SpaceX Falcon 9: To Static Fire or not to Static Fire; that is the question

[zubenelgenubi]

Re: Crew-1 Static Fire:

NASA's @Astro_illini says the agency is monitoring the weather forecast and that it "potentially is going to have an impact" on the Crew-1 launch date.

"I think we've moved the static fire" from Monday [November 9] to Tuesday [November 10] "because of the weather conditions."  [They did.]

[zubenelgenubi]

Re: Crew-1 Static Fire:

NASA's @Astro_illini says the agency is monitoring the weather forecast and that it "potentially is going to have an impact" on the Crew-1 launch date.

"I think we've moved the static fire" from Monday [November 9] to Tuesday [November 10] "because of the weather conditions."  [They did.]

Successful Static Fire on November 11.

[zubenelgenubi]

Open question: Will SpaceX perform a Static Fire on the 1st stage for NROL-108?  What does the "customer" want?
Lack of data: We don't know exactly when the launch is, and we don't know which (used) stage it will be.

NET November 18, CCAFS SLC-40, B1059.5

Cross-post:

NextSpaceflight says the booster will be B1059.5. Meaning B1059 is the first time a booster does three RTLS (also all RTLS's this year were B1059) and first time a external customer uses a fifth flight booster.
https://nextspaceflight.com/launches/details/5112

NET date and location

EDIT: Launch delayed into December.

[zubenelgenubi]

When will be the Static Fire of B1063.1, Vandenberg AFB, for Sentinel-6A?:

My bold; Static Fire?

From sentinel6.blog

<snip>
Preparations were underway for the rehearsals of the satellite on on Thursday and the launcher on Friday [November 13].
<snip>

[zubenelgenubi]

When will be the Static Fire of B1063.1, Vandenberg AFB, for Sentinel-6A?:

November 17!

https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/1328779234945478663

Static fire test complete – targeting Saturday, November 21 for Falcon 9 launch of the Sentinel-6 Michael Freilich mission and landing at SLC-4 at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California

[zubenelgenubi]

Starting here, we have the data for the Starlink v1.0 Flight 15 launch: Date, time, launch location, and LV first stage.

As this will be 1049's seventh use, we assume that there will be a Static Fire.  The payload is Starlink satellites, an "internal" customer, so SpaceX will likely choose to do so with the payloads and fairing atop the LV.  The vehicle may be rolled out and erected at SLC-40, before Static Fire and launch, as late as a day or two before launch.

[zubenelgenubi]

Re: Static Fire, Starlink v1.0 Flight 15:

Looks like the static fire may have been aborted. We did not see any action at 1:30 a.m. [November 20] Eastern as expected.

***

Static Fire at 4:00 pm EST, November 21.

https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/1330277683234746368

Static fire test complete – targeting Falcon 9 launch of Starlink from SLC-40 in Florida on Sunday, November 22.

[zubenelgenubi]

Dragon SpX-21 currently scheduled to launch from KSC LC-39A on December 5, on first stage 1058.4.
Static Fire before launch, or no Static Fire?
My opinion:  Expect a Static Fire, as this is a NASA and ISS support payload, but without Dragon attached.
Thus, roll-out for Static Fire, followed by return to the LC-39A HIF for Dragon late load on the pad for Dragon attachment, then a return to the pad for launch.

ADD: Static Fire scheduled for morning Thursday, December 3 EST (local time).

and EDITS

[zubenelgenubi]

SXM-7 launching to GTO on December 10 from SLC-40, aboard Falcon 9 first stage 1051.7.  This is the second booster to reach a seventh flight.

My opinion:  Rocket will transport to pad for Static Fire, without the payload or payload fairing.
Upon successful completion, rocket returns to HIF for payload attachment.
Return to pad for launch.

[Joffan]

Dragon SpX-21 currently scheduled to launch from KSC LC-39A on December 5, on first stage 1058.4.
Static Fire before launch, or no Static Fire?
My opinion:  Expect a Static Fire, as this is a NASA and ISS support payload, but without Dragon attached.
Thus, roll-out for Static Fire, return to the LC-39A HIF for Dragon late load for Dragon attachment, then a return to the pad for launch.

EDIT: Static Fire scheduled for morning Thursday, December 3 EST (local time).

