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

[Chris Bergin]

https://twitter.com/NASASpaceflight/status/1306645995367944196

[Steven Pietrobon]

T-50 minutes. NSF livestream. Weather is 70% go.

[jcm]

So no rideshare, but back to the two-burn mission profile? I wonder why? Anyone know?

[Steven Pietrobon]

There's a Twitter report that there is a scrub. No word yet from SpaceX.

https://twitter.com/nextspaceflight/status/1306649263703601152

[Bubbinski]

Is the weather choppy at the recovery site where JRTI is?

[Steven Pietrobon]

NSF heard something on the loudspeaker about a hazard in the area. Not seeing vapour coming off the vehicle which would indicate that propellant loading has not started.

[FutureSpaceTourist]

https://twitter.com/spacex/status/1306655390713536513

[SMS]

https://twitter.com/TSKelso/status/1306673001912438784

[ZachS09]

https://twitter.com/TSKelso/status/1306673001912438784

Subtracting the deployment time (18:59:17 UTC) by the deployment milestone (1 hour, 1 minute, 24 seconds), the launch time should be at 17:57:53 UTC (1:57:53 PM EDT).

[soltasto]

So no rideshare, but back to the two-burn mission profile? I wonder why? Anyone know?

Maybe they just want more margin. Or the satellites increased a bit in mass

[cpushack]

So no rideshare, but back to the two-burn mission profile? I wonder why? Anyone know?

Maybe they just want more margin. Or the satellites increased a bit in mass

THey have added the sunshades and potentially some more with laser links

[FutureSpaceTourist]

L-1 forecast for tomorrow only 30% GO

[gongora]

https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/1306770607560962049

Standing down from tomorrow’s launch of Starlink due to severe weather in the recovery area, which is likely to persist for a couple days. Will announce a new target launch date once confirmed

[FutureSpaceTourist]

twitter.com/erdayastronaut/status/1306655628434329600

Is this one of the first scrubs due to recovery issues?! That's pretty awesome that recovery has become more of a consideration for mission success. Wow!

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1306778373314826240

Current was too strong for droneship to hold station. Thrusters to be upgraded for future missions.

[aviators99]

twitter.com/erdayastronaut/status/1306655628434329600

Is this one of the first scrubs due to recovery issues?! That's pretty awesome that recovery has become more of a consideration for mission success. Wow!

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1306778373314826240

Current was too strong for droneship to hold station. Thrusters to be upgraded for future missions.

That is indeed interesting.  I recall early missions where SpaceX had emphasized the secondary nature of recovery and I believe specifically commented that they would launch even when recovery was hindered.  I wonder if this was customer cargo if things would be different?  Recovery is certainly a large part of cost-savings, so you would think it still would.  What if it was USSF, I wonder?

[Alexphysics]

No need to wonder. This is not the first time they have done this both with their own payload and with a paying customer. Some customers like NASA might benefit from the delay if that means the booster could be available for another mission for them in the future. If the recovery fails there's no future booster and SpaceX would have to make a new one risking a possible delay.

[cppetrie]

My recollection is that there was a commercial mission within the last year or so that was delayed a day or two in order to improve recovery site conditions. Can’t recall which one off the top of my head. I think for a commercial or USSF launch it would simply be a negotiation between SpaceX and the customer regarding whether to delay for recovery. There may even be language in some of the launch contracts that permit SpaceX some flexibility to delay a few days for recovery operations.

[Nomadd]

twitter.com/erdayastronaut/status/1306655628434329600

Is this one of the first scrubs due to recovery issues?! That's pretty awesome that recovery has become more of a consideration for mission success. Wow!

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1306778373314826240

Current was too strong for droneship to hold station. Thrusters to be upgraded for future missions.

That is indeed interesting.  I recall early missions where SpaceX had emphasized the secondary nature of recovery and I believe specifically commented that they would launch even when recovery was hindered.  I wonder if this was customer cargo if things would be different?  Recovery is certainly a large part of cost-savings, so you would think it still would.  What if it was USSF, I wonder?

Losing boosters every time the sea is too active isn't going to help get Starlink going any faster. They don't have that many available. Outside customers aren't going to have any reason to accept a delay unless they're writing contracts that way.   

[anof]

My recollection is that there was a commercial mission within the last year or so that was delayed a day or two in order to improve recovery site conditions. Can’t recall which one off the top of my head. I think for a commercial or USSF launch it would simply be a negotiation between SpaceX and the customer regarding whether to delay for recovery. There may even be language in some of the launch contracts that permit SpaceX some flexibility to delay a few days for recovery operations.

I believe there also was a CRS mission that was delayed by an ASDS issue.

[Prettz]

twitter.com/erdayastronaut/status/1306655628434329600

Is this one of the first scrubs due to recovery issues?! That's pretty awesome that recovery has become more of a consideration for mission success. Wow!

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1306778373314826240

Current was too strong for droneship to hold station. Thrusters to be upgraded for future missions.

Weren't the thrusters just recently upgraded to even bigger ones? Or was that for the other droneship?