https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/827479074021003264Quotepbdes: @Thales_Alenia_S(3): 2d batch of IRDM Next sats planned for April on @SpaceX. Koreasat 5A geo sat may launch July on @SpaceX, then 3d IRDM.
pbdes: @Thales_Alenia_S(3): 2d batch of IRDM Next sats planned for April on @SpaceX. Koreasat 5A geo sat may launch July on @SpaceX, then 3d IRDM.
@Thales_Alenia_S (2): We've 22 @IridiumComm Next sats ready for @SpaceX launch & 10 finishing integration. Orbit test of 1st 10 going well.
Jeff Foust @jeff_foust 10 min Iridium says the launch of its next ten satellites will slip to mid-June because of a backlog in SpaceX’s manifest: http://bit.ly/2kpGL5S
Can someone please explain how a manifest backlog on the east coast impacts the iridium launch from vendenburg?
Quote from: mn on 02/16/2017 03:39 pmCan someone please explain how a manifest backlog on the east coast impacts the iridium launch from vendenburg?Why does it matter which pad is involved? A manifest backlog is still a backlog. There are only so many F9 being made and at least 6 (??) manifested missions ahead of them. Other customers are taking priority at the moment.
Quote from: stcks on 02/16/2017 03:43 pmQuote from: mn on 02/16/2017 03:39 pmCan someone please explain how a manifest backlog on the east coast impacts the iridium launch from vendenburg?Why does it matter which pad is involved? A manifest backlog is still a backlog. There are only so many F9 being made and at least 6 (??) manifested missions ahead of them. Other customers are taking priority at the moment.Manufacturing cores is not a bottleneck currently, they had plenty of time to manufactore lots of F9 cores when they were not launching any when the last RUD investigation was going on.Also they have multiple used F9 cores waiting to be reused.
Quote from: SmallKing on 02/15/2017 12:33 pmJeff Foust @jeff_foust 10 min Iridium says the launch of its next ten satellites will slip to mid-June because of a backlog in SpaceX’s manifest: http://bit.ly/2kpGL5SCan someone please explain how a manifest backlog on the east coast impacts the iridium launch from vendenburg?
Its a nice story but honestly SpaceX was never going to be able to make an April flight after the 39A delays. With no delays it would still have been a long shot. The best case overly-optimistic scenario of being able to launch every 2 weeks barely gets them a launch in May. Lets see how these upcoming flights go and then we can make some predictions on whether the June date will hold as well.
Quote from: stcks on 02/16/2017 05:33 pmIts a nice story but honestly SpaceX was never going to be able to make an April flight after the 39A delays. With no delays it would still have been a long shot. The best case overly-optimistic scenario of being able to launch every 2 weeks barely gets them a launch in May. Lets see how these upcoming flights go and then we can make some predictions on whether the June date will hold as well.Sorry but this theory I have the hardest time understanding. If anything, delays at 39A should make it easier to launch iridium on time.
Quote from: mn on 02/16/2017 05:39 pmQuote from: stcks on 02/16/2017 05:33 pmIts a nice story but honestly SpaceX was never going to be able to make an April flight after the 39A delays. With no delays it would still have been a long shot. The best case overly-optimistic scenario of being able to launch every 2 weeks barely gets them a launch in May. Lets see how these upcoming flights go and then we can make some predictions on whether the June date will hold as well.Sorry but this theory I have the hardest time understanding. If anything, delays at 39A should make it easier to launch iridium on time.Just my 2 cents again, but here's how I read it: If the delays were going to be many more months, then Iridium at VAFB would be taking priority. But since they are now L-2 on 39A those east coast customers who are chomping at the bit to get into orbit are taking priority.
So if I got you correctly, when CRS-10 was on for Feb 14 Iridium was officially on for April, but when CRS-10 got pushed to the 18th suddenly Iridium got pushed back to June?
I would imagine core allocation comes down to a financial calculation. As I understand it, launch contracts usually include a penalty for the provider for missing the contractual launch date. So, SpaceX likely allocates cores and other constrained resources to whichever site will minimize the total penalties accrued.The penalty minimizing allocation will change as you slip further behind on one pad vs. another and will favor sending cores to a site that is further behind and/or has a larger backlog.