NASASpaceFlight.com Forum

SpaceX Vehicles and Missions => SpaceX Missions Section => Topic started by: Chris Bergin on 06/21/2018 09:44 pm

Title: SpaceX Falcon Heavy : USSF-52 : KSC LC-39A : 2023
Post by: Chris Bergin on 06/21/2018 09:44 pm
Discussion thread for the USSF-52 (formerly AFSPC-52) mission.

NSF Threads for USSF-52 : Discussion (https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=47474.0)
NSF Articles for USSF-52 :

2023 on Falcon Heavy from LC-39A.



https://twitter.com/ChrisG_NSF/status/1009912924356440065

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DgPt-qeXcAMc-KY.jpg)

http://www.losangeles.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/1557227/air-force-awards-afspc-52-launch-services-contract-to-spacex/
Quote
The Air Force has announced the award of an Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) launch service contract.  Space Exploration Technologies Corporation (SpaceX) has been awarded a $130 million firm-fixed price contract for launch services to deliver Air Force Space Command (AFSPC)-52 satellite to the intended orbit.  The contract provides the Government with a total launch solution for this mission, which includes launch vehicle production, mission integration and launch operations.  This mission is planned to be launched from Kennedy Space Center, Florida.

This is the fifth competitive procurement under the current Phase 1A strategy.  These launch service contract awards strike a balance between meeting operational needs and lowering launch costs through reintroducing competition for National Security Space missions.

“The competitive award of this EELV launch service contract directly supports Space and Missile Systems Center’s (SMC) mission of delivering resilient and affordable space capabilities to our Nation while maintaining assured access to space,” said Lt. Gen. John Thompson, Air Force program executive officer for Space and SMC commander.

AFSPC-52 is a classified mission projected to launch in late Fiscal Year 2020.

The Air Force Space Command's Space and Missile Systems Center, located at the Los Angeles Air Force Base, California, is the U.S. Air Force's center of excellence for acquiring and developing military space systems. Its portfolio includes the Global Positioning System, military satellite communications, defense meteorological satellites, space launch and range systems, satellite control networks, space based infrared systems, and space situational awareness capabilities.

https://www.defense.gov/News/Contracts/Contract-View/Article/1557205/ (https://www.defense.gov/News/Contracts/Contract-View/Article/1557205/)
Quote
Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (SpaceX), Hawthorne, California, has been awarded a $130,000,000 firm-fixed-price contract, for launch services to deliver the Air Force Space Command-52 satellite to its intended orbit.  This launch service contract will include launch vehicle production and mission, as well as integration, launch operations and spaceflight worthiness activities.  Work will be performed in Hawthorne, California; Kennedy Space Center, Florida; and McGregor, Texas, and is expected to be completed by September 2020.  This award is the result of a competitive acquisition, and two proposals were received.  Fiscal 2018 space procurement funds in the amount of $130,000,000 will be obligated at the time of award.  The Contracting Division, Launch Systems Enterprise Directorate, Space and Missile Systems Center, Los Angeles Air Force Base, California, is the contracting activity (FA8811-18-C-0003). (Awarded June 20, 2018)

Previous discussion here :
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=43266.msg1728038#msg1728038
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - NET Sept 2020
Post by: yokem55 on 06/21/2018 09:45 pm
#SpaceX has won a competitively-awarded #AirForce launch contract for the AFSPC-52 flight. The mission will utilize a #FalconHeavy rocket. Mission will launch by Sept. 2020 from LC-39A at Kennedy Space Center. Statement from Gwynne Shotwell below... https://t.co/a5ka2ov20L

https://twitter.com/ChrisG_NSF/status/1009912924356440065
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - NET Sept 2020
Post by: jpo234 on 06/21/2018 10:04 pm
What was the alternative? Atlas 5 or a Delta IV?
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - NET Sept 2020
Post by: russianhalo117 on 06/21/2018 10:17 pm
What was the alternative? Atlas 5 or a Delta IV?
previously listed on the NSF US schedule as flying on an Atlas V 500 series with other sites listing it as an AV551.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: WindnWar on 06/21/2018 10:25 pm
Contract is valued at $130 million.

https://www.defense.gov/News/Contracts/Contract-View/Article/1557205/ (https://www.defense.gov/News/Contracts/Contract-View/Article/1557205/)
Quote
Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (SpaceX), Hawthorne, California, has been awarded a $130,000,000 firm-fixed-price contract, for launch services to deliver the Air Force Space Command-52 satellite to its intended orbit.  This launch service contract will include launch vehicle production and mission, as well as integration, launch operations and spaceflight worthiness activities.  Work will be performed in Hawthorne, California; Kennedy Space Center, Florida; and McGregor, Texas, and is expected to be completed by September 2020.  This award is the result of a competitive acquisition, and two proposals were received.  Fiscal 2018 space procurement funds in the amount of $130,000,000 will be obligated at the time of award.  The Contracting Division, Launch Systems Enterprise Directorate, Space and Missile Systems Center, Los Angeles Air Force Base, California, is the contracting activity (FA8811-18-C-0003). (Awarded June 20, 2018)

I wonder what the competition bid, though since they didn't win we won't know.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: WindnWar on 06/21/2018 10:34 pm
For comparison the last two awards AFSPC-8 and AFSPC-12 were to ULA for a combined price of $354 million.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: yokem55 on 06/21/2018 10:41 pm
So the question is, what kind of Falcon Heavy flight does $130 million buy? All 3 cores recovered, or exended core?
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: russianhalo117 on 06/21/2018 10:42 pm
So the question is, what kind of Falcon Heavy flight does $130 million buy? All 3 cores recovered, or exended core?
Q; All 3 cores recovered, or exended core?
A: Was not stated.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: gongora on 06/21/2018 10:56 pm
Previous discussion here :
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=43266.msg1728038#msg1728038

Interesting choice, the requirements seemed borderline for F9. Good win for SpaceX.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: wannamoonbase on 06/21/2018 11:28 pm
Nice, congrats SpaceX.

