Tweet from Thales Alenia Space:#KeyFigure : 30 #IridiumNEXT #satellites now fully operational in #orbit. 17 ready to be shipped. 17 under integration. @IridiumComm
For planning purposes, take note that Iridium said multiple times today that this will be NET early December, not NET late-November.There are "a couple things being finalized" along with a desire on Iridium's part to deconflict with the Thanksgiving holiday.That's all I can say right now.Matt Desch says a target date will be released by Iridium within the next two weeks.(Edit: fixed grammar)
Nominally late November, but working schedule with SpaceX now. Will inform world soon.
Matt Desch tweeted this earlier today, maybe his evil twin got his Twitter password QuoteNominally late November, but working schedule with SpaceX now. Will inform world soon.
Matt Desch @IridiumBossUnfortunately, I’m pretty sure we’re not going to be the first RTLS for our launch 4. Wish it were true, but alas...
QuoteMatt Desch @IridiumBossUnfortunately, I’m pretty sure we’re not going to be the first RTLS for our launch 4. Wish it were true, but alas...Now this has got me confused. What exactly would prevent this flight from being the first RTLS? Is it lack of performance? Regulations?
https://twitter.com/IridiumBoss/status/920015420777816065There's also this ~24 hours earlier, could just be that he asked SpaceX and they said no RTLS, but he does say not the first RTLS rather than simply not RTLS. Is there any possibility SpaceX are planning a November Vandy launch now that Iridium 4 is December. I'd have thought we'd know about it by now if they were, but given we only just found out about Zuma and they still seem to be finalising Iridium 4 details according to Desch, maybe there's been a last minute schedule rearrangement.
No increase in insurance premiums, and seemingly no increase in launch cadence (not an earlier launch date as a result of this contract modification), so what was the incentive to switch to flight-proven first stage?
[...] while also making sure we maintain our cadence to complete the five remaining Iridium NEXT launches by the middle of next year.
Maybe Project Zuma has requested a fresh core. Given the tight schedule, SpaceX had to reallocate the Iridium-N4 core but were able to talk Iridium into accepting a reused core.
Putting myself in Iridium's shoes: why do this?Again, I'm all for it, just curious on the business case / motivation to do so.
So must have been a risk of schedule slips if they hadn't taken a flight-proven booster.
QuoteSo must have been a risk of schedule slips if they hadn't taken a flight-proven booster.I'm not sure such an assertion can be made. This launch slipped from Oct to Nov, and it would seem the booster/parts and pieces would be well into their testing for a Nov launch date at this point. Now, with the flight-proven booster, the launch is NET 22 Dec, a significant slip from 'late-Nov'. How much more would one expect a new built booster to cause a launch slip further than the NET 22 Dec date? No way to know, just a bunch of spit-balling, so perhaps you're correct!There was obviously a reason to make this decision and it is likely a combination of factors, just trying to figure it out. :-)Cheers!