I believe that late load can be undertaken via the crew access arm, on the pad & vertical.

[zubenelgenubi]

Dragon SpX-21 currently scheduled to launch from KSC LC-39A on December 5, on first stage 1058.4.
Static Fire before launch, or no Static Fire?
My opinion:  Expect a Static Fire, as this is a NASA and ISS support payload, with Dragon attached.

EDIT: Static Fire scheduled for morning Thursday, December 3 EST (local time).

Cross-post:

https://twitter.com/spacex/status/1334502616374550529

Static fire test complete — targeting December 5 for Falcon 9 launch of Dragon’s 21st resupply mission to the @space_station; team is keeping an eye on weather conditions as the forecast is currently 40% favorable for liftoff

[zubenelgenubi]

I believe that late load can be undertaken via the crew access arm, on the pad & vertical.

Yes!
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=51769.msg2161700#msg2161700

[zubenelgenubi]

Open question: Will SpaceX perform a Static Fire on the 1st stage for NROL-108?  What does the "customer" want?

Cross-post:

NextSpaceflight says the booster will be B1059.5. Meaning B1059 is the first time a booster does three RTLS (also all RTLS's this year were B1059) and first time a external customer uses a fifth flight booster.
https://nextspaceflight.com/launches/details/5112

Launch NET December 17, from KSC LC-39A, still B1059.5.

[zubenelgenubi]

SXM-7 launching to GTO on December 10 from SLC-40, aboard Falcon 9 first stage 1051.7.  This is the second booster to reach a seventh flight.

My opinion:  Rocket will transport to pad for Static Fire, without the payload or payload fairing.
Upon successful completion, rocket returns to HIF for payload attachment.
Return to pad for launch.

Successful Static Fire, December 7 1800 EST.

https://twitter.com/nasaspaceflight/status/1336083637935214595

Static Fire conducted. As always, wait for SpaceX to confirm a good test and the launch date (NROL-44 also on the Range).

Caught via FleetCam at Port Canaveral.

[zubenelgenubi]

Open question: Will SpaceX perform a Static Fire on the 1st stage for NROL-108?  What does the "customer" want?

Cross-post:

NextSpaceflight says the booster will be B1059.5. Meaning B1059 is the first time a booster does three RTLS (also all RTLS's this year were B1059) and first time a external customer uses a fifth flight booster.
https://nextspaceflight.com/launches/details/5112

Launch NET December 17, from KSC LC-39A, still B1059.5.

Cross-post; roll-out circa 24 hours before launch; probably means no Static Fire.

https://twitter.com/emrekelly/status/1339221785057894400

Falcon 9 / NROL-108 is rolling out to pad 39A in advance of Thursday's planned 0900 to 1200 ET liftoff. Nice photobomb courtesy of a KSC crawler.

[Joffan]

I'm pretty surprised by no static fire for a NRO launch on a used booster. SpaceX must have made a convincing case with their data.

This suggests to me that future static fires for used boosters might only be for cases when the previous flight data had a few peculiarities, and/or they've changed out some major components.

[zubenelgenubi]

Booster 1060.4 for Turksat 5A.  Launch currently scheduled for January 5 UTC, SLC-40.

Will SpaceX perform a Static Fire?

[Jansen]

I'm pretty surprised by no static fire for a NRO launch on a used booster. SpaceX must have made a convincing case with their data.

This suggests to me that future static fires for used boosters might only be for cases when the previous flight data had a few peculiarities, and/or they've changed out some major components.

This launch was unusual in that it was a commercial launch contract, not under NSSL. NRO wanted this bird up quickly, even opting for LC-39A vs the more secure SLC-40.

[rsdavis9]

Could it be that for a used booster a static fire REDUCES the success probability.
Being a customer what would you rather have:
1. Loads of performance data from a successful lauch for the full engine runtime.
2. A 2 sec static fire. Possibly the short duration could break something and without the full duration you will miss it.

[Jansen]

Could it be that for a used booster a static fire REDUCES the success probability.
Being a customer what would you rather have:
1. Loads of performance data from a successful lauch for the full engine runtime.
2. A 2 sec static fire. Possibly the short duration could break something and without the full duration you will miss it.

If something is going to break in a 2 second static fire, it will certainly fail during a 2 minute launch.