The FH is a beautiful thing to see flying. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: Michael Baylor on 06/21/2018 11:39 pm
So the question is, what kind of Falcon Heavy flight does $130 million buy? All 3 cores recovered, or exended core?
The requirements seem to suggest that this was borderline doable on a Falcon 9 expendable. Therefore, I am guessing that this will be a fully recoverable Falcon Heavy launch. However, all three of the cores will be brand new plus the other AF requirements (thus the higher price).
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: envy887 on 06/21/2018 11:51 pm
So the question is, what kind of Falcon Heavy flight does $130 million buy? All 3 cores recovered, or exended core?
The requirements seem to suggest that this was borderline doable on a Falcon 9 expendable. Therefore, I am guessing that this will be a fully recoverable Falcon Heavy launch. However, all three of the cores will be brand new plus the other AF requirements (thus the higher price).

F9 B4 has already easily exceed the performance requirements of the RFP reference, with the supersync delivery of Intelsat 35e at 6700 kg.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: WindnWar on 06/22/2018 01:37 am
Is it possible that the reference orbit requires delivery to the specified requirements without using a supersync orbit? If so would that require a coast longer than possible with Falcon 9 to be able to achieve that orbit?

Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: russianhalo117 on 06/22/2018 02:11 am
Previous discussion here :
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=43266.msg1728038#msg1728038

Interesting choice, the requirements seemed borderline for F9. Good win for SpaceX.
originally i think it was to be a transfer orbit and could now be direct insertion
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: envy887 on 06/22/2018 02:23 am
Previous discussion here :
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=43266.msg1728038#msg1728038

Interesting choice, the requirements seemed borderline for F9. Good win for SpaceX.
originally i think it was to be a transfer orbit and could now be direct insertion

Could be, but I doubt it for $130 million.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: Michael Baylor on 06/22/2018 02:24 am
originally i think it was to be a transfer orbit and could now be direct insertion
That would make a Delta IV Heavy bid slightly more likely on ULA's part. It really on the payload mass though.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: Lar on 06/22/2018 02:45 am
So the question is, what kind of Falcon Heavy flight does $130 million buy? All 3 cores recovered, or exended core?
The requirements seem to suggest that this was borderline doable on a Falcon 9 expendable. Therefore, I am guessing that this will be a fully recoverable Falcon Heavy launch. However, all three of the cores will be brand new plus the other AF requirements (thus the higher price).

So SpaceX will get some cores to reuse elsewhere. Customers asking (and paying extra for) brand new cores means money in their pocket.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: gongora on 06/22/2018 02:47 am
Even if it's not direct insertion they could have bid more than the minimum required performance.  The solicitations sometimes say they can buy extra performance to allow for longer lifetime, secondary payloads, etc.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: Nomadd on 06/22/2018 02:48 am
Previous discussion here :
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=43266.msg1728038#msg1728038

Interesting choice, the requirements seemed borderline for F9. Good win for SpaceX.
originally i think it was to be a transfer orbit and could now be direct insertion

Could be, but I doubt it for $130 million.
Why? Would they have to give up the core? They advertise four times that payload to GTO.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: Brovane on 06/22/2018 03:08 am
So the USAF certified the FH for EELV payloads after only one flight?   ???    SpaceX hasn't even flown the launch the USAF procured as a FH demo yet. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: Brovane on 06/22/2018 03:20 am
So the question is, what kind of Falcon Heavy flight does $130 million buy? All 3 cores recovered, or exended core?
The requirements seem to suggest that this was borderline doable on a Falcon 9 expendable. Therefore, I am guessing that this will be a fully recoverable Falcon Heavy launch. However, all three of the cores will be brand new plus the other AF requirements (thus the higher price).

Can we assume that all three cores will be not be flight proven?  SpaceX could have done multiple bids offering different mixes of flight proven versus non flight proven boosters.   
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: gongora on 06/22/2018 03:25 am
The EELV program doesn't have a process for certifying flight-proven rockets yet.  SpaceX would have needed to bid a new launch vehicle.  That will probably remain the case for the rest of Phase 1A.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: Therodon on 06/22/2018 07:01 am
So the USAF certified the FH for EELV payloads after only one flight?   ???    SpaceX hasn't even flown the launch the USAF procured as a FH demo yet.

The Mission is 2020, so its not really high risk  ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: woods170 on 06/22/2018 07:46 am
So the USAF certified the FH for EELV payloads after only one flight?   ???    SpaceX hasn't even flown the launch the USAF procured as a FH demo yet. 

By the time AFSPC-52 is scheduled to launch FH will have flown at least three times.
Also, at least two recent missions (FH maiden launch and a F9 mission) had test objectives to satisfy USAF certification requirements.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: Brovane on 06/22/2018 12:07 pm
So the USAF certified the FH for EELV payloads after only one flight?   ???    SpaceX hasn't even flown the launch the USAF procured as a FH demo yet. 

By the time AFSPC-52 is scheduled to launch FH will have flown at least three times.
Also, at least two recent missions (FH maiden launch and a F9 mission) had test objectives to satisfy USAF certification requirements.

The statement from Shotwell indicated that FH was already certified, not that certification was pending.  So that would mean the USAF certified the FH after only one flight if we take Shotwell's statement at face value.

"On behalf of all of our employees, I want to thank the Air Force for certifying Falcon Heavy"
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: MaxTeranous on 06/22/2018 12:15 pm
So the USAF certified the FH for EELV payloads after only one flight?   ???    SpaceX hasn't even flown the launch the USAF procured as a FH demo yet. 

By the time AFSPC-52 is scheduled to launch FH will have flown at least three times.
Also, at least two recent missions (FH maiden launch and a F9 mission) had test objectives to satisfy USAF certification requirements.

The statement from Shotwell indicated that FH was already certified, not that certification was pending.  So that would mean the USAF certified the FH after only one flight if we take Shotwell's statement at face value.

