NASASpaceFlight.com Forum

SpaceX Vehicles and Missions => SpaceX Missions Section => Topic started by: Chris Bergin on 07/30/2013 07:10 pm

Title: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : NET March 2019
Post by: Chris Bergin on 07/30/2013 07:10 pm
Discussion Thread for RCM RADARSAT Constellation mission.

NSF Threads for RCM RADARSAT Constellation : Discussion (https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=32492.0)
NSF Articles for RCM RADARSAT Constellation :

NET March 2019 on reused Falcon 9 from Vandenberg.  Mass is around 1400kg? for each of the three satellites? plus a custom deployer.  Orbit is 600km SSO.



[ Edit Oct. 23, 2017: Most of the references to this mission (http://www.asc-csa.gc.ca/eng/satellites/radarsat/default.asp) still have it launching in the second half of 2018.  Except for that one comment from DLR (http://www.dlr.de/dlr/en/desktopdefault.aspx/tabid-10081/151_read-23370/#/gallery/27659) that they were calibrating the transponders leading up to launch in 2019.  The mass is generally listed as about 1400kg (total?), except for that one (http://www.asc-csa.gc.ca/pdf/eng/publications/radarsat-constellation-eng.pdf) saying it's 1600kg. ]

http://www.asc-csa.gc.ca/eng/satellites/radarsat/default.asp



Very short presser, so beefed it up with the history etc.

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2013/07/spacex-falcon-9-radarsat-constellation/



Other SpaceX resources on NASASpaceflight:
   SpaceX News Articles (Recent) (http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/tag/spacex/)
   SpaceX News Articles from 2006 (Including numerous exclusive Elon interviews) (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=21862.0)
   SpaceX Dragon Articles (http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/tag/dragon/)
   SpaceX Missions Section (with Launch Manifest and info on past and future missions) (https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?board=55.0)

   L2 SpaceX Section (https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?board=60.0)
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : Early 2019
Post by: Space Junkie on 07/30/2013 07:22 pm
What exactly does "reservation contract" mean?  I don't recall seeing that language in other recent announcements. Is it different than an "agreement to launch?"
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : Early 2019
Post by: John B on 07/30/2013 07:25 pm
What exactly does "reservation contract" mean?  I don't recall seeing that language in other recent announcements. Is it different than an "agreement to launch?"

It's like a MOU. Clearly customers want to see this new rocket have some successes before putting money down.
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : Early 2019
Post by: R7 on 07/30/2013 07:39 pm
Very short presser, so beefed it up with the history etc.

Given CASSIOPE's history gotta give props to SpaceX sales dpt ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : Early 2019
Post by: Space Junkie on 07/30/2013 07:42 pm
What exactly does "reservation contract" mean?  I don't recall seeing that language in other recent announcements. Is it different than an "agreement to launch?"

It's like a MOU. Clearly customers want to see this new rocket have some successes before putting money down.

Thanks. It sounded like less than full commitment to me.

Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : Early 2019
Post by: robertross on 07/31/2013 12:56 am
Now that I'm posting on the correct thread...

A great win-win day for Canada & SpaceX. Too cool. Congrats.

And this holds hope for even more good news for both Canada's space industry, and SpaceX's manifest:

"While the baseline mission for this evolution in Canada’s Earth Observation capability revolves around three satellites, the constellation is designed to be scalable to six satellites."

Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : Early 2019
Post by: Helodriver on 07/31/2013 09:29 am
In the correct forum...

Does SpaceX have a suitable standard multiple payload dispenser in development or will a one off hardware solution for deploying three satellites  need to be devised for this mission?
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : Early 2019
Post by: kevin-rf on 