Author Topic: SpaceX Falcon 9 : Formosat-5 : SLC-4E Vandenberg : Aug 24, 2017 : DISCUSSION  (Read 267237 times)

Offline Galactic Penguin SST

According to this news, SpaceX had told NSPO this mission must be delayed, due to range closure. And we know Formosat-5 was undergone a successful test in Taiwan on May 20.
Now I reckon Formosat-5 will be launched NET August, Iridium NEXT will be FIRST possibly.

http://www.chinatimes.com/realtimenews/20160523005380-260410

The same article on Formosat-5 revealed that a loose bolt fell off from a payload's circuit board during satellite vibration tests on April 19 - which has been fixed and shown to be OK after additional tests on May 6 and 19/20.

It looks like that the main passenger won't be ready even had the Western Range been ready in June/July.....  ::)
Astronomy & spaceflight geek penguin. In a relationship w/ Space Shuttle Discovery. Current Priority: Chasing the Chinese Spaceflight Wonder Egg & A Certain Chinese Mars Rover

Offline wannamoonbase

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4757
  • Denver, CO
    • U.S. Metric Association
  • Liked: 2484
  • Likes Given: 3199
According to this news, SpaceX had told NSPO this mission must be delayed, due to range closure. And we know Formosat-5 was undergone a successful test in Taiwan on May 20.
Now I reckon Formosat-5 will be launched NET August, Iridium NEXT will be FIRST possibly.

http://www.chinatimes.com/realtimenews/20160523005380-260410

The same article on Formosat-5 revealed that a loose bolt fell off from a payload's circuit board during satellite vibration tests on April 19 - which has been fixed and shown to be OK after additional tests on May 6 and 19/20.

It looks like that the main passenger won't be ready even had the Western Range been ready in June/July.....  ::)

A screw here a screw there......

I find it interesting that with as little as VAFB gets used that there is now a competition to see which payload gets launched first.

Busy times ahead for SpaceX in the next 3 months with 6 launches.
Superheavy + Starship the final push to launch commit!

Offline ZachS09

  • Space Savant
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7849
  • Roanoke, TX
  • Liked: 1861
  • Likes Given: 1759
If (and only if) FORMOSAT 5's first stage was to ever make an RTLS landing attempt, the vehicle would have to start pitching to about 60 degrees until 110 seconds into the flight when it will pitch back to around 89 degrees by the time MECO and stage separation occurs. That way, it would make it easier for the first stage to boostback towards LZ-2 without a hitch.

I got this info by simulating a VAFB RTLS on the Orbiter simulator.
Liftoff for St. Jude's! Go Dragon, Go Falcon, Godspeed Inspiration4!

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35701
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 17786
  • Likes Given: 395
. That way, it would make it easier for the first stage to boostback towards LZ-2 without a hitch.


FYI, it would still be LC-1 or LZ-1 since it is at VAFB and facility naming conventions separate for each launch site.

Offline deruch

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2422
  • California
  • Liked: 2006
  • Likes Given: 5636
. That way, it would make it easier for the first stage to boostback towards LZ-2 without a hitch.


FYI, it would still be LC-1 or LZ-1 since it is at VAFB and facility naming conventions separate for each launch site.

How does that track with your insistence that SpaceX doesn't have naming rights and that the base name will be the only official one (at least, this is my offhand recollection of your insistence during SpaceX's flirtation with using "Landing Complex-1")?  i.e. LZ-1 is still LC-13 and only LZ-1 by unofficial courtesy to SpaceX.  Ergo, SpaceX can "unofficially" designate their VAFB landing pad anything they want.  If they go to LZ-2 or LZ-42 that's up to them isn't it?  It'd still be SLC-4W officially, and there isn't any "unofficial" naming convention.
Shouldn't reality posts be in "Advanced concepts"?  --Nomadd

Offline sunbingfa

  • Member
  • Posts: 46
  • Liked: 12
  • Likes Given: 18
Now CRS-9 is July 16th and there seems to be no launch before that (except the Euelsat and ABA mission). Iridium launch is in Sep now. Any update on this one? Before or after Iridium?