"On behalf of all of our employees, I want to thank the Air Force for certifying Falcon Heavy"

It can be read both ways, but it really doesn't matter, they've got the contract and by launch time the paperwork will be in order. That's what's important.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: Brovane on 06/22/2018 01:08 pm


The statement from Shotwell indicated that FH was already certified, not that certification was pending.  So that would mean the USAF certified the FH after only one flight if we take Shotwell's statement at face value.

"On behalf of all of our employees, I want to thank the Air Force for certifying Falcon Heavy"

It can be read both ways, but it really doesn't matter, they've got the contract and by launch time the paperwork will be in order. That's what's important.

I don't see how it can be read both ways.  Shotwell is clearly stating the FH has been certified by the USAF.  Even the USAF statement makes no mention that the contract is awarded on the basis that the FH will be certified in the future.

If Shotwell's statement is correct, that the USAF felt comfortable enough with the Feb 6th launch data to award EELV certification to the FH after only one launch and 5-months of data review, that is note worthy. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: woods170 on 06/22/2018 01:26 pm
So the USAF certified the FH for EELV payloads after only one flight?   ???    SpaceX hasn't even flown the launch the USAF procured as a FH demo yet. 

By the time AFSPC-52 is scheduled to launch FH will have flown at least three times.
Also, at least two recent missions (FH maiden launch and a F9 mission) had test objectives to satisfy USAF certification requirements.

The statement from Shotwell indicated that FH was already certified, not that certification was pending.  So that would mean the USAF certified the FH after only one flight if we take Shotwell's statement at face value.

"On behalf of all of our employees, I want to thank the Air Force for certifying Falcon Heavy"

It can be read as "being in the process of being certified" as well.

Yes, I know, semantics. But concluding that FH is already certified, based on the ambiguous statement from Gwynne alone, is far-fetched.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: abaddon on 06/22/2018 01:33 pm
From SpaceNews:
Quote
The Falcon Heavy beat United Launch Alliance’s Delta 4 in a competition under the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle program. The launch will take place at Kennedy Space Center, Florida.
This seems to answer the question as to which LV ULA bid.  I would have to think that further implies that the requirements were out of spec for an Atlas V launch, so a direct injection seems likely.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: wannamoonbase on 06/22/2018 01:36 pm
There will be at least 2-3 more flights on the FH before then as well.  The USAF will have eyes on all SpaceX launches no doubt.

Next up a vertical integration launch.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: Brovane on 06/22/2018 02:24 pm
So the USAF certified the FH for EELV payloads after only one flight?   ???    SpaceX hasn't even flown the launch the USAF procured as a FH demo yet. 

By the time AFSPC-52 is scheduled to launch FH will have flown at least three times.
Also, at least two recent missions (FH maiden launch and a F9 mission) had test objectives to satisfy USAF certification requirements.

The statement from Shotwell indicated that FH was already certified, not that certification was pending.  So that would mean the USAF certified the FH after only one flight if we take Shotwell's statement at face value.

"On behalf of all of our employees, I want to thank the Air Force for certifying Falcon Heavy"

It can be read as "being in the process of being certified" as well.

Yes, I know, semantics. But concluding that FH is already certified, based on the ambiguous statement from Gwynne alone, is far-fetched.


I am sure the crack reporting team at NSF forum can get clarification from SpaceX on the status of FH EELV certification. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: envy887 on 06/22/2018 02:41 pm
From SpaceNews:
Quote
The Falcon Heavy beat United Launch Alliance’s Delta 4 in a competition under the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle program. The launch will take place at Kennedy Space Center, Florida.
This seems to answer the question as to which LV ULA bid.  I would have to think that further implies that the requirements were out of spec for an Atlas V launch, so a direct injection seems likely.

Is it confirmed that ULA is not bidding the Delta IV Medium at all anymore? The 5,4 Medium could do the reference mission.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: envy887 on 06/22/2018 02:47 pm
Previous discussion here :
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=43266.msg1728038#msg1728038

Interesting choice, the requirements seemed borderline for F9. Good win for SpaceX.
originally i think it was to be a transfer orbit and could now be direct insertion

Could be, but I doubt it for $130 million.
Why? Would they have to give up the core? They advertise four times that payload to GTO.

They advertise 8,000 kg to GTO for $90M commercial. USAF assurance adds at least $30M on that. Direct GEO insertion is a special service that requires extra batteries and helium in the upper stage, so probably costs more. It doesn't add up to me.

I think this a good example of a greater 5.5 t but less than 8.0 t GTO flight with 3-core recovery on FH. The cost is almost exactly as expected, and it fits perfectly with the reference orbit.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: dante2308 on 06/22/2018 03:57 pm
So the USAF certified the FH for EELV payloads after only one flight?   ???    SpaceX hasn't even flown the launch the USAF procured as a FH demo yet.

Maybe this has to do with the Falcon Heavy being a derivative of the Falcon 9.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: oldAtlas_Eguy on 06/22/2018 07:58 pm
The current stated contracting policy for the AF which has not changed is that prior to contract award the LV must be AF certified. This is only excepted by demo's and some experimental payload waivers: example STP-2.

The AF may have delayed the award to gain the time to complete certification of FH since that was the LV that the source selection favored.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: russianhalo117 on 06/22/2018 11:18 pm
The current stated contracting policy for the AF which has not changed is that prior to contract award the LV must be AF certified. This is only excepted by demo's and some experimental payload waivers: example STP-2.

The AF may have delayed the award to gain the time to complete certification of FH since that was the LV that the source selection favored.
It will have the required flights by September 2020.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: oldAtlas_Eguy on 06/23/2018 01:34 am
The current stated contracting policy for the AF which has not changed is that prior to contract award the LV must be AF certified. This is only excepted by demo's and some experimental payload waivers: example STP-2.

