Author Topic: SpaceX Falcon 9 : Telstar 18 Vantage/Apstar-5C : Sept 10, 2018 - DISCUSSION  (Read 66790 times)

Offline ChrisGebhardt

  • Assistant Managing Editor
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7842
  • ad astra scientia
  • ~1 AU
  • Liked: 7877
  • Likes Given: 853
Launch has slipped 2 days.

New launch day and window:

25 August at 23:33 EDT to 03:33 EDT on 26th.... which is 26 August from 0333-0733 UTC.

Offline shuttlefan

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1608
  • Liked: 13
  • Likes Given: 4
Launch has slipped 2 days.

New launch day and window:

25 August at 23:33 EDT to 03:33 EDT on 26th.... which is 26 August from 0333-0733 UTC.

Static fire date?

Offline sayidreddy

  • Member
  • Posts: 3
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 16
Payload Vehicle engineer for Telstar 18 on Reddit says there is a 5-10 day delay for the launch, may not be in August. Any confirmation for this?

https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/95cte4/telstar_18v_apstar_5c_launch_campaign_thread/e4kgxuw/?context=3
« Last Edit: 08/21/2018 02:36 pm by sayidreddy »

Offline Comga

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6466
  • Liked: 4572
  • Likes Given: 5136
Payload Vehicle engineer for Telstar 18 on Reddit says there is a 5-10 day delay for the launch, may not be in August. Any confirmation for this?

https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/95cte4/telstar_18v_apstar_5c_launch_campaign_thread/e4kgxuw/?context=3

Quote
Hate to tease you but right now there is no officially released reason so I can't say. Even being on the customer side they won't tell me too much.
Sounds like it's on the rocket side.
:(
A 24 day gap is no way to hit a 30 launch per year pace, especially when it's followed by a 30 day gap.
SpaceX may be remedying Shotwell's forecasted slowdown in 2019 by having a bunch slip in from 2018.
edit: My list now has 35 launches in 2019.  We shall see.
« Last Edit: 08/21/2018 03:25 pm by Comga »
What kind of wastrels would dump a perfectly good booster in the ocean after just one use?

Offline marsbase

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 429
  • North Carolina
  • Liked: 480
  • Likes Given: 82
A 24 day gap is no way to hit a 30 launch per year pace, especially when it's followed by a 30 day gap.
I don't think SpaceX can be criticized for being slow about launching rockets, since they launch more than anyone else in the world.  If they aren't launching,there is a good reason.  Public criticism of delays probably played a role in NASA launching the Challenger under adverse conditions. That's what I think of when someone says SpaceX should go faster.

Offline OccasionalTraveller

  • Member
  • Posts: 36
  • Liked: 18
  • Likes Given: 0
We already know that there is a brand new Block 5 booster at the Cape for this mission - I believe this time it has actually been photographed in enough detail to identify it unambiguously as B1049.

We also know that subsequent boosters are in production flow, at least one later having been seen at McGregor. I feel the community is over-confident in identification, but I believe this sighting was made after seeing B1049 moving between sites at the Cape, and the booster on the test stand was clearly new. I find it hard to believe, given that the production line is somewhat flexible between first and second stages, that SpaceX would fail to complete an upper stage required for this mission, in preference to completing a booster for a later one (possibly not even for the following mission).

That leaves us with:

* Fairings
* Payload
* Possible retro-fitting of COPV 2.0
* Switching to pre-flown booster

Payload fairings have typically been the long-pole item. There seems to have been possible damage in transit before, necessitating flying a fairing back to Hawthorne then return to the Cape, using one of the Antonov planes.

The payload itself - has SSL actually confirmed shipping it to the Cape? When Telstar 19V shipped in June, Telstar 18V was described as 'nearly finished and in the queue to ship.' I can't see a press release regarding shipping 18V and it's not mentioned in any other Maxar/SSL release since then.

The first booster known to feature the new COPVs is B1051, but that is now delayed to November. SpaceX may want to bring them into service sooner so they can demonstrate them on earlier flights. However, replacing them on a built booster waiting to go into service, and delaying the launch thereby, doesn't seem like it would be acceptable to the customer. The customer doesn't benefit at all from this.

Finally, our assumption of using the new booster may be mistaken. It could be that this is really a re-flight of B1047, previously used for Telstar 19V, and that it's actually taking longer to refurbish than hoped. The customer might be prepared to wait for SpaceX to do so if they can get a $10m discount. This wouldn't explain why SpaceX have transported B1049 across the Cape from SLC-40 to 39A and back again, though!

For what it's worth, I think the payload is delayed, with a side bet on fairing issues.

Sent from my Swift 2 Plus using Tapatalk


Offline Nehkara

I have a theory.

Telkom-4 (Merah Putih) was originally expected to launch on F9 core B1049.  Unexpectedly after having loaded that core into the SLC-40 hangar in preparations for flight they pulled it out and took it back to the LC-39A hangar and the sooty and flight proven B1046 was moved into the SLC-40 hangar and ended up being the rocket that performed the mission.

