Author Topic: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : NET May 22, 2018 - DISCUSSION  (Read 109526 times)

Offline russianhalo117

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8749
  • Liked: 4660
  • Likes Given: 768
DISCUSSION THREAD for Flight 6 of the Iridium NEXT constellation, a rideshare of 5 Iridium NEXT satellites along with the 2 GRACE-FO satellites.

Flight 6: Successful launch on May 22, 2018 at 12:48pm PDT (1948 UTC) on a reused Falcon 9 (1043.2, previously used on ZUMA mission) from SLC-4E at Vandenberg.  The booster was expended.  Fairing recovery was unsuccessful.

   NSF Threads for Iridium NEXT Flight 6: Discussion / Updates
   NSF Articles for Iridium NEXT Flight 6: 

See the Flight 1 Discussion Thread for more information and links to other Iridium Next threads and articles.

Iridium satellites (5)
   Payload Mass: 860kg per satellite plus 500kg for dispenser.
   Launch orbit: 625km, 86.66 degrees

GRACE-FO satellites (2)
   Payload Mass: 580kg per satellite plus dispenser.
   Orbit: 490km, 89 degrees


Former Launch Details (Kept for Historical Background)

The GRACE-FO launch vehicle system (LVS) was jointly selected by GFZ and NASA in June 2013. Before, a technical feasibility study has been successfully performed by the International Space Company Kosmotras (ISCK). It includes the DNEPR launch vehicle, a multi-satellite dispenser, and the personnel, test equipment and facilities for preparation, integration and launch of the twin satellites. The DNEPR launcher is a result of the Russian Program for Elimination of the SS-18 Inter-continental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs) that are being withdrawn from service and instead further used for commercial orbital launches of payloads. The LVS is managed, under sub-contract of GFZ, by the SpaceTech GmbH (STI) Launch Vehicle System Manager and is supported by the JPL Project and its contractors.

The GRACE-FO satellites will be launched from Baikonur / Kazakhstan into a co-planar Orbit with a target launch date of 5. August 2017 and following (GRACE-like) orbital parameters:

a = 490 ± 10 km
i = 89.0 ± 0.06°
e < 0.0025

Source Link (Helmholtz-Centre Potsdam - GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences): http://www.gfz-potsdam.de/en/research/organizational-units/departments/department-1/global-geomonitoring-and-gravity-field/topics/development-operation-and-analysis-of-gravity-field-satellite-missions/grace-fo/launch-vehicle-system/

Date of Validity: 13.12.2013
NASA/DLR MISSION GRACE-FO (Follow On) scheduled for launch on ISC Kosmotras Dnepr ILV on 05 August 2017.



Other SpaceX resources on NASASpaceflight:
   SpaceX News Articles (Recent)  /   SpaceX News Articles from 2006 (Including numerous exclusive Elon interviews)
   SpaceX Dragon Articles  /  SpaceX Missions Section (with Launch Manifest and info on past and future missions)
   L2 SpaceX Section
« Last Edit: 05/26/2018 07:02 am by input~2 »

Offline Skyrocket

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2631
  • Frankfurt am Main, Germany
  • Liked: 939
  • Likes Given: 172
Re: Dnepr with NASA/DLR MISSION GRACE-FO on 05 August 2017
« Reply #1 on: 08/23/2016 11:24 pm »
Got info from GFZ, that Dnepr is no longer available as launch vehicle for GRACE-FO. They are currently in negotiations with SpaceX for a Falcon-9 launch.

Offline russianhalo117

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8749
  • Liked: 4660
  • Likes Given: 768
Re: Dnepr with NASA/DLR MISSION GRACE-FO on 05 August 2017
« Reply #2 on: 08/23/2016 11:59 pm »
Got info from GFZ, that Dnepr is no longer available as launch vehicle for GRACE-FO. They are currently in negotiations with SpaceX for a Falcon-9 launch.
PM this to Satori.

Offline Graham

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 213
  • Aerospace Engineer
  • New York
  • Liked: 254
  • Likes Given: 117
Re: Dnepr with NASA/DLR MISSION GRACE-FO on 05 August 2017
« Reply #3 on: 08/24/2016 12:04 am »
Got info from GFZ, that Dnepr is no longer available as launch vehicle for GRACE-FO. They are currently in negotiations with SpaceX for a Falcon-9 launch.
Do we know why?
I have loved the stars too fondly to be fearful of the night
- Sarah Williams

Offline russianhalo117

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8749
  • Liked: 4660
  • Likes Given: 768
Re: Dnepr with NASA/DLR MISSION GRACE-FO on 05 August 2017
« Reply #4 on: 08/24/2016 12:12 am »
Got info from GFZ, that Dnepr is no longer available as launch vehicle for GRACE-FO. They are currently in negotiations with SpaceX for a Falcon-9 launch.
Do we know why?
Developing situation:
ISC Kosmotras appears to have had its authority to process spacecraft and launch Dnepr LV's terminated by the Corporations ROSCOSMOS and URSC by order from the Russian government. The only remaining Dnepr LV is currently in the silo for Iridium, but may be delayed or cancelled because permission to proceed into the launch campaign has been denied so far. ISC Kosmotras is apparently going to be dissolved via merger into Eurockot some time following the Iridium launch.
« Last Edit: 09/09/2016 01:57 am by russianhalo117 »

Offline russianhalo117

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8749
  • Liked: 4660
  • Likes Given: 768
« Last Edit: 12/10/2016 05:35 pm by russianhalo117 »

Offline soltasto

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 636
  • Italy, Earth
  • Liked: 1118
  • Likes Given: 40
What if a normal Iridium NEXT flight will be split into 2 and one gets a GRACE-FO satellite while the other gets the other 2 satellites that were meant to launch on a DNEPR?

Offline russianhalo117

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8749
  • Liked: 4660
  • Likes Given: 768
What if a normal Iridium NEXT flight will be split into 2 and one gets a GRACE-FO satellite while the other gets the other 2 satellites that were meant to launch on a DNEPR?
The following satellites do not yet have a flight to space and 71/72 flight is in limbo.
Iridium-NEXT 71 - Do LC-370/11 Dnepr ? with Iridium-NEXT 72
Iridium-NEXT 72 - Do LC-370/11 Dnepr ? with Iridium-NEXT 71
Iridium-NEXT 73 - with Iridium-NEXT
Iridium-NEXT 74 - with Iridium-NEXT
Iridium-NEXT 75 - with Iridium-NEXT
Iridium-NEXT 76 - with Iridium-NEXT
Iridium-NEXT 77 - with Iridium-NEXT
Iridium-NEXT 78 - with Iridium-NEXT
Iridium-NEXT 79 - with Iridium-NEXT
Iridium-NEXT 80 - with Iridium-NEXT
Iridium-NEXT 81 - with Iridium-NEXT

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10183
  • US
  • Liked: 13845
  • Likes Given: 5915
Tweet from Matt Desch
Quote
It's official: launching 75 of our 81 NEXT sats on a total of 8 Falcon 9s. Same cost through 2018 as last plan with Dnepr. Rideshare=smart!

Followup Tweet from Matt Desch
Quote
@IridiumBoss it will be new falcon 9 or a reused falcon 9???
Matt Desch: New.

Tweet from Iridium Investor Relations (@IridiumIR)
Quote
announces 8th launch, rideshare with NASA/GFZ to deliver 5 Iridium NEXT satellites to LEO, expected by early 2018.

Iridium Press Release [Jan 31, 2017] : Iridium Adds Eighth Launch with SpaceX for Satellite Rideshare with NASA/GFZ
Quote
Iridium strikes deal with GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences to launch five additional spare Iridium NEXT satellites as well as NASA/GFZ's Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment Follow-on (GRACE-FO) Mission

MCLEAN, Va., Jan. 31, 2017 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Iridium Communications Inc. (NASDAQ:IRDM) announced today that it has contracted with SpaceX for an eighth Falcon 9 launch. Along for the ride are the twin-satellites of the NASA/GFZ Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment Follow-On (GRACE-FO) mission, which will be deployed into a separate low-Earth orbit, marking the first rideshare deal for Iridium. An agreement of this kind is economical for all parties, and affords Iridium the ability to launch five additional satellites for its next-generation global satellite network.   The rideshare is anticipated to launch out of Vandenberg Air Force Base in California by early 2018.

"This is a very smart way to get additional Iridium NEXT satellites into orbit," said Matt Desch, chief executive officer at Iridium. "This launch provides added resiliency to our network for not much more than we had planned originally to launch 72 satellites, including two with Kosmotras."  Desch continued, "We are pleased to be sharing a rocket with NASA and GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences for this additional SpaceX launch, and GFZ has been a great business partner throughout this process."

Not only is this launch a rare opportunity to ride with NASA, but it also represents a particularly compelling economical solution. The Company had always expected to launch additional satellites after the Iridium NEXT construction was completed to utilize the nine ground spares built into the program. This rideshare represents a material savings from other supplemental launch options due to the efficiency of sharing the rocket with GRACE-FO, and the incremental cost during the Iridium NEXT construction period is immaterial when considering the avoidance of unspent amounts contemplated under the Kosmotras program. It also affords Iridium the opportunity to rearrange its launch and satellite drifting plan and launch these five satellites directly into their operational orbital plane while increasing the number of planned in-orbit spares by three satellites.  Further, this development allows Iridium to complete the whole operational constellation at a faster rate than it would have with seven launches. Iridium will still consider launching satellites with Kosmotras once approvals are available.

Iridium NEXT is the company's next-generation global satellite constellation.  Replacing Iridium's existing network of low-Earth orbit satellites, Iridium NEXT is poised to re-energize the mobile satellite industry with faster speeds and higher throughputs for all industry verticals.  The launch of the Iridium NEXT constellation represents an unprecedented feat for satellite communications, and has been coined the largest "tech refresh" of its kind.

The Company has contracted with SpaceX for seven dedicated Iridium NEXT launches, deploying 70 Iridium NEXT satellites into low-Earth orbit, across a 13-month period out of Vandenberg Air Force Base in California. This eighth launch will increase the constellation's count to 75 total in-orbit satellites, nine of which will serve as on-orbit spares. The first set of Iridium NEXT satellites was successfully launched on January 14th and is currently under test in orbit.  For more information about Iridium NEXT, please visit www.iridiumnext.com.

GRACE-FO is a successor to the joint NASA/DLR/GFZ GRACE mission, which launched in 2002 and is still in operation. The twin GRACE-FO satellites, which operate in tandem, will continue GRACE's legacy of tracking changes in the distribution of Earth's mass over time by creating monthly maps of Earth's gravity field. The movements of masses of water, ice, air, and the solid Earth are driven by processes such as precipitation, droughts, floods, the melting of snow and ice, ground water usage and storage, and even tectonic events such as large earthquakes. GRACE is improving our understanding and knowledge of a variety of important Earth system processes:  the terrestrial water cycle and changes in ice sheets, glaciers and sea level, surface and deep-ocean currents; and variations in Earth's lithosphere and mantle density. These measurements provide a unique view of the Earth system and have far-reaching benefits to society and the world's population. The mission is managed by NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, California, for NASA's Science Mission Directorate.

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47936
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 81286
  • Likes Given: 36776
Quote
@IridiumComm : We're paying @SpaceX $67.9M for 8th Falcon 9 launch in mid-2018. GFZ Germany funds $31.8M of that to carry 2 GRACE-FO sats.

https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/834787161539039232

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47936
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 81286
  • Likes Given: 36776
So because of sharing the launch cost, the 8th F9 for Iridium is cheaper than the previous planned (now doubtful) Dnepr launch:

Quote
@IridiumComm: We pd Kosmotras Moscow $38.6M for 2-sat launch on Dnepr. Launch may never happen, & $$ may be lost.

https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/835046295941353473

Offline russianhalo117

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8749
  • Liked: 4660
  • Likes Given: 768
So because of sharing the launch cost, the 8th F9 for Iridium is cheaper than the previous planned (now doubtful) Dnepr launch:

Quote
@IridiumComm: We pd Kosmotras Moscow $38.6M for 2-sat launch on Dnepr. Launch may never happen, & $$ may be lost.

https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/835046295941353473
cheaper on F9 because launching 5 Iridium sats versus previous plan of launching 2 on Dnepr. Then couple that savings with a large 2 sat rideshare and price goes down.

Offline abaddon

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3051
  • Liked: 3899
  • Likes Given: 5264
cheaper on F9 because launching 5 Iridium sats versus previous plan of launching 2 on Dnepr. Then couple that savings with a large 2 sat rideshare and price goes down.
Right; $36.1M cost to Iridium for the launch versus $38.6M on Dnepr.  In terms of cost per satellite it gets even better; $7.22M vs $19.3M.  $7M/per is pretty close to the cost to Iridium with the current contract, so it is a good deal for them that they found a way to get the extra birds on orbit at a similar price.

Offline russianhalo117

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8749
  • Liked: 4660
  • Likes Given: 768
cheaper on F9 because launching 5 Iridium sats versus previous plan of launching 2 on Dnepr. Then couple that savings with a large 2 sat rideshare and price goes down.
Right; $36.1M cost to Iridium for the launch versus $38.6M on Dnepr.  In terms of cost per satellite it gets even better; $7.22M vs $19.3M.  $7M/per is pretty close to the cost to Iridium with the current contract, so it is a good deal for them that they found a way to get the extra birds on orbit at a similar price.
So if they do recover the full cost of the Dnepr payment (They wont) and pay 36.1M for flight 8 then that is a savings of 38.6 - 36.1 = 2.5 (in millions). If they dont recover it payment then the cost is 38.6 + 36.1 = 74.7 (in millions).

Offline russianhalo117

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8749
  • Liked: 4660
  • Likes Given: 768
GRACE-FO satellites
Airbus Defence and Space
Published on Jun 22, 2017
Both GRACE-FO satellites will continually take very exact measurements of their separation distance, which changes depending on the Earth’s gravity. In this way, scientists are able to map the Earth’s gravitational fields.


Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10183
  • US
  • Liked: 13845
  • Likes Given: 5915
Tweet from Caleb Henry:
Quote
.@AirbusSpace tested the dispensers for the NASA/GFZ GRACE-FO mission. Both science sats launch w/ 5 @IridiumComm sats on a @SpaceX rocket.

Offline Rik ISS-fan

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1515
  • the Netherlands
  • Liked: 612
  • Likes Given: 211

Offline Tomness

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 660
  • Into the abyss will I run
  • Liked: 289
  • Likes Given: 737
Tweet from Caleb Henry:
Quote
.@AirbusSpace tested the dispensers for the NASA/GFZ GRACE-FO mission. Both science sats launch w/ 5 @IridiumComm sats on a @SpaceX rocket.

So for this launch, they will not be using SpaceX dispensers for GRACE-FO / Idriduim NEXT Launch?

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10183
  • US
  • Liked: 13845
  • Likes Given: 5915
Tweet from Caleb Henry:
Quote
.@AirbusSpace tested the dispensers for the NASA/GFZ GRACE-FO mission. Both science sats launch w/ 5 @IridiumComm sats on a @SpaceX rocket.

So for this launch, they will not be using SpaceX dispensers for GRACE-FO / Idriduim NEXT Launch?

For the launches with 10 Iridium satellites they use two 5-satellite dispensers from SpaceX stacked together.  For the Iridium/GRACE-FO launch, it will be a single 5-satellite dispenser from SpaceX stacked with the GRACE-FO dispenser from Airbus.

Offline deruch

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2422
  • California
  • Liked: 2006
  • Likes Given: 5634
Just stumbled across the Office of Safety & Mission Assurance's long-term planning schedule for Safety & Mission Success Reviews which shows tentative launch date for GRACE-FO of 2018-03-21.  That date was current based on an ELV milestone schedule from August 2nd.  I won't be too surprised if this date doesn't hold since it's still quite a ways out, especially since then they'd have a bunch of very high profile launches currently scheduled for that month: DM-1, TESS, GRACE-FO.  TESS has a harder deadline for launch and DM-1 is vital for their crew schedules.

Link to SMSR .pdf
« Last Edit: 08/23/2017 01:06 am by deruch »
Shouldn't reality posts be in "Advanced concepts"?  --Nomadd

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47936
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 81286
  • Likes Given: 36776
Good find, thank you. Also a lot of other Iridium flights to fit in first, unless they change the order.