The AF may have delayed the award to gain the time to complete certification of FH since that was the LV that the source selection favored.
It will have the required flights by September 2020.
You are confusing AF contracting policy with NASA. If the LV has not been certified it cannot be awarded a contract (AF contracting policy). If AF did not follow this policy then ULA can sue and probably win and be awarded the contract by the courts.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: oldAtlas_Eguy on 06/23/2018 01:36 am
The FH is a configuration of the F9. It only requires a review of what is different from that of the F9. It does not really require 3 flights.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: gongora on 06/23/2018 02:07 am
The FH is a configuration of the F9. It only requires a review of what is different from that of the F9. It does not really require 3 flights.

FH is not just a configuration of F9.  It is a different launch vehicle.  AF tends to treat heavy vehicles different from medium vehicles since they don't fly as often.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: sanman on 06/23/2018 03:50 am
Wow,what kind of payload needs the lifting power of FalconHeavy?
That must be a very large satellite.  :o
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: Nehkara on 06/23/2018 04:26 am
Wow,what kind of payload needs the lifting power of FalconHeavy?
That must be a very large satellite.  :o

It's 6350 kg.  I believe SpaceX going forward will not be expending rockets unless absolutely necessary and Elon intimated at the press conferences surrounding the FH demo launch that going forward the price for an expendable Falcon 9 is the same as the price for a reusable Falcon Heavy.

Falcon 9 is capable of this launch - its largest GTO launch was 6761 kg with Intelsat-35e - but it would have to be expended.  Therefore, SpaceX bid Falcon Heavy.

There's probably also some measure of wanting to establish the market for Falcon Heavy.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: su27k on 06/23/2018 04:44 am
The current stated contracting policy for the AF which has not changed is that prior to contract award the LV must be AF certified. This is only excepted by demo's and some experimental payload waivers: example STP-2.

The AF may have delayed the award to gain the time to complete certification of FH since that was the LV that the source selection favored.
It will have the required flights by September 2020.
You are confusing AF contracting policy with NASA. If the LV has not been certified it cannot be awarded a contract (AF contracting policy). If AF did not follow this policy then ULA can sue and probably win and be awarded the contract by the courts.

IIRC after the lawsuit AF changed the certification process to allow some issues to be closed after certification, but before launch. So it's possible that while FH is certified, SpaceX still need to do some additional work (like flying Block 5 FH twice) before they can launch this thing.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: AncientU on 06/23/2018 02:17 pm
In Phase 2, USAF will be awarding flights to a launch vehicle that has never launched.  The rules are evolving, to say the least, since the Phase 1 Block Buy.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: Chris Bergin on 06/23/2018 03:22 pm
We have high confidence (higher than I could portray in this article) that FH beat out Atlas V 551, not Delta.


https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2018/06/falcon-9-static-fire-test-crs-15/
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: AncientU on 06/23/2018 03:33 pm
We have high confidence (higher than I could portray in this article) that FH beat out Atlas V 551, not Delta.


https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2018/06/falcon-9-static-fire-test-crs-15/

This is exactly the niche FH was built to cover... heavy launches that were within range for an expendable F9.  The price of the reusable FH was reported long ago to be less than the expendable F9.  Took a while, but the goal appears to have been met.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: sanman on 06/23/2018 07:05 pm

It's 6350 kg.  I believe SpaceX going forward will not be expending rockets unless absolutely necessary and Elon intimated at the press conferences surrounding the FH demo launch that going forward the price for an expendable Falcon 9 is the same as the price for a reusable Falcon Heavy.

Falcon 9 is capable of this launch - its largest GTO launch was 6761 kg with Intelsat-35e - but it would have to be expended.  Therefore, SpaceX bid Falcon Heavy.

There's probably also some measure of wanting to establish the market for Falcon Heavy.

But there's also probably the fact that SpaceX will need to more fully re-purpose its production lines towards the new BFR hardware, and that's why they'll need to maintain a healthy supply of F9Rs, rather than launching them disposably.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: marsbase on 06/23/2018 07:17 pm
I think this tells you that, beyond all the hype and marketing, SpaceX really thinks they can re-use the B5 many times (thus it's too valuable to expend until it's 8th or 9th launch) and they have real confidence in their ability to recover all three cores from FH.  SpaceX will be risking 3 cores in order to not expend 1 core.  So they REALLY believe in their launch vehicle.

How does ULA ever win another contract?  If FH can beat the Atlas, there is nothing ULA can do but cut their price and their profit.  I guess we'll find out what their profit margin has been all these years.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: rpapo on 06/23/2018 07:32 pm
How does ULA ever win another contract?
They're hoping to do so with Vulcan.  Whether that will be too little, too late is another question entirely.  For another forum thread, not this one.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: TrevorMonty on 06/23/2018 07:49 pm




How does ULA ever win another contract?  If FH can beat the Atlas, there is nothing ULA can do but cut their price and their profit.  I guess we'll find out what their profit margin has been all these years.

DOD will spread the contracts around regardless of price difference. They can't afford to have ULA go out of business and lose an alternative supplier.



Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: dante2308 on 06/23/2018 08:25 pm




How does ULA ever win another contract?  If FH can beat the Atlas, there is nothing ULA can do but cut their price and their profit.  I guess we'll find out what their profit margin has been all these years.

DOD will spread the contracts around regardless of price difference. They can't afford to have ULA go out of business and lose an alternative supplier.

Aren't there multiple providers aiming for the next round of EELV? The DoD doesn't have enough launches to spread around to float that many companies. They said as much in the hearing.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: gongora on 06/23/2018 08:36 pm
Aren't there multiple providers aiming for the next round of EELV? The DoD doesn't have enough launches to spread around to float that many companies. They said as much in the hearing.

The plan is to guarantee a minimum number of launches to two providers for (five years?) and maybe let others also bid if more missions are available.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: WindnWar on 06/23/2018 08:37 pm
How does ULA ever win another contract?
They're hoping to do so with Vulcan.  Whether that will be too little, too late is another question entirely.  For another forum thread, not this one.

