Will this be a new core, or a flight-proven core?
How about the Boeing Satellite Constellation (this launch being a prototype)? Had some strong rumors that Apple was funding it, the launch would fit for a LZ-1 landing, and would make sense for a "stealth" appearance.http://www.idownloadblog.com/2017/04/21/boing-apple-satellite-service/
... I fail to see why they would launch from the busier Cape instead of from the West Coast.
Does SpaceX need to file papers with FCC if it's a government payload? I thought the filing is only for commercial launches. Kind of defeat the purpose of a secret payload if you have to get public license from FCC.
Quote from: Ronsmytheiii on 10/14/2017 04:03 pmHow about the Boeing Satellite Constellation (this launch being a prototype)? Had some strong rumors that Apple was funding it, the launch would fit for a LZ-1 landing, and would make sense for a "stealth" appearance.http://www.idownloadblog.com/2017/04/21/boing-apple-satellite-service/Had this originates from Vandenberg I would have bet something like this (prototype satellites for any of the aspiring constellations). However they would need higher inclination orbits for simulating actual operations (probably eliminating any target orbit of below 60 degrees inclination) In the case that a huge dog-leg movement can be used, I fail to see why they would launch from the busier Cape instead of from the West Coast.
Quote from: Galactic Penguin SST on 10/14/2017 04:14 pm... I fail to see why they would launch from the busier Cape instead of from the West Coast.Maybe at the time it was planned they didn't have clearance for RTLS at VAFB, so an east-coast launch allowed cheaper operations?
...Furthermore, an inability to RTLS at Vandenberg at present has not stopped RTLS-capable missions (the Iridium flights and Formosat) from launching from there and landing on Just Read The Instructions.
Quote from: ChrisGebhardt on 10/14/2017 04:44 pm...Furthermore, an inability to RTLS at Vandenberg at present has not stopped RTLS-capable missions (the Iridium flights and Formosat) from launching from there and landing on Just Read The Instructions.But they had to launch from VAFB because of their orbit requirements. If a payload could make use of almost any orbital inclination, these other factors might come into play.
Payloads/Missions have specific orbital inclination needs. If this mission needed a polar orbit, it would be going from Vandy regardless of RTLS ability (like the Iridium flights and Formosat). This mission clearly doesn't need a polar orbit. It needs an orbit only serviceable from the Cape; hence why it's launching from the Cape.
All of NASA's probes to other planets have launched from Cape Canaveral, Fla., but the specifics of the InSight spacecraft gave officials flexibility in choosing the launch site, according to mission managers.
Quote from: ChrisGebhardt on 10/14/2017 05:08 pmPayloads/Missions have specific orbital inclination needs. If this mission needed a polar orbit, it would be going from Vandy regardless of RTLS ability (like the Iridium flights and Formosat). This mission clearly doesn't need a polar orbit. It needs an orbit only serviceable from the Cape; hence why it's launching from the Cape.Except the Mars InSight mission did have flexibility in selecting a launch site based on factors other than inclination needs:QuoteAll of NASA's probes to other planets have launched from Cape Canaveral, Fla., but the specifics of the InSight spacecraft gave officials flexibility in choosing the launch site, according to mission managers. https://spaceflightnow.com/news/n1312/19insight/#.UrR4J2eA0bISo basing a test satellite launch site on other factors isnt unimaginable.
Could also test a full block 5 vehicle?
2017:November 10 - JPSS-1 (NOAA-20), MiRaTA, Buccaneer RMM, EagleSat, CP 7, Fox 1B (RadFxSat), MakerSat 0 - Delta II 7920-10C - Vandenberg SLC-2W - 09:47:03-09:48:05November 10 - Cygnus OA-8 (CRS-8) - Antares-230 - MARS LP-0A - 12:03-12:08
I'm thinking if there are any light geostationary comsats (say 2 to 3.5 tonnes) around that had never had a launch contract announced, or even without their identities known, that might be launching by now. For example, there was that 3 Boeing 702SP order from the US government in 2013 that cannot be pinned down to any known satellite and was once floated around as a candidate for NROL-76 earlier this year. So far none of them seemed to have been launched yet, and if they are launched on F9 one at a time the 1st stage would have easily made an RTLS.
It is still possible, perhaps even the most parsimonious explanation, that there is no mystery launch. It could be second license for CRS-13 in case there are major hiccups with pad 40. The licenses could have ended up like that due to how the paperwork and ISS scheduling worked out. November 10th is notably an ISS launch date.
Quote from: Raul on 10/11/2017 06:53 pmQuote from: crandles57 on 10/11/2017 01:35 pmNovember 28th per https://spaceflightnow.com/launch-schedule/ Sept 30 change. http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=8184.1440 says SLC-40 dating back to a change on 9th August but I cannot see source for that. sfn and launchphotography are not yet showing pad.Is SLC-40 confirmed somewhere?Yes. According official FCC application issued last week (3th Oct) SpaceX plans launch CRS-13 mission from Complex 40.Then we should be seeing some roll out and testing in the next 2-4 weeks.
Quote from: crandles57 on 10/11/2017 01:35 pmNovember 28th per https://spaceflightnow.com/launch-schedule/ Sept 30 change. http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=8184.1440 says SLC-40 dating back to a change on 9th August but I cannot see source for that. sfn and launchphotography are not yet showing pad.Is SLC-40 confirmed somewhere?Yes. According official FCC application issued last week (3th Oct) SpaceX plans launch CRS-13 mission from Complex 40.
November 28th per https://spaceflightnow.com/launch-schedule/ Sept 30 change. http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=8184.1440 says SLC-40 dating back to a change on 9th August but I cannot see source for that. sfn and launchphotography are not yet showing pad.Is SLC-40 confirmed somewhere?