Now here we are and B1049 is scheduled to launch Telstar 18V and the mission was delayed from August 16th to 23rd to 25th and now into September.

I'm wondering if there is something wrong with that booster that's taking longer than expected to fix?

Offline Steven Pietrobon

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39218
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 32738
  • Likes Given: 8196
I don't think SpaceX can be criticized for being slow about launching rockets, since they launch more than anyone else in the world.

That's a myth. China has launched 22 times this year compared to SpaceX with 15 launches.
Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #1:  Engineering is done with numbers.  Analysis without numbers is only an opinion.

Offline Alexphysics

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1605
  • Spain
  • Liked: 5917
  • Likes Given: 945
I have a theory.

Telkom-4 (Merah Putih) was originally expected to launch on F9 core B1049.  Unexpectedly after having loaded that core into the SLC-40 hangar in preparations for flight they pulled it out and took it back to the LC-39A hangar and the sooty and flight proven B1046 was moved into the SLC-40 hangar and ended up being the rocket that performed the mission.

Now here we are and B1049 is scheduled to launch Telstar 18V and the mission was delayed from August 16th to 23rd to 25th and now into September.

I'm wondering if there is something wrong with that booster that's taking longer than expected to fix?

Not to deny your theory but B1046.2 was put into SLC-40 right after Telstar 19V, so the part about B1049 being moved first for this flight doesn't match what I know.

Offline marsbase

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 429
  • North Carolina
  • Liked: 480
  • Likes Given: 82
That's a myth. China has launched 22 times this year compared to SpaceX with 15 launches.
How can I track this?  Does China have a website that lists their manifest?

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8144
  • Liked: 6801
  • Likes Given: 2965
That's a myth. China has launched 22 times this year compared to SpaceX with 15 launches.
How can I track this?  Does China have a website that lists their manifest?

There is a summary of global launches over in the General Discussion section here, and also Ed Kyle tracks all orbital launches on his website: http://spacelaunchreport.com/log2018.html#stats

Offline Celestar

  • Member
  • Posts: 40
  • Liked: 64
  • Likes Given: 2

Offline OnWithTheShow

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 349
  • Philadelphia, PA
  • Liked: 153
  • Likes Given: 27
An An-124 flight landed at MCO yesterday... any ideas what it was for?

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10205
  • US
  • Liked: 13885
  • Likes Given: 5933
An An-124 flight landed at MCO yesterday... any ideas what it was for?

Flights to Orlando have nothing to do with stuff at the Cape (and there have been a couple of those flights between Orlando and Paris recently).

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10205
  • US
  • Liked: 13885
  • Likes Given: 5933
If you want to discuss the flight rates of China and SpaceX please create a separate thread, or maybe use the POLL: Number of SpaceX orbital flights in 2018 thread.

Offline intrepidpursuit

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 721
  • Orlando, FL
  • Liked: 561
  • Likes Given: 400
An An-124 flight landed at MCO yesterday... any ideas what it was for?

Flights to Orlando have nothing to do with stuff at the Cape (and there have been a couple of those flights between Orlando and Paris recently).

The An-124s usually come to Orlando to refuel before or after dropping things at the cape. They don't seem to have the facilities for that beast on the skid strip or SSLF.

Offline russianhalo117

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8755
  • Liked: 4673
  • Likes Given: 768
An An-124 flight landed at MCO yesterday... any ideas what it was for?

Flights to Orlando have nothing to do with stuff at the Cape (and there have been a couple of those flights between Orlando and Paris recently).

The An-124s usually come to Orlando to refuel before or after dropping things at the cape. They don't seem to have the facilities for that beast on the skid strip or SSLF.
They cam refuel aircraft C-5 et cetera at KXMR and KTTS with no problems at all.

Offline intrepidpursuit

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 721
  • Orlando, FL
  • Liked: 561
  • Likes Given: 400
An An-124 flight landed at MCO yesterday... any ideas what it was for?

Flights to Orlando have nothing to do with stuff at the Cape (and there have been a couple of those flights between Orlando and Paris recently).

The An-124s usually come to Orlando to refuel before or after dropping things at the cape. They don't seem to have the facilities for that beast on the skid strip or SSLF.
They cam refuel aircraft C-5 et cetera at KXMR and KTTS with no problems at all.

It made a refueling stop in Orlando when it dropped off Bangabandhu-1. It also used MCO as base of operations for Puerto Rico recovery ops. I don't find any other references though. Perhaps it can refuel on the skid strip but on at SSLF? Either way, the point was that Antonov landings at MCO can be applicable to space launches.

https://www.facebook.com/flyMCO/videos/antonov-an-124-glides-in-for-landing-at-mco/10155231012856625/

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10205
  • US
  • Liked: 13885
  • Likes Given: 5933
The next SpaceX payload coming from France to the Cape should be in 2020.

Offline dorkmo

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 710
  • Liked: 338
  • Likes Given: 848
disneyland paris is celebrating 25 years. Maybe theyre planning something big.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0