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10183
  • US
  • Liked: 13845
  • Likes Given: 5915
Just stumbled across the Office of Safety & Mission Assurance's long-term planning schedule for Safety & Mission Success Reviews which shows tentative launch date for GRACE-FO of 2018-03-21.  That date was current based on an ELV milestone schedule from August 2nd.  I won't be too surprised if this date doesn't hold since it's still quite a ways out, especially since then they'd have a bunch of very high profile launches currently scheduled for that month: DM-1, TESS, GRACE-FO.  TESS has a harder deadline for launch and DM-1 is vital for their crew schedules.

Link to SMSR .pdf

The last date we heard for DM-1 is February, and SpaceX should be capable of doing back-to-back days on the launches of TESS and GRACE-FO.  I've just been wondering whether this needed to come after the other 7 Iridium launches.  Maybe that's not a requirement.
« Last Edit: 08/23/2017 02:28 am by gongora »

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10183
  • US
  • Liked: 13845
  • Likes Given: 5915
Tweet from Matt Desch:
Quote
Ten. Always 10, except Launch 6 will be a rideshare with GRACE, and that one will launch 5.

That fits perfectly with the NASA schedule we've seen.

Offline JoerTex

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 211
  • Austin, Texas
  • Liked: 432
  • Likes Given: 482
For those with family who 'need to know' about GRACE, here is a newspaper link covering the mission, and ends with GRACE-FO.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/12/magazine/what-could-we-lose-if-a-nasa-mission-goes-dark.html
« Last Edit: 09/16/2017 03:40 am by gongora »

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10183
  • US
  • Liked: 13845
  • Likes Given: 5915
The original GRACE satellites are set to be retired before GRACE-FO launches.

[JPL] GRACE Mission Making Plans for Final Science Data Collection
Quote
The team expects the October/November science data collection to be the mission's last before GRACE-2 runs out of fuel. The additional monthly gravity map produced will help further extend GRACE's data record closer to the launch of GRACE's successor mission, GRACE-Follow-On, scheduled for early 2018.

As directed by the mission's Joint Steering Group, final decommissioning for both GRACE-1 and GRACE-2 will begin once the dual satellite science phase concludes.

Offline OccasionalTraveller

  • Member
  • Posts: 36
  • Liked: 18
  • Likes Given: 0
JPL's Grace-FO website is now showing a launch countdown of 79 days 14 hours (as of writing). I think that would make it 8 December 2017 at 0800 UTC.

This seems unlikely if it remains Iridium-NEXT Flight 6, unless the launches go out of order. Is the current predicted date based on anything other than an average interval between launches? Can SpaceX accelerate launches 4, 5 and 6 to achieve this date?
« Last Edit: 09/22/2017 03:16 am by gongora »

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10183
  • US
  • Liked: 13845
  • Likes Given: 5915
JPL's Grace-FO website is now showing a launch countdown of 79 days 14 hours (as of writing). I think that would make it 8 December 2017 at 0800 UTC.

This seems unlikely if it remains Iridium-NEXT Flight 6, unless the launches go out of order. Is the current predicted date based on anything other than an average interval between launches? Can SpaceX accelerate launches 4, 5 and 6 to achieve this date?

The March date was from a NASA schedule.  It's unlikely they get in a fifth launch this year.  There's no way they get in a sixth launch this year.

Offline Steven Pietrobon

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39048
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 32346
  • Likes Given: 8025
JPL's Grace-FO website is now showing a launch countdown of 79 days 14 hours (as of writing). I think that would make it 8 December 2017 at 0800 UTC.

That website is saying early 2018 for the launch, so that count down clock is wrong.

https://gracefo.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/overview/
Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #1:  Engineering is done with numbers.  Analysis without numbers is only an opinion.

Offline deruch

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2422
  • California
  • Liked: 2006
  • Likes Given: 5634
JPL's Grace-FO website is now showing a launch countdown of 79 days 14 hours (as of writing). I think that would make it 8 December 2017 at 0800 UTC.

That website is saying early 2018 for the launch, so that count down clock is wrong.

https://gracefo.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/overview/
It's possible that given the news that the original GRACE sats are going to be decommissioned very soon that the Iridium launch order has been swapped to allow for the possibility of overlapping coverage with GRACE-FO as originally intended.  That would mean that the GRACE-FO+(5) IrNext sats would go up on Launch#4 instead of Launch#6.
Shouldn't reality posts be in "Advanced concepts"?  --Nomadd

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10183
  • US
  • Liked: 13845
  • Likes Given: 5915
JPL's Grace-FO website is now showing a launch countdown of 79 days 14 hours (as of writing). I think that would make it 8 December 2017 at 0800 UTC.

That website is saying early 2018 for the launch, so that count down clock is wrong.

https://gracefo.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/overview/
It's possible that given the news that the original GRACE sats are going to be decommissioned very soon that the Iridium launch order has been swapped to allow for the possibility of overlapping coverage with GRACE-FO as originally intended.  That would mean that the GRACE-FO+(5) IrNext sats would go up on Launch#4 instead of Launch#6.

Four days ago the CEO of Iridium said it was still planned to be flight 6

Offline deruch

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2422
  • California
  • Liked: 2006
  • Likes Given: 5634
JPL's Grace-FO website is now showing a launch countdown of 79 days 14 hours (as of writing). I think that would make it 8 December 2017 at 0800 UTC.

That website is saying early 2018 for the launch, so that count down clock is wrong.

https://gracefo.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/overview/
It's possible that given the news that the original GRACE sats are going to be decommissioned very soon that the Iridium launch order has been swapped to allow for the possibility of overlapping coverage with GRACE-FO as originally intended.  That would mean that the GRACE-FO+(5) IrNext sats would go up on Launch#4 instead of Launch#6.

Four days ago the CEO of Iridium said it was still planned to be flight 6
I'm aware.  I think it's entirely within the realm of possibility that an agreement to swap launch order could have been quickly hammered out, assuming the GRACE-FO s/c can be prepared in time for the earlier launch.  In fact, such an agreement could have been discussed much earlier as an option for fast action.  So, while I think the current March schedule should still be the target date for the thread I won't be at all surprised to learn that the swap has been approved.  Having even a very little bit of overlapping measurement is hugely important to the usefulness of the GRACE-FO data.  Compensating Iridium for any projected revenue losses due to delayed coverage shouldn't be that difficult.  I'm not sure how "individualized" each of the Iridium NEXT s/c are or whether they are all perfectly interchangeable.  Does anyone know?
« Last Edit: 09/22/2017 05:08 am by deruch »
Shouldn't reality posts be in "Advanced concepts"?  --Nomadd

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10183
  • US
  • Liked: 13845
  • Likes Given: 5915
(translation by Google)
Grace FO satellites look through the surface
Quote
Two satellites built at Airbus in Immenstaad, which are to continue surveying the earth's gravitational field over the next five years, were last presented on German soil at IABG in Ottobrunn near Munich on Friday
...
The twins were developed on behalf of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) of the American Space Agency NASA and the German Geo-Research Center (GFZ) in Potsdam.
...
Each of the two satellites weighs 655 kilograms. To start, they are clamped on a carbon fiber fixture and released in orbit. For attitude control and control, each has 32 kilograms of fuel (nitrogen gas) on board
...
On December 12, the Grace-FO will be flown with a jumbo jet and 40 tons of equipment from Munich to California. At the Air Force Base in Vandenberg, the satellites are mounted on the fixture and tested again for their function. Then they come in a capsule on the Raktspitze, are refueled and started in mid-March 2018 with a Falcon rocket.

Offline speedevil

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4406
  • Fife
  • Liked: 2762
  • Likes Given: 3369
It's possible that given the news that the original GRACE sats are going to be decommissioned very soon that the Iridium launch order has been swapped to allow for the possibility of overlapping coverage with GRACE-FO as originally intended.  That would mean that the GRACE-FO+(5) IrNext sats would go up on Launch#4 instead of Launch#6.

Certainly not alas.
http://www2.csr.utexas.edu/grace/

Quote
After more than 15 productive years in orbit, the U.S./German GRACE (Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment) satellite mission has ended science operations. During their mission, the twin GRACE satellites have provided unprecedented insights into how our planet is changing by tracking the continuous movement of liquid water, ice and the solid Earth.

GRACE made science measurements by precisely measuring the distance between its twin satellites, GRACE-1 and GRACE-2, which required that both spacecraft and their instruments be fully functional. Following an age-related battery issue on GRACE-2 in September, it became apparent by mid-October that GRACE-2's remaining battery capacity would not be sufficient to operate its science instruments and telemetry transmitter. Consequently, the decision was made to decommission the GRACE-2 satellite and end GRACE's science mission.

Despite the loss of one of the twin GRACE satellites, the other satellite, GRACE-1, will continue operating through the end of 2017. "GRACE-1's remaining fuel will be used to complete previously planned maneuvers to calibrate and characterize its accelerometer to improve the final scientific return and insights from the 15-year GRACE record," said GRACE Project Scientist Carmen Boening of JPL.

Currently, GRACE-2's remaining fuel is being expended and the satellite has begun to slowly deorbit. Atmospheric reentry of GRACE-2 is expected sometime in December or January. Decommissioning and atmospheric reentry of GRACE-1 are expected in early 2018. NASA and the German Space Operations Center will jointly monitor the deorbit and reentry of both satellites.

Even if 'early 2018' overlaps with launch dates, the loss of one satellite means there is no meaningful gravitational measurement going on at all.

A fifteen year mission is just an awesome achievement.

I have not investigated closely and it appears that the GRACE-FO satellites are using a very similar design, and while in principle you could operate GRACE-FO with GRACE-1, the orbit GRACE-FO will be put in will be very much higher, so this is not possible, even if the satellites are actually compatible.

(GRACE1/2's orbit has decayed significantly)

Offline russianhalo117

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8749
  • Liked: 4660
  • Likes Given: 768
It's possible that given the news that the original GRACE sats are going to be decommissioned very soon that the Iridium launch order has been swapped to allow for the possibility of overlapping coverage with GRACE-FO as originally intended.  That would mean that the GRACE-FO+(5) IrNext sats would go up on Launch#4 instead of Launch#6.

Certainly not alas.
http://www2.csr.utexas.edu/grace/

Quote
After more than 15 productive years in orbit, the U.S./German GRACE (Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment) satellite mission has ended science operations. During their mission, the twin GRACE satellites have provided unprecedented insights into how our planet is changing by tracking the continuous movement of liquid water, ice and the solid Earth.

GRACE made science measurements by precisely measuring the distance between its twin satellites, GRACE-1 and GRACE-2, which required that both spacecraft and their instruments be fully functional. Following an age-related battery issue on GRACE-2 in September, it became apparent by mid-October that GRACE-2's remaining battery capacity would not be sufficient to operate its science instruments and telemetry transmitter. Consequently, the decision was made to decommission the GRACE-2 satellite and end GRACE's science mission.

Despite the loss of one of the twin GRACE satellites, the other satellite, GRACE-1, will continue operating through the end of 2017. "GRACE-1's remaining fuel will be used to complete previously planned maneuvers to calibrate and characterize its accelerometer to improve the final scientific return and insights from the 15-year GRACE record," said GRACE Project Scientist Carmen Boening of JPL.

Currently, GRACE-2's remaining fuel is being expended and the satellite has begun to slowly deorbit. Atmospheric reentry of GRACE-2 is expected sometime in December or January. Decommissioning and atmospheric reentry of GRACE-1 are expected in early 2018. NASA and the German Space Operations Center will jointly monitor the deorbit and reentry of both satellites.

Even if 'early 2018' overlaps with launch dates, the loss of one satellite means there is no meaningful gravitational measurement going on at all.

A fifteen year mission is just an awesome achievement.

I have not investigated closely and it appears that the GRACE-FO satellites are using a very similar design, and while in principle you could operate GRACE-FO with GRACE-1, the orbit GRACE-FO will be put in will be very much higher, so this is not possible, even if the satellites are actually compatible.

(GRACE1/2's orbit has decayed significantly)
GRACE 1 and 2 are at end of life station keeping wise and are super low on propellant. If there was an immediate means to refuel them then they could 2 or more decades. As for GRACE-FO, they are the GRACE-1 and 2 flight spares and have been in storage since they were built. The were pulled out of storage to receive minor upgrades of components and the addition of laser optics for ranging between the two spacecraft.

Offline speedevil

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4406
  • Fife
  • Liked: 2762
  • Likes Given: 3369
GRACE 1 and 2 are at end of life station keeping wise and are super low on propellant. If there was an immediate means to refuel them then they could 2 or more decades. As for GRACE-FO, they are the GRACE-1 and 2 flight spares and have been in storage since they were built. The were pulled out of storage to receive minor upgrades of components and the addition of laser optics for ranging between the two spacecraft.
I hadn't realised they were flight spares, thanks.
Grace 2 has had a pretty terminal battery issue, and seems unlikely to last decades.
(of course, if it was swapped...)

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10183
  • US
  • Liked: 13845
  • Likes Given: 5915
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : Mar 21/22, 2018
« Reply #35 on: 12/08/2017 09:20 pm »
Matt Desch said on twitter that this will use a new booster.

SpaceflightNow is showing a launch time of 6:43pm PDT (1:43am next day UTC).
« Last Edit: 12/08/2017 09:22 pm by gongora »

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6257
  • Liked: 4164
  • Likes Given: 6078
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : Mar 21/22, 2018
« Reply #36 on: 12/08/2017 11:05 pm »
Matt Desch said on twitter that this will use a new booster.

SpaceflightNow is showing a launch time of 6:43pm PDT (1:43am next day UTC).

If a new Block 5, he can use it for all remaining Iridium Next launches.
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47936
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 81286
  • Likes Given: 36776
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : Mar 21/22, 2018
« Reply #37 on: 12/12/2017 09:53 am »
Quote
US/German GRACE-FO gravity-research sats leave @AirbusSpace Germany for Calif. for spring launch to LEO on @SpaceX w/ 5 @IridiumComm mobile-comms sats. https://www.spaceintelreport.com/iridium/

https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/940528070938808321


Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47936
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 81286
  • Likes Given: 36776
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : Mar 21/22, 2018
« Reply #38 on: 12/12/2017 01:56 pm »
Quote
US/German GRACE-FO gravity-research sats leave @AirbusSpace Germany for Calif. for spring launch to LEO on @SpaceX w/ 5 @IridiumComm mobile-comms sats. https://www.spaceintelreport.com/iridium/

https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/940528070938808321

In response to above tweet:

Quote
Our rideshare partner for Iridium-6. Great working relationship; we're looking forward to flying together.

https://twitter.com/IridiumBoss/status/940595205371318273

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10183
  • US
  • Liked: 13845
  • Likes Given: 5915
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : Mar 21/22, 2018
« Reply #39 on: 12/12/2017 06:41 pm »
Tweet from Jeff Foust:
Quote
Freilich: GRACE Follow On expected to launch in March or April 2018 with Iridium satellites (on a Falcon 9). ICESat-2 making “tremendous progress” to Sept. 2018 launch. #AGU17

Offline Steven Pietrobon

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39048
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 32346
  • Likes Given: 8025
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : Mar 21/22, 2018
« Reply #40 on: 12/14/2017 02:02 am »
News | December 13, 2017
Next-Generation GRACE Satellites Arrive at Launch Site

A pair of advanced U.S./German Earth research satellites with some very big shoes to fill is now at California's Vandenberg Air Force Base to begin final preparations for launch next spring.

https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?feature=7025
Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #1:  Engineering is done with numbers.  Analysis without numbers is only an opinion.

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10183
  • US
  • Liked: 13845
  • Likes Given: 5915
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : Mar 21/22, 2018
« Reply #41 on: 01/22/2018 03:17 pm »
Iridium Announces Date for Fifth Iridium® NEXT Launch

First Iridium launch of 2018 set to begin rapid launch cadence targeting completion by mid-year
 
MCLEAN, Va., Jan. 22, 2018 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Iridium Communications Inc. (NASDAQ:IRDM) announced today that the fifth Iridium NEXT launch has been targeted by SpaceX for March 18, 2018 at 8:19 am PDT (15:19 UTC) from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California. The first of four launches planned for 2018, Iridium-5 will deliver 10 more Iridium NEXT satellites to orbit, bringing the total number of new satellites deployed to 50. This launch will use the same Falcon 9 first stage as the Iridium-3 launch that took place in October 2017 and begin a rapid-cadence launch schedule targeting completion of the Iridium manifest by mid-2018.

“We are entering the home stretch,” said Matt Desch, chief executive officer, at Iridium. “This is going to be a monumental year for us as we complete our constellation refresh. In addition to four launches, we will continue the testing and validation processes for our new specialty broadband service, Iridium CertusSM, and look forward to its commercial launch later this year. We consider 2017 to be a great success and anticipate this year to be even better.”