They can also still win contracts that require vertical integration or longer fairings than SpaceX provides for the time being, at least until SpaceX can offer those as well. But that's a much smaller subset of payloads.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: marsbase on 06/23/2018 08:44 pm

DOD will spread the contracts around regardless of price difference. They can't afford to have ULA go out of business and lose an alternative supplier.
If that's true The Air Force is not going to save much money, which is their other stated goal.  Unlike commercial launches, government contracts are public record.  When SpaceX loses to ULA, they then know the price to charge for the next contract bid.  That is exactly what SpaceX did in the most recent round of contracts for CRS supply missions.  SpaceX suddenly discovered that they had not been charging enough.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: envy887 on 06/23/2018 09:09 pm




How does ULA ever win another contract?  If FH can beat the Atlas, there is nothing ULA can do but cut their price and their profit.  I guess we'll find out what their profit margin has been all these years.

DOD will spread the contracts around regardless of price difference. They can't afford to have ULA go out of business and lose an alternative supplier.

Aren't there multiple providers aiming for the next round of EELV? The DoD doesn't have enough launches to spread around to float that many companies. They said as much in the hearing.

There are four providers that have announced they are competing for EELV: SpaceX, ULA, NGIS (formerly OATK), and Blue Origin.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: gongora on 06/23/2018 09:27 pm
Someone on Reddit helpfully linked this old SpaceNews article from July 2017 with quotes from Claire Leon:
Air Force asks SpaceX, ULA to bid on a five-launch contract (http://spacenews.com/air-force-ask-spacex-ula-to-bid-on-a-five-launch-contract/)
Quote
“It would need to be certified by the time that we awarded the contract,” Leon said. “We want to see one flight, and before we would actually fly a mission we would want to see three flights.”

edit: That just reminded me that she is no longer with the Air Force, don't remember if we ever posted about that here:
http://seavernews.lmu.edu/2018/02/12/lmu-appoints-former-boeing-executive-director-of-systems-engineering-program/
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: Star One on 06/23/2018 10:48 pm

DOD will spread the contracts around regardless of price difference. They can't afford to have ULA go out of business and lose an alternative supplier.
If that's true The Air Force is not going to save much money, which is their other stated goal.  Unlike commercial launches, government contracts are public record.  When SpaceX loses to ULA, they then know the price to charge for the next contract bid.  That is exactly what SpaceX did in the most recent round of contracts for CRS supply missions.  SpaceX suddenly discovered that they had not been charging enough.

Guaranteed access is more important than price.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: aero on 06/23/2018 10:53 pm
But there is Blue and Orbital that could come into the mix if the price was right. Who else?
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: Star One on 06/23/2018 10:57 pm
But there is Blue and Orbital that could come into the mix if the price was right. Who else?

Orbital’s offering looks dead in the water to me unless the preservation of solid motor production factors into it.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: intrepidpursuit on 06/23/2018 11:09 pm
If they gurantee payloads for a second provider then the second provider doesn't necessarily need to compete with SpaceX on price. That could be the strength of the NGIS offering, experienced provider with derivative hardware and infrastructure. They may hope they can beat out Blue on risk and ULA on price.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - AFSPC-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: gongora on 06/23/2018 11:28 pm
There is a thread for the EELV-2 solicitation.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=43924.0
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - USSF-52 - 39A - Sept. 2020
Post by: gongora on 03/15/2020 12:20 am
[Spaceflight Now - June 30, 2019] Barring a surprise, SpaceX’s next Falcon Heavy flight is planned in late 2020 (https://spaceflightnow.com/2019/06/30/barring-a-surprise-spacexs-next-falcon-heavy-flight-is-planned-in-late-2020/)
Quote
After the AFSPC-44 launch, the Air Force plans another Falcon Heavy mission with SpaceX in the spring 0f 2021, Bongiovi said. That launch, designated AFSPC-52, was previously planned to lift off by September 2020, but in a briefing with reporters earlier this month, Bongiovi twice said the AFSPC-44 mission is the Air Force’s next Falcon Heavy mission.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - USSF-52 - 39A - Spring 2021
Post by: Nate_Trost on 09/27/2020 02:36 pm
Now that the government has agreed to do GPS missions on reflown stages, I'm curious to see if this mission will still use new side boosters.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - USSF-52 - 39A - 2021
Post by: gongora on 09/27/2020 02:48 pm
I hadn't updated the date on this launch in a while.  With USSF-44 moving to late spring, it's extremely unlikely this flight would occur in the first half of 2021.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - USSF-52 - 39A - Spring 2021
Post by: gongora on 09/27/2020 02:50 pm
Now that the government has agreed to do GPS missions on reflown stages, I'm curious to see if this mission will still use new side boosters.

That will be interesting to see.  They've already tested reused side boosters on a DoD launch (although it wasn't under the NSSL program).
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - USSF-52 - 39A - 2021
Post by: ZachS09 on 09/27/2020 02:51 pm
Now that the government has agreed to do GPS missions on reflown stages, I'm curious to see if this mission will still use new side boosters.

That will be interesting to see.  They've already tested reused side boosters on a DoD launch (although it wasn't under the NSSL program).

I hope B1052 and B1053 get to fly for a third time. They've been in storage WAY too long.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - USSF-52 - 39A - Spring 2021
Post by: Jansen on 12/21/2020 11:16 pm
Now that the government has agreed to do GPS missions on reflown stages, I'm curious to see if this mission will still use new side boosters.

That will be interesting to see.  They've already tested reused side boosters on a DoD launch (although it wasn't under the NSSL program).