Offline tleski

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 474
  • Washington, DC
  • Liked: 360
  • Likes Given: 705
We will probably find out after the tomorrow's launch, but I don't think that Vandenberg delay means that flights from the Cape will be put on hold.
« Last Edit: 06/14/2016 05:57 pm by tleski »

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8980
  • US
  • Liked: 11134
  • Likes Given: 4979
Now CRS-9 is July 16th and there seems to be no launch before that (except the Euelsat and ABA mission). Iridium launch is in Sep now. Any update on this one? Before or after Iridium?

This just popped up on Twitter, Tweet from PBdeS
Quote
Iridium CEO Desch: ... We think our Sept launch is next SpaceX launch from VAFB.
« Last Edit: 06/14/2016 08:39 pm by gongora »

Offline dsobin

  • Member
  • Posts: 49
  • New Jersey, USA
  • Liked: 15
  • Likes Given: 793
Now CRS-9 is July 16th and there seems to be no launch before that (except the Euelsat and ABA mission). Iridium launch is in Sep now. Any update on this one? Before or after Iridium?

This just popped up on Twitter, Tweet from PBdeS
Quote
Iridium CEO Desch: We've purchased 7 new Falcon 9s, no reusable stages in the mix. We think our Sept launch is next SpaceX launch from VAFB.

Presumable, Mr. Desch meant to say no reused stages, rather than no reusable stages, since all F9 stages are potentially reusable.

Offline intrepidpursuit

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 713
  • Orlando, FL
  • Liked: 556
  • Likes Given: 396
This just popped up on Twitter, Tweet from PBdeS
Quote
Iridium CEO Desch: We've purchased 7 new Falcon 9s, no reusable stages in the mix. We think our Sept launch is next SpaceX launch from VAFB.

That's curious. They don't sell rockets, they sell services. You could discount the first part as just imprecise speech. The second part is pretty definitive. I suppose since the insurance stuff is just getting worked out they may have made a bulk buy of insurances coverage before reusability was an option. I agree with dsobin that I'm sure he meant reused not reusable. Reusability is integral to the F9.

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8980
  • US
  • Liked: 11134
  • Likes Given: 4979
Tweet from Peter B. de Selding
Quote
SpaceX confirms Iridium launch NET 12 Sept to occur before Formosat 5 & Spaceflight Sherpa tug of 87 sats from VAFB.

Offline mtakala24

Changed the thread title back to just September, as we've not heard of a date for this yet. This one should be after Iridium, as the tweets are confirming that it is the first launch from Vandenberg for SpaceX after summer.

Now, lets see if SpaceX can do both in September....


(and of course I had to mix up and post this into wrong thread first!)

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8980
  • US
  • Liked: 11134
  • Likes Given: 4979
This link and the two attached pdf files are the best sources I've found for the SHERPA info so far.  One of the documents mentions 89 payloads, most places say 87, so who knows.

SHERPA Rideshare Mission on eoPortal.org
One of the pdf files is footnote three on this web page.

To slightly clarify what Rik ISS-fan said above, the SHERPA will have a radial port adapter for the eXCITe payload, a dual port adapter for the pair of BlackSky payloads, and 3 of the QuadPack Plates to hold all of the cubesat launchers.

There are 21 QuadPack dispensers, which each mass 7.5kg and hold up to 24kg of payload, so that should be a maximum mass of 661.5kg for CubeSat dispensers and payloads, not counting the adapter plates.

Formosat 5 - 525kg

SHERPA (up to 1200kg, with or without the SHERPA itself?):
eXCITe (PTB 1) - 160kg
2x Blacksky Global Pathfinder - 2x50kg (edit: maybe not?)
84-86 CubeSats:
[6U] Arkyd-6, EcAMSat, ITASAT-1
[3U] Aalto-1, CNUSail 1, DIDO-1, ISARA, KAUSAT 5, LMPC (AeroCube 9), SIGMA (KHUSAT 3), Spire CubeSat (x20-ish)?
[2U] CANYVAL-X 2
[1.5U] OCSD B, OCSD C
[1U] 3CAT1, CANYVAL-X 1, CAT1, FOX-1C, FOX-1D, Nayif-1, ROBUSTA-1B, skCUBE, STEP Cube Lab, Suchai
[unknown] CubeSats (~40)

Edit 6/29: This article in SpaceNews implies that there won't be Blacksky satellites on the Sherpa, so not sure what's going on with that spot.
« Last Edit: 06/30/2016 01:51 am by gongora »

Offline Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7672
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 8855
  • Likes Given: 10686
This just popped up on Twitter, Tweet from PBdeS
Quote
Iridium CEO Desch: We've purchased 7 new Falcon 9s, no reusable stages in the mix. We think our Sept launch is next SpaceX launch from VAFB.

