Author Topic: SpaceX F9 : Intuitive Machines IM-1 : KSC LC-39A : 15 Feb 2024 (06:05 UTC)  (Read 463446 times)

Offline cryogenicvalve

  • Member
  • Posts: 56
  • Liked: 17
  • Likes Given: 26
That second stage is amazing. The first stage does a return to launch site and second stage has enough dv for TLI. What is the dv for that second stage then, something like 10 km/s ?!
« Last Edit: 02/15/2024 11:16 am by cryogenicvalve »

Offline spacexplorer

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 644
  • italy
  • Liked: 379
  • Likes Given: 402
The JPL Horizons system now has data for IM-1, possibly pre-loaded from Intuitive. If it is to be believed, the lander is now  71812 km from the center of the Earth, moving away at 2.8642 km/s.
https://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/horizons/app.html#/


***************************************************
 Date__(UT)__HR:MN                delta      deldot
***************************************************
 2024-Feb-15 11:35     7.1812412254E+04   2.8642172

Yes, it's what I used for my chart above:

https://win98.altervista.org/space/exploration/3d/space-explorer-tracker.html?orbiter=-229&body=@301&start=2024-02-16%2007:07&stop=2024-02-22%200:0&step=300&3dzoom=1

Offline eeergo

I went looking for it:

It is in response to a question by Will Robinson-Smith, which is at 20m 5s in the video. "Modified 39A" ... "spent a lot of time qualifying the disconnect" ... "route the lines up through the second stage and through a payload adapter fitting."

Fantastic, thank you so much for taking the time to find it!

So the second stage was mission-specific then - interesting.
-DaviD-

Offline r8ix

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 300
  • Liked: 287
  • Likes Given: 94
I went looking for it:

It is in response to a question by Will Robinson-Smith, which is at 20m 5s in the video. "Modified 39A" ... "spent a lot of time qualifying the disconnect" ... "route the lines up through the second stage and through a payload adapter fitting."

Fantastic, thank you so much for taking the time to find it!

So the second stage was mission-specific then - interesting.

My understanding was that the QD modifications were to fuel the IM lander, and that the 2nd stage was only modified to support payload fueling, not its own performance (though it was a gray band 2nd stage, wasn’t it?).
« Last Edit: 02/15/2024 07:00 pm by r8ix »

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15461
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 8667
  • Likes Given: 1369
I have seen IM-1 mass given as 675 kg, 1,908 kg, and 1,931 kg.  Which is the launch mass?

 - Ed Kyle

Offline Svetoslav

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1677
  • Bulgaria
  • Liked: 1196
  • Likes Given: 114
First update on the website:

​The IM-1 mission Nova-C class lunar lander has launched on SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket and successfully commissioned in space by establishing a stable attitude, solar charging, and radio communications contact with the Company’s mission operations center in Houston.

https://www.intuitivemachines.com/im-1

Offline haywoodfloyd

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 658
  • Ottawa, Ontario CANADA
  • Liked: 191
  • Likes Given: 19
Has a mission timeline been published yet?

https://twitter.com/launchphoto/status/1755265740867821669

Quote
Intuitive Machines IM-1 lunar lander
spotted the propellant lines going inside fairing see hole
Quote
The company had to modify the second stage of the Falcon 9 rocket to add propellants onto the Nova C lander at the launch pad shortly before liftoff. SpaceX and Intuitive Machines completed two tests of this new procedure over the weekend. It's a complex process, and during the countdown, SpaceX actually controls six valves on the lunar lander to ensure the integrity of the fueling process. Despite the tests, a non-nominal methane temperature reading observed late Tuesday night scrubbed the first launch attempt a couple of hours before the planned liftoff early Wednesday.

I am confused is propellant lines to the lander from Second stage or fairing. We were told that propellants was passed through fairing. I spotted the the holes as propellant feed entrances so what this case from second stage. Please elaborate.( image below to show the holes

Offline Alexphysics

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1618
  • Spain
  • Liked: 5978
  • Likes Given: 947
Those "holes" are the usual ones for the fairing conditioning. The umbilicals were connected to the second stage. On the "moon shot" of Falcon 9 on the pad you can see the new hardware and on the strongback there's an extra QD going to the top of the second stage, this is the QD for methane and oxygen for this lander.

And for those curious, T0 to the second was 1:05:37AM EST (06:05:37 UTC) for this launch.

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17360
  • Liked: 7182
  • Likes Given: 3081

Offline SpaceFinnOriginal

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 188
  • Liked: 54
  • Likes Given: 190
https://twitter.com/Gwynne_Shotwell/status/1758024561181000003

Quote
IM-1 is on its way to be the first American spacecraft to land on the lunar surface since the Apollo program ended more than 50 years ago!
This footage is asking for Fur Elise music.

Offline shiro

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 158
  • Liked: 391
  • Likes Given: 559
Since launches from LC-39A are often constrained by a number of different factors that can't be easily described by the simple statistics of pad (or booster) turnaround times, I don't insist the numbers for this launch are particularly useful. However, I've decided to do my calculations anyway, just in case.

Booster B1060.18 turnaround time:
144 days 2 hours 27 minutes
(its previous mission was Starlink Group 6-18 on Sep 24, 2023 UTC).