Things are unlikely to change until GPS III SV05 gets certified, but SMC has stated they would like to transition to fully reuseable Falcons within 18 months.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - USSF-52 - 39A - 2021
Post by: Jansen on 12/21/2020 11:17 pm
Quote
The following Falcon Heavy mission, another classified payload named USSF-52, will also require three new stages. That mission is expected to enable the recovery of all three stages: both side boosters and the center core.
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2020/09/spacex-manifest-falcon-heavy-arrives-mcgregor/
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - USSF-52 - 39A - NET October 2021
Post by: Phillipsturtles on 02/16/2021 01:57 am
Launch scheduled for October 2021 according to USSF.
https://spaceflightnow.com/2021/02/15/spacex-planning-launch-of-two-falcon-heavy-missions-in-summer-and-fall/
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - USSF-52 - 39A - 2021
Post by: Tommyboy on 03/13/2021 03:51 pm
Quote
The following Falcon Heavy mission, another classified payload named USSF-52, will also require three new stages. That mission is expected to enable the recovery of all three stages: both side boosters and the center core.
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2020/09/spacex-manifest-falcon-heavy-arrives-mcgregor/

Just wanted to point out that since all three boosters will be recovered, they must use three ASDS for this mission.

Therefore A Shortfall Of Gravitas *must* enter service before this mission.
Why three ASDSses? Maybe the boosters can RTLS and the code can land on an ASDS.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - USSF-52 - 39A - NET October 2021
Post by: Jansen on 03/13/2021 04:23 pm
You’re right, I was looking at the GTO requirements for another mission and was thinking of those numbers.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - USSF-52 - 39A - NET October 2021
Post by: Jansen on 05/13/2021 02:37 am
I think this flight might be in October now.

https://fcc.report/IBFS/SES-STA-INTR2021-01859

Here’s the relevant bit if you don’t want to dig:
Quote
The spacecraft will be launched on or about October 9th, 2021 on a Falcon Heavy from the Kennedy Space Center. USUVL will rideshare on the vehicle with an unspecified US military spacecraft. USUVL will be injected into super-sync orbit on or about November 27th thru December 8th at which time USN will begin S- band support. The spacecraft is inclined at 2.8 degrees as to minimize potential interference with other geo spacecraft. The operators of USUVL have begun and will coordinate with other operators as to not cause interference as it moves around the geo-belt.

Looks like launch targeting 09 October 2021.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - USSF-52 - 39A - NET October 2021
Post by: gongora on 05/13/2021 03:04 am
I think this flight might be in October now.

https://fcc.report/IBFS/SES-STA-INTR2021-01859

Here’s the relevant bit if you don’t want to dig:
Quote
The spacecraft will be launched on or about October 9th, 2021 on a Falcon Heavy from the Kennedy Space Center. USUVL will rideshare on the vehicle with an unspecified US military spacecraft. USUVL will be injected into super-sync orbit on or about November 27th thru December 8th at which time USN will begin S- band support. The spacecraft is inclined at 2.8 degrees as to minimize potential interference with other geo spacecraft. The operators of USUVL have begun and will coordinate with other operators as to not cause interference as it moves around the geo-belt.

Looks like launch targeting 09 October 2021.

I doubt that is for USSF-52
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - USSF-52 - 39A - NET October 2021
Post by: scr00chy on 05/13/2021 10:51 am
But isn't the super-sync deployment more in line with USSF-52 than USSF-44, which is going direct to GEO?
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - USSF-52 - 39A - 2022
Post by: gongora on 05/19/2021 04:57 pm
This is now scheduled for 2022.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - USSF-52 - 39A - 2022
Post by: Jansen on 05/19/2021 09:24 pm
https://youtu.be/4Xc4ILelYR0

At 33:33 he says a FH is already planned for side booster reuse, in a response to a question. He didn’t specify which one.

Edit: Around 39:20 he confirms the slip for USSF-52
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - USSF-52 - KSC LC-39A - early 2022
Post by: zubenelgenubi on 06/07/2021 10:53 pm
Cross-post:
Multiple USA launch updates from SFN Launch Schedule (https://spaceflightnow.com/launch-schedule/), updated June 7

Falcon Heavy / USSF-52
Launch date: Early 2022
Launch time: TBD
Launch site: LC-39A, Kennedy Space Center, Florida
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - USSF-52 - KSC LC-39A - early 2022
Post by: techdude06 on 08/21/2021 02:31 am
https://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1428864787702849542?s=19

The U.S. Air Force awards SpaceX with a $19.2 million modification to its AFSPC-52 mission contract, due to “a change in the contract requirements.”

The original launch award was worth $130 million, bringing the total now to $149.2 million. https://t.co/k3b3jxMqy2 https://t.co/dmtXSFJFGI
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210821/5c38ba9439a381707da06ac097e25a38.jpg)

Sent from my KB2005 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - USSF-52 - KSC LC-39A - early 2022
Post by: scr00chy on 10/04/2021 06:38 pm
https://spaceflightnow.com/2021/10/04/payload-issue-delays-spacexs-next-falcon-heavy-launch-to-early-2022/

Quote
The Space Systems Command spokesperson said the USSF-52 mission, the next national security launch on a Falcon Heavy, is scheduled for the second quarter of 2022.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - USSF-52 - KSC LC-39A - NET June 2022
Post by: zubenelgenubi on 02/27/2022 11:30 pm
Cross-post:
With JRTI back in the que. The FH mission can go forward if the payload is ready. But once you get past the mid Mar for a launch date. All of the Crew Dragon and cargo Dragon flights one right after another would mean that it is either now (after the 3 Mar flight) or mid to late May.

Is there info as to if the payload is ready or not?
USSF-44 is not happening until next quarter [Q2 2022] at the earliest.

Assuming USSF-52 still follows USSF-44, it would now be NET June [2022]?

How long is a Falcon Heavy launch campaign?
Edit: 40 days from Crew DM1 to Arabsat-6A, in 2019, is the minimum thus far.
I assume/hope it will take less time now?
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - USSF-52 - KSC LC-39A - NET June 2022
Post by: Comga on 02/28/2022 04:04 pm
Cross-post:
With JRTI back in the que. The FH mission can go forward if the payload is ready. But once you get past the mid Mar for a launch date. All of the Crew Dragon and cargo Dragon flights one right after another would mean that it is either now (after the 3 Mar flight) or mid to late May.

Is there info as to if the payload is ready or not?
USSF-44 is not happening until next quarter [Q2 2022] at the earliest.

