Author Topic: SpaceX F9 : Starlink v1.0 L12 : KSC LC-39A : October 6, 2020 (11:29 UTC)  (Read 148793 times)

Offline zubenelgenubi

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8112
  • Arc to Arcturus, then Spike to Spica
  • Sometimes it feels like Trantor in the time of Hari Seldon
  • Liked: 4785
  • Likes Given: 41129
I've used this in the past: https://aerospace.org/reentries
Support your local planetarium! (COVID-panic and forward: Now more than ever.)
My current avatar is saying "i wants to go uppies!"

Offline soltasto

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 559
  • Italy, Earth
  • Liked: 886
  • Likes Given: 40

Also renders these complaints moot, unless NASA now criticizes SpaceX for doing the same.
https://spacenews.com/bridenstine-criticizes-china-for-uncontrolled-rocket-reentry/

 - Ed Kyle

The scale of the objects is quite different. It would be like dropping the SLS core stage or an entire Starship. The Falcon 9 stage 2 is much smaller and is comparable to a satellite in mass.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35721
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 19881
  • Likes Given: 10362
Jonathan McDowell reports that "The Falcon 9 second stage from the Oct 6 Starlink launch reentered over Inner Mongolia at 1401 UTC Oct 30."
https://twitter.com/planet4589/status/1322349629183270913

42N   110.9E   53 deg   Ascending track 
Big open spaces out there.  If anything survived, China will find it....
I wonder about that. This stuff would be ITAR controlled under normal circumstances.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Vettedrmr

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 957
  • Hot Springs, AR
  • Liked: 1289
  • Likes Given: 2109
Also renders these complaints moot, unless NASA now criticizes SpaceX for doing the same.
https://spacenews.com/bridenstine-criticizes-china-for-uncontrolled-rocket-reentry/

 - Ed Kyle

I disagree.  One was done intentionally, one was after a failure that was identified and (presumably) analyzed and any necessary changes made to subsequent 2nd stages.
Aviation/space enthusiast, retired control system SW engineer, doesn't know anything!

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6711
  • California
  • Liked: 8138
  • Likes Given: 5181
Roll on Starship, with all stages recoverable!

As long as everything works.  Keep in mind that this Falcon 9 second stage was supposed to have deorbited itself on launch day.

 - Ed Kyle
Never change, Ed. SpaceX makes the most effort of any launch provider to actively de-orbit their upper stages, but on the rare occasion it fails, you raise a stink about it. Iím sure youíll manage to count it as a mission failure somehow or add another asterisk on your statistics. ;)
« Last Edit: 10/31/2020 03:28 pm by Lars-J »

Offline Jeff Lerner

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 577
  • Toronto, Canada
  • Liked: 231
  • Likes Given: 177
Roll on Starship, with all stages recoverable!

As long as everything works.  Keep in mind that this Falcon 9 second stage was supposed to have deorbited itself on launch day.

 - Ed Kyle
Never change, Ed. SpaceX makes the most effort of any launch provider to actively de-orbit their upper stages, but on the rare occasion it fails, you raise a stink about it. Iím sure youíll manage to count it as a mission failure somehow or add another asterisk on your statistics. ;)

With all due respect...has SpaceX ever failed to de-orbit an upper stage ??..also have they indicated  what the problem was ??...Spacex has just discovered a problem with several first stage engines that caused a slip to Crew 1...we donít know what the problem was with this 2nd stage but we canít discount this might also have an impact on the Crew 1 flight

Offline anof

  • Member
  • Posts: 61
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 52
  • Likes Given: 102
Falcon 9 second stages re-enter uncontrolled from GTO missions. Once difference is the inclination of the orbit. The ground track of the Starlink orbit might go over more landmass vs a lower inclination GTO orbit.

There was some mention of not enough margin for the re-entry burn on reddit. The person also mentioned that it was a known risk that the burn might not occur.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35721
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 19881
  • Likes Given: 10362
The core stage of Long March 5 is *much* larger than the falcon 9 upper stage. Like 4 times as big.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline WannaWalnetto

  • Member
  • Posts: 43
  • US Left Coast
  • Liked: 52
  • Likes Given: 12
If I recall correctly, this was the only F9 second stage that didnít either park itself in the GTO graveyard or have a controlled re-entry.

