SpaceX Falcon 9 : X-37B OTV-5 : September 7, 2017 : DISCUSSION

[tvg98]

As some have speculated, ULA was not given the opportunity to bid for this particular payload.

https://twitter.com/torybruno/status/873243359204302849

Hey @torybruno, did you bid for the X-37B mission that was awarded to SpaceX?

No. We were not given the opportunity to bid.

[bdub217]

Any word whether they've added the hammerhead crane to 39A to allow vertical integration of this payload?  I understand that the USAF has always sneered at horizontal integration and that one of the few reasons the existing service structure remains on 39A, in addition to accommodating a crew dragon white room and escape infrastructure was to permit the vertical integration of national security payloads. At least as of the last launch - haven't seen any new hardware go up on the FSS that would presumably be able to allow this. Anyone got any insight?

[gongora]

Any word whether they've added the hammerhead crane to 39A to allow vertical integration of this payload?  I understand that the USAF has always sneered at horizontal integration and that one of the few reasons the existing service structure remains on 39A, in addition to accommodating a crew dragon white room and escape infrastructure was to permit the vertical integration of national security payloads. At least as of the last launch - haven't seen any new hardware go up on the FSS that would presumably be able to allow this. Anyone got any insight?

Hasn't been done, no indication it would be done for this launch.  Also don't know anything about the supposed "sneering" at horizontal integration, the GPS 3 satellites can be horizontally integrated.

[Thorny]

I understand that the USAF has always sneered at horizontal integration and that one of the few reasons the existing service structure remains on 39A,

The Rotating Service Structure will be torn down, they just haven't gotten around to it yet with other priorities like getting 39A up and running and rebuilding 40.

[AncientU]

As some have speculated, ULA was not given the opportunity to bid for this particular payload.

https://twitter.com/torybruno/status/873243359204302849

Hey @torybruno, did you bid for the X-37B mission that was awarded to SpaceX?

No. We were not given the opportunity to bid.

Seems unfair, doesn't it?

[rpapo]

Seems unfair, doesn't it?

They could have put it out for bid, and SpaceX could have won, but I don't think the USAF really wanted that in this case.  It appears they wanted to ensure that SpaceX would do the extra work required for the first launch of the X-37 on a Falcon.  That way they'd get an alternate (and almost completely unrelated) launcher for their payload.  If they then alternate ULA and SpaceX, and perhaps Blue Origin later on, they keep multiple launch options available, current and in practice.  That is to the advantage of the USAF.

There's relatively little doubt that SpaceX could win every launch if it was entirely about money.  And little doubt that ULA could win every launch if it were entirely about reliability.

[AncientU]

Seems unfair, doesn't it?

They could have put it out for bid, and SpaceX could have won, but I don't think the USAF really wanted that in this case.  It appears they wanted to ensure that SpaceX would do the extra work required for the first launch of the X-37 on a Falcon.  That way they'd get an alternate (and almost completely unrelated) launcher for their payload.  If they then alternate ULA and SpaceX, and perhaps Blue Origin later on, they keep multiple launch options available, current and in practice.  That is to the advantage of the USAF.

There's relatively little doubt that SpaceX could win every launch if it was entirely about money.  And little doubt that ULA could win every launch if it were entirely about reliability.

The competitive environment is forcing SpaceX to work on improving reliability (as are their internal finances) and ULA to work on costs.  Great progress is being made on both sides.  Free and open competition has improved the NSS launch bottom line -- hopefully they can avoid undercutting this virtuous cycle with 'managed' competition.

[kevin-rf]

Fairing question. We know that spaceX has been working on fairing recovery, and we know in the past they have placed gopro's in the fairing that have washed up on beaches. Being a government mission, chances they will attempt fairing recovery and at the same time have cameras in the fairings?

Just seems like a no go, while they are working out the kinks and the customer would most likely be less than thrilled if they lost one of the gopro's.

That said, the video of the fairing separating from the X-37B would be awesome.

[ZachS09]

Fairing question. We know that spaceX has been working on fairing recovery, and we know in the past they have placed gopro's in the fairing that have washed up on beaches. Being a government mission, chances they will attempt fairing recovery and at the same time have cameras in the fairings?

Just seems like a no go, while they are working out the kinks and the customer would most likely be less than thrilled if they lost one of the gopro's.

That said, the video of the fairing separating from the X-37B would be awesome.

I'm not sure about the fairing sep being shown, because previous AFSPC missions flown on Atlas V and Delta IV were classified like NRO missions were, so I would expect a similar webcast to NROL-76 in which after stage separation, the booster gets all the attention.