The Iridium network is comprised of six polar orbiting planes, each containing 11 operational crosslinked satellites, for a total of 66 satellites in the active constellation. The Iridium-5 launch will deliver the new satellites to orbital plane 1, where all 10 will go directly into service after testing and validation.  Following Iridium-5, the Iridium-6 Rideshare mission is targeted for mid-to-late April.  The Rideshare will carry five Iridium NEXT satellites and the twin satellites for the NASA/German Research Center for Geosciences (GFZ) Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment Follow-On mission. The final four launches will bring a total of 35 new satellites to space, completing the constellation of 66 operational satellites and 9 in-orbit spares.

Iridium NEXT is the company's $3 billion, next-generation, mobile, global satellite network scheduled for completion in 2018. The constellation features 66 active satellites, plus nine on-orbit spares. In total, 81 new satellites are being built, with the six remaining satellites serving as ground spares. Iridium NEXT will replace the company's existing global constellation in one of the largest technology upgrades ever completed in space.  It represents the evolution of critical communications infrastructure that governments and organizations worldwide rely on to drive business, enable connectivity, empower disaster relief efforts and more.

For more information about Iridium NEXT, please visit www.IridiumNEXT.com

Offline DaveJes1979

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 319
  • Toontown, CA
  • Liked: 86
  • Likes Given: 6
Given that the upcoming PAZ launch and Iridium 5 launches will expend their first stages, it looks like Iridium 6 will likely be the first Vandenberg RTLS mission.  That is unless, of course, the secondary payloads make the rocket too heavy for RTLS.  However, the current manifest chart says that the Iridium 6 payload is "~6k" kg, lighter than the usual 9600 kg Iridium missions.

Add to this the fact that the first stage is brand-new, unlike the block 3 first stages they have been throwing away in expendable missions.
« Last Edit: 02/02/2018 01:05 am by DaveJes1979 »

Offline scr00chy

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1185
  • Czechia
    • ElonX.net
  • Liked: 1684
  • Likes Given: 1589
Given that the upcoming PAZ launch and Iridium 5 launches will expend their first stages, it looks like Iridium 6 will likely be the first Vandenberg RTLS mission.  That is unless, of course, the secondary payloads make the rocket too heavy for RTLS.  However, the current manifest chart says "~6k", lighter than the usual 9600 lbs. Iridium missions.
What about the harbor seals? Isn't SpaceX prevented from making RTLS attempts between March and June (pupping season)?

Offline DaveJes1979

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 319
  • Toontown, CA
  • Liked: 86
  • Likes Given: 6
I've never heard of that limitation, Sc00chy.  Do you have a source for that?

Offline AnalogMan

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3429
  • Cambridge, UK
  • Liked: 1597
  • Likes Given: 50
I've never heard of that limitation, Sc00chy.  Do you have a source for that?

NOAA Incidental Harassment Authorization - November 30, 2017
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/research/spacex_2017iha_issued.pdf

4. Mitigation Requirements

The holder of this Authorization must implement the following mitigation measures:
(a) Unless constrained by other factors including human safety or national security concerns, launches must be scheduled to avoid boost-backs and landings during the harbor seal pupping season of March through June when practicable.


OCR copy attached

Offline DaveJes1979

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 319
  • Toontown, CA
  • Liked: 86
  • Likes Given: 6
Hmm, so no Vandenberg RTLS until July, I guess.

Offline vaporcobra

I wouldn't be so certain, although it seems probable. The "when practicable" language essentially gives SpaceX some level of wiggle room.

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10183
  • US
  • Liked: 13845
  • Likes Given: 5915
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : late April, 2018
« Reply #48 on: 02/22/2018 07:40 pm »
Tweet from Peter B. de Selding:
Quote
For @IridiumComm, if @SpaceX launches today OK as planned, the 5th IRDM 10-sat Falcon 9 launch should occur on March 29. Then 6th F9 launch end-April.

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10183
  • US
  • Liked: 13845
  • Likes Given: 5915
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : late April, 2018
« Reply #49 on: 02/23/2018 02:29 am »
GRACE-FO on the top dispenser, Iridium on the bottom dispenser.

Quote
"Following next month’s launch, our cadence with SpaceX should move more rapidly as launch frequency is planned to increase to approximately one launch every five to six weeks or so. In fact, our sixth launch is currently scheduled for a quick turnaround at the end of April, that will be a rideshare with the JPL German Grace satellites in which we’ll utilize half of the payload to launch five Iridium NEXT satellites alongside the two Grace satellites which will be mounted on the dispenser above ours."

Online ChrisC

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2212
  • Liked: 1537
  • Likes Given: 1741
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : late April, 2018
« Reply #50 on: 02/23/2018 01:37 pm »
Note: above quote is from Iridium's 4th Quarter conference call.
PSA #1: EST does NOT mean "Eastern Time".  Use "Eastern" or "ET" instead, all year round, and avoid this common error.  Google "EST vs EDT".
PSA #2: It's and its: know the difference and quietly impress grammar pedants.  Google "angry flower its" .  *** See profile for two more NSF forum tips. ***

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10183
  • US
  • Liked: 13845
  • Likes Given: 5915
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : late April, 2018
« Reply #51 on: 02/23/2018 01:53 pm »
Some relevant Tweets:
Quote
Tagnan:
What about iridium 6? At the very least do you know if it will be reused or not?

Matt Desch:
Considering, but its a ride share so a little more complicated and hasn't been totally finalized...

Tagnan:
How much do ride shares get to decide in terms of vehicle used and other options?

Matt Desch:
It's a cooperative effort, and mostly decided up front in a contract, or in ongoing discussions as you jointly prepare and project manage towards the launch.  In this case, we're the lead with SpaceX, but we work to make sure decisions are right for our rideshare partner too.

Offline DaveJes1979

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 319
  • Toontown, CA
  • Liked: 86
  • Likes Given: 6
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : late April, 2018
« Reply #52 on: 03/13/2018 01:44 am »
Less than 2 months out. Still no info on 1st stage recovery?

Offline Jakusb

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1207
  • NL
  • Liked: 1215
  • Likes Given: 637
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : late April, 2018
« Reply #53 on: 03/13/2018 08:32 am »
I expect/predict that core 1043 is being refurbed for this launch...
If it does require a new core it must be 1047. In that case 1043 would most likely be used for IridiumNext-7...

Offline vaporcobra

I expect/predict that core 1043 is being refurbed for this launch...
If it does require a new core it must be 1047. In that case 1043 would most likely be used for IridiumNext-7...

Interesting, even in spite of the NASA science payload? I've assumed that GRACE-FO are somewhat more valuable/irreplaceable than a Cargo Dragon, the only mission type we've yet to see NASA accept flight-proven boosters for. With TESS, LSP didn't even want it to fly on the first new Block 5 core, let alone a flight-proven booster.

Offline Skyrocket

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2631
  • Frankfurt am Main, Germany
  • Liked: 939
  • Likes Given: 172
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : late April, 2018
« Reply #55 on: 03/13/2018 10:57 pm »
I expect/predict that core 1043 is being refurbed for this launch...
If it does require a new core it must be 1047. In that case 1043 would most likely be used for IridiumNext-7...

Interesting, even in spite of the NASA science payload? I've assumed that GRACE-FO are somewhat more valuable/irreplaceable than a Cargo Dragon, the only mission type we've yet to see NASA accept flight-proven boosters for. With TESS, LSP didn't even want it to fly on the first new Block 5 core, let alone a flight-proven booster.

Concerning the launch, GRACE-FO is not a NASA payload, but a DLR payload. The German partners of the project are responsible for launch (which allowed the earlier launch manifesting on a Dnepr rocket).

Offline Jakusb

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1207
  • NL
  • Liked: 1215
  • Likes Given: 637
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : late April, 2018
« Reply #56 on: 03/13/2018 10:58 pm »
I expect/predict that core 1043 is being refurbed for this launch...
If it does require a new core it must be 1047. In that case 1043 would most likely be used for IridiumNext-7...

Interesting, even in spite of the NASA science payload? I've assumed that GRACE-FO are somewhat more valuable/irreplaceable than a Cargo Dragon, the only mission type we've yet to see NASA accept flight-proven boosters for. With TESS, LSP didn't even want it to fly on the first new Block 5 core, let alone a flight-proven booster.

My prediction is purely based on availability. And a little bit of wishful thinking.
1046 is still @McGregor....
We will see, soon enough if the mission starts moving right.
At this point a flight-proven booster that has done just a LEO mission and proven to refly 10(11?) times, or a brand new Block-5 of which the first still has not had a full duration burn...?!?

Something with a paradigm-shift maybe..

Offline deruch

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2422
  • California
  • Liked: 2006
  • Likes Given: 5634
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : late April, 2018
« Reply #57 on: 03/13/2018 10:59 pm »
I expect/predict that core 1043 is being refurbed for this launch...
If it does require a new core it must be 1047. In that case 1043 would most likely be used for IridiumNext-7...

Interesting, even in spite of the NASA science payload? I've assumed that GRACE-FO are somewhat more valuable/irreplaceable than a Cargo Dragon, the only mission type we've yet to see NASA accept flight-proven boosters for. With TESS, LSP didn't even want it to fly on the first new Block 5 core, let alone a flight-proven booster.

The GRACE-FO mission was contracted by Germany's DLR and not NASA's Launch Services Program, so maybe that could be a potential factor.  But, I doubt it really changes anything and believe this will launch on a new, non-Block 5 F9.  According to Matt Desch [see tweets quoted by gongora a few posts up], Iridium is the lead on contract with SpaceX and they have discretion to do what they want but it would be pretty amazing if they made a choice that their partners weren't fully on board with.  I believe that comment was in response to fairing reuse, not booster reuse but I'm not fully sure.

edit: ninja'd by Gunter re:DLR involvement/direction.

edit2:  For clarity, my belief is that SpaceX built them a legacy core (not Block 5) even if they had planned to be switched to full Block 5 production.  I won't be too surprised if the same is in progress for the Air Force's GPS-3 launch.  Though, they may have enough flight data by then to make that a non-issue.
« Last Edit: 03/13/2018 11:03 pm by deruch »
Shouldn't reality posts be in "Advanced concepts"?  --Nomadd

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10183
  • US
  • Liked: 13845
  • Likes Given: 5915
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : late April, 2018
« Reply #58 on: 03/13/2018 11:01 pm »
I expect/predict that core 1043 is being refurbed for this launch...
If it does require a new core it must be 1047. In that case 1043 would most likely be used for IridiumNext-7...

Interesting, even in spite of the NASA science payload? I've assumed that GRACE-FO are somewhat more valuable/irreplaceable than a Cargo Dragon, the only mission type we've yet to see NASA accept flight-proven boosters for. With TESS, LSP didn't even want it to fly on the first new Block 5 core, let alone a flight-proven booster.

LSP is only a consultant on this flight, they're not procuring it.

Offline Lewis007

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1661
  • the Netherlands
  • Liked: 549
  • Likes Given: 120
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : late April, 2018
« Reply #59 on: 03/14/2018 06:26 am »
Some pics of the GRACE-FO sats processed for launch in a VAFB clean room

Offline Jakusb

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1207
  • NL
  • Liked: 1215
  • Likes Given: 637
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : late April, 2018
« Reply #60 on: 03/14/2018 07:58 am »
edit2:  For clarity, my belief is that SpaceX built them a legacy core (not Block 5) even if they had planned to be switched to full Block 5 production.  I won't be too surprised if the same is in progress for the Air Force's GPS-3 launch.  Though, they may have enough flight data by then to make that a non-issue.

If this is the case it must be 1047 or more unlikely 1048 to be a non-Block5 core.
Thing is, when I spoke (a while back) to an insider of McGregor, there was mention of the engines of 1047 to be @McGregor, but no mention them being older version then those for 1046. No explicit mention them being new either, but it would be more mention worthy if they had been older version...
Anyway, core 1047 is not yet seen, so expected to still be @Hawthorne, as is 1048.
Time is running out for them to be tested in time @McGregor to make a timely launch end of april.
I guess there are 2 weeks left +/- 1 week for these cores to arrive and be tested @McGregor.

My money is still on Block4 1043-2... They have reflown 9 cores without incident...
But time will tell. Will be interesting to see core 1047 @McGregor and if it is Block5 or not...

edit: added "a while back"
« Last Edit: 03/14/2018 08:00 am by Jakusb »

Offline vaporcobra

NET April 28. No mention of recovery ops in this particular STA. 

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10183
  • US
  • Liked: 13845
  • Likes Given: 5915
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : late April, 2018
« Reply #62 on: 03/19/2018 04:06 pm »
NET April 28. No mention of recovery ops in this particular STA.

Recovery ops would be a separate STA (and there isn't one  :) )

Offline vaporcobra

NET April 28. No mention of recovery ops in this particular STA.

Recovery ops would be a separate STA (and there isn't one  :) )

My memory may be failing me (apologies if this is a rehash), but looking through the current FCC license for seven Iridium launches from VAFB, it explicitly does not permit/mention booster landings at SLC-4's LZ, pretty much precluding any attempt at a land recovery until the license is updated/replaced.
https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/licenses_permits/media/LLS%2017-096B%20Rev%202.pdf

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10183
  • US
  • Liked: 13845
  • Likes Given: 5915
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : late April, 2018
« Reply #64 on: 03/20/2018 01:51 pm »
NET April 28. No mention of recovery ops in this particular STA.

Recovery ops would be a separate STA (and there isn't one  :) )

My memory may be failing me (apologies if this is a rehash), but looking through the current FCC license for seven Iridium launches from VAFB, it explicitly does not permit/mention booster landings at SLC-4's LZ, pretty much precluding any attempt at a land recovery until the license is updated/replaced.
https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/licenses_permits/media/LLS%2017-096B%20Rev%202.pdf

I forgot about that little detail on landing, but this flight also requires a new or amended FAA license anyway.  This flight isn't in the group of seven that is covered by the current license, it's the eighth contracted flight and has a different payload.

Offline Craig_VG

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 219
  • Liked: 730
  • Likes Given: 528
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : late April, 2018
« Reply #65 on: 03/21/2018 08:51 pm »
This launch will be on a flight proven booster

Matt Desch is in discussions on this being Block 5, and if it is it will be a reflown Block 5
ahh I read that incorrectly

https://twitter.com/IridiumBoss/status/976575188614762496
« Last Edit: 03/21/2018 09:18 pm by Craig_VG »

Offline cppetrie

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 792
  • Liked: 552
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : late April, 2018
« Reply #66 on: 03/21/2018 08:59 pm »
Matt Desch is in discussions on this being Block 5, and if it is it will be a reflown Block 5


https://twitter.com/IridiumBoss/status/976575188614762496
Won’t be a block 5 if it’s reused. First block 5 will only have flown a couple of weeks prior and from the wrong coast.

Offline Jakusb

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1207
  • NL
  • Liked: 1215
  • Likes Given: 637
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : late April, 2018
« Reply #67 on: 03/21/2018 09:34 pm »
I have been predicting this mission to fly on 1043-2 (Zuma core)... ;)
All is converging to this prediction now.. 8)

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10183
  • US
  • Liked: 13845
  • Likes Given: 5915
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : late April, 2018
« Reply #68 on: 03/28/2018 02:37 am »
The Spaceflight Now launch schedule has this slipping to NET May 10.

Offline deruch

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2422
  • California
  • Liked: 2006
  • Likes Given: 5634
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : late April, 2018
« Reply #69 on: 03/29/2018 06:40 am »
NET April 28. No mention of recovery ops in this particular STA.

Recovery ops would be a separate STA (and there isn't one  :) )

My memory may be failing me (apologies if this is a rehash), but looking through the current FCC license for seven Iridium launches from VAFB, it explicitly does not permit/mention booster landings at SLC-4's LZ, pretty much precluding any attempt at a land recovery until the license is updated/replaced.
https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/licenses_permits/media/LLS%2017-096B%20Rev%202.pdf

The Iridium FAA Launch License has been updated to add Iridium-6/GRACE-FO [.pdf warning] on March 22nd!  (also attached for posterity)

List of relevant changes:
1. Changes usage of "Falcon 9 Version 1.2" to just "Falcon 9" throughout.  [this has also been done for other recent F9 licenses]
2. Changes licensed number of flights from 7 to 8 in all instances.
3. Adds one launch of 5 Iridium NEXT payloads and 2 GRACE-FO payloads.
4. Expands allowable flight azimuths from "175 to 180 degrees" to "175 to 182 degrees".
5. Increased Govt. Property Insurance policy requirement for pre-flight activities from $1M to $2M.

