Quote from: soltasto on 02/21/2019 10:27 pmInclination should about 55-56 degrees if my very inaccurate measurements are right. Which is a very strage inclination. It is higher than the ISS orbit, and lower than a Molniya orbit. AFAIK Starling will also be different at 53°. Anybody knows any satellite launched to that inclination?My *quick* calculation gives something similar at 54-55 degrees. GPS sats are usually inserted on orbits with a similar inclination but we would have known if it were a GPS sat. All I can think of apart from Starlink is a secret military sat to a Molnya-like orbit. That would explain the need for a downrange landing with no boostback. Any LEO orbit would at least allow a partial boostback burn like on Iridium missions...
Inclination should about 55-56 degrees if my very inaccurate measurements are right. Which is a very strage inclination. It is higher than the ISS orbit, and lower than a Molniya orbit. AFAIK Starling will also be different at 53°. Anybody knows any satellite launched to that inclination?
I think it may be for Starlink too but I wonder why a downrange landing with no boostback burn (which is what one could guess from that distance of about 620km from the launchpad). Will they fill the entire fairing to the top with sats so the payload will be very heavy? Or what?
My guess is that this launch will use the B1046.4 booster. It would be a good way to show customers that a booster used 4 times isn't any less safe than a booster with fewer launches under its belt.
Quote from: scr00chy on 03/07/2019 02:49 amMy guess is that this launch will use the B1046.4 booster. It would be a good way to show customers that a booster used 4 times isn't any less safe than a booster with fewer launches under its belt.Or B1050.2, if their trials on extensive repairs to seawater corrosion work well (Mr. Musk indicated before that it will be allocated to Starlink if eventually repaired).
Quote from: Galactic Penguin SST on 03/07/2019 02:57 amQuote from: scr00chy on 03/07/2019 02:49 amMy guess is that this launch will use the B1046.4 booster. It would be a good way to show customers that a booster used 4 times isn't any less safe than a booster with fewer launches under its belt.Or B1050.2, if their trials on extensive repairs to seawater corrosion work well (Mr. Musk indicated before that it will be allocated to Starlink if eventually repaired).I considered it but I think if B1050.2 would have been chosen for the in-flight abort if it was expected to ever be flight-worthy again. That would have been an ideal mission for it IMHO.
Quote from: scr00chy on 03/07/2019 09:23 amQuote from: Galactic Penguin SST on 03/07/2019 02:57 amOr B1050.2, if their trials on extensive repairs to seawater corrosion work well (Mr. Musk indicated before that it will be allocated to Starlink if eventually repaired).I considered it but I think if B1050.2 would have been chosen for the in-flight abort if it was expected to ever be flight-worthy again. That would have been an ideal mission for it IMHO.Unless NASA said 'no'...
Quote from: Galactic Penguin SST on 03/07/2019 02:57 amOr B1050.2, if their trials on extensive repairs to seawater corrosion work well (Mr. Musk indicated before that it will be allocated to Starlink if eventually repaired).I considered it but I think if B1050.2 would have been chosen for the in-flight abort if it was expected to ever be flight-worthy again. That would have been an ideal mission for it IMHO.
Or B1050.2, if their trials on extensive repairs to seawater corrosion work well (Mr. Musk indicated before that it will be allocated to Starlink if eventually repaired).
If I understand correctly, the cuRrent FCC filing is to support the F9 launch only. So will they need to file with the FCC to support the satellites after deployment? If so, do we know how far in advance that might be done? I assume that would give us an idea how many satellites they would be expecting on this launch.
I might be wrong, but isn't starlink sat operation - once deployed - covered under the existing FCC license SpaceX has for the starlink constellation?
How many sats are we expecting to be launched?
Quote from: ThomasGadd on 03/11/2019 04:18 pmQuote from: cebri on 03/11/2019 10:14 amHow many sats are we expecting to be launched?In total or per launch?For current planned total I don't know. For the initial consolation 66x24 at 525 km,the initial launches are on F9's there are reasonable guesses of 22 to 28 sats per launchFor you or anyone: Does anyone have a guess or information as to launch cadence?
Quote from: cebri on 03/11/2019 10:14 amHow many sats are we expecting to be launched?In total or per launch?For current planned total I don't know. For the initial consolation 66x24 at 525 km,the initial launches are on F9's there are reasonable guesses of 22 to 28 sats per launch
Quote from: AC in NC on 03/11/2019 04:31 pmFor you or anyone: Does anyone have a guess or information as to launch cadence?Everything I've read are guesses...I think once they launch this first mission they will start launching on a regular basis. The constellation doesn't have to be complete to be useful.
For you or anyone: Does anyone have a guess or information as to launch cadence?