SpaceX F9 - Eutelsat 10B - CCSFS SLC-40 - 22/23 November 2022 (02:57 UTC)

[Rondaz]

Successful launch of #EUTELSAT10B: a #satellite bringing new inflight & maritime #connectivity services!"Congratulations to all involved, from @Thales_Alenia_S to @SpaceX & the dedicated #Eutelsat launch campaign team" - @Eutelsat_SA CEO Eva Berneke

https://twitter.com/Eutelsat_SA/status/1595333742033346561

[Rondaz]

Successful launch of EUTELSAT 10B telecom satellite http://thls.co/3BzY50LLJ20 A new-generation #satellite delivering connectivity for the aviation and maritime sectors.

https://twitter.com/Thales_Alenia_S/status/1595329610480336897

[Rondaz]

Update / Update

After more than 4 years of service, the Booster B1049 performs its last mission and moves to the left side of the infographic.

https://twitter.com/SpaceNosey/status/1595313798105145344

[Rondaz]

Orbital Launch no. 162 of 2022

SpaceX #Falcon9 expendable booster #B1049-11 successfully launched the #Eutelsat10B to Geo Synchronous Transfer Orbit.

https://twitter.com/nkknspace/status/1595288438386794496

[Rondaz]

Update..

Recent launch of #Eutelsat10B mission via #SpaceX's #Falcon9 vehicle..

Booster supported this mission..

https://twitter.com/_rykllan/status/1595358397406248960

[Rondaz]

Eutelsat 10B launch was:

11th flight of B1049 booster
53rd SpaceX launch this year
127th re-flight of booster
158th successful Falcon 9 launch in a row
162nd successful SpaceX launch in row
186th launch of Falcon 9
195th launch for SpaceX

https://twitter.com/PerAsperaAdMars/status/1595259257334661120

[Rondaz]

Eutelsat 10B mission profile for @ElonXnet website..

https://twitter.com/_rykllan/status/1595403913045450752

[Rondaz]

SpaceX now currently has 16 active Falcon 9 boosters:

• B1052-7
• B1053-2
• B1058-14
• B1060-14
• B1061-10
• B1062-10
• B1063-8
• B1064-1
• B1065-1
• B1067-7
• B1069-3
• B1071-5
• B1073-4
• B1076-0
• B1077-1
• B1078-0

In November, we lost three boosters (B1066, B1051 & B1049).

But at the same time, we got some brand new ones that joined the fleet!

https://twitter.com/JennyHPhoto/status/1595462271920128000

[refsmmat]

Looked like there was a Mars photobomb on the telescopic tracking at about T+2:08?

[FutureSpaceTourist]

SpaceX launch photo

[OneSpeed]

Here is a comparison of the webcast telemetry from the Galaxy 31-32 and Eutelsat 10B missions, both of which expended the booster on the way to super-synchronous transfer orbits. The payload masses were about 6,600 and 5,500kg respectively.

Differences in the launch to LEO were that Eutelsat spent a couple of seconds longer in the throttle bucket, inserted 3km higher at 168km, and some 80m/s faster (7,907m/s in the orbital frame of reference), for a higher apogee.

From the vis-visa equation, and assuming that altitude at injection to LEO is at perigee, the coast orbits were:
G31-32 165 x 200km
E-10B  168 x 480km

At insertion to GTO, assuming a starting orbital inclination of 28.5°, then the total ΔV required for a combined injection and plane change is:

G31-32 10,509m/s - 7,827m/s = 2,682m/s plus 4.3° plane change at 198km = 80m/s. √2,682² + 80² = 2,683m/s.
E-10B  10,465m/s - 7,907m/s = 2,558m/s plus 5.72° plane change at 261km = 104m/s. √2,558² + 104² = 2,560m/s.

So, the ~1,100kg payload difference corresponded to a ΔV difference of ~123m/s.

[LouScheffer]

Here is a comparison of the webcast telemetry from the Galaxy 31-32 and Eutelsat 10B missions, both of which expended the booster on the way to super-synchronous transfer orbits. The payload masses were about 6,600 and 5,500kg respectively.

Differences in the launch to LEO were that Eutelsat spent a couple of seconds longer in the throttle bucket, inserted 3km higher at 168km, and some 80m/s faster (7,907m/s in the orbital frame of reference), for a higher apogee.

From the vis-visa equation, and assuming that altitude at injection to LEO is at perigee, the coast orbits were:
G31-32 165 x 200km
E-10B  168 x 480km

At insertion to GTO, assuming a starting orbital inclination of 28.5°, then the total ΔV required for a combined injection and plane change is:

G31-32 10,509m/s - 7,827m/s = 2,682m/s plus 4.3° plane change at 198km = 80m/s. √2,682² + 80² = 2,683m/s.
E-10B  10,465m/s - 7,907m/s = 2,558m/s plus 5.72° plane change at 261km = 104m/s. √2,558² + 104² = 2,560m/s.

So, the ~1,100kg payload difference corresponded to a ΔV difference of ~123m/s.