Unchanged:  Still specifically calls out landing the stages on ASDS or in the ocean.  RTLS not allowed with this license. 
« Last Edit: 03/29/2018 07:46 am by deruch »
Shouldn't reality posts be in "Advanced concepts"?  --Nomadd

Offline vaporcobra

NET May 10 per Vandenberg launch alert emails.

Offline Chris Bergin

Iridium Announces Target Launch Date for the Iridium-6/GRACE-FO Mission

Unique “Rideshare” Mission will Deploy Two Sets of Satellites in Two Separate Orbits

MCLEAN, Va. – April 9, 2018 – Iridium Communications Inc. (NASDAQ: IRDM) announced today that the Iridium-6/GRACE-FO rideshare mission, the sixth Iridium® NEXT launch overall, has been targeted for launch by SpaceX from Vandenberg Air Force Base (VAFB) in California for May 19, 2018 at approximately 1:03 PM PDT (20:03 UTC). An exact instantaneous launch window time will be available closer to launch. The second of four Iridium launches planned for 2018, this mission will deliver five Iridium NEXT satellites to orbit, alongside the twin satellites for the NASA/German Research Center for Geosciences (GFZ) Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment Follow-On (GRACE-FO) mission. Collaboratively chosen by all parties and considering range availability, this launch date maintains scheduled completion of the Iridium NEXT manifest in 2018.

This unique “rideshare” launch, will first deploy the twin GRACE-FO spacecraft, after which the Falcon 9 second stage will continue onward to the deployment orbit for the five Iridium NEXT satellites. Upon completion, the Iridium-6/GRACE-FO mission will increase the total number of Iridium NEXT satellites in space to 55, leaving just two launches, of 10 satellites each, remaining.  Iridium NEXT satellites are scheduled to begin shipping to the launch site this week while the twin GRACE-FO spacecraft are already onsite at the VAFB Harris Corporation facility, and have been stacked, attached to their dispenser and are preparing for transfer to the SpaceX launch complex.

For this mission, all five Iridium NEXT satellites will be delivered to orbital plane six. The Iridium network is comprised of six polar orbiting planes, each containing 11 operational crosslinked satellites, for a total of 66 satellites in the active constellation. The 2018 Iridium NEXT launch series will bring a total of 35 new satellites to space, completing the constellation of 66 operational satellites and 9 in-orbit spares. In total, 81 new satellites are being built, with the six remaining satellites serving as ground spares.

Iridium NEXT is the company's $3 billion, next-generation, mobile, global satellite network scheduled for completion in 2018.  Iridium NEXT will replace the company's existing global constellation in one of the largest technology upgrades ever completed in space.  It represents the evolution of critical communications infrastructure that governments and organizations worldwide rely on to drive business, enable connectivity, empower disaster relief efforts and more.

For more information about Iridium NEXT, please visit www.IridiumNEXT.com
Support NSF via L2 -- Help improve NSF -- Site Rules/Feedback/Updates
**Not a L2 member? Whitelist this forum in your adblocker to support the site and ensure full functionality.**

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47936
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 81286
  • Likes Given: 36776
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : NET May 19, 2018
« Reply #72 on: 04/09/2018 02:57 pm »
Iridium shipping starts this week:

Quote
Launch date for Iridium-6/GRACE-FO mission now set: Saturday, May 19th at approximately 1:03 pm PDT (20:03 UTC).  May 20th backup. Five more Iridium NEXT satellites will start shipping this week to VAFB; the 2 GRACE-FO sats are already at the base.  #RidesharingMakesSense!

https://twitter.com/iridiumboss/status/983357276852453377

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47936
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 81286
  • Likes Given: 36776

Offline Ultrafamicom

  • Member
  • Posts: 73
  • Liked: 22
  • Likes Given: 27
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : NET May 19, 2018
« Reply #74 on: 04/10/2018 11:08 am »
I’m a bit confused about this mission profile ???

Iridium satellites (5)
   Payload Mass: 860kg per satellite plus 500kg for dispenser.
   Launch orbit: 625km, 86.66 degrees

GRACE-FO satellites (2)
   Payload Mass: 580kg per satellite plus dispenser.
   Orbit: 490km, 89 degrees

According to the topic post, the Iridium and GRACE-FO will be launched into orbits with different inclinations and altitudes. So even assuming a direct orbit insertion to one of the target orbits, it still requires 3 restarts of S2 in order to deliver the payloads to target orbit and then deorbit. While M1Ds on the S1 have performed multiple 4 burn RTLS and ASDS missions, have S2 and M1D Vac been verified for such mission?

And besides, given the different inclinations,a plane changing maneuver in LEO is required, which is very unefficient (about 370m/s for 2.6 degrees), perhaps it would be better to deliver the heavier Iridiums first and then maneuver for GRACE-FO?
« Last Edit: 04/10/2018 11:10 am by Ultrafamicom »

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12092
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 18181
  • Likes Given: 12139
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : NET May 19, 2018
« Reply #75 on: 04/10/2018 11:38 am »
I’m a bit confused about this mission profile ???

Iridium satellites (5)
   Payload Mass: 860kg per satellite plus 500kg for dispenser.
   Launch orbit: 625km, 86.66 degrees

GRACE-FO satellites (2)
   Payload Mass: 580kg per satellite plus dispenser.
   Orbit: 490km, 89 degrees

According to the topic post, the Iridium and GRACE-FO will be launched into orbits with different inclinations and altitudes. So even assuming a direct orbit insertion to one of the target orbits, it still requires 3 restarts of S2 in order to deliver the payloads to target orbit and then deorbit. While M1Ds on the S1 have performed multiple 4 burn RTLS and ASDS missions, have S2 and M1D Vac been verified for such mission?

And besides, given the different inclinations,a plane changing maneuver in LEO is required, which is very unefficient (about 370m/s for 2.6 degrees), perhaps it would be better to deliver the heavier Iridiums first and then maneuver for GRACE-FO?

Please note the rather significant difference in orbital altitude between GRACE-FO and the Iridium sats and than remember that neither GRACE-FO, nor the Iridium sats have circularisation capabilities.
« Last Edit: 04/10/2018 11:39 am by woods170 »

Online OneSpeed

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1580
  • Liked: 4897
  • Likes Given: 2063
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : NET May 19, 2018
« Reply #76 on: 04/10/2018 12:09 pm »
I’m a bit confused about this mission profile ???

Iridium satellites (5)
   Payload Mass: 860kg per satellite plus 500kg for dispenser.
   Launch orbit: 625km, 86.66 degrees

GRACE-FO satellites (2)
   Payload Mass: 580kg per satellite plus dispenser.
   Orbit: 490km, 89 degrees

According to the topic post, the Iridium and GRACE-FO will be launched into orbits with different inclinations and altitudes. So even assuming a direct orbit insertion to one of the target orbits, it still requires 3 restarts of S2 in order to deliver the payloads to target orbit and then deorbit. While M1Ds on the S1 have performed multiple 4 burn RTLS and ASDS missions, have S2 and M1D Vac been verified for such mission?

For the Falcon Heavy Demo mission, S2 performed three burns. The first to 166 x 200kms, the second to 200 x 7000kms, and the third after a nearly 6 hour coast to heliocentric orbit.

And besides, given the different inclinations,a plane changing maneuver in LEO is required, which is very unefficient (about 370m/s for 2.6 degrees), perhaps it would be better to deliver the heavier Iridiums first and then maneuver for GRACE-FO?

This unique “rideshare” launch, will first deploy the twin GRACE-FO spacecraft, after which the Falcon 9 second stage will continue onward to the deployment orbit for the five Iridium NEXT satellites.

Please note the rather significant difference in orbital altitude between GRACE-FO and the Iridium sats and than remember that neither GRACE-FO, nor the Iridium sats have circularisation capabilities.

I see what Ultrafamicom is getting at, but if you deploy the Iridium satellites first, you then require the same plane change (admittedly of less mass), combined with the additional ∆V of a reduction in perigee, a circularisation at 490kms before deployment of the GRACE-FO satellites, and ultimately a de-orbit burn. So, four S2 burns, and probably a higher ∆V requirement.

Online ZachS09

  • Space Savant
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8405
  • Roanoke, TX
  • Liked: 2343
  • Likes Given: 2057
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : NET May 19, 2018
« Reply #77 on: 04/10/2018 01:15 pm »
I'm predicting that the second stage will directly insert itself into the GRACE-FO orbit (490 km, inclined 89 degrees) before the second burn increases the apogee and lowers the inclination while the third burn circularizes the Iridium-NEXT orbit (625 km, inclined 86.66 degrees).
Liftoff for St. Jude's! Go Dragon, Go Falcon, Godspeed Inspiration4!

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12092
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 18181
  • Likes Given: 12139
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : NET May 19, 2018
« Reply #78 on: 04/10/2018 01:22 pm »
Please note the rather significant difference in orbital altitude between GRACE-FO and the Iridium sats and than remember that neither GRACE-FO, nor the Iridium sats have circularisation capabilities.

I see what Ultrafamicom is getting at, but if you deploy the Iridium satellites first, you then require the same plane change (admittedly of less mass), combined with the additional ∆V of a reduction in perigee, a circularisation at 490kms before deployment of the GRACE-FO satellites, and ultimately a de-orbit burn. So, four S2 burns, and probably a higher ∆V requirement.

Indeed. And although an F9 S2 is quite capable it does make sense to do things as efficiently as possible. Which precludes dropping off the Iridium sats first.

Offline Semmel

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2178
  • Germany
  • Liked: 2433
  • Likes Given: 11916
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : NET May 19, 2018
« Reply #79 on: 04/10/2018 01:53 pm »
Please note the rather significant difference in orbital altitude between GRACE-FO and the Iridium sats and than remember that neither GRACE-FO, nor the Iridium sats have circularisation capabilities.

I see what Ultrafamicom is getting at, but if you deploy the Iridium satellites first, you then require the same plane change (admittedly of less mass), combined with the additional ∆V of a reduction in perigee, a circularisation at 490kms before deployment of the GRACE-FO satellites, and ultimately a de-orbit burn. So, four S2 burns, and probably a higher ∆V requirement.

Indeed. And although an F9 S2 is quite capable it does make sense to do things as efficiently as possible. Which precludes dropping off the Iridium sats first.

Also, for structural reasons, it makes sense to put the heavier sats below the light sats. Otherwise the payload would be quite top heavy in comparison..

Offline Ultrafamicom

  • Member
  • Posts: 73
  • Liked: 22
  • Likes Given: 27
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : NET May 19, 2018
« Reply #80 on: 04/10/2018 02:13 pm »
Please note the rather significant difference in orbital altitude between GRACE-FO and the Iridium sats and than remember that neither GRACE-FO, nor the Iridium sats have circularisation capabilities.

I see what Ultrafamicom is getting at, but if you deploy the Iridium satellites first, you then require the same plane change (admittedly of less mass), combined with the additional ∆V of a reduction in perigee, a circularisation at 490kms before deployment of the GRACE-FO satellites, and ultimately a de-orbit burn. So, four S2 burns, and probably a higher ∆V requirement.

Indeed. And although an F9 S2 is quite capable it does make sense to do things as efficiently as possible. Which precludes dropping off the Iridium sats first.

For efficiency it is preferred to drop off the Iridium sats first.
While plane change cost near 400m/s delta-v, launching to 625km costs only 70m/s more than 490km(may be a little more for direct ascension). So the options are 1. haul 6t to GRACE-FO orbit, release 1.2t, burn 400m/s with 4.8t  payload, deorbit(+35m/s for higher apogee) 2. haul 6t to GRACE-FO orbit plus 70m/s, release 4.3t, burn 400m/s  with 1.7t  payload, deorbit. The latter one seems to be better.

A real concern may be the structures, thanks Semmel for pointing out.
« Last Edit: 04/10/2018 02:15 pm by Ultrafamicom »

Online Comga

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6460
  • Liked: 4567
  • Likes Given: 5105
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : NET May 19, 2018
« Reply #81 on: 04/10/2018 02:52 pm »
I'm predicting that the second stage will directly insert itself into the GRACE-FO orbit (490 km, inclined 89 degrees) before the second burn increases the apogee and lowers the inclination while the third burn circularizes the Iridium-NEXT orbit (625 km, inclined 86.66 degrees).

"Discussion without numerical analysis is just opinion."
There is always an optimum distribution of the plane change between the two burns.
It generally goes as the ratio of the velocities.
Given that these orbits are not significantly different in velocity, like between the perigee and apogee of a GTO, the plane change will be nearly evenly split, with slightly more than half at the slower upper orbit.
Of course, given that this post is also without numerical analysis, it is also just an opinion, but we can say that "the exercise is left to the reader."  :)
What kind of wastrels would dump a perfectly good booster in the ocean after just one use?

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8142
  • Liked: 6799
  • Likes Given: 2963
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : NET May 19, 2018
« Reply #82 on: 04/10/2018 04:33 pm »
Please note the rather significant difference in orbital altitude between GRACE-FO and the Iridium sats and than remember that neither GRACE-FO, nor the Iridium sats have circularisation capabilities.

I see what Ultrafamicom is getting at, but if you deploy the Iridium satellites first, you then require the same plane change (admittedly of less mass), combined with the additional ∆V of a reduction in perigee, a circularisation at 490kms before deployment of the GRACE-FO satellites, and ultimately a de-orbit burn. So, four S2 burns, and probably a higher ∆V requirement.

Indeed. And although an F9 S2 is quite capable it does make sense to do things as efficiently as possible. Which precludes dropping off the Iridium sats first.

Also, for structural reasons, it makes sense to put the heavier sats below the light sats. Otherwise the payload would be quite top heavy in comparison..

Aren't the Iridium satellites ejected to the side? Why couldn't they put the Iridiums on the bottom and still eject them first?

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8823
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1318
  • Likes Given: 306
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : NET May 19, 2018
« Reply #83 on: 04/10/2018 07:02 pm »
Also, for structural reasons, it makes sense to put the heavier sats below the light sats. Otherwise the payload would be quite top heavy in comparison..

Huh? From a rocket control perspective, the farther forward you move the rocket's center of mass (Top Heavy), the easier the control problem becomes. That's why the LOX tank is usually above the kero tank in most rocket first stage designs. The only real exception is some LH upper-stages where it is reversed due to it being more mass efficient to run LH piping around and through the much smaller LOX tank.
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8142
  • Liked: 6799
  • Likes Given: 2963
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : NET May 19, 2018
« Reply #84 on: 04/10/2018 08:28 pm »
Also, for structural reasons, it makes sense to put the heavier sats below the light sats. Otherwise the payload would be quite top heavy in comparison..

Huh? From a rocket control perspective, the farther forward you move the rocket's center of mass (Top Heavy), the easier the control problem becomes. That's why the LOX tank is usually above the kero tank in most rocket first stage designs. The only real exception is some LH upper-stages where it is reversed due to it being more mass efficient to run LH piping around and through the much smaller LOX tank.

Control and structural concerns are separate. If the Iridiums are on top, the GRACE-FO dispenser has to support their 4800 kg mass under 6 g acceleration (plus vibration, out of axis loads, etc.).

Offline vaporcobra

We've known this for awhile. GRACE-FO on the top dispenser.

GRACE-FO on the top dispenser, Iridium on the bottom dispenser.

Quote
"Following next month’s launch, our cadence with SpaceX should move more rapidly as launch frequency is planned to increase to approximately one launch every five to six weeks or so. In fact, our sixth launch is currently scheduled for a quick turnaround at the end of April, that will be a rideshare with the JPL German Grace satellites in which we’ll utilize half of the payload to launch five Iridium NEXT satellites alongside the two Grace satellites which will be mounted on the dispenser above ours."

Offline Targeteer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6106
  • near hangar 18
  • Liked: 3315
  • Likes Given: 1125
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : NET May 19, 2018
« Reply #86 on: 04/10/2018 09:06 pm »
April 10, 2018
MEDIA ADVISORY M18-057
NASA Invites Media to Launch of GRACE Follow-On Spacecraft
 

The two satellites that make up NASA’s Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment Follow-On (GRACE-FO) mission, launching May 19, 2018, will monitor changes in ice sheets and glaciers, underground water storage and sea level, providing a unique view of Earth’s climate that has far-reaching benefits.

Credits: NASA

Media accreditation now is open to cover the launch of NASA’s Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment Follow-On (GRACE-FO) mission – twin satellites that constitute the agency’s latest Earth-observing mission.