[Lar]

(mod) Let's not wander too far down the ULA vs. SpaceX and cost vs. reliability and fair vs. unfair and bid vs. no bid paths ok? Comments were noted and legit to mention, thanks for finding and citing... but this is a mission thread.

[Lars-J]

As some have speculated, ULA was not given the opportunity to bid for this particular payload.

https://twitter.com/torybruno/status/873243359204302849

Hey @torybruno, did you bid for the X-37B mission that was awarded to SpaceX?

No. We were not given the opportunity to bid.

Seems unfair, doesn't it?

It would be highly ironic of ULA to complain about closed bidding.    In this case DoD is merely making sure they have two providers. Presumably future bids of X-37 launches will now be open to both.

[clongton]

...And little doubt that ULA could win every launch if it were entirely about reliability.

Only so long as Atlas, not Vulcan, is the launch vehicle. Once Atlas is retired Vulcan will need to stand on its own with brand new no-history engines. Upper stage has lots of heritage but the main stage is really still a paper rocket at this point. 

But while Vulcan is gaining history the F9 will be as well. Unless Vulcan gains a lot of outside launches Falcon will have the edge on both cost and reliability. I expect to see Falcon become the launcher of choice for the X-37 going forward as Atlas reaches EoS.

[Nomadd]

That said, the video of the fairing separating from the X-37B would be awesome.

Done to "Also sprach Zarathustra"?

[cppetrie]

Fairing question. We know that spaceX has been working on fairing recovery, and we know in the past they have placed gopro's in the fairing that have washed up on beaches. Being a government mission, chances they will attempt fairing recovery and at the same time have cameras in the fairings?

Just seems like a no go, while they are working out the kinks and the customer would most likely be less than thrilled if they lost one of the gopro's.

That said, the video of the fairing separating from the X-37B would be awesome.

I'm not sure about the fairing sep being shown, because previous AFSPC missions flown on Atlas V and Delta IV were classified like NRO missions were, so I would expect a similar webcast to NROL-76 in which after stage separation, the booster gets all the attention.

I won't be surprised either way. NROL-76 wasn't shown because knowing what the satellite looked like would tell watchers about what it is doing. But the outside appearance of the X-37B is well known publicly so hiding it during the launch doesn't really accomplish anything. The secret payloads will be enclosed in the payload bay so nothing will be visible. But it is also SOP for no video so they may stick to that. Only time will tell.

[kevin-rf]

My real question, is will they attempt fairing recovery, and if they do, would they remove any recording devices. They have in the past stuck gopro's in the fairings.

[Ben the Space Brit]

@kevin-rf

It would probably be simpler just not to bother with putting any recording devices on the fairings. It would be even simpler just not to attempt experimental recoveries on classified national security payloads. There are plenty of other opportunities in their manifest.

[Norm38]

What information about the launch orbit could be gleaned from fairing cameras that wouldn't already be known from the fairing splash down maritime warnings?  Everyone knows the launch direction.
What else is there to hide?

[cscott]

What information about the launch orbit could be gleaned from fairing cameras that wouldn't already be known from the fairing splash down maritime warnings?  Everyone knows the launch direction.
What else is there to hide?

I think you need to be answering the reverse question: given that the mission is classified, who is going to do the effort to declassify and release this footage, and why? Who is going to file the paperwork to allow a diagnostic camera to be present in the first place? Who is going to certify that SpaceX's chain of custody of that footage meets the appropriate data security standards?

By default, it's probably easier just to leave off the cameras.  If the footage manages to be recorded and/or broadcast, someone had a strong interest in doing so: either SpaceX really needed the diagnostics, or the customer really wanted the publicity.  It would take an active effort.

[matthewkantar]

From sketches in the speculative XB-37 on Falcon thread, the fit of the orbiter in the fairing is tight. I would think the Airforce and SpaceX would not want to do the fairing separation blind. Especially for the first time. The knowledge that could be gained in the event of a mishap far outweighs keeping pictures of a (widely photographed) spacecraft secret.

Matthew

[gongora]

From sketches in the speculative XB-37 on Falcon thread, the fit of the orbiter in the fairing is tight. I would think the Airforce and SpaceX would not want to do the fairing separation blind. Especially for the first time. The knowledge that could be gained in the event of a mishap far outweighs keeping pictures of a (widely photographed) spacecraft secret.

Matthew

You are misinterpreting the picture. That is the allowable payload envelope, not the physical sides of the fairing.