That's curious. They don't sell rockets, they sell services.

Right, SpaceX sells transportation services.

But they are now starting to offer different options for those services, such as launching on a rocket that has never been used previously, or on a rocket that has been used previously.  And those different options have different prices, so Iridium is likely just reiterating that their previous purchase of services has not changed, and that they will not be potentially lowering their launch costs by trying out reused rockets.
If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8980
  • US
  • Liked: 11134
  • Likes Given: 4979
Apparently Orbcomm is unhappy about someone throwing 90 smallsats that mostly don't have propulsion into an orbit near their constellation.  Looks like this flight has not been licensed by the FCC yet.  Also the number of payloads is up to 90, with more than half (56) of those being Planet Doves.  I haven't had a chance to read through all this stuff yet, there are probably more payload details to be found.  Lots of letters among Spaceflight, Orbcomm, Planet, etc. in the FCC filing that may be interesting reading (just started on the one from Planet so far.)

SpaceNews: Spaceflight’s 90-satellite mission, a boon for smallsats, 
is a nightmare for Orbcomm
Quote
...
Orbcomm has asked U.S. regulators to stop the launch until Spaceflight demonstrates that releasing 90 satellites — most of them without on-board propulsion — into a single elliptical orbital plane overlapping Orbcomm’s constellation does not raise orbital-collision issues.

Orbcomm has been negotiating directly with smallsat operators Planet and Spire Global, both of San Francisco, on a solution. Planet and Spire combined are expected to account for a majority of the 90-satellite payload.

In petitions to the U.S. Federal Communications Commission, Orbcomm argues that the risk of collision or orbital debris creation posed by the Sherpa mission is too high to allow the flight to occur without a thorough vetting of the issues.
...

The FCC Application can be found here
Here is the list of filings for that Application

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8980
  • US
  • Liked: 11134
  • Likes Given: 4979
Updated payload list:
Formosat 5 - 525kg

SHERPA (603kg + ~620kg payloads):
eXCITe (PTB 1) - 160kg
Blacksky Global Pathfinder 2- 50kg (Pathfinder 1 was moved to PSLV)
88 CubeSats:
[6U] Arkyd-6, EcAMSat, ITASAT-1, CORVUS‐BC
[3U] Aalto-1, CNUSail 1, DIDO-1, ISARA, KAUSAT 5, ICE‐Cap, SIGMA (KHUSAT 3)
     Spire (Eight)
     Planet (56)
[2U] CANYVAL-X 2
[1.5U] OCSD B, OCSD C
[1U] 3CAT1, CANYVAL-X 1, PROPCUBE, FOX-1C, FOX-1D, Nayif-1, ROBUSTA-1B, skCUBE, STEP Cube Lab, Suchai

Edit 2016-08-08: Count down to 89 (per tweet from Jeff Foust), don't know which one is getting left off.
Edit 2017-02-03: Planet removed their Doves, they will launch on PSLV. 
      Nayif-1 has been removed, it will launch on PSLV.
« Last Edit: 02/03/2017 04:16 pm by gongora »

Offline Dante80

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 888
  • Athens : Greece
  • Liked: 815
  • Likes Given: 508

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26145
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 49172
  • Likes Given: 16672
From Jeff Foust at the Small Sat conference:

Quote
Jason Andrews, Spaceflight: we see ourselves as one of the first commercial spacelines. Flown 93 satellites to date. #smallsat
https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/762791795776368640

Quote
Andrews: 89 satellites flying on SHERPA mission, from 2U cubesats to a 150-kg satellite. #smallsat
https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/762792887893405696

Quote
Andrews: asked SpaceX to drop perigee before deploying SHERPA to ensure satellites meet 25-year deorbit requirement. #smallsat
https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/762793271198220288

Quote
Andrews: hoping for SHERPA launch (on Falcon 9 also carrying Formosat-5) from Vandenberg in late October.#smallsat
https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/762793850255450112

Edit: Ninja'd on the final tweet! Copying & pasting between twitter & forum is slow on my phone ...
« Last Edit: 08/09/2016 06:18 am by FutureSpaceTourist »

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8980
  • US
  • Liked: 11134
  • Likes Given: 4979
Checked the FCC application, looks like the bickering between Orbcomm and Spaceflight/Planet/Spire/etc continues.  Couple tidbits from the latest letters...