GRACE-FO will continue the task of the original GRACE mission, providing critical measurements that will be used with other data to monitor the movement of water masses across the planet and mass changes within the Earth itself. Monitoring changes in ice sheets and glaciers, underground water storage and sea level provides a unique view of Earth’s climate and has far-reaching benefits.

GRACE-FO will launch as part of a commercial rideshare mission with five Iridium Communications Inc. satellites aboard a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket. The Iridium-6/GRACE-FO launch is scheduled for no earlier than 1:03 p.m. PDT (4:03 p.m. EDT) May 19 from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California.

Media who are interested in covering the launch at Vandenberg can apply by emailing [email protected].

Media who are foreign nationals or green card holders must complete an online application and provide a photocopy of their passport to [email protected] no later than 2 p.m. PDT Monday, April 16. Media who are U.S. citizens must apply online no later than 2 p.m. Sunday, May 13.

Vandenberg Air Force Base security will have final authority to decide which media are credentialed to cover launches, and submitting the request by the deadline does not guarantee approval.

NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California, manages the GRACE-FO mission for the agency’s Science Mission Directorate in Washington, under the direction of the Earth Systematic Missions Program Office at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland.

The spacecraft were built by Airbus Defence and Space in Friedrichshafen, Germany, under subcontract to JPL. The GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences contracted GRACE-FO launch services from Iridium. GFZ has subcontracted mission operations to the German Aerospace Center (DLR), which operates the German Space Operations Center in Oberpfaffenhofen, Germany.

Additional details on the mission and prelaunch media activities will be announced closer to the launch date.

For more information on GRACE-FO, visit:

https://www.nasa.gov/gracefo
Best quote heard during an inspection, "I was unaware that I was the only one who was aware."

Offline Steven Pietrobon

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39048
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 32346
  • Likes Given: 8025
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : NET May 19, 2018
« Reply #87 on: 04/11/2018 06:08 am »
I'm predicting that the second stage will directly insert itself into the GRACE-FO orbit (490 km, inclined 89 degrees) before the second burn increases the apogee and lowers the inclination while the third burn circularizes the Iridium-NEXT orbit (625 km, inclined 86.66 degrees).

Actually, you want to split the plane change at both perigee and apogee to get the best performance. This saves you 57 m/s! Attached is the program I used to calculated this.

Enter initial perigee height (km): 490
Enter initial apogee height (km): 490
Enter required inclination change (deg): 2.34
Enter final orbit height (km): 625

theta1 =  2.34 deg, dv1 =  339.4 m/s
theta2 =  0.00 deg, dv2 =  144.7 m/s
dv =  484.0 m/s

theta1 =  1.26 deg, dv1 =  218.4 m/s
theta2 =  1.08 deg, dv2 =  208.7 m/s
dv =  427.1 m/s
« Last Edit: 04/11/2018 06:18 am by Steven Pietrobon »
Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #1:  Engineering is done with numbers.  Analysis without numbers is only an opinion.

Offline vaporcobra

Brian Webb (Vandy's Launch Alert dude) may have just suggested that Iridium-6 and Iridium-7 have swapped spots. I'm checking to see if it was a mistake, but it seems unlikely given that he uses the correct satellite numbers for 6-8.

Offline cppetrie

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 792
  • Liked: 552
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : NET May 19, 2018
« Reply #89 on: 04/16/2018 05:44 am »
Brian Webb (Vandy's Launch Alert dude) may have just suggested that Iridium-6 and Iridium-7 have swapped spots. I'm checking to see if it was a mistake, but it seems unlikely given that he uses the correct satellite numbers for 6-8.
Seems like typo. He has a second GRACE-FO pair going with 10 Iridium sats in August. That’s not even possible let alone not what the plan is.

Online ZachS09

  • Space Savant
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8405
  • Roanoke, TX
  • Liked: 2343
  • Likes Given: 2057
Re: SpaceX F9 : Iridium NEXT 6 with GRACE-FO : NET May 19, 2018
« Reply #90 on: 04/25/2018 03:49 pm »
Quote
May 19 2018 on a new Falcon 9

Do we not have confirmation from Matt Desch that this will be flight-proven?

It was said that Core B1043 would be used on the Iridium-NEXT F6 & GRACE-FO mission.

And obviously, because it's a Block 4 booster, it will be expended with a considerable amount of fuel left for EDL tests.
« Last Edit: 04/25/2018 03:50 pm by ZachS09 »
Liftoff for St. Jude's! Go Dragon, Go Falcon, Godspeed Inspiration4!

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10183
  • US
  • Liked: 13845
  • Likes Given: 5915
Tweet from Matt Desch:
Quote
The first few satellites went through full vacuum and thermal (and acoustic etc) tests to validate the design (and assembly processes).  Subsequent vehicles only go through thermal cycling to validate assembly workmanship.

Offline speedevil

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4406
  • Fife
  • Liked: 2762
  • Likes Given: 3369
Some pre-launch information on GRACE-FO.
I don't think there is anything that has not been well covered before.


Offline andrewsdanj

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 145
  • Liked: 105
  • Likes Given: 51
From the update thread we apparently have two 'second stage' entry areas active 11 minutes apart. Have we seen this before? Are we about to see some more aggressive/active S2 entry testing?

Offline SciNews

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 812
  • Romania
  • Liked: 737
  • Likes Given: 6
Some pre-launch information on GRACE-FO.
I don't think there is anything that has not been well covered before.
Edited version of the video with added illustration of GRACE-FO components, short time-lapse of installation and a picture of the twin satellites.

Online ZachS09

  • Space Savant
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8405
  • Roanoke, TX
  • Liked: 2343
  • Likes Given: 2057
Remind me if this question was answered already:

Does GRACE-FO use the same dispenser as the one for Iridium-NEXT? If not, then the top dispenser should be lighter than 500 kilograms.
« Last Edit: 05/16/2018 02:58 pm by ZachS09 »
Liftoff for St. Jude's! Go Dragon, Go Falcon, Godspeed Inspiration4!

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10183
  • US
  • Liked: 13845
  • Likes Given: 5915
Remind me if this question was answered already:

Does GRACE-FO use the same dispenser as the one for Iridium-NEXT? If not, then the top dispenser should be lighter than 500 kilograms.

Completely different. (Airbus made the GRACE-FO dispenser)
« Last Edit: 05/16/2018 03:02 pm by gongora »

Offline Heinrich

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 140
  • Liked: 26
  • Likes Given: 140
From the update thread we apparently have two 'second stage' entry areas active 11 minutes apart. Have we seen this before? Are we about to see some more aggressive/active S2 entry testing?
Brake.  Ditch all remaining payload attachment  hardware.  Then continue do another breaking burn to do reentry experiment with 2nd stage?  Could be. 

Between zone 1 and zone 2 is the south Pole.  Is my assumption correct they are not allowed to dispose hardware there for environmental reasons or no limitations?
« Last Edit: 05/18/2018 12:11 pm by Heinrich »

Online ZachS09

  • Space Savant
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8405
  • Roanoke, TX
  • Liked: 2343
  • Likes Given: 2057
Just read over the newly-released press kit; how is the second stage going to reach a circular orbit of 625 kilometers, using one restart, from the initial orbit of 490 kilometers?

I thought three burns would be necessary.
Liftoff for St. Jude's! Go Dragon, Go Falcon, Godspeed Inspiration4!

Offline vaporcobra

Just read over the newly-released press kit; how is the second stage going to reach a circular orbit of 625 kilometers, using one restart, from the initial orbit of 490 kilometers?

I thought three burns would be necessary.

It's possible to change periapsis and apoapsis at the same time. The rough analogy is a right triangle, where you can achieve the same two-step X and Y axis movement by taking the hypotenuse. Just more complicated :D

Offline niwax

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1421
  • Germany
    • SpaceX Booster List
  • Liked: 2033
  • Likes Given: 166
Just read over the newly-released press kit; how is the second stage going to reach a circular orbit of 625 kilometers, using one restart, from the initial orbit of 490 kilometers?

I thought three burns would be necessary.

It's possible to change periapsis and apoapsis at the same time. The rough analogy is a right triangle, where you can achieve the same two-step X and Y axis movement by taking the hypotenuse. Just more complicated :D


According to the press kit the burn is just 8s. So possibly just a transfer orbit? The dv to circularize from an 490-625km elliptical orbit is minimal an they are looking to deploy multiple satellites, so they definitely have some maneuvering capability.
Which booster has the most soot? SpaceX booster launch history! (discussion)

Online Comga

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6460
  • Liked: 4567
  • Likes Given: 5105
Just read over the newly-released press kit; how is the second stage going to reach a circular orbit of 625 kilometers, using one restart, from the initial orbit of 490 kilometers?

I thought three burns would be necessary.

Of the 164 kg of hydrazine onboard each Iridium NEXT satellite, 38 kg is budgeted for "Insertion - Mission Orbit".
With an Isp of 220 seconds and a spacecraft mass of 840 kg, according to Gunter's it is left to the reader to verify that this is adequate to raise the apogee from the 490 km by 625 km transfer orbit, assuming the Falcon 9 second stage takes care of the plane change.
What kind of wastrels would dump a perfectly good booster in the ocean after just one use?

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8142
  • Liked: 6799
  • Likes Given: 2963
Just read over the newly-released press kit; how is the second stage going to reach a circular orbit of 625 kilometers, using one restart, from the initial orbit of 490 kilometers?

I thought three burns would be necessary.

Of the 164 kg of hydrazine onboard each Iridium NEXT satellite, 38 kg is budgeted for "Insertion - Mission Orbit".
With an Isp of 220 seconds and a spacecraft mass of 840 kg, according to Gunter's it is left to the reader to verify that this is adequate to raise the apogee from the 490 km by 625 km transfer orbit, assuming the Falcon 9 second stage takes care of the plane change.

I get 99.9 m/s available, and only 36.8 m/s required to circularize. Seems like that would work.

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15377
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 8530
  • Likes Given: 1351
Just a note that the first stage will burn for about 166 seconds according to the press kit, which is about 23 seconds longer than during previous Block 4 Iridium launches that used downrange recovery.  The initial second stage burn will be about 436 seconds long, much longer than previous 383 sec-ish first burns for Iridium missions that went to lower (180 x 625 km) transfer orbits.

This despite the fact that total payload mass is significantly less than during those previous Iridium missions (~5.5 tonnes versus 8.6 tonnes).  The higher, circular initial orbit and subsequent plane change apparently suck up the performance difference and still require the using up of some or all of the former first stage recovery boost capability.

I wonder if these five Iridiums might actually weigh more at launch than the others, loaded with more propellant to handle the extra delta-v orbit-raising requirement.
 
 - Ed Kyle
« Last Edit: 05/22/2018 04:05 pm by edkyle99 »

Offline IntoTheVoid

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 422
  • USA
  • Liked: 420
  • Likes Given: 134
Three additional patches
Source: http://spacexpatchlist.space/

Wow! Did someone really forget the 'X' in SpaceX? I hope that's not an official patch.

Edit: The patch with the die, under the 5 pips.
« Last Edit: 05/22/2018 03:33 pm by IntoTheVoid »

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10183
  • US
  • Liked: 13845
  • Likes Given: 5915
I'm pretty sure Matt Desch mentioned at some point that these 5 satellites aren't getting dropped off in the normal Iridium deployment orbit (they will use more fuel to get to their final orbit), but I can't remember where the reference is.  Does anyone else recall that?

Online Comga

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6460
  • Liked: 4567
  • Likes Given: 5105
Three additional patches
Source: http://spacexpatchlist.space/

Wow! Did someone really forget the 'X' in SpaceX? I hope that's not an official patch.

What missing "X"?  It's there on the rocket. The long, curved part of it is grey, not blue, like several official versions.
Its a limitation of the low resolution that comes with stitching.
What kind of wastrels would dump a perfectly good booster in the ocean after just one use?

Online Comga

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6460
  • Liked: 4567
  • Likes Given: 5105
Three additional patches
Source: http://spacexpatchlist.space/

Wow! Did someone really forget the 'X' in SpaceX? I hope that's not an official patch.

What missing "X"?  It's there on the rocket. The long, curved part of it is grey, not blue, like several official versions.
Its a limitation of the low resolution that comes with stitching.

The patch with the die, under the 5 pips.

You are correct.
That's pretty funny.
In addition to dice being a rather questionable graphic for something as dicy as a rocket launch....
What kind of wastrels would dump a perfectly good booster in the ocean after just one use?

Offline LouScheffer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3380
  • Liked: 6102
  • Likes Given: 836
Just a note that the first stage will burn for about 166 seconds according to the press kit, which is about 23 seconds longer than during previous Block 4 Iridium launches that used downrange recovery.  The initial second stage burn will be about 436 seconds long, much longer than previous 383 sec-ish first burns for Iridium missions that went to lower (180 x 625 km) transfer orbits.
Maybe the G-force limits for Grace are lower than that of Iridium, so they have to throttle back and hence burn longer?

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10183
  • US
  • Liked: 13845
  • Likes Given: 5915
In the Iridium NEXT overview post (https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35112.msg1222679#msg1222679) I seem to have a mistake somewhere in my destinations for the satellites of each launch.  Matt Desch said recently that Planes 2, 3, 6 will each have 2 spares (13 sats), which would make me think Planes 1, 4, 5 each have 1 spare (12 sats).  When I total up the launches I get 11 in Plane 1 and 14 in Plane 2.  Can anyone spot where I'm going wrong?
« Last Edit: 05/22/2018 05:04 pm by gongora »

Offline Norm38

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1696
  • Liked: 1272
  • Likes Given: 2316
Is that  a new Block 5 interstage?  Or is it just really really sooty?

Online ZachS09

  • Space Savant
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8405
  • Roanoke, TX
  • Liked: 2343
  • Likes Given: 2057
Is that  a new Block 5 interstage?  Or is it just really really sooty?

It's a sooty interstage because the F9 and American flag can be seen on the side.

The Block 5 interstage is completely black and those logos are moved to the first stage fuel tank.
« Last Edit: 05/22/2018 05:38 pm by ZachS09 »
Liftoff for St. Jude's! Go Dragon, Go Falcon, Godspeed Inspiration4!

Offline Joffan

Three additional patches
Source: http://spacexpatchlist.space/

Wow! Did someone really forget the 'X' in SpaceX? I hope that's not an official patch.

Edit: The patch with the die, under the 5 pips.

You have to join the dots to find the X :-)
Getting through max-Q for humanity becoming fully spacefaring

Offline HarryM

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 427
  • California
  • Liked: 40
  • Likes Given: 41
Fog here in Paso Robles finally burning through! Hope to get a good view, though sun-glare at the time of day and direction (due south) could be an issue.

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10183
  • US
  • Liked: 13845
  • Likes Given: 5915
In the Iridium NEXT overview post (https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35112.msg1222679#msg1222679) I seem to have a mistake somewhere in my destinations for the satellites of each launch.  Matt Desch said recently that Planes 2, 3, 6 will each have 2 spares (13 sats), which would make me think Planes 1, 4, 5 each have 1 spare (12 sats).  When I total up the launches I get 11 in Plane 1 and 14 in Plane 2.  Can anyone spot where I'm going wrong?

Many thanks to the person who pointed me to an old post:

Tweet from Matt Desch:
Quote
Changed our plan recently. L3 goes to Plane 4 now: all 10 will go in service. L4 to Plane 2: 8 slated for operation, 2 to drift to P1.

Iridium's press release for flight 4 still gave the old information of only drifting one satellite.

Offline intrepidpursuit

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 721
  • Orlando, FL
  • Liked: 561
  • Likes Given: 400
They commented that there was something disappointing happening on another camera that didn't relate to the second stage or the primary mission. Failed recovery experiment with the faring?

Online dglow

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2067
  • Liked: 2295
  • Likes Given: 4430
That was my first guess.

Offline Doesitfloat

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 334
  • Detroit MI
  • Liked: 499
  • Likes Given: 197
Loss of video from 1st stage

Offline Prettz

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 497
  • O'Neillian
  • Atlanta, GA
  • Liked: 259
  • Likes Given: 30
The second stage camera looked worse than ever. What's the deal with that?

Offline Semmel

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2178
  • Germany
  • Liked: 2433
  • Likes Given: 11916
Grace was actually visible for 1 or 2 frames at the upper border of the image next to the iridium sat just before the stream got cut.

Online ZachS09

  • Space Savant
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8405
  • Roanoke, TX
  • Liked: 2343
  • Likes Given: 2057
The second stage camera looked worse than ever. What's the deal with that?

My best guess is that the bolts holding the camera to the fixture were inadvertently loosened, causing the camera to vibrate.
Liftoff for St. Jude's! Go Dragon, Go Falcon, Godspeed Inspiration4!

