“SpaceX is under contract to launch NROL-76 in March 2017 from Cape Canaveral [Air Force Station],” Loretta DeSio, an NRO spokesman said in a May 18 email. “The NRO is anticipating the possibility of SpaceX supporting additional missions based on future competitions.”A SpaceX spokesman referred questions to the NRO. Almost all missions for the NRO are classified, which means the government announces few details.The launch contract may be as much as three years old. In a 2013 House Armed Services strategic forces subcommittee hearing, Sapp told lawmakers that while she expected SpaceX to bid for launches in future competitions, “we are actually on contract with SpaceX for a smaller mission.”
So how about the mysterious US government co-passenger to be launched together with SSL-built PSN-6 in early 2017? It will be a small experimental satellite or something like NROL-66, using spare space in payload fairing nose cone as was described somewhere.
Quote from: cmj9808 on 05/19/2016 05:13 amSo how about the mysterious US government co-passenger to be launched together with SSL-built PSN-6 in early 2017? It will be a small experimental satellite or something like NROL-66, using spare space in payload fairing nose cone as was described somewhere.Please see the KH-11 thread for the article I recently posted in there about the NRO's increasing use of cubesats.
Quote from: Star One on 05/19/2016 05:58 amQuote from: cmj9808 on 05/19/2016 05:13 amSo how about the mysterious US government co-passenger to be launched together with SSL-built PSN-6 in early 2017? It will be a small experimental satellite or something like NROL-66, using spare space in payload fairing nose cone as was described somewhere.Please see the KH-11 thread for the article I recently posted in there about the NRO's increasing use of cubesats.I doubt it's some kind of cubesat. NRO, whose Colony program can be traced back to 2009, is definitely not a newbie in the cubesat arena, and none of their cubesats was given a NROL designation.
Note that the direct quote in the article is not that they're launching from CCAFS, it's that they're launching from 'Cape Canaveral [Air Force Station]'. CCAFS appears to be conjecture on SpaceNew's part.
I'll take that information and run with it in my understanding of NROL-76 launching from SLC-40.
I meant as a secondary payload.
Quote from: Star One on 05/19/2016 11:41 amI meant as a secondary payload.I'm no expert but surely NRO wouldn't let a secondary payload from another organisation on one of their launches.
Quote from: Kryten on 05/19/2016 08:45 amNote that the direct quote in the article is not that they're launching from CCAFS, it's that they're launching from 'Cape Canaveral [Air Force Station]'. CCAFS appears to be conjecture on SpaceNew's part.Kennedy Space Center, home of LC-39A, is not located at Cape Canaveral. It's located on Merritt Island. CCAFS, home of SLC-40, is located at Cape Canaveral. Although the two areas are located next to each other, they are in fact two different areas with two different names. Had the intention been to launch from LC-39A, the spokesperson, IMO, would have said that the launch would take place from KSC. But the spokesperson said Cape Canaveral. So, for now, I'll take that information and run with it in my understanding of NROL-76 launching from SLC-40.
Does the USAF procure the LV for the NRO or do they do it themselves?
Does the NRO follow USAF guidelines regarding LV certification? Or their own?
Quote from: Ben the Space Brit on 05/19/2016 01:19 pmQuote from: Star One on 05/19/2016 11:41 amI meant as a secondary payload.I'm no expert but surely NRO wouldn't let a secondary payload from another organisation on one of their launches.Why not?
There hasn't been a need for military LV certification until Spacex came along.NRO has bought Atlas III, Minotaurs, etc
Quote from: Ben the Space Brit on 05/19/2016 01:19 pmQuote from: Star One on 05/19/2016 11:41 amI meant as a secondary payload.I'm no expert but surely NRO wouldn't let a secondary payload from another organisation on one of their launches.This has happened already: The NROL-36, NROL-39 and NROL-55 missions (all on Atlas V rockets) carried each a bunch of cubesats from different organisations as secondary payloads.
Quote from: Skyrocket on 05/19/2016 05:24 pmQuote from: Ben the Space Brit on 05/19/2016 01:19 pmQuote from: Star One on 05/19/2016 11:41 amI meant as a secondary payload.I'm no expert but surely NRO wouldn't let a secondary payload from another organisation on one of their launches.This has happened already: The NROL-36, NROL-39 and NROL-55 missions (all on Atlas V rockets) carried each a bunch of cubesats from different organisations as secondary payloads.A little clarification on that: Cubesats are loaded in their dispensers well before any SV is mated to a launch vehicle. But still, no reason you can't have cleared people to work any tasks where visual access might be possible. Lots of different organizations learn to play well together.