From a Spaceflight, Inc. letter:
Quote
On August 29, 2016, on behalf of Spaceflight, Inc. (“Spaceflight”), the undersigned spoke by telephone to Jose Albuquerque, Chief of the Satellite Division of the Commission’s International Bureau, to inform him of the September 9th scheduled commencement of integration activities for SHERPA.

During the course of this call, Mr. Albuquerque asked what entity would have the authority to abort the SHERPA separation from the Falcon 9 second stage, as well as release of the SHERPA mission secondary payload satellites, in the event of a SpaceX Formosat-5 launch mission anomaly that precludes lowering the Falcon 9 2d stage from the Formosat-5 720 km circular release orbit to the specified 450 x [720].

In the circumstances described above, the launch provider, SpaceX, has the authority to abort the SHEPRA separation to ensure mission safety, which will result in neither the SHERPA nor auxiliary payloads being deployed.
I'm assuming "integration activities" here means loading sats onto the Sherpa at Spaceflight's facility.

From a Planet letter:
Quote
Planet also emphasized its willingness to execute an agreement with ORBCOMM but emphasized that finalizing such an agreement should not be a prerequisite to the grant of a license. Planet has already begun adding GPS-derived orbital position estimates for its recently launched “Flock 2p” satellites to its publicly available website, http://ephemerides.planet-labs.com/, and will do so for the “Flock 2c” satellites as well. The GPS solutions are updated multiple times a day and provide more accurate orbit determination than JSPoC predictions or radio ranging, alone.
« Last Edit: 08/31/2016 12:33 am by gongora »

Offline russianhalo117

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7906
  • Liked: 3727
  • Likes Given: 744
Checked the FCC application, looks like the bickering between Orbcomm and Spaceflight/Planet/Spire/etc continues.  Couple tidbits from the latest letters...

From a Spaceflight, Inc. letter:
Quote
On August 29, 2016, on behalf of Spaceflight, Inc. (“Spaceflight”), the undersigned spoke by telephone to Jose Albuquerque, Chief of the Satellite Division of the Commission’s International Bureau, to inform him of the September 9th scheduled commencement of integration activities for SHERPA.

During the course of this call, Mr. Albuquerque asked what entity would have the authority to abort the SHERPA separation from the Falcon 9 second stage, as well as release of the SHERPA mission secondary payload satellites, in the event of a SpaceX Formosat-5 launch mission anomaly that precludes lowering the Falcon 9 2d stage from the Formosat-5 720 km circular release orbit to the specified 450 x [720].

In the circumstances described above, the launch provider, SpaceX, has the authority to abort the SHEPRA separation to ensure mission safety, which will result in neither the SHERPA nor auxiliary payloads being deployed.
I'm assuming "integration activities" here means loading sats onto the Sherpa at Spaceflight's facility.

From a Planet letter:
Quote
Planet also emphasized its willingness to execute an agreement with ORBCOMM but emphasized that finalizing such an agreement should not be a prerequisite to the grant of a license. Planet has already begun adding GPS-derived orbital position estimates for its recently launched “Flock 2p” satellites to its publicly available website, http://ephemerides.planet-labs.com/, and will do so for the “Flock 2c” satellites as well. The GPS solutions are updated multiple times a day and provide more accurate orbit determination than JSPoC predictions or radio ranging, alone.
Integration activities at this point refers to final integration for flight of SHERPA itself with its lower PAF and upper PAF. Secondary Payloads are integrated much closer to the launch date.
« Last Edit: 08/31/2016 12:57 am by russianhalo117 »

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement SkyTale Software GmbH
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0