Offline SciNews

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 812
  • Romania
  • Liked: 737
  • Likes Given: 6
SpaceX and NASA feeds

Offline Mongo62

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1072
  • Liked: 834
  • Likes Given: 156
It's in Jell-O-Vision!

Offline AllenB

  • Member
  • Posts: 78
  • Evanston, IL, USA
  • Liked: 125
  • Likes Given: 346
The second stage camera looked worse than ever. What's the deal with that?

Appeared to be switching between two cameras, one good and one... shaky. So probably nothing worse than a bad camera.

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6809
  • California
  • Liked: 8485
  • Likes Given: 5384
The second stage camera looked worse than ever. What's the deal with that?

My best guess is that the bolts holding the camera to the fixture were inadvertently loosened, causing the camera to vibrate.

Based on the wider angle of view, these are the same (not so great) cameras that the block 5 upper stage used. They also vibrated quite a bit) This might actually be a block 5 upper stage.

Taken together with the worst tracking camera footage ever(?), the video quality from this mission is a bit lacking.  :)
« Last Edit: 05/22/2018 08:14 pm by Lars-J »

Offline Prettz

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 497
  • O'Neillian
  • Atlanta, GA
  • Liked: 259
  • Likes Given: 30
The second stage camera looked worse than ever. What's the deal with that?

My best guess is that the bolts holding the camera to the fixture were inadvertently loosened, causing the camera to vibrate.
No, not vibration. I mean the picture looked like crap on both cameras. Not at all like previous broadcasts, and actually worse than the Block 5 launch, which was also dramatically worse than previous launches.

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6809
  • California
  • Liked: 8485
  • Likes Given: 5384
The second stage camera looked worse than ever. What's the deal with that?

My best guess is that the bolts holding the camera to the fixture were inadvertently loosened, causing the camera to vibrate.
No, not vibration. I mean the picture looked like crap on both cameras. Not at all like previous broadcasts, and actually worse than the Block 5 launch, which was also dramatically worse than previous launches.

It looked about the same (just as bad) as the block 5 launch, IMO. The difference is most likely due to different lighting conditions due to local time of day and direction of launch.
« Last Edit: 05/22/2018 08:29 pm by Lars-J »

Online ZachS09

  • Space Savant
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8405
  • Roanoke, TX
  • Liked: 2343
  • Likes Given: 2057
I don't know about why the quality was terrible because I'm not a camera expert.
Liftoff for St. Jude's! Go Dragon, Go Falcon, Godspeed Inspiration4!

Offline whitelancer64

Nice launch!!

Also a NEW RECORD for SpaceX - the shortest turnaround for a previously flown booster:

135 days.
« Last Edit: 05/22/2018 08:31 pm by whitelancer64 »
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Online Comga

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6460
  • Liked: 4567
  • Likes Given: 5105
Separate subject.
Sometime before launch, during LOX loading, there was significant venting from the TEL.  Big vapor clouds.
Something comes out along with the vapor, arcing downward under gravity, leaving more vapor trails behind.
My guess, posted to the UPDATES thread, was that it was bits of LOX being spewed.
It was not a judgment,   I was not saying anything was wrong or unexpected.  It's just something I had not noticed before.
I was told that any LOX being released would be a safety issue and wouldn't happen.

Does anyone here have insight into the nature of this?

When the webcast is up on YouTube perhaps a screenshot can be captured.


What kind of wastrels would dump a perfectly good booster in the ocean after just one use?

Offline whitelancer64

Separate subject.
Sometime before launch, during LOX loading, there was significant venting from the TEL.  Big vapor clouds.
Something comes out along with the vapor, arcing downward under gravity, leaving more vapor trails behind.
My guess, posted to the UPDATES thread, was that it was bits of LOX being spewed.
It was not a judgment,   I was not saying anything was wrong or unexpected.  It's just something I had not noticed before.
I was told that any LOX being released would be a safety issue and wouldn't happen.

Does anyone here have insight into the nature of this?

When the webcast is up on YouTube perhaps a screenshot can be captured.

Occasional large vents have been seen before. What you're describing doesn't sound unusual.
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Online Comga

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6460
  • Liked: 4567
  • Likes Given: 5105
Separate subject.
Sometime before launch, during LOX loading, there was significant venting from the TEL.  Big vapor clouds.
Something comes out along with the vapor, arcing downward under gravity, leaving more vapor trails behind.
My guess, posted to the UPDATES thread, was that it was bits of LOX being spewed.
It was not a judgment,   I was not saying anything was wrong or unexpected.  It's just something I had not noticed before.
I was told that any LOX being released would be a safety issue and wouldn't happen.

Does anyone here have insight into the nature of this?

When the webcast is up on YouTube perhaps a screenshot can be captured.

Occasional large vents have been seen before. What you're describing doesn't sound unusual.

Not a large vent cloud.
Something solid or liquid and cold.  Dense enough to fall like a stone but dissipating as it falls.
Again, I am not saying it's bad or different, just something I have not noticed on previous launches.
Have been told it cannot be LOX.
But what could it be?

edit:  The YouTube video starts at under T-1:00 so doesn't go back far enough to see this.
« Last Edit: 05/22/2018 09:36 pm by ChrisGebhardt »
What kind of wastrels would dump a perfectly good booster in the ocean after just one use?

Offline whitelancer64

Separate subject.
Sometime before launch, during LOX loading, there was significant venting from the TEL.  Big vapor clouds.
Something comes out along with the vapor, arcing downward under gravity, leaving more vapor trails behind.
My guess, posted to the UPDATES thread, was that it was bits of LOX being spewed.
It was not a judgment,   I was not saying anything was wrong or unexpected.  It's just something I had not noticed before.
I was told that any LOX being released would be a safety issue and wouldn't happen.

Does anyone here have insight into the nature of this?

When the webcast is up on YouTube perhaps a screenshot can be captured.

Occasional large vents have been seen before. What you're describing doesn't sound unusual.

Not a large vent cloud.
Something solid or liquid and cold.  Dense enough to fall like a stone but dissipating as it falls.
Again, I am not saying it's bad or different, just something I have not noticed on previous launches.
Have been told it cannot be LOX.  (Even had the comment edited out by a mod, as is his right.)
But what could it be?

A screenshot would help.
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Offline Ben the Space Brit

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7206
  • A spaceflight fan
  • London, UK
  • Liked: 806
  • Likes Given: 900
Interesting to see the lights of Arabia and Turkey flowing under the U/S as it flew overhead and just a touch of sunrise at the very end before the end of the webcast.

Also interesting to see the LOX vent at the top of the M-VAC engine bell clogging with a solid O2 'snowball' after SECO2.
« Last Edit: 05/22/2018 09:04 pm by Ben the Space Brit »
"Oops! I left the silly thing in reverse!" - Duck Dodgers

~*~*~*~

The Space Shuttle Program - 1981-2011

The time for words has passed; The time has come to put up or shut up!
DON'T PROPAGANDISE, FLY!!!

Offline Steven Pietrobon

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39048
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 32346
  • Likes Given: 8025
Congratulations to SpaceX, Iridium, GFZ and NASA for the successful launch!

Captures of fairing separation.
« Last Edit: 05/22/2018 09:32 pm by Steven Pietrobon »
Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #1:  Engineering is done with numbers.  Analysis without numbers is only an opinion.

Offline Steven Pietrobon

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39048
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 32346
  • Likes Given: 8025
The second burn went from 27,443 to 27,581 km/h, a delta-V of only 38.3 m/s.
« Last Edit: 05/22/2018 09:53 pm by Steven Pietrobon »
Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #1:  Engineering is done with numbers.  Analysis without numbers is only an opinion.

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10183
  • US
  • Liked: 13845
  • Likes Given: 5915
The second burn went from 27,443 to 27,581 km/h, a delta-V of only 38.3 m/s.

Was it just an inclination change?

Online ZachS09

  • Space Savant
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8405
  • Roanoke, TX
  • Liked: 2343
  • Likes Given: 2057
The second burn went from 27,443 to 27,581 km/h, a delta-V of only 38.3 m/s.

Was it just an inclination change?

I believe it also raised the apogee to 625 kilometers.
Liftoff for St. Jude's! Go Dragon, Go Falcon, Godspeed Inspiration4!

Offline Herb Schaltegger

Separate subject.
Sometime before launch, during LOX loading, there was significant venting from the TEL.  Big vapor clouds.
Something comes out along with the vapor, arcing downward under gravity, leaving more vapor trails behind.
My guess, posted to the UPDATES thread, was that it was bits of LOX being spewed.
It was not a judgment,   I was not saying anything was wrong or unexpected.  It's just something I had not noticed before.
I was told that any LOX being released would be a safety issue and wouldn't happen.

Does anyone here have insight into the nature of this?

When the webcast is up on YouTube perhaps a screenshot can be captured.

Occasional large vents have been seen before. What you're describing doesn't sound unusual.

Not a large vent cloud.
Something solid or liquid and cold.  Dense enough to fall like a stone but dissipating as it falls.
Again, I am not saying it's bad or different, just something I have not noticed on previous launches.
Have been told it cannot be LOX.
But what could it be?

edit:  The YouTube video starts at under T-1:00 so doesn't go back far enough to see this.

I've seen the same thing on recent launches. Looks like a spurt of LOX that evaporates as it falls. Watch the last several minutes of the last few launches; I'm sure you'll see something similar on at least one or two of them. Visibility and apparent size of the vent event almost certainly depends greatly on ambient temperature, humidity and lighting.
Ad astra per aspirin ...

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8142
  • Liked: 6799
  • Likes Given: 2963
The second burn went from 27,443 to 27,581 km/h, a delta-V of only 38.3 m/s.

Was it just an inclination change?

An inclination change would only change direction, not speed. The difference between a 490x490 km orbit and a 490x625 km orbit is indeed about 38 m/s.

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8142
  • Liked: 6799
  • Likes Given: 2963
Separate subject.
Sometime before launch, during LOX loading, there was significant venting from the TEL.  Big vapor clouds.
Something comes out along with the vapor, arcing downward under gravity, leaving more vapor trails behind.
My guess, posted to the UPDATES thread, was that it was bits of LOX being spewed.
It was not a judgment,   I was not saying anything was wrong or unexpected.  It's just something I had not noticed before.
I was told that any LOX being released would be a safety issue and wouldn't happen.

Does anyone here have insight into the nature of this?

When the webcast is up on YouTube perhaps a screenshot can be captured.

Occasional large vents have been seen before. What you're describing doesn't sound unusual.

Not a large vent cloud.
Something solid or liquid and cold.  Dense enough to fall like a stone but dissipating as it falls.
Again, I am not saying it's bad or different, just something I have not noticed on previous launches.
Have been told it cannot be LOX.
But what could it be?

edit:  The YouTube video starts at under T-1:00 so doesn't go back far enough to see this.

I've seen the same thing on recent launches. Looks like a spurt of LOX that evaporates as it falls. Watch the last several minutes of the last few launches; I'm sure you'll see something similar on at least one or two of them. Visibility and apparent size of the vent event almost certainly depends greatly on ambient temperature, humidity and lighting.

It's fairly common on all launches since SpaceX switched to densified propellant. I don't remember seeing it at all before then.

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10586
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 4548
  • Likes Given: 13523
Happy faces all around congrats! Thanks for the great coverage team NSF! :)
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator

Offline cwr

Separate subject.
Sometime before launch, during LOX loading, there was significant venting from the TEL.  Big vapor clouds.
Something comes out along with the vapor, arcing downward under gravity, leaving more vapor trails behind.
My guess, posted to the UPDATES thread, was that it was bits of LOX being spewed.
It was not a judgment,   I was not saying anything was wrong or unexpected.  It's just something I had not noticed before.
I was told that any LOX being released would be a safety issue and wouldn't happen.

Does anyone here have insight into the nature of this?

When the webcast is up on YouTube perhaps a screenshot can be captured.

Occasional large vents have been seen before. What you're describing doesn't sound unusual.

Not a large vent cloud.
Something solid or liquid and cold.  Dense enough to fall like a stone but dissipating as it falls.
Again, I am not saying it's bad or different, just something I have not noticed on previous launches.
Have been told it cannot be LOX.
But what could it be?

edit:  The YouTube video starts at under T-1:00 so doesn't go back far enough to see this.

I've seen the same thing on recent launches. Looks like a spurt of LOX that evaporates as it falls. Watch the last several minutes of the last few launches; I'm sure you'll see something similar on at least one or two of them. Visibility and apparent size of the vent event almost certainly depends greatly on ambient temperature, humidity and lighting.

During the webcast, the announcer said a large vent was about to happen and it was caused when they flushed
the piping on the TEL [I've watched all but one F9 launch live and I'd never heard of that flushing before].
Also the timing was a little strange for that event, since they are normally still topping off LOX until about T-30secs and this statement was about T-2mins (in my recollection). I'm maybe misremembering exactly
what was said but at the time I thought "that's the explanation for the large vent that is the familiar
sign that we're close to launch".
I can't correlate the time of this flushing with the possible LOX plume being discussed without going back
and listening/watching that part of the webcast. Maybe this triggers the recollection of others?

Carl

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10183
  • US
  • Liked: 13845
  • Likes Given: 5915
Iridium sats at 86.71 degree inclination.  I need to learn how to do the TLE conversion for the orbit height.

Online Comga

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6460
  • Liked: 4567
  • Likes Given: 5105
Separate subject.
Sometime before launch, during LOX loading, there was significant venting from the TEL.  Big vapor clouds.
Something comes out along with the vapor, arcing downward under gravity, leaving more vapor trails behind.
My guess, posted to the UPDATES thread, was that it was bits of LOX being spewed.
It was not a judgment,   I was not saying anything was wrong or unexpected.  It's just something I had not noticed before.
I was told that any LOX being released would be a safety issue and wouldn't happen.

Does anyone here have insight into the nature of this?

When the webcast is up on YouTube perhaps a screenshot can be captured.

Occasional large vents have been seen before. What you're describing doesn't sound unusual.

Not a large vent cloud.
Something solid or liquid and cold.  Dense enough to fall like a stone but dissipating as it falls.
Again, I am not saying it's bad or different, just something I have not noticed on previous launches.
Have been told it cannot be LOX.  (Even had the comment edited out by a mod, as is his right.)
But what could it be?

A screenshot would help.

A collage of stills with the feature in question circled in red.
It is more evident when watching the video.
Gas venting puffs out.  The tips of these fall under gravity and dissipate.

edit: Could it be air liquefied by the below-boiling-point vented GOX?
« Last Edit: 05/22/2018 11:48 pm by Comga »
What kind of wastrels would dump a perfectly good booster in the ocean after just one use?

Offline Helodriver

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1076
  • Liked: 5971
  • Likes Given: 700
Took advantage of the brief clear window to shoot a daylight streak of Iridium/Grace arcing over the Santa Ynez Mountains. A fine day!

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6257
  • Liked: 4164
  • Likes Given: 6078
Separate subject.
Sometime before launch, during LOX loading, there was significant venting from the TEL.  Big vapor clouds.
Something comes out along with the vapor, arcing downward under gravity, leaving more vapor trails behind.
My guess, posted to the UPDATES thread, was that it was bits of LOX being spewed.
It was not a judgment,   I was not saying anything was wrong or unexpected.  It's just something I had not noticed before.
I was told that any LOX being released would be a safety issue and wouldn't happen.

Does anyone here have insight into the nature of this?

When the webcast is up on YouTube perhaps a screenshot can be captured.

Occasional large vents have been seen before. What you're describing doesn't sound unusual.

Not a large vent cloud.
Something solid or liquid and cold.  Dense enough to fall like a stone but dissipating as it falls.
Again, I am not saying it's bad or different, just something I have not noticed on previous launches.
Have been told it cannot be LOX.  (Even had the comment edited out by a mod, as is his right.)
But what could it be?

A screenshot would help.

A collage of stills with the feature in question circled in red.
It is more evident when watching the video.
Gas venting puffs out.  The tips of these fall under gravity and dissipate.

Those are streams of liquid oxygen.  The still-liquid phase falls like water would, but evaporating/boiling-off as it falls through the relatively hot air.
« Last Edit: 05/23/2018 12:11 am by AncientU »
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline rickl

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 899
  • Pennsylvania, USA
  • Liked: 146
  • Likes Given: 150
I guess it must not have been important since no one else has mentioned it, but I wonder what was the snake-like piece of debris that separated from the second stage at SECO-1.  It looked like a piece of hose or cable.
The Space Age is just starting to get interesting.