I get different numbers but the same general conclusion. Here's how I try this computation (spreadsheet):

From the webcast, we get the altitude at SECO, and the altitude at GTO injection.  I assume the SECO altitude is the perigee.  The injection happens 1/4 of the way around the orbit, so it's half way to apogee, which is 1/2 way around the orbit.  This is not precisely linear, but as the orbits are so close to circular it's close.  So the apogee is about twice the delta of injection.  For example, for Eutelsat10, SECO is at 164 km, GTO injection at 293 km, so I guess an apogee of 422 km.

Next, for any orbit, given the perigee and apogee you can find the semimajor axis a = (perigee + apogee)/2 + Rearth, where Rearth is the Earth's radius.  From this you can find the speed at any radius r from v = sqrt(mu*(2/r - 1/a)).  So find the speed at the injection height.

Now do the same for the GTO orbit using the apogee and perigee from the TLEs.  Find the velocity at perigee.  If there is no plane change, the difference between these number is the delta-V required.

But in these two cases there is a plane change.  This needs to be computed as a vector sum, and depends quite strongly on the original velocity coming in.  Referring to the diagram below, the cross component is VFinal*sin(theta), and the along-existing-trajectory component is Vfinal*cos(theta)-Voriginal.  These are then combined using sqrt of sum of squares.

Anyway, after all this thrashing, it appears Eutelsat10 used about 144 m/s more for GTO injection than Galaxy31.  This is surprisingly low, as the next section below (using the rocket equation dV = Vexhaust*ln(Mstart/Mfinal) ) indicates the second stage alone should gain 293 m/s just from reducing the payload mass from 6.6 to 5.5 tonnes.  On top of that, Eutelsat10 also got about 34 m/s more out of the first stage.  From this, it appears Eutelsat 10 could have been delivered into an even better orbit. I have no idea why this is not the case.

[FutureSpaceTourist]

https://twitter.com/spaceoffshore/status/1596152201717506048

Arrival! Doug returns to Port Canaveral with both fairing halves from the Eutelsat-10B mission

nsf.live/spacecoast

[FutureSpaceTourist]

https://twitter.com/farryfaz/status/1596298504628236288

A Shortfall of Gravitas, Megan, and Bob returning to Port with fairings from Eutelsat-10B mission earlier this week. @GregScott_photo

[Steven Pietrobon]

I don't think this is right.  The first stage cutoff was about 400 m/s more than usual.  If you add this with no inclination change, you get an apogee of 87000 km or so.   But it's only 60000 km so the rest was used to reduce inclination.  By my figuring it should result in about only 21-22 degrees left to remove, and about 1570 m/s to GEO.

As it turns out, my program gave a good estimate of 58,090.6 km vs 60,000 km expected, despite entering an incorrect inclination of 27°. I get 60,117.6 km with the correct inclination and 1579.0 m/s to GEO.

Enter initial perigee height (km): 312
Enter SpaceX speed (km/h): 35840
Enter initial orbit inclination (deg): 22.84

Estimated inertial speed = 10405.2 m/s
Estimated apogee height = 60117.6 km

Enter required inclination change (deg): 22.84
Enter final orbit height (km): -1
Geosynchronous altitude = 35786.0 km

Burn at 60117.6 km: theta1 = 21.62 deg, dv1 = 1244.9 m/s
Burn at 35786.0 km: theta2 =  1.22 deg, dv2 =  334.0 m/s
dv = 1579.0 m/s

[FutureSpaceTourist]

https://twitter.com/spaceoffshore/status/1596902097865146369

Offloading of fairing halves from Eutelsat-10B today from Doug.

twitter.com/omgfyitbh/status/1596893220943773696

View from my porthole this morning. Megan and Doug alongside and two fairing halves being lifted ashore.
@SpaceOffshore
#spacexfleet #SpaceX #spacecoast

[gongora]

Satellite is up to 10163 x 67043 km, 7.64 deg

[GWR64]

Almost in GEO
Eutelsat 10B is at longitude 1.5 - 1.6 deg. East.
Screenshot Celestrak:

[GWR64]

Alongside:
I have looked at pictures, videos of Eutelsat 10B and after that also of Konnect VHTS and Hotbird 13F (I think 13G is the same).
In my opinion, they all still use Hall Effect Thruster SPT-140D from OKB Fakel.
I had assumed these would be replaced by Safran's PPS®5000 Hall Effect Thruster.
The two are very similar, the performance is about the same.
But the PPS®5000 has a square faceplate, which I don't see on any of these satellites.
The SPT-140D doesn't have that.

https://www.safran-group.com/products-services/ppsr5000-plasma-thruster
https://www.roscosmos.online/168.en.html

[zubenelgenubi]

[Re: Eutelsat 10B, Konnect VHTS, Hotbird 13F, and 13G]

In my opinion, they all still use Hall Effect Thruster SPT-140D from OKB Fakel.

I had assumed these would be replaced by Safran's PPS®5000 Hall Effect Thruster.

The two are very similar, the performance is about the same.

But the PPS®5000 has a square faceplate, which I don't see on any of these satellites.

The SPT-140D doesn't have that.

Might these four satellites have used the last four OKB Fakel units in stock at Thales Alenia Space and Airbus Defence and Space, respectively?