Assuming USSF-52 still follows USSF-44, it would now be NET June [2022]?

How long is a Falcon Heavy launch campaign?
Edit: 40 days from Crew DM1 to Arabsat-6A, in 2019, is the minimum thus far.
I assume/hope it will take less time now?

This contradicts the “next national security launch” statement from October.
https://spaceflightnow.com/2021/10/04/payload-issue-delays-spacexs-next-falcon-heavy-launch-to-early-2022/ (https://spaceflightnow.com/2021/10/04/payload-issue-delays-spacexs-next-falcon-heavy-launch-to-early-2022/)

Quote
The Space Systems Command spokesperson said the USSF-52 mission, the next national security launch on a Falcon Heavy, is scheduled for the second quarter of 2022.

From where was it learned that the order has been reversed?
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - USSF-52 - KSC LC-39A - NET June 2022
Post by: realnouns on 02/28/2022 04:11 pm

This contradicts the “next national security launch” statement from October.
https://spaceflightnow.com/2021/10/04/payload-issue-delays-spacexs-next-falcon-heavy-launch-to-early-2022/ (https://spaceflightnow.com/2021/10/04/payload-issue-delays-spacexs-next-falcon-heavy-launch-to-early-2022/)

Quote
The Space Systems Command spokesperson said the USSF-52 mission, the next national security launch on a Falcon Heavy, is scheduled for the second quarter of 2022.

From where was it learned that the order has been reversed?

Full quote in the article reads "The Space Systems Command spokesperson said the USSF-52 mission, the next national security launch on a Falcon Heavy after USSF-44, is scheduled for the second quarter of 2022."
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - USSF-52 - KSC LC-39A - NET June 2022
Post by: scr00chy on 02/28/2022 04:15 pm

This contradicts the “next national security launch” statement from October.
https://spaceflightnow.com/2021/10/04/payload-issue-delays-spacexs-next-falcon-heavy-launch-to-early-2022/ (https://spaceflightnow.com/2021/10/04/payload-issue-delays-spacexs-next-falcon-heavy-launch-to-early-2022/)

Quote
The Space Systems Command spokesperson said the USSF-52 mission, the next national security launch on a Falcon Heavy, is scheduled for the second quarter of 2022.

From where was it learned that the order has been reversed?

Years ago, the order was USSF-52, then USSF-44. Then at some point, they swapped the order. Last we heard was USSF-44 in early 2022 and USSF-52 in Q2 2022. The full quote from the October article is:

Quote
The Space Systems Command spokesperson said the USSF-52 mission, the next national security launch on a Falcon Heavy after USSF-44, is scheduled for the second quarter of 2022.

That's the latest,  but with additional delays since then and the fact that USSF-52 was originally supposed to launch first anyway, I assume it's possible USSF-52 could end up launching first if the payload is ready before USSF-44.

Would be nice to get some updated launch dates, though.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - USSF-52 - KSC LC-39A - NET June 2022
Post by: Alexphysics on 02/28/2022 09:24 pm
Last I heard the plan was still to have -52 launch after -44 and there's reasons as to why that is the case. With -44 not being able to launch until May at the very earliest, I'd say, as a complete guess on my part let that be clear, that -52 might not be until at least July. I wouldn't even be surprised if they move it after Psyche if -44 keeps being delayed.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - USSF-52 - KSC LC-39A - NET June 2022
Post by: zubenelgenubi on 02/28/2022 09:41 pm
I wouldn't even be surprised if they move it after Psyche if -44 keeps being delayed.
Yes, spacecraft with interplanetary launch windows take priority.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - USSF-52 - KSC LC-39A - NET June 2022
Post by: Conexion Espacial on 03/01/2022 02:09 am
https://twitter.com/nextspaceflight/status/1498494197183041538
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - USSF-52 - KSC LC-39A - NET June 2022
Post by: russianhalo117 on 03/01/2022 02:12 am
https://twitter.com/nextspaceflight/status/1498494197183041538
That is a normal wartime (Cold War) response given the current situation and global theatres picture.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - USSF-52 - KSC LC-39A - mid-2022
Post by: zubenelgenubi on 03/10/2022 05:44 pm
Cross-post re: next two Falcon Heavy launches:
https://spaceflightnow.com/launch-schedule/
[March 9 update]
Quote
<snip>
2nd Quarter • Falcon Heavy • USSF 44
Launch time: TBD
Launch site: LC-39A, Kennedy Space Center, Florida
...
Mid-2022 • Falcon Heavy • USSF 52
Launch time: TBD
Launch site: LC-39A, Kennedy Space Center, Florida
USSF-52 launching before or after Psyche?
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - USSF-52 - KSC LC-39A - mid-2022
Post by: baldusi on 03/12/2022 05:25 pm
Cross-post re: next two Falcon Heavy launches:
https://spaceflightnow.com/launch-schedule/
[March 9 update]
Quote
<snip>
2nd Quarter • Falcon Heavy • USSF 44
Launch time: TBD
Launch site: LC-39A, Kennedy Space Center, Florida
...
Mid-2022 • Falcon Heavy • USSF 52
Launch time: TBD
Launch site: LC-39A, Kennedy Space Center, Florida
USSF-52 launching before or after Psyche?
Psyche is planetary. They will probably get top pad priority.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy - USSF-52 - KSC LC-39A - mid-2022
Post by: Conexion Espacial on 03/25/2022 09:10 pm
NextSpaceFlight (https://nextspaceflight.com/launches/details/110) show this launch for October 2022
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy : USSF-52 : KSC LC-39A : October 2022
Post by: zubenelgenubi on 03/30/2022 12:08 am
SFN Launch Schedule (https://spaceflightnow.com/launch-schedule/) update, March 25 (one of many):
USSF-52 launches in October 2022 from Kennedy LC-39A.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy : USSF-52 : KSC LC-39A : October 2022
Post by: Conexion Espacial on 04/23/2022 07:59 am

NextSpaceFlight (https://nextspaceflight.com/launches/details/110) indicates the following configuration for the Falcon Heavy boosters:
B1064: Side Booster
B1070: Center Core
B1065: Side Booster
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy : USSF-52 : KSC LC-39A : October 2022
Post by: Comga on 04/23/2022 06:09 pm

NextSpaceFlight (https://nextspaceflight.com/launches/details/110) indicates the following configuration for the Falcon Heavy boosters:
B1064: Side Booster
B1070: Center Core
B1065: Side Booster

Furthermore it says, in the nomenclature from the Manifest:
B1064: Side Booster  1064-2 ?
B1070: Center Core   1070-1 X
B1065: Side Booster  1065-2 ?