Offline seruriermarshal

  • Member
  • Member
  • Posts: 44
  • Liked: 30
  • Likes Given: 8
Congratulations to SpaceX

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6809
  • California
  • Liked: 8485
  • Likes Given: 5384
I guess it must not have been important since no one else has mentioned it, but I wonder what was the snake-like piece of debris that separated from the second stage at SECO-1.  It looked like a piece of hose or cable.

It might also just have been LOX that froze in that shape.

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6809
  • California
  • Liked: 8485
  • Likes Given: 5384
A camera was toasted by the Falcon 9 today...  ;D  https://www.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10156135691076233&id=506906232

Quote
Brilliant NASA photographer Bill Ingalls always produces great images. He always asks himself, how close can I put my camera to the rocket launch for the best shot? The rocket answered.

Offline LouScheffer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3380
  • Liked: 6102
  • Likes Given: 836
Iridium sats at 86.71 degree inclination.  I need to learn how to do the TLE conversion for the orbit height.

Here's how:
#The the 8th field of line 2, that's the revolutions per day.  From this find the semi-major axis in km from Kepler's law and GM for earth:
sma = (8681663.653/rpd)^(2/3); print "sma=", sma;

#The fifth field is the eccentricity.   It's of the form "0.XXXXXX", but only the XXXXXX  is given, the "0." is assumed
e = ("0." $5) + 0.0; print "e=", e;

#Now given the semi-major axi and the eccentricity, find the apogee and perigee.  These are computed from the center of the Earth, so subtract the
# Earth's radius (6371 km)
p = sma * (1-e) - 6371; print "perigee =", p;
a = sma * (1+e) - 6371; print " apogee =", a;

Here's an example to try:
1 26934U 01044A   14144.63398148  .00000000  00000-0  00000-0 0    02
2 26934  97.0335 276.7823 0001902 124.8490  48.3766 15.68826283    01
sma= 6740.4
e= 0.0001902
perigee = 368.114
apogee = 370.678

« Last Edit: 05/23/2018 12:38 am by LouScheffer »

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10183
  • US
  • Liked: 13845
  • Likes Given: 5915
Iridium sats at 86.71 degree inclination.  I need to learn how to do the TLE conversion for the orbit height.

Here's how:
#The the 8th field of line 2, that's the revolutions per day.  From this find the semi-major axis in km from Kepler's law and GM for earth:
sma = (8681663.653/rpd)^(2/3); print "sma=", sma;

#The fifth field is the eccentricity.   It's of the form "0.XXXXXX", but only the XXXXXX  is given, the "0." is assumed
e = ("0." $5) + 0.0; print "e=", e;

#Now given the semi-major axi and the eccentricity, find the apogee and perigee.  These are computed from the center of the Earth, so subtract the
# Earth's radius (6371 km)
p = sma * (1-e) - 6371; print "perigee =", p;
a = sma * (1+e) - 6371; print " apogee =", a;

Here's an example to try:
1 26934U 01044A   14144.63398148  .00000000  00000-0  00000-0 0    02
2 26934  97.0335 276.7823 0001902 124.8490  48.3766 15.68826283    01
sma= 6740.4
e= 0.0001902
perigee = 368.114
apogee = 370.678

1 43478U 18047C   18142.95257369  .00000034  00000-0  00000+0 0  9994
2 43478  86.7101 239.9250 0153544 332.9069 117.8366 14.89094608    17

I got 504x718, which doesn't seem right (or maybe I just can't do math tonight)

edit:  I got 498x712 when I put it in a spreadsheet, which preserved a few more digits between calculations than I did manually  :)
« Last Edit: 05/23/2018 02:28 am by gongora »

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8142
  • Liked: 6799
  • Likes Given: 2963
I guess it must not have been important since no one else has mentioned it, but I wonder what was the snake-like piece of debris that separated from the second stage at SECO-1.  It looked like a piece of hose or cable.

It might also just have been LOX that froze in that shape.

It was flexible and sitting on the (probably very hot) GG exhaust duct, so I rather doubt frozen LOX. Didn't look like it was connected to anything, so not hose or cable. Maybe a piece of mylar tape or insulation?

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6809
  • California
  • Liked: 8485
  • Likes Given: 5384
I guess it must not have been important since no one else has mentioned it, but I wonder what was the snake-like piece of debris that separated from the second stage at SECO-1.  It looked like a piece of hose or cable.

It might also just have been LOX that froze in that shape.

It was flexible and sitting on the (probably very hot) GG exhaust duct, so I rather doubt frozen LOX. Didn't look like it was connected to anything, so not hose or cable. Maybe a piece of mylar tape or insulation?

It’s not that hot. Frozen LOX (in snow clump form) is commonly seen around it.

Offline LouScheffer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3380
  • Liked: 6102
  • Likes Given: 836
Iridium sats at 86.71 degree inclination.  I need to learn how to do the TLE conversion for the orbit height.

Here's how:
#The the 8th field of line 2, that's the revolutions per day.  From this find the semi-major axis in km from Kepler's law and GM for earth:
sma = (8681663.653/rpd)^(2/3); print "sma=", sma;

#The fifth field is the eccentricity.   It's of the form "0.XXXXXX", but only the XXXXXX  is given, the "0." is assumed
e = ("0." $5) + 0.0; print "e=", e;

#Now given the semi-major axi and the eccentricity, find the apogee and perigee.  These are computed from the center of the Earth, so subtract the
# Earth's radius (6371 km)
p = sma * (1-e) - 6371; print "perigee =", p;
a = sma * (1+e) - 6371; print " apogee =", a;

1 43478U 18047C   18142.95257369  .00000034  00000-0  00000+0 0  9994
2 43478  86.7101 239.9250 0153544 332.9069 117.8366 14.89094608    17

I got 504x718, which doesn't seem right (or maybe I just can't do math tonight)
I get:
1 43478U 18047C   18142.95257369  .00000034  00000-0  00000+0 0  9994
2 43478  86.7101 239.9250 0153544 332.9069 117.8366 14.89094608    17
sma= 6978.9
e= 0.0153544
perigee = 500.745
apogee = 715.059

So I think your calculation is correct.  The perigee makes sense; little else is possible given the initial orbit and the 8 second burn.  The apogee is a little short of the 780 km quoted in the NSF article, but if it's like ISS, they start a little low so the satellites will run a little faster than the desired altitude.  Then when they reach the desired spot in the plane they raise the orbit and circularize.

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10183
  • US
  • Liked: 13845
  • Likes Given: 5915
Hmmm, I guess it is around there.

Tweet from Jonathan McDowell:
Quote
GRACE-FO satellites cataloged in 483 x 505 km orbits, Iridium 110, 147, 152, 161 and 162 cataloged in 494 x 710 km orbits. The Falcon 9 second stage was deorbited  after deploying the sats.

Offline JimO

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2000
  • Texas, USA
  • Liked: 482
  • Likes Given: 195
Hmmm, I guess it is around there.

Tweet from Jonathan McDowell:
Quote
GRACE-FO satellites cataloged in 483 x 505 km orbits, Iridium 110, 147, 152, 161 and 162 cataloged in 494 x 710 km orbits. The Falcon 9 second stage was deorbited  after deploying the sats.

Any reports of observations of the deorbit burn?

Offline speedevil

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4406
  • Fife
  • Liked: 2762
  • Likes Given: 3369
A camera was toasted by the Falcon 9 today...  ;D  https://www.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10156135691076233&id=506906232

Quote
Brilliant NASA photographer Bill Ingalls always produces great images. He always asks himself, how close can I put my camera to the rocket launch for the best shot? The rocket answered.
https://imgur.com/gallery/yqehN3W - only good pic it got.
I guess distance was fine, being in the trajectory of the flame duct wasn't.

Offline Bananas_on_Mars

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 552
  • Liked: 448
  • Likes Given: 251
There were reports of some bush fire around the pad so they couldn't get their remote cameras. From the picture, burning grass/bushes might be to blame instead of the rocket IMO.
« Last Edit: 05/23/2018 12:13 pm by Bananas_on_Mars »

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6257
  • Liked: 4164
  • Likes Given: 6078
We have a new metric for payloads:
Quote
Two sportscar-sized satellites in orbit to measure Earth's water
Quote
A SpaceX rocket Tuesday blasted off a duo of sports car-sized satellites built by the US and Germany to reveal changes in sea level rise, ice melt and drought on Earth.
https://phys.org/news/2018-05-sportscar-sized-satellites-orbit-earth.html

Less random* than whales...


* Unless you are using an Infinite Improbability Drive
« Last Edit: 05/23/2018 12:38 pm by AncientU »
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline Ben the Space Brit

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7206
  • A spaceflight fan
  • London, UK
  • Liked: 806
  • Likes Given: 900
It makes sense. Everyone has seen a picture of the 'Starman' Tesla Roadster, so the thought of sports cars in space is an easy-to-grasp point of comparison! ;D
"Oops! I left the silly thing in reverse!" - Duck Dodgers

~*~*~*~

The Space Shuttle Program - 1981-2011

The time for words has passed; The time has come to put up or shut up!
DON'T PROPAGANDISE, FLY!!!

Offline LouScheffer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3380
  • Liked: 6102
  • Likes Given: 836
Government launches are often thought of as more expensive than commercial launches.  For example, the TESS launch contract was $87 million, but a bare-bones commercial F9 is thought to be about $62M, though the price Iridum pays is not public.  The difference is often ascribed to extra checks, paperwork, reviews, and so on.

So by this logic, for this shared launch, Iridium would pay $31 million (half a commercial launch), and GRACE would pay $31M + $25M for extra services = $56M.  Or did NASA agree to just use standard commercial processing for this flight?  Or conversely, does Iridium normally buy more than the bare-bones services, so their cost is closer to NASA cost when everything is included?


Offline jpo234

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2021
  • Liked: 2279
  • Likes Given: 2184
Government launches are often thought of as more expensive than commercial launches.  For example, the TESS launch contract was $87 million, but a bare-bones commercial F9 is thought to be about $62M, though the price Iridum pays is not public.  The difference is often ascribed to extra checks, paperwork, reviews, and so on.

So by this logic, for this shared launch, Iridium would pay $31 million (half a commercial launch), and GRACE would pay $31M + $25M for extra services = $56M.  Or did NASA agree to just use standard commercial processing for this flight?  Or conversely, does Iridium normally buy more than the bare-bones services, so their cost is closer to NASA cost when everything is included?

Who paid and purchased the GRACE-FO part of the launch: NASA or GFZ?
You want to be inspired by things. You want to wake up in the morning and think the future is going to be great. That's what being a spacefaring civilization is all about. It's about believing in the future and believing the future will be better than the past. And I can't think of anything more exciting than being out there among the stars.

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10183
  • US
  • Liked: 13845
  • Likes Given: 5915
Iridium paid about $70M/launch including payload dispensers for the seven launches.

GRACE-FO was not a NASA launch contract.

Offline Hitech

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 192
  • United States
  • Liked: 112
  • Likes Given: 202
As with the last flight the video OB was very poor.

Offline deruch

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2422
  • California
  • Liked: 2006
  • Likes Given: 5634
Government launches are often thought of as more expensive than commercial launches.  For example, the TESS launch contract was $87 million, but a bare-bones commercial F9 is thought to be about $62M, though the price Iridum pays is not public.  The difference is often ascribed to extra checks, paperwork, reviews, and so on.

So by this logic, for this shared launch, Iridium would pay $31 million (half a commercial launch), and GRACE would pay $31M + $25M for extra services = $56M.  Or did NASA agree to just use standard commercial processing for this flight?  Or conversely, does Iridium normally buy more than the bare-bones services, so their cost is closer to NASA cost when everything is included?

Who paid and purchased the GRACE-FO part of the launch: NASA or GFZ?
GFZ.
Shouldn't reality posts be in "Advanced concepts"?  --Nomadd

Offline Sam Ho

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 815
  • Liked: 575
  • Likes Given: 71
There were reports of some bush fire around the pad so they couldn't get their remote cameras. From the picture, burning grass/bushes might be to blame instead of the rocket IMO.
Yes, he posted a clarification that it was a brush fire.
Quote from: Bill Ingalls
Well, one remote cam outside the pad perimeter was found to be a bit toast(y). sigh 😞

** and yes - it made pix until it's demise. **

Seeing many like and share this, but mis-reporting that this camera was close to the pad. I had many other cameras much closer to the pad than this and all are safe. This was result of a small brush fire, which is not unheard of from launches, and was extinguished by fireman, albeit, after my cam was baked. :)
https://www.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10213781978078424&id=1075771262

Offline russianhalo117

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8749
  • Liked: 4660
  • Likes Given: 768
Government launches are often thought of as more expensive than commercial launches.  For example, the TESS launch contract was $87 million, but a bare-bones commercial F9 is thought to be about $62M, though the price Iridum pays is not public.  The difference is often ascribed to extra checks, paperwork, reviews, and so on.

So by this logic, for this shared launch, Iridium would pay $31 million (half a commercial launch), and GRACE would pay $31M + $25M for extra services = $56M.  Or did NASA agree to just use standard commercial processing for this flight?  Or conversely, does Iridium normally buy more than the bare-bones services, so their cost is closer to NASA cost when everything is included?

Who paid and purchased the GRACE-FO part of the launch: NASA or GFZ?
GFZ. AFAIK they used the processing facilty at SLC-6 for GRACE-FO then they were moved to another facility to be joined with Iridium on the dispenser stack.

Online groundbound

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 383
  • Liked: 405
  • Likes Given: 15
We have a new metric for payloads:
Quote
Two sportscar-sized satellites in orbit to measure Earth's water
Quote
A SpaceX rocket Tuesday blasted off a duo of sports car-sized satellites built by the US and Germany to reveal changes in sea level rise, ice melt and drought on Earth.
https://phys.org/news/2018-05-sportscar-sized-satellites-orbit-earth.html

Less random* than whales...


* Unless you are using an Infinite Improbability Drive

This metric is too vague.

You need to specify "short sportscar," "long sportscar," or "metric sportscar."

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15377
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 8530
  • Likes Given: 1351
As with the last flight the video OB was very poor.
I thought it was fine.  I was more bummed about the out of focus tracking camera, which was probably caused by cloud/fog/haze or some-such that spoofed the autofocus.  That was probably a range camera not "owned" by SpaceX.  The NASA webcast provided better tracking shots that were more in focus, for some reason.

On board video is not a given going forward.  It is not provided at all for most launches in the world.

 - Ed Kyle
« Last Edit: 05/23/2018 06:59 pm by edkyle99 »

Offline Sam Ho

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 815
  • Liked: 575
  • Likes Given: 71
Government launches are often thought of as more expensive than commercial launches.  For example, the TESS launch contract was $87 million, but a bare-bones commercial F9 is thought to be about $62M, though the price Iridum pays is not public.  The difference is often ascribed to extra checks, paperwork, reviews, and so on.

So by this logic, for this shared launch, Iridium would pay $31 million (half a commercial launch), and GRACE would pay $31M + $25M for extra services = $56M.  Or did NASA agree to just use standard commercial processing for this flight?  Or conversely, does Iridium normally buy more than the bare-bones services, so their cost is closer to NASA cost when everything is included?
Who paid and purchased the GRACE-FO part of the launch: NASA or GFZ?
GFZ. AFAIK they used the processing facilty at SLC-6 for GRACE-FO then they were moved to another facility to be joined with Iridium on the dispenser stack.

From GFZ's page on the rideshare:
Quote
As the Russian/Ukraine Dnepr and corresponding launch services can no longer be provided by the International Space Company Kosmotras (ISCK), the joint NASA-GFZ Joint Steering Group has decided to exchange the GRACE-FO launcher. The corresponding contract was signed on 14. November 2016 by the Board of GFZ and Iridium Satellite LLC. It stipulates a "Rideshare" between GRACE-FO and 5 Iridium-Next satellites on a Space-X Falcon-9 from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California within the launch period December 2017 till February 2018.

The accompanying press release (in German; the English version seems to have disappeared) says that the German share of the mission is €77.7 million, and is about 1/4 of the total.  This is more than just the launch, though.

