Pratt and Whitney presser out, and says RS-68A, and says developed for NROL-15!http://www.pw.utc.com/media_center/press_releases/2012/06_jun/06-29-2012_00002.aspQuote...During hot-fire tests, the RS-68A engine demonstrated the ability to operate for 4,800 seconds of cumulative run time – more than 10 times what’s needed to boost the Delta IV Heavy rocket into space....
...During hot-fire tests, the RS-68A engine demonstrated the ability to operate for 4,800 seconds of cumulative run time – more than 10 times what’s needed to boost the Delta IV Heavy rocket into space....
Someone asked about MERCURY (the COMINT satellite); my understanding was that the Integrated Overhead SIGINT Architecture plan had merged the two GEO SIGINT programs into one. Of course, that was a while ago, the way bureaucracies work they could easily have become unmerged again.
look at the top of the article to the right of the Delta symbol
nor are Atlas numbers, on the newer rockets - the recent AV-023 launch used an older rocket). As for me, I'm simply going to stop using the mission numbers, because ULA seems to have largely abandoned them.
Quote from: edkyle99 on 06/30/2012 03:37 pmnor are Atlas numbers, on the newer rockets - the recent AV-023 launch used an older rocket). As for me, I'm simply going to stop using the mission numbers, because ULA seems to have largely abandoned them.Atlas uses them, they are on all the vehicles, just not visible on the 500 series.
The vehicle numbers are used on all the missions documentation. RBSP will be AV-032. It is on all the procedures for the mission
Quote from: kevin-rf on 06/29/2012 08:11 pmPratt and Whitney presser out, and says RS-68A, and says developed for NROL-15!http://www.pw.utc.com/media_center/press_releases/2012/06_jun/06-29-2012_00002.aspQuote...During hot-fire tests, the RS-68A engine demonstrated the ability to operate for 4,800 seconds of cumulative run time – more than 10 times what’s needed to boost the Delta IV Heavy rocket into space....Would it be fair to assume they'd need to replace the ablative on the nozzle between test runs?cheers, Martin
Upper stage not deorbited?
USSTRATCOM has apparently reserved 2 catalog numbers for objects in orbit from this launch (38528 & 38529). At this time the next available number is 38550.
http://www.satobs.org/seesat/Jul-2012/0188.htmlQuote(4) Bright unknown geostationary found very low on eastern horizon. Since it doesnt match anything reasonably confident its related to theNROL-15 launch. Unable to secure further observations due to cloud.Thank you, Greg! Those are our first observations of what must be the payload of NROL-15.
(4) Bright unknown geostationary found very low on eastern horizon. Since it doesnt match anything reasonably confident its related to theNROL-15 launch. Unable to secure further observations due to cloud.
A development:Quotehttp://www.satobs.org/seesat/Jul-2012/0188.htmlQuote(4) Bright unknown geostationary found very low on eastern horizon. Since it doesnt match anything reasonably confident its related to theNROL-15 launch. Unable to secure further observations due to cloud.Thank you, Greg! Those are our first observations of what must be the payload of NROL-15.Interesting discussion in the remainder of the message.
Occam's razor in this situation would say that it is a redesignated vehicle and not the silliness he has come up with.
Its brightness is also consistent with my highly speculative pre-launch guess of a GEO decoy to cover for a Misty that would have ended up in a LEO ~35 deg orbit, but that proves nothing. Unless the Misty is spotted and identified, or some convincing clue is found in the GEO object's orbital or optical behavior, the heavy SIGINT hypothesis will prevail. Until recently, an explanation that would support the heavy SIGINT hypothesis eluded me, but I believe I have made some progress. NROL-15 seems mysterious due to the need to upgrade the Delta IV-Heavy's main engines to launch it, and the apparent ~11 year delay in launching it, based on its NROL number. There is also the fact that that three Mentors were launched in the interim, one on a Titan IVB, two on Delta IV-Heavy with standard main engines. It made little sense for a heavier version to have been planned to precede them to orbit. But much of the mystery would vanish if the launch were not actually delayed by a decade. What if the NROL-15 designation had originally been assigned to a different payload that was cancelled, and later re-assigned to the present payload? Supporting evidence may be found in NROL-1, which almost certainly is an example of a re-assigned NROL designator. I hope to provide a more detailed outline in the near future.
1. Its brightness is also consistent with my highly speculative pre-launch guess of a GEO decoy to cover for a Misty that would have ended up in a LEO ~35 deg orbit, but that proves nothing.2. Until recently, an explanation that would support the heavy SIGINT hypothesis eluded me, but I believe I have made some progress. 3. NROL-15 seems mysterious due to the need to upgrade the Delta IV-Heavy's main engines to launch it, and the apparent ~11 year delay in launching it, based on its NROL number.
