SpaceX Falcon Heavy : USSF-67 : KSC LC-39A : 15 January 2023 (22:56 UTC)

[FutureSpaceTourist]

https://twitter.com/spacex/status/1614977522063773697

Sped up tracking cam footage of Falcon Heavy from launch to landing

[Herb Schaltegger]

... Once it reaches apogee, it will relight it's engine for a final time to circularize the orbit at GEO altitude. ...

After payload separation, shouldn't there be a subsequent disposal burn of the second stage to the graveyard orbit above GEO?

Not by the Merlin Vacuum engine. The smaller attitude control thrusters are used for that.

The attitude control thrusters are cold nitrogen gas. I don’t believe they have nearly enough dV to place the entire mass of the second stage into a graveyard orbit.

The Falcon S2 has demonstrated long-coast, multiple-burn mission profiles in the past as proof-of-concept for exactly this kind of mission.

[FutureSpaceTourist]

twitter.com/trevormahlmann/status/1615001425460748288

🔥Falcon Heavy🔥that is all🔥

https://twitter.com/trevormahlmann/status/1615003375183007744

Alternate edits of my photos of Falcon Heavy lifting off last night with alllllll the detail🤩
~nailed~ the exposure on this one🤌🏼

And you can see the center core throttling down as it clears the tower. Thrilled🤘🏼

[FutureSpaceTourist]

https://twitter.com/nextspaceflight/status/1615002730371719168

Falcon Heavy launches USSF-67 just after sunset. @NASASpaceflight

nasaspaceflight.com/2023/01/ussf-6…

Edit to add:

https://twitter.com/nextspaceflight/status/1615009954108436481

Liftoff of a SpaceX Falcon Heavy with USSF-67!

Replay: youtube.com/watch?v=PCitZJ… @NASASpaceflight

[Eagandale4114]

Pre landing shockwave 

https://twitter.com/astroferg/status/1614870743317192709?s=46&t=Y8hnu64r21SwF_T4QHxx0w

[FutureSpaceTourist]

https://twitter.com/johnkrausphotos/status/1615004322806521856

Liftoff of Falcon Heavy and USSF-67

Edit to add:

https://twitter.com/johnkrausphotos/status/1615020016956473356

[FutureSpaceTourist]

https://twitter.com/nextspaceflight/status/1615007163516084224

27 Merlin engines producing over 5 millions pounds of thrust on a SpaceX Falcon Heavy. @NASASpaceflight

Edit to add:

https://twitter.com/nextspaceflight/status/1615015262708994049

Falcon Heavy is going to be tiny compared to Starship. Exhibit A:

[FutureSpaceTourist]

https://twitter.com/spacecoast_stve/status/1615017304017997824

She’s a beaut, ain’t she?

Falcon Heavy rises into twilight carrying #USSF67.

Mission overview: nasaspaceflight.com/2023/01/ussf-6…

[abaddon]

It's quite remarkable that the three-month gap between the USSF-44 and USSF-67 launches is comparable to the time gap between the April and June 2019 Falcon Heavy launches, because the second Falcon Heavy launch did not take place until a little over a year after the first FH launch.

IIRC, the first launch was not a Block 5 Falcon Heavy, but was rather a sort of prototype built from the Block 3 "Full Thrust" version of the Falcon 9.  Its boosters were both recycled from earlier missions, each of them having sat idle or being refurbished for nearly two years, and they were never used again.  One of them was retired to the Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex, and the other one was simply retired.  Somewhere.

So they weren't really the same rocket.  Comparisons in turnaround time are not really valid between the first launch and the later ones.  And besides, the customers probably wanted to wait and see how the first launch went before fully committing themselves to using the Falcon Heavy.  Fortunately, the first launch went off without any hitches I am aware of other than the failure to recover the center core.

Excellent points.  Worth pointing out that most rockets have a relatively long time between initial launches and second launches; H2 206 days, Ariane 5 513 days (after 1st launch failure), Atlas V 266 days, Falcon 9 187 days, and Delta IV clocking in at a relatively slim 111 days.  Average days between launches for first five launches: H2 348 days, Ariane V 346 days, Atlas V 233 days, Delta IV 320 days, Falcon 9 250 days.