Quote
GFZ will be responsible for

* Science data exploitation and dissemination within the joint US/German Science Data System (SDS) including release of product versions of the GRACE-FO science data products through their Information System and Data Center (ISDC),
* Provision of developments for the Experimental Laser Ranging Interferometer (LRI),
* Provision of a Launch vehicle and launch services,
* Provision of Laser Retro-Reflectors (LRR) for each spacecraft,
* Mission operation (with US-support) and
* Leading the European Science Team.
https://www.gfz-potsdam.de/en/section/global-geomonitoring-and-gravity-field/projects/gravity-recovery-and-climate-experiment-follow-on-grace-fo-mission/
https://www.gfz-potsdam.de/medien-kommunikation/meldungen/detailansicht/article/das-erdschwerefeld-im-blick-mission-grace-fo-startet-auf-einer-rakete-von-spacex/

Offline Mongo62

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1072
  • Liked: 834
  • Likes Given: 156
As with the last flight the video OB was very poor.
I thought it was fine.  I was more bummed about the out of focus tracking camera, which was probably caused by cloud/fog/haze or some-such that spoofed the autofocus.  That was probably a range camera not "owned" by SpaceX.  The NASA webcast provided better tracking shots that were more in focus, for some reason.

On board video is not a given going forward.  It is not provided at all for most launches in the world.

 - Ed Kyle

Is there a reason why manual focus is not used? Just set focus to infinity and keep it there, the rocket isn't going to suddenly jump close enough to the camera to require a change in focus.

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6809
  • California
  • Liked: 8485
  • Likes Given: 5384
As with the last flight the video OB was very poor.
I thought it was fine.  I was more bummed about the out of focus tracking camera, which was probably caused by cloud/fog/haze or some-such that spoofed the autofocus.  That was probably a range camera not "owned" by SpaceX.  The NASA webcast provided better tracking shots that were more in focus, for some reason.

On board video is not a given going forward.  It is not provided at all for most launches in the world.

 - Ed Kyle

Is there a reason why manual focus is not used? Just set focus to infinity and keep it there, the rocket isn't going to suddenly jump close enough to the camera to require a change in focus.

With large tracking cameras it would likely be insufficient to keep it in focus from just a few miles away to ~100 miles away.

Offline Semmel

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2178
  • Germany
  • Liked: 2433
  • Likes Given: 11916
As with the last flight the video OB was very poor.
I thought it was fine.  I was more bummed about the out of focus tracking camera, which was probably caused by cloud/fog/haze or some-such that spoofed the autofocus.  That was probably a range camera not "owned" by SpaceX.  The NASA webcast provided better tracking shots that were more in focus, for some reason.

On board video is not a given going forward.  It is not provided at all for most launches in the world.

 - Ed Kyle

Is there a reason why manual focus is not used? Just set focus to infinity and keep it there, the rocket isn't going to suddenly jump close enough to the camera to require a change in focus.

The focus depends on ambient temperature. So you have to refocus short before the launch to get a good fit. This should be possible if the camera is manually operated, however I dont know if thats the case for tracking cameras. Come to think of it, I have no idea how the Vandenberg tracking cams looks like.

Offline Bananas_on_Mars

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 552
  • Liked: 448
  • Likes Given: 251
I think there's some pictures of the setup on the internet... seems like usually the telescope for aiming the setup and the telescope for the camera are mounted in parallel. So the operator might not even have noticed the camera was out of focus.

Offline Sam Ho

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 815
  • Liked: 575
  • Likes Given: 71
I think there's some pictures of the setup on the internet... seems like usually the telescope for aiming the setup and the telescope for the camera are mounted in parallel. So the operator might not even have noticed the camera was out of focus.
Photo from 2002 of a tracker here:
http://vandenberg.airshowjournal.com/2002/Img_0972.jpg

Offline Hitech

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 192
  • United States
  • Liked: 112
  • Likes Given: 202
The second stage OB video had a lot of "blooming" and "jello" and some "haloing" (likely due to condensation on the lens).

Offline jacqmans

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21704
  • Houten, The Netherlands
  • Liked: 8555
  • Likes Given: 320
NASA's "melted camera" has become a social media thing. As with many photos that spread like wildfire on the Internet, only part of the camera's story has been exposed so far. Here is the rest of it.

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/what-really-happened-to-that-melted-nasa-camera
« Last Edit: 05/26/2018 10:22 am by jacqmans »
Jacques :-)

Offline Johnnyhinbos

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3863
  • Boston, MA
  • Liked: 8095
  • Likes Given: 943
So that was one of two remotes he had set up OUTSIDE the safety perimeter, it being the farthest away. Doesn’t seem too safe to me...
John Hanzl. Author, action / adventure www.johnhanzl.com

Offline eweilow

Interestingly, SpaceTrack lists also eighth object on orbit, cataloged as object H, identified as FALCON 9 DEBRIS - separated on similar orbit as GRACE-FO 1&2.

2018-047H 2018-05-26 17:44 UTC - 479/498km/89.04°
Quote
0 FALCON 9 DEB
1 43483U 18047H   18146.73897838  .00064663  00000-0  25203-2 0  9994
2 43483  89.0445 238.5947 0013792 240.1102 119.8751 15.25615106   468
Dispenser, mass or something??
Whatever it is, it's got ~531x the BSTAR drag term compared to GRACE-FO 1 and is already in a 502 x 483 km orbit (compared to the GRACE-FO satellites both in 509 x 489 km)

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13463
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 11864
  • Likes Given: 11086
So that was one of two remotes he had set up OUTSIDE the safety perimeter, it being the farthest away. Doesn’t seem too safe to me...

I think it would have been fine except for the grass fire breaking out?
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline Jdeshetler

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 814
  • Silicon Valley, CA
  • Liked: 3661
  • Likes Given: 3546
So that was one of two remotes he had set up OUTSIDE the safety perimeter, it being the farthest away. Doesn’t seem too safe to me...

I think it would have been fine except for the grass fire breaking out?

Yes, it's fine, it's just that Bill selected this spot across from the blast duct for maximum visual effect which it is and somehow lost the gamble.  According to my remote video camera up the hill, the burning debris traveled 800' from the flame duct to this remote spot across the mini-valley.

Offline Targeteer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6106
  • near hangar 18
  • Liked: 3315
  • Likes Given: 1125
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/jpl/grace-fo-satellite-switching-to-backup-instrument-processing-unit


The Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment Follow-On (GRACE-FO) mission team plans to switch to a backup system in the Microwave Instrument (MWI) on one of the twin spacecraft this month. Following the switch-over, GRACE-FO is expected to quickly resume science data collection.

A month after launching this past May, GRACE-FO produced its first preliminary gravity field map. The mission has not acquired science data since mid-July due to an anomaly with a component of the Microwave Instrument on one of the GRACE-FO spacecraft. The mission team is completing its investigation into the cause of the anomaly.

The primary science objective of GRACE-FO -- like its predecessor GRACE, which operated from 2002 to 2017 -- is to track how water is redistributed on Earth, by producing highly accurate, monthly gravity field maps. Measurements of changes in Earth's gravity field provide measurements of mass change and enable unique insights into Earth's changing climate, Earth system processes like droughts and sea level changes, and the impacts of human activities on water resources.

The two GRACE-FO spacecraft were launched on a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket on May 22. The mission's launch and early operations phases were completed within five days, and the science instruments were activated a few days later. Analysis of the initial data indicated that both the Microwave Instrument and the Laser Ranging Interferometer were producing highly precise measurements of the gravity-induced change in distance between the two GRACE-FO satellites -- as good as or better than the original GRACE mission.

On July 19, the primary MWI Instrument Processing Unit (IPU) on the GRACE-FO 2 satellite powered down in response to autonomous commands from an instrument fault monitor indicating that the IPU was using less current than expected. The IPU provides various timing references for the satellite as well as onboard digital signal-processing functions for the Microwave Instrument and GPS signals. Each of the two GRACE-FO satellites is equipped with a pair of IPUs -- a primary unit and a redundant one -- to provide backup in case one unit malfunctions.

Following several unsuccessful attempts to reactivate the IPU, mission managers at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California, established an anomaly response team on Aug. 6 to investigate the issue. The team is working with the engineers who developed the Microwave Instrument, attempting to reproduce the abnormal behavior in the laboratory to understand the cause of the problem.

Following completion of the remaining instrument calibrations, the performance and stability of the redundant IPU will be monitored for at least 30 days. Once the instrument’s stable operation has been confirmed, the mission will be on track to enter its science operations phase, beginning with a four-month data-validation period as previously planned.

GRACE-FO is a partnership between NASA and the German Research Centre for Geosciences (GeoForschungsZentrum (GFZ). Both spacecraft are being operated from the German Space Operations Center in Oberpfaffenhofen, Germany, under a GFZ contract with the German Aerospace Center (Deutsches Zentrum fur Luft- und Raumfahrt (DLR)). JPL manages the mission for NASA's Science Mission Directorate at NASA Headquarters in Washington.

For more information about GRACE-FO, see:

https://www.nasa.gov/gracefo

https://gracefo.jpl.nasa.gov/

Esprit Smith
Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, California
818-354-4269
[email protected]
Best quote heard during an inspection, "I was unaware that I was the only one who was aware."

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10183
  • US
  • Liked: 13845
  • Likes Given: 5915
Don't remember if this was posted before, from Iridium corporate filings:
Quote
SpaceX
In March 2010, the Company entered into an agreement with Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (“SpaceX”) to secure SpaceX as the primary launch services provider for Iridium NEXT (as amended to date, the “SpaceX Agreement”). The total price under the SpaceX Agreement for seven launches and a reflight option in the event of a launch failure is $453.1 million. The SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket is configured to carry ten Iridium NEXT satellites to orbit for each of these seven launches. In November 2016, the Company entered into an agreement for an eighth launch with SpaceX to launch five additional satellites and share the launch with GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences (“GFZ”). This launch took place in May 2018. The total price under the SpaceX Agreement for the eighth launch was $61.9 million. GFZ paid Iridium $29.8 million to include in the launch NASA’s two Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment Follow-On satellites. As of June 30, 2018, the Company had made aggregate payments of $486.4 million to SpaceX, which were capitalized as construction in progress within property and equipment, net in the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheet.

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8142
  • Liked: 6799
  • Likes Given: 2963
Don't remember if this was posted before, from Iridium corporate filings:
Quote
SpaceX
In March 2010, the Company entered into an agreement with Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (“SpaceX”) to secure SpaceX as the primary launch services provider for Iridium NEXT (as amended to date, the “SpaceX Agreement”). The total price under the SpaceX Agreement for seven launches and a reflight option in the event of a launch failure is $453.1 million. The SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket is configured to carry ten Iridium NEXT satellites to orbit for each of these seven launches. In November 2016, the Company entered into an agreement for an eighth launch with SpaceX to launch five additional satellites and share the launch with GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences (“GFZ”). This launch took place in May 2018. The total price under the SpaceX Agreement for the eighth launch was $61.9 million. GFZ paid Iridium $29.8 million to include in the launch NASA’s two Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment Follow-On satellites. As of June 30, 2018, the Company had made aggregate payments of $486.4 million to SpaceX, which were capitalized as construction in progress within property and equipment, net in the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheet.

So the 7 flights with the reflight option were $64.7 million each, or a 4.6% markup over the $61.9 million 8th flight. That 4.6% is remarkably similar to the cost of insurance on Falcon (reportedly 4-5%), so I wonder if they paid extra for that option.

There's no mention of the cost of the dispensers, which were provided by SpaceX. If they are included in the launch cost, then it appears Iridium negotiated a small discount below list price for the actual launches.

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10183
  • US
  • Liked: 13845
  • Likes Given: 5915
There's no mention of the cost of the dispensers, which were provided by SpaceX. If they are included in the launch cost, then it appears Iridium negotiated a small discount below list price for the actual launches.

That price was supposed to include the dispensers.

Offline smoliarm

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 831
  • Moscow, Russia
  • Liked: 716
  • Likes Given: 609
It's interesting how the contract value changed through time:
The original press-release (June 10, 2010):
Quote
Iridium Communications Inc. (Nasdaq:IRDM) and Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) are pleased to announce that the Falcon 9 will be a major provider of launch services for Iridium NEXT, Iridium’s next-generation satellite constellation. The $492 million contract, while being the largest single commercial launch deal ever signed, nonetheless represents a new benchmark in cost-effective satellite delivery to space.
https://www.spacex.com/press/2012/12/19/iridium-and-spacex-sign-major-commercial-launch-contract

Later, in April 2016, Peter B. de Selding gave lower figure:
Quote
The Iridium contract with ... SpaceX, valued at $468.1 million, includes the possibility of an eighth launch if one of the seven committed flights fails.
...
As of March 31, Iridium had paid SpaceX $315.3 million for the seven launches.
https://spacenews.com/iridium-says-2nd-generation-constellation-ready-to-launch-with-spacex-starting-in-july/

And now the third figure, from Iridium corporate filings:
Quote
The total price under the SpaceX Agreement for seven launches and a reflight option in the event of a launch failure is $453.1 million.

With respect to the difference between the last two figures ($468.1 M vs $453.1 M), I'd attribute these $15 M to discount for used boosters (flights 4 and 5)


Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10183
  • US
  • Liked: 13845
  • Likes Given: 5915
With respect to the difference between the last two figures ($468.1 M vs $453.1 M), I'd attribute these $15 M to discount for used boosters (flights 4 and 5)

That would be my guess.

Offline deruch

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2422
  • California
  • Liked: 2006
  • Likes Given: 5634
With respect to the difference between the last two figures ($468.1 M vs $453.1 M), I'd attribute these $15 M to discount for used boosters (flights 4 and 5)

That would be my guess.

Could also include some discount penalties for delayed launches.  IIRC, other SpaceX launch contracts that we have seen have included escalating discounts up to a max of 10% of the contract value for the launch being delayed (longer delay=higher discount).  The final amount isn't too far off from that (~8% actual). 
Shouldn't reality posts be in "Advanced concepts"?  --Nomadd

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10183
  • US
  • Liked: 13845
  • Likes Given: 5915
Matt Desch said they received a discount for reusing those boosters.  If there were any discounts for delays they probably happened for the earlier flights.
« Last Edit: 09/25/2018 06:47 pm by gongora »

Offline abaddon

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3051
  • Liked: 3899
  • Likes Given: 5264
Matt Desch said they received a discount for reusing those boosters.  If there were any discounts for delays they probably happened for the earlier flights.
IIRC he also said the discount wasn't "substantial" and that the primary motivating factor was schedule.  Didn't find the exact quote I was looking for but this is close: https://spaceflightnow.com/2017/10/20/iridium-swaps-two-new-falcon-9-rockets-for-flight-proven-boosters/.

So yes, there definitely was a discount, but $15 million per flight (a 25% reduction in price) seems possible but maybe a bit high.

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10183
  • US
  • Liked: 13845
  • Likes Given: 5915
They reused 2 boosters.  $15M for two reuses seems to be in the right ballpark.

Online ZachS09

  • Space Savant
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8405
  • Roanoke, TX
  • Liked: 2343
  • Likes Given: 2057
They reused 2 boosters.  $15M for two reuses seems to be in the right ballpark.

I thought they reused three including the one with the rideshare.
Liftoff for St. Jude's! Go Dragon, Go Falcon, Godspeed Inspiration4!

Offline smoliarm

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 831
  • Moscow, Russia
  • Liked: 716
  • Likes Given: 609
They reused 2 boosters.  $15M for two reuses seems to be in the right ballpark.

I thought they reused three including the one with the rideshare.

Right, but - the text in filing states:
Quote
The total price under the SpaceX Agreement for seven launches and a reflight option in the event of a launch failure is $453.1 million. The SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket is configured to carry ten Iridium NEXT satellites to orbit for each of these seven launches. In November 2016, the Company entered into an agreement for an eighth launch with SpaceX to launch five additional satellites and share the launch with GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences (“GFZ”). This launch took place in May 2018. The total price under the SpaceX Agreement for the eighth launch was $61.9 million. GFZ paid Iridium $29.8 million to include in the launch NASA’s two Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment Follow-On satellites.

here I highlighted fragments which mean (as I understand) that the "total price" ($453.1 million) is for seven launches (of which two were with re-used boosters). The eight launch (with GRACE-FO) is listed there separately, with its price ($61.9 million) shown separately, and it is NOT included in "total price".

By the way, the  figure for GRACE-FO also seems quite reasonable:

The price for single flight (10x Iridiums) with NEW booster: 453.1 / 7 = $66.9M <--- "453.1" is a mistype, correct figure is $468.1
Discount for flight with used booster: 15 / 2 = $7.5M
So the price for single flight with USED booster: 66.9 - 7.50 = $59.4M

For GRACE-FO filing says the price was $61.9M, slightly higher (by $2.5M).
My guess, it's because of TWO target orbits and hence more complex flight profile.
But again here is a considerable discount compared to the "new booster" price.

Edit: corrected mistype.
« Last Edit: 09/28/2018 10:24 am by smoliarm »

Tags:
 

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