If you mean getting to final science orbit without a lunar flyby, Falcon 9 could not do it. It would require firing at the apogee and F9 second stage doesn't have the capability to coast for such a long time (at least tens of hours if I'm not wrong) and start the engine.
Quote from: Raul on 04/20/2018 08:45 amActual TESS orbit before first apogee burn according to Space-track.NORAD SATNAME INTLDES PERIOD INCL APOGEE PERIGEE43435 TESS 2018-038A 10244.32 29.54 299450 296Did they overperform? I remember apogee target of 270k km.
Actual TESS orbit before first apogee burn according to Space-track.NORAD SATNAME INTLDES PERIOD INCL APOGEE PERIGEE43435 TESS 2018-038A 10244.32 29.54 299450 296
Didn't F9 have sufficient capability to deliver TESS directly to its final orbit, or nearly so, and saved the maneuvering?
Quote from: toruonu on 04/20/2018 10:33 amQuote from: Raul on 04/20/2018 08:45 amActual TESS orbit before first apogee burn according to Space-track.NORAD SATNAME INTLDES PERIOD INCL APOGEE PERIGEE43435 TESS 2018-038A 10244.32 29.54 299450 296Did they overperform? I remember apogee target of 270k km.Keep in mind that the apogee of such an eccentric orbit is very sensitive to final velocityerror of a low height burn. That also means very little delta V by TESS to change it.
It seems they gave TESS a little more as reserve. Inclination is listed as 29.54 degrees, planned were 28.5 though it might be possible that TESS already tested its own engine.
[/size]Actual TESS orbit before first apogee burn according to Space-track.NORAD SATNAME INTLDES PERIOD INCL APOGEE PERIGEE43435 TESS 2018-038A 10244.32 29.54 299450 296
The @NASA_TESS first apogee maneuver (A1M) was successfully completed yesterday. This burn was a 50 second checkout burn to characterize the performance of the #TESS thrusters.
.@NASA_TESS current speed (at about 22 Apr 2018 15:46 UTC / 11:46 AM EST) was approximately 0.373 km/s. It will be increasing until #TESS reaches perigee at about 25 Apr 2018 05:42 UTC / 1:42 PM at which point it will be approximately 9.51 km/s.
Has there been any mention of the Roomba being used on this landing?
The project did not meet its expected March 2018 launch date due to certification delays for its launch vehicle, the SpaceX Falcon 9 upgrade known as Block 4. Certification is necessary because it will be the first time that a NASA instrument will launch on the Block 4 version of the vehicle. The TESS project expected that NASA’s Launch Services Program would certify the Block 4 in September 2017, 7 months before TESS is scheduled to launch. However, NASA needed additional time to investigate the Falcon 9 second stage pressure vessel, which was involved in an anomaly that caused an explosion in September 2016. SpaceX also required extra time to meet NASA’s Launch Services Program requirements.
From the 2018 GAO assessment of NASA projectsQuoteThe project did not meet its expected March 2018 launchdate due to certification delays for its launch vehicle, theSpaceX Falcon 9 upgrade known as Block 4. Certificationis necessary because it will be the first time that a NASAinstrument will launch on the Block 4 version of the vehicle.The TESS project expected that NASA’s Launch ServicesProgram would certify the Block 4 in September 2017, 7months before TESS is scheduled to launch. However,NASA needed additional time to investigate the Falcon 9second stage pressure vessel, which was involved in ananomaly that caused an explosion in September 2016.SpaceX also required extra time to meet NASA’s LaunchServices Program requirements.
The project did not meet its expected March 2018 launchdate due to certification delays for its launch vehicle, theSpaceX Falcon 9 upgrade known as Block 4. Certificationis necessary because it will be the first time that a NASAinstrument will launch on the Block 4 version of the vehicle.The TESS project expected that NASA’s Launch ServicesProgram would certify the Block 4 in September 2017, 7months before TESS is scheduled to launch. However,NASA needed additional time to investigate the Falcon 9second stage pressure vessel, which was involved in ananomaly that caused an explosion in September 2016.SpaceX also required extra time to meet NASA’s LaunchServices Program requirements.
Quote from: gongora on 05/02/2018 02:43 amFrom the 2018 GAO assessment of NASA projectsQuoteThe project did not meet its expected March 2018 launchdate due to certification delays for its launch vehicle, theSpaceX Falcon 9 upgrade known as Block 4. Certificationis necessary because it will be the first time that a NASAinstrument will launch on the Block 4 version of the vehicle.The TESS project expected that NASA’s Launch ServicesProgram would certify the Block 4 in September 2017, 7months before TESS is scheduled to launch. However,NASA needed additional time to investigate the Falcon 9second stage pressure vessel, which was involved in ananomaly that caused an explosion in September 2016.SpaceX also required extra time to meet NASA’s LaunchServices Program requirements.Correct me if I'm wrong, TESS booster was the last Block 4 SpaceX ever built, right?Just like Jason3 launched on the last 1.1 ever launched.Duh, this certification stuff really seriously lags behind SpaceX innovation speed.
It was delayed by *a month*.How much does SpaceX routinely delay its manifest (for completely valid reasons, I'm sure)? Or is it just that some faction in SpaceX "seriously lags behind" another SpaceX faction's "innovation speed"?Let's not go all fanboi into a SpaceX vs NASA discussion again. The reason reviews weren't done faster isn't stated, and I would guess having mission assurance oversight in order to prevent mishaps is something desirable, not the contrary. It doesn't matter if it was the last Block 4, the review on S2 COPVs (which caused two LOMs so far) wasn't mature on time.