[Targeteer]

55263    USA 342   2023-008A   1407.48   0.06   35251   35199   
55264    LDPE-3A   2023-008B   PAYLOAD   
55265    FALCON HEAVY R/B   2023-008C   ROCKET BODY   
55266    FALCON HEAVY DEB   2023-008D   DEBRIS
55267    LDPE-3A DEB   2023-008E   DEBRIS   

[FutureSpaceTourist]

https://twitter.com/julia_bergeron/status/1615057308597293068

Falcon Heavy rising from LC-39A

Mission overview: nasaspaceflight.com/2023/01/ussf-6…

📷 Me for @NASASpaceflight

https://twitter.com/julia_bergeron/status/1615057737158692888

Fire and fury in the wake of Falcon Heavy leaving the nest.

📷 Me for @NASASpaceflight

[FutureSpaceTourist]

https://twitter.com/planet4589/status/1615070615773249537

Space-Track catalog now shows 5 objects from the Falcon Heavy launch: USA 342 (CBAS 2), LDPE 3A, FH upper stage, debris object from the FH, and debris object (presumably adapter of some kind) from LDPE. No TLEs, but satcat gives a 35199 x 35251 km x 0.06 deg orbit for USA 342

[lrk]

The interstage looks kind of used? Looking at the picture SpaceX posted, it’s definitely a bit dirtier than the tank section of the center core.

Kind of a late reply, but the dark grey band is actually the RP-1 tank of the upper stage, painted grey for thermal reasons on long-duration coast missions.  The interstage (which has the FH logo) is below this and is white. 

In any case, the FH interstage has extra hardware for booster separation, and there wouldn't be any used FH interstages around. 

[FutureSpaceTourist]

[ugordan]

The interstage looks kind of used? Looking at the picture SpaceX posted, it’s definitely a bit dirtier than the tank section of the center core.

Kind of a late reply, but the dark grey band is actually the RP-1 tank of the upper stage, painted grey for thermal reasons on long-duration coast missions.  The interstage (which has the FH logo) is below this and is white. 

No, Tim's not mistaking the RP-1 tank for the interstage. The interstage in that image *does* look more off-white grey than the center core for example, but it also looks the same kind of off-white as the 2nd stage LOX tank so... It's probably a surface coating thing making it look darker in that particular illumination setup.

[LouScheffer]

I'm looking forward to the analysis that @OneSpeed normally provides, scraping the speed and altitude numbers off the SpaceX webcast and producing (rough) graphs for us that indicate performance.

The first plot compares the core booster telemetry, and differences include:

1. A much shorter throttle down for MaxQ, at 22s for USSF-44, and 11s for USSF-67.
2. As a result, post MaxQ USSF-67 was some 30m/s faster all the way to MECO.

I suspect SpaceX is looking at measured stresses and still optimizing how little throttle bucket they need.  USSF-44 was the first mission in several years, and they optimized the hardware in the meantime.  So I suspect measurements from that flight showed they did not need such a big throttle bucket.

The second plot compares the side booster telemetry.

I think the biggest difference here is seen when comparing to a single-core mission, such as Starlink 5-1.  The boosters of a Heavy are pushing a much greater load (almost half of a full Falcon 9 each) than the booster of a Starlink.  As a result their acceleration tops out at 2Gs, and their speed at cutoff is much less (maybe 1500 m/s as opposed to about 2200 m/s, reading from the graphs).  The boostback burn helps even more, cutting the horizontal component roughly in half, since they take about 5 minutes to return where they spent 2.5 minutes going out.   As a result their boostback burn starts at about 1300 m/s and drops them to about 1000 m/s.  This is a quite short burn.  Then the slow speed means the aero deceleration is less, too, about 3.7 Gs peak.

On the StarLink missions, the entry burn starts at about 2200 m/s and ends at 1500 m/s.  That's more than twice the dV needed and explains why the entry burn is twice as long.  Then the higher exit speed from the burn means stronger aero deceleration (looks like about 5.8 Gs).  So FH side boosters have a very gentle mission compared to droneship landing missions or even RTLS single-stick missions.