We may have known all this but it helps to be explicit.

B1070
One and done
How 20th century ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy : USSF-52 : KSC LC-39A : October 2022
Post by: AstroWare on 04/23/2022 07:46 pm

NextSpaceFlight (https://nextspaceflight.com/launches/details/110) indicates the following configuration for the Falcon Heavy boosters:
B1064: Side Booster
B1070: Center Core
B1065: Side Booster

Furthermore it says, in the nomenclature from the Manifest:
B1064: Side Booster  1064-2 ?
B1070: Center Core   1070-1 X
B1065: Side Booster  1065-2 ?

We may have known all this but it helps to be explicit.

B1070
One and done
How 20th century ;)
Maybe that makes sense...

It may be cheaper to build a FH core without recovery hardware at all then what they save by installing it, (performing reusable missions) , then removing it, and launching it expendable.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy : USSF-52 : KSC LC-39A : October 2022
Post by: alugobi on 04/23/2022 09:40 pm
Or the customer wanted a new one for center core.  We don't know. 

In any event, the cost of those connectors and fasteners is likely to be negligible overall.  SX don't nickel and dime themselves. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy : USSF-52 : KSC LC-39A : October 2022
Post by: Zed_Noir on 04/23/2022 10:55 pm
.....
B1070
One and done
How 20th century ;)
No, it just means the Falcon upper stage isn't big enough to enable downrange recovery for the center core for high energy launches.

Yes, saying the Falcon Heavy, the world's more powerful operational launcher is under performing is amusing.  :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy : USSF-52 : KSC LC-39A : October 2022
Post by: rpapo on 04/23/2022 11:00 pm
.....
B1070
One and done
How 20th century ;)
No, it just means the Falcon upper stage isn't big enough to enable downrange recovery for the center core for high energy launches.

Yes, saying the Falcon Heavy, the world's more powerful operational launcher is under performing is amusing.  :)
Weren't there people who claimed there was no point to having the Falcon Heavy?  That it was too big for any currently foreseeable payloads?  I expect to see this same thing happen within a couple of years of Starship being available for launches.  Build it bigger, somebody will make a payload for it.  Just ask the ghost of the AN-225...
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy : USSF-52 : KSC LC-39A : October 2022
Post by: DanClemmensen on 04/23/2022 11:50 pm
.....
B1070
One and done
How 20th century ;)
No, it just means the Falcon upper stage isn't big enough to enable downrange recovery for the center core for high energy launches.

Yes, saying the Falcon Heavy, the world's more powerful operational launcher is under performing is amusing.  :)
Weren't there people who claimed there was no point to having the Falcon Heavy?  That it was too big for any currently foreseeable payloads?  I expect to see this same thing happen within a couple of years of Starship being available for launches.  Build it bigger, somebody will make a payload for it.  Just ask the ghost of the AN-225...
:) Of course there is a need for larger payloads. Otherwise, why would Congress NASA be building the SLS block 1B?  :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy : USSF-52 : KSC LC-39A : October 2022
Post by: scr00chy on 05/14/2022 09:52 pm
Does the indefinite USSF-44 delay mean that USSF-52 will launch first, possibly with the boosters that were originally meant to fly first on USSF-44?
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy : USSF-52 : KSC LC-39A : October 2022
Post by: Zed_Noir on 05/14/2022 10:36 pm
Does the indefinite USSF-44 delay mean that USSF-52 will launch first, possibly with the boosters that were originally meant to fly first on USSF-44?
You are presuming that USSF-52 encounters no schedule shift to the right.

Maybe the center expendable core for USSF-44 will be shifted to another launch.
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy : USSF-52 : KSC LC-39A : October 2022
Post by: Stan-1967 on 05/14/2022 11:09 pm

Weren't there people who claimed there was no point to having the Falcon Heavy?  That it was too big for any currently foreseeable payloads?  I expect to see this same thing happen within a couple of years of Starship being available for launches.  Build it bigger, somebody will make a payload for it.  Just ask the ghost of the AN-225...

I don’t know about that.  There were more people pointing out that the evolution of F9 single stick into y to be current version pretty much absorbed the primary market of +6t to GTO.  What market was left for FH?   It was pointed out by many that FH center core expendable was the most interesting configuration.   I think that had turned out to be the correct take.  There is no mass market for FH,  but it can excel in high value payloads to BEO
Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy : USSF-52 : KSC LC-39A : October 2022
Post by: Conexion Espacial on 06/23/2022 04:33 am
NextSpaceflight (https://nextspaceflight.com/launches/details/110) indicates that the launch is now scheduled for [NET] April 2023.

Title: Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy : USSF-52 : KSC LC-39A : 2023
Post by: zubenelgenubi on 08/15/2022 08:34 pm
SFN Launch Schedule (https://spaceflightnow.com/launch-schedule/) update, August 15:
USSF-52 launch TBD.



Falcon Heavy first stage assignments:
Yeah it was previously planned for them to use the same side boosters on all [the upcoming USSF] missions but back then the order was 44, 52, and 67. Now it appears to be the opposite so [USSF-67] will likely fly those side boosters as new boosters and then proceed with 52 and 44 reusing them
Has the center core assignments changed for these missions?
Not aware of that, not sure they would care about changing those since they're all expendable anyways