Online Comga

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6083
  • Liked: 3973
  • Likes Given: 3708
Jonathan McDowell reports that "The Falcon 9 second stage from the Oct 6 Starlink launch reentered over Inner Mongolia at 1401 UTC Oct 30."
https://twitter.com/planet4589/status/1322349629183270913

42N   110.9E   53 deg   Ascending track 
Big open spaces out there.  If anything survived, China will find it.

Also renders these complaints moot, unless NASA now criticizes SpaceX for doing the same.
https://spacenews.com/bridenstine-criticizes-china-for-uncontrolled-rocket-reentry/

 - Ed Kyle

Not necessarily
For one, itís a much larger object
Quote
However, the rocketís core stage, 31.7 meters long and 5 meters in diameter, was left in a low, uncontrolled orbit.

That core stage reentered at 11:33 a.m. Eastern May 11 off the coast of west Africa, according to the U.S. Space Forceís 18th Space Control Squadron. However, local reports suggest debris from that 20-ton stage appears to have survived reentry and landed in the African nation of CŰte díIvoire, along the vehicleís trajectory but more than 2,000 kilometers downrange from the reentry point. That debris included a pipe or conduit about 12 meters long.

For another, itís a question of intent.
The Falcon 9 stage was IIRC intended for a controlled reentry but the Chinese rocket was not.

 
However, the ďbig open spaces out thereĒ reminds me of the regrettable comment about Skylab reentering over Australia.
What kind of wastrels would dump a perfectly good booster in the ocean after just one use?

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6711
  • California
  • Liked: 8138
  • Likes Given: 5181
Falcon 9 second stages re-enter uncontrolled from GTO missions. Once difference is the inclination of the orbit. The ground track of the Starlink orbit might go over more landmass vs a lower inclination GTO orbit.

There was some mention of not enough margin for the re-entry burn on reddit. The person also mentioned that it was a known risk that the burn might not occur.
True, the GTO missions do not have deorbit burns. But SpaceX really goes to great lengths to deorbit its 2nd stages for all LEO missions (more than you can say for almost all providers save possible ULA), which is why it irks me to see some posters put such a great emphasis on this failed deorbit burn. Yes, something happened but it will be addressed.

(This is similar to how people make a big deal of a failed S1 landing, yet make no mention when everyone else dunks its first stage into the ocean - yet again)

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11327
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 14996
  • Likes Given: 9185

Also renders these complaints moot, unless NASA now criticizes SpaceX for doing the same.
https://spacenews.com/bridenstine-criticizes-china-for-uncontrolled-rocket-reentry/

 - Ed Kyle

Bridenstine criticizing China was rather hypocritical given that NASA has been responsible for the single largest uncontrolled reentry event ever: Skylab.

Online LouScheffer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2952
  • Liked: 5177
  • Likes Given: 657

Never change, Ed. [...] Iím sure youíll manage to count it as a mission failure somehow or add another asterisk on your statistics. ;)

Nah.  In my mind, I count as failures the Atlas V missions where the second stage exploded while in a high orbit that will not re-enter for millennia.  My logic is that passivation is a formal mission requirement, written into the contract, that the rocket did not fulfill.

But Ed's opinion is that the only part of the contract that counts is delivering the payload to the correct orbit.  To me, this seems like saying the only way to judge a company is by its return to shareholders - there should be no consideration of effect on society or the environment, even if these had been agreed to in advance in a formal contract.  This seems wrong to me, both on environmental grounds and as a matter of contract law, but as Ed will be the first to point out, opinions differ on these matters.

Offline su27k

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5824
  • Liked: 8356
  • Likes Given: 794
Possible video of the reentry from Harbin, China:

https://twitter.com/ExySpear/status/1322666095925469184

Possible video of the reentry from Khabarovsk, Russia:

« Last Edit: 11/03/2020 10:40 am by su27k »

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement SkyTale Software GmbH
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1