It even looks to me like FH side boosters could get rid of the entry burn entirely.  After all, they start their entry burn with less speed than normal missions have after their entry burn.  The only reason I can see why they might not be able to do this is if they need the steering capability of the burn.  Even if so, they should be able to reduce the burn to a burp of just a second or so.

[FutureSpaceTourist]

Replay from the field of the most beautiful launch by SpaceX of USSF-67. The launched on top of a SpaceX Falcon Heavy from LC-39A at 5:56PM EST on January 15, 2023 from Kennedy Space Center.  For the USSF-67 mission, the primary payload was the Continuous Broadcast Augmenting SATCOM 2 (CBAS-2) satellite, while the secondary payload was the Long Duration Propulsive ESPA – 3A (LDPE-3A) platform.

Article: https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2023/...
NSF Store: https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/shop/

Video from Michael Baylor (@nextspaceflight), Sawyer Rosenstein (@thenasaman), Thomas Burghardt (@TGMetsFan98), Space Coast Live, and Stephen Marr (@spacecoast_stve). Edited by Sawyer Rosenstein (@thenasaman).

All content copyright to NSF. Not to be used elsewhere without explicit permission from NSF.

[jacqmans]

Northrop Grumman-built Satellite to Support US Space Force National Security Mission

January 16, 2023

DULLES, Va. – Jan. 16, 2023 – Northrop Grumman Corporation's (NYSE: NOC) Long Duration Propulsive ESPA (LDPE)-3A spacecraft launched successfully in support of the USSF-67 mission. This spacecraft helps advance rapid access to space for the U.S. Space Force and marks the third successful launch in the LDPE program.

The LDPE-3A was built using Northrop Grumman’s ESPAStar, providing rapid access to space by maximizing the available volume inside a launch vehicle. This bus carries hardware for five independent missions, eliminating the need for each mission to wait for a future launch opportunity.

“From conception and development of next-generation space technology, like ESPAStar, to on-orbit command and control, we are prepared to support the full lifecycle of our customer’s missions throughout the ever-evolving threat environment,” said Troy Brashear, vice president, national security systems, Northrop Grumman.

Northrop Grumman also designed, developed and implemented the command and control, and mission execution software system for the LDPE program. The software system uses a common baseline across multiple programs, putting more capability in the hands of customer operators at a lower cost.

The ESPAStar product employs a customized version of a standard ESPA ring, providing added propulsion, power and avionic subsystems. A SpaceX Falcon Heavy launch vehicle will deliver LDPE-3A to near-geosynchronous Earth orbit for a one-year mission life.

USSF-67 is the third mission for the LDPE program. The Northrop Grumman-built LDPE-1 launched aboard the STP-3 mission in December 2021 and LDPE-2 aboard the USSF-44 mission in November 2022. Northrop Grumman will continue to deliver future ESPAStar spacecrafts, mission systems engineering, ground software systems and hardware platforms for critical USSF missions.

Northrop Grumman is a technology company, focused on global security and human discovery. Our pioneering solutions equip our customers with capabilities they need to connect, advance and protect the U.S. and its allies. Driven by a shared purpose to solve our customers’ toughest problems, our 90,000 employees define possible every day.

https://news.northropgrumman.com/news/releases/northrop-grumman-built-satellite-to-support-us-space-force-national-security-mission

[Chinakpradhan]

The interstage looks kind of used? Looking at the picture SpaceX posted, it’s definitely a bit dirtier than the tank section of the center core.

Kind of a late reply, but the dark grey band is actually the RP-1 tank of the upper stage, painted grey for thermal reasons on long-duration coast missions.  The interstage (which has the FH logo) is below this and is white. 

In any case, the FH interstage has extra hardware for booster separation, and there wouldn't be any used FH interstages around.

interstage is black built but white painted for the fancy fH logo the interstage is still block 5 iteration. Who loves a fh with black interstage. Due to this it sometimes look white but a couple of moments are there when it look a bit dull or an used interstage

[ugordan]