FYI: median turnaround time for Falcon 9 / Heavy boosters is currently 50.16 days *
* – based on the last 30 launches, excluding new first stages.

Launchpad LC-39A turnaround time:
17 days 4 hours 55 minutes
(the previous launch from this pad was Starlink Group 6-38 on Jan 29, 2024 UTC).

FYI: median turnaround time for LC-39A is currently 22.75 days *
* – based on the last 30 launches.

The same type of stats for previous SpaceX launches may be found on this spreadsheet online.

Offline ZachS09

  • Space Savant
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8451
  • Roanoke, TX
  • Liked: 2377
  • Likes Given: 2076
I went looking for it:

It is in response to a question by Will Robinson-Smith, which is at 20m 5s in the video. "Modified 39A" ... "spent a lot of time qualifying the disconnect" ... "route the lines up through the second stage and through a payload adapter fitting."

Fantastic, thank you so much for taking the time to find it!

So the second stage was mission-specific then - interesting.

My understanding was that the QS modifications were to fuel the IM lander, and that the 2nd stage was only modified to support payload fueling, not its own performance (though it was a gray band 2nd stage, wasn’t it?).

This Stage 2 did NOT have the Mission Extension Kit (gray band). I don’t see a point in applying an MEK for a 45-minute flight unless they wanted to do some tests after payload separation.
Liftoff for St. Jude's! Go Dragon, Go Falcon, Godspeed Inspiration4!

Online catdlr

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11949
  • Enthusiast since the Redstones
  • Marina del Rey, California, USA
  • Liked: 9572
  • Likes Given: 8197
https://twitter.com/johnkrausphotos/status/1758168743883001953

Quote
Falcon 9 launches IM-1 toward the Moon at 1:05am ET this morning

It's Tony De La Rosa, ...I don't create this stuff, I just report it.

Online catdlr

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11949
  • Enthusiast since the Redstones
  • Marina del Rey, California, USA
  • Liked: 9572
  • Likes Given: 8197
https://twitter.com/Gwynne_Shotwell/status/1758158569692930304

Quote
Critical back-to-back Falcon 9 launches in 7.5 hours! Is there anything @SpaceX employees can’t do? I am so proud of the team and the company we have created together. Whether we’re breaking another record or simply working to make SpaceX an awesome place to work—SpaceX rocks!

My comment:  Gwynne would have been even more proud if the VSFB Starlink launch had gone well.  A triumph of three launches in 7.5 hours was possible.
It's Tony De La Rosa, ...I don't create this stuff, I just report it.

Offline Alexphysics

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1618
  • Spain
  • Liked: 5978
  • Likes Given: 947
Anyone know the rough parameters of the orbit after TLI burn?

Offline ChrisC

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2257
  • Liked: 1609
  • Likes Given: 1806
I believe the norm here for robotic deep space probes is for forum coverage to continue in the dedicated thread in the science section.  This thread continues for launch-related discussion.  So here's the link to the forum thread where cruise and landing will be covered:  https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=59696.0
« Last Edit: 02/15/2024 06:30 pm by ChrisC »
PSA #1: EST does NOT mean "Eastern Time".  Use "Eastern" or "ET" instead, all year round, and avoid this common error.  Google "EST vs EDT".
PSA #2: It's and its: know the difference and quietly impress grammar pedants.  Google "angry flower its" .  *** See profile for two more NSF forum tips. ***

Offline r8ix

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 300
  • Liked: 287
  • Likes Given: 94
I went looking for it:

It is in response to a question by Will Robinson-Smith, which is at 20m 5s in the video. "Modified 39A" ... "spent a lot of time qualifying the disconnect" ... "route the lines up through the second stage and through a payload adapter fitting."

Fantastic, thank you so much for taking the time to find it!

So the second stage was mission-specific then - interesting.

My understanding was that the QS modifications were to fuel the IM lander, and that the 2nd stage was only modified to support payload fueling, not its own performance (though it was a gray band 2nd stage, wasn’t it?).

This Stage 2 did NOT have the Mission Extension Kit (gray band). I don’t see a point in applying an MEK for a 45-minute flight unless they wanted to do some tests after payload separation.

Was that the USSF flight, then? Thanks for clarifying.

Online theinternetftw

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 871
    • www.theinternetftw.com
  • Liked: 2201
  • Likes Given: 1015
Anyone know the rough parameters of the orbit after TLI burn?

Jonathan very helpfully took a stab at it here: https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=49177.msg2568041#msg2568041 -- Note he says "They are likely to be off by a significant amount".

The latter TLE works out to a 225 km x 443,656 km x 26.5 deg orbit, which has a 12.6 day period.
« Last Edit: 02/15/2024 07:12 pm by theinternetftw »

Offline Alexphysics

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1618
  • Spain
  • Liked: 5978
  • Likes Given: 947
Anyone know the rough parameters of the orbit after TLI burn?

Jonathan very helpfully took a stab at it here: https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=49177.msg2568041#msg2568041 -- Note he says "They are likely to be off by a significant amount".

The latter TLE works out to a 225 km x 443,656 km x 26.5 deg orbit, which has a 12.6 day period.

Thanks, I saw that comment but my understanding of TLEs is very limited as I haven't really worked with them that much 😅

Tags: im-1 Falcon 9 Moon 
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1