Author Topic: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread  (Read 66711 times)

Offline notherspacexfan

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 121
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #140 on: 05/06/2011 11:37 am »
Via Clark Lindsay, this tidbit from Businessweek:

"The Air Force plans to bid out several launches, beginning with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Deep Space Climate Observatory satellite, scheduled for fiscal 2012, which begins on Oct. 1."

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/11_20/b4228033785287.htm

(Mods:  Apologies if I screwed this up.  I'm not too good at the whole embedding thing.)

I thought NASA bought launch services for NOAA under NLS. How/why is the AF involved?

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37641
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21719
  • Likes Given: 429
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #141 on: 05/06/2011 11:41 am »
Via Clark Lindsay, this tidbit from Businessweek:

"The Air Force plans to bid out several launches, beginning with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Deep Space Climate Observatory satellite, scheduled for fiscal 2012, which begins on Oct. 1."

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/11_20/b4228033785287.htm

(Mods:  Apologies if I screwed this up.  I'm not too good at the whole embedding thing.)

I thought NASA bought launch services for NOAA under NLS. How/why is the AF involved?

might be their contribution to the project

Offline GClark

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 377
  • Liked: 55
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #142 on: 05/07/2011 06:18 am »
Again, via Clark, this:

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=space&id=news/asd/2011/05/06/10.xml&headline=Triana%20Sat%20Eyed%20For%20Competitive%20Test%20Launch

Relevant quote:

"The service is requesting $135 million in the fiscal 2012 budget, sent to Congress in February, to fund the competition for launching NASA’s Deep Space Climate Observatory (DSCOVR) satellite, says Maj. Gen. John Hyten, director of space programs for the Air Force’s acquisition office...Though the satellite would provide scientific data to government users, it is not a critical payload; thus it is suitable for boost in a test launch that poses higher risk than other Pentagon launches."

ymmv

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15461
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 8667
  • Likes Given: 1369
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #143 on: 05/07/2011 02:16 pm »
Again, via Clark, this:

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=space&id=news/asd/2011/05/06/10.xml&headline=Triana%20Sat%20Eyed%20For%20Competitive%20Test%20Launch

Relevant quote:

"The service is requesting $135 million in the fiscal 2012 budget, sent to Congress in February, to fund the competition for launching NASA’s Deep Space Climate Observatory (DSCOVR) satellite, says Maj. Gen. John Hyten, director of space programs for the Air Force’s acquisition office...Though the satellite would provide scientific data to government users, it is not a critical payload; thus it is suitable for boost in a test launch that poses higher risk than other Pentagon launches."

ymmv


Interesting.  Seems aimed directly at Orbital (Taurus 2) and/or SpaceX (Falcon 9).  The message all but announces the end of Delta 2.

 - Ed Kyle
« Last Edit: 05/07/2011 02:18 pm by edkyle99 »

Offline baldusi

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8359
  • Buenos Aires, Argentina
  • Liked: 2542
  • Likes Given: 8299
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #144 on: 05/10/2011 02:24 pm »
Any Delta II would have to eat the whole cost of overhead and pad infrastructure from the last Delta II until it's launch. I think the end of Delta II was in 2010. I mean that it was clear that they wouldn't get any more clients.
« Last Edit: 05/10/2011 02:25 pm by baldusi »

Online ugordan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8521
    • My mainly Cassini image gallery
  • Liked: 3550
  • Likes Given: 762

Offline WHAP

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 795
  • Liked: 105
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #146 on: 05/10/2011 02:47 pm »
I think the end of Delta II was in 2010.

What ugordon said, plus Aquarius (June 2011) and NPP (October 2011). 
ULA employee.  My opinions do not necessarily reflect those of my employer.

Offline baldusi

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8359
  • Buenos Aires, Argentina
  • Liked: 2542
  • Likes Given: 8299
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #147 on: 05/10/2011 03:00 pm »
May be I didn't made myself clear. I meant that it was clear in 2010 that it was completely uneconomical for Delta II to compete for 2012 mission against Atlas (due to the pad and overhead costs), much less with Falcon and/or Taurus II. There even was a GAO paper about that.

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15461
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 8667
  • Likes Given: 1369
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #148 on: 05/11/2011 12:49 am »
May be I didn't made myself clear. I meant that it was clear in 2010 that it was completely uneconomical for Delta II to compete for 2012 mission against Atlas (due to the pad and overhead costs), much less with Falcon and/or Taurus II. There even was a GAO paper about that.

This still doesn't make sense to me.  How can it be economical to launch one Falcon 9 per year (which is what will likely happen this year, if even one) but not to launch one or two Delta 2 rockets?  How can it be economical to build a brand new launch complex and launch vehicle processing facility from scratch (for Taurus 2 in Virginia) but not to keep using an already-built, existing Delta 2 launch infrastructure?

But, of course, this argument is long-decided, and not in Delta 2's favor.

 - Ed Kyle 


Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37641
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21719
  • Likes Given: 429
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #149 on: 05/11/2011 01:25 am »
This still doesn't make sense to me.  How can it be economical to launch one Falcon 9 per year (which is what will likely happen this year, if even one) but not to launch one or two Delta 2 rockets?  How can it be economical to build a brand new launch complex and launch vehicle processing facility from scratch (for Taurus 2 in Virginia) but not to keep using an already-built, existing Delta 2 launch infrastructure?

But, of course, this argument is long-decided, and not in Delta 2's favor.


Because the govt is not paying for all costs to build and operate those complexes.  Because those contractors' prices are much lower than what ULA is charging.  Delta II's infrastructure is very expensive.

Offline Antares

  • ABO^2
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5181
  • Done arguing with amateurs
  • Liked: 371
  • Likes Given: 228
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #150 on: 05/11/2011 03:36 am »
To put a little finer point on it, Delta II infrastructure was last clean-sheeted in the 80s.  It's been consolidated in the last few years with consideration to the launch rate.  F9 and T2 have the benefit of having been clean-sheeted in the last few years.  Infrastructure is much better optimized to current launch rate - and/or adaptable to greater throughput.  If nothing else, Orbital's Launch Systems Group has figured out how to make a really low launch rate - if not optimized (a strong word) - at least doable.
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 alexw

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1230
  • Liked: 4
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #151 on: 05/11/2011 05:56 am »
To put a little finer point on it, Delta II infrastructure was last clean-sheeted in the 80s.  It's been consolidated in the last few years with consideration to the launch rate.  F9 and T2 have the benefit of having been clean-sheeted in the last few years.  Infrastructure is much better optimized to current launch rate - and/or adaptable to greater throughput.  If nothing else, Orbital's Launch Systems Group has figured out how to make a really low launch rate - if not optimized (a strong word) - at least doable.
    Interesting point. Could you elaborate on how they may have achieved that?
       -Alex

Offline madscientist197

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1014
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #152 on: 05/11/2011 08:42 am »
Orbital seems to outsource a lot of the problem. ATK, for example, who produce the solid stages probably relies on NASA's SRB contract to help maintain capabilities required for the production of their other solid stages. We'll see how that turns out
John

Offline Antares

  • ABO^2
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5181
  • Done arguing with amateurs
  • Liked: 371
  • Likes Given: 228
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #153 on: 05/11/2011 03:10 pm »
They also use the same components across many programs, which helps the classic aerospace production rate problem.
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 Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10294
  • Liked: 703
  • Likes Given: 727
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #154 on: 06/29/2012 02:53 pm »
http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n1202/17noaabudget/

The Deep Space Climate Observatory, or DSCOVR, would be funded at almost $23 million in fiscal year 2013. The fiscal year 2012 budget passed by Congress gives NOAA about $30 million for DSCOVR.

NOAA is refurbishing the DSCOVR spacecraft, originally developed by NASA for an Earth science mission, to host a suite of space weather sensors to help forecast geomagnetic storms, which can disrupt power grids, communications, navigation services and endanger astronauts in space.

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10294
  • Liked: 703
  • Likes Given: 727
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #155 on: 06/29/2012 03:02 pm »
An interesting overview of the DSCOVR program.

Offline Lars_J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6160
  • California
  • Liked: 677
  • Likes Given: 195
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #156 on: 12/05/2012 05:22 pm »
SpaceX will apparently launch it in 2014 on an F9 v1.1:

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/awx_12_05_2012_p0-524585.xml

Quote
SpaceX will use its Falcon 9 v1.1 to boost NASA’s Deep Space Climate Observatory (DSCOVR) in November 2014 and the Falcon 9 Heavy for launch of a Space Test Program satellite in September 2015, says Lt. Gen. Ellen Pawlikowski, program executive officer for Air Force space programs.

Offline russianhalo117

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8789
  • Liked: 4701
  • Likes Given: 768
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #157 on: 12/05/2012 05:24 pm »
SpaceX will apparently launch it in 2014 on an F9 v1.1:

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/awx_12_05_2012_p0-524585.xml

Quote
SpaceX will use its Falcon 9 v1.1 to boost NASA’s Deep Space Climate Observatory (DSCOVR) in November 2014 and the Falcon 9 Heavy for launch of a Space Test Program satellite in September 2015, says Lt. Gen. Ellen Pawlikowski, program executive officer for Air Force space programs.
Please message Salo this or post it in the USA Launch Schedule.

Offline simonbp

  • Science Guy
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7138
  • Liked: 314
  • Likes Given: 183
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #158 on: 12/05/2012 07:02 pm »
Wow, is that a record for a cold storage spacecraft to actually be launched?

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8823
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1318
  • Likes Given: 306
Re: Triana (GoreSat) DSCO (DSCOVR) Discussion Thread
« Reply #159 on: 12/05/2012 07:24 pm »
Wow, is that a record for a cold storage spacecraft to actually be launched?
Where not a bunch of KH-8's put in storage in the 70's and then launched in the 80's. Specifically Higherboy (SP?) comes to mind. So maybe not,..
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Tags:
 

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