RTF at last QuoteFalcon 9 Flight 30 - Iridium NEXT (not verified)payload mass: 10 x 800 kilograms, orbit: 780 km x 780 km, 86.4° [99]delivered orbit:618 x 627 km x 86.66° [103] S) 2017-01-03, Scrub due to a minor GSE issue [101] F) 2017-01-05, Successful static fire (no payload) [100] L) 2017-01-14, Successful launch (the one with the live rocketcam S1 landing) [102] BR) 2017-01-14, Successful landing at JRTI (1 engine landing burn) [102]
Falcon 9 Flight 30 - Iridium NEXT (not verified)payload mass: 10 x 800 kilograms, orbit: 780 km x 780 km, 86.4° [99]delivered orbit:618 x 627 km x 86.66° [103] S) 2017-01-03, Scrub due to a minor GSE issue [101] F) 2017-01-05, Successful static fire (no payload) [100] L) 2017-01-14, Successful launch (the one with the live rocketcam S1 landing) [102] BR) 2017-01-14, Successful landing at JRTI (1 engine landing burn) [102]
Falcon 9 Flight 30 - Iridium NEXT-1 (not verified)payload mass: 9,600 kilograms (10x860kg + 1000kg dispenser)[99] orbit: 780 km x 780 km, 86.4° [104]delivered orbit:618 x 627 km x 86.66° [103]core number: 29 [105] S) 2017-01-03, Scrub due to a minor GSE issue [101] F) 2017-01-05, Successful static fire (no payload) [100] L) 2017-01-14, Successful launch (the one with the live rocketcam S1 landing) [102] BR) 2017-01-14, Successful landing at JRTI (1 engine landing burn) [102]
Quote from: cartman on 01/14/2017 07:11 pmRTF at last QuoteFalcon 9 Flight 30 - Iridium NEXT (not verified)payload mass: 10 x 800 kilograms, orbit: 780 km x 780 km, 86.4° [99]delivered orbit:618 x 627 km x 86.66° [103] S) 2017-01-03, Scrub due to a minor GSE issue [101] F) 2017-01-05, Successful static fire (no payload) [100] L) 2017-01-14, Successful launch (the one with the live rocketcam S1 landing) [102] BR) 2017-01-14, Successful landing at JRTI (1 engine landing burn) [102]Cartman, The Iridium flight has a number 29 stamped on the core. Is the Falcon Flight 30 suppose to be different than the core number? source: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=41751.msg1630497#msg1630497
Falcon 9 Flight 28 - JCSAT-16 (not verified)payload mass: 4,600 kilograms, orbit: geosynchronous [94] delivered orbit: 184 x 35912 km x 20.85° [96] F) 2016-08-11, Successful static fire (no payload) [92] [93] L) 2016-08-14, Successful launch (the one with the first GTO 1 engine landing burn) [95] BR) 2016-08-14, Successful landing at OCISLY (1 engine landing burn) [95]Falcon 9 Flight n/a - AMOS-6 (not verified)payload mass: 5,500 kilograms, orbit: geosynchronous [97] S) 2016-09-01, Failure during prop loading for static fire, loss of payload (the one where the static fire went kaboom) [97] Falcon 9 Flight 29 - Iridium NEXT-1 (not verified)payload mass: 9,600 kilograms (10x860kg + 1000kg dispenser)[99] orbit: 780 km x 780 km, 86.4° [104]delivered orbit:618 x 627 km x 86.66° [103] S) 2017-01-03, Scrub due to a minor GSE issue [101] F) 2017-01-05, Successful static fire (no payload) [100] L) 2017-01-14, Successful launch (the one with the live rocketcam S1 landing) [102] BR) 2017-01-14, Successful landing at JRTI (1 engine landing burn) [102]
ok so what do we do with AMOS-6? one solution would be to leave it there without a number:flight 28 jcsat 16n/a - amos-6flight 29 iridium next-1
Falcon 9 Flight 30 - Iridium NEXT-1 RTF Mission (not verified)payload mass: 9,600 kilograms (10x860kg + 1000kg dispenser)[99] orbit: 780 km x 780 km, 86.4° [104]delivered orbit:618 x 627 km x 86.66° [103]core number: 1029 S) 2017-01-03, Scrub due to a minor GSE issue [101] F) 2017-01-05, Successful static fire (no payload) [100] L) 2017-01-14, Successful launch (the one with the live rocketcam S1 landing) [102] BR) 2017-01-14, Successful landing at JRTI (1 engine landing burn) [102]
Maybe this should be put into Wikipedia.Forum posts tend to be more prone to bit rot after some years pass.
Quote from: gospacex on 01/23/2017 12:27 amMaybe this should be put into Wikipedia.Forum posts tend to be more prone to bit rot after some years pass.Wikipedia tries not to publish "original research" which are not reflections of primary source documents. It is an encyclopedia, not a research journal.I think it would be easier if NSF would periodically post a data-heavy article with the flight history to date -- maybe once a year, as a year-in-review sort of thing -- and then a WIkipedia article could draw from that as its source and maintain an archived master list.(I'm a Wikimedia Foundation engineer, but not anything special on Wikipedia. We try to keep code editing and content editing separate. So appropriately discount my advice and feel free to consult a real editor or admin, etc.)
Falcon 9 Flight 31 - CRS-10 (not verified)payload mass: Dragon + 2,490 kilograms to ISS including SAGE-III, STP-H5, orbit: LEO [105]delivered orbit: 363 x 209km x 51.63° [106]core number: 1031 F) 2017-02-12, Successful static fire [105] C) 2017-02-18, Scrub at T-13sec due to an issue with an upper stage engine actuator [105] L) 2017-07-19, Successful launch (the one with the first 39A launch)[105] BR) 2017-07-19, Successful landing at LZ1[105]
First post updated for today's launchQuoteFalcon 9 Flight 31 - CRS-10 (not verified)payload mass: Dragon + 2,490 kilograms to ISS including SAGE-III, STP-H5, orbit: LEO [105]delivered orbit: 363 x 209km x 51.63° [106]core number: 1031 F) 2017-02-12, Successful static fire [105] C) 2017-02-18, Scrub at T-13sec due to an issue with an upper stage engine actuator [105] L) 2017-07-19, Successful launch (the one with the first 39A launch)[105] BR) 2017-07-19, Successful landing at LZ1[105]
Quote from: cartman on 02/19/2017 11:21 pmFirst post updated for today's launchQuoteFalcon 9 Flight 31 - CRS-10 (not verified)payload mass: Dragon + 2,490 kilograms to ISS including SAGE-III, STP-H5, orbit: LEO [105]delivered orbit: 363 x 209km x 51.63° [106]core number: 1031 F) 2017-02-12, Successful static fire [105] C) 2017-02-18, Scrub at T-13sec due to an issue with an upper stage engine actuator [105] L) 2017-07-19, Successful launch (the one with the first 39A launch)[105] BR) 2017-07-19, Successful landing at LZ1[105]You have some typos in the dates (2017-07-19). Also the flight numbering issue pops up again, it was Flight 32 on the paperwork and got pulled ahead of Flight 31 (Echostar).
"the one with the extremely low cloud cover"?Of course, 39A was the historic part. But the bit that will stick in my memory is the awkward two broadcast minutes of sound and no visible rocket after the falcon disappeared into the clouds.