likes Given: 539
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - Inmarsat 5 F4 - May 15, 2017 - DISCUSSION
« Reply #397 on: 05/27/2017 04:32 pm »
To be fair - and assuming this campaign did do a depletion burn as theorized - this was a 531/4M+5,4  performance (see the WGS campaigns for Delta IV and the AEHF campaigns for Atlas V).

It is assumed that Block 5 may match 541, while still being a two stage kerolox LV (and about 20t heavier than said Atlas V variant).
« Last Edit: 05/27/2017 04:44 pm by Dante80 »

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6257
  • Liked: 4164
  • Likes Given: 6078
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - Inmarsat 5 F4 - May 15, 2017 - DISCUSSION
« Reply #398 on: 05/27/2017 07:00 pm »
To be fair - and assuming this campaign did do a depletion burn as theorized - this was a 531/4M+5,4  performance (see the WGS campaigns for Delta IV and the AEHF campaigns for Atlas V).

It is assumed that Block 5 may match 541, while still being a two stage kerolox LV (and about 20t heavier than said Atlas V variant).

You are referring to high energy orbits, right?
To LEO, Block 5 will far surpass Atlas V 551; may come close to matching Delta IV Heavy.
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline Dante80

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 893
  • Athens : Greece
  • Liked: 835
  • Likes Given: 539
Re: SpaceX Falcon 9 - Inmarsat 5 F4 - May 15, 2017 - DISCUSSION
« Reply #399 on: 05/27/2017 07:22 pm »

You are referring to high energy orbits, right?
To LEO, Block 5 will far surpass Atlas V 551; may come close to matching Delta IV Heavy.

Yep, we were talking about GTO missions. Falcon 9 is an absolute monster as far as LEO is concerned. You cannot beat kerolox in that profile.

Falcon 9 block5 can probably match the ISS throw-weight of Ariane 5 ES. And that is a 760t rocket!
« Last Edit: 05/27/2017 07:32 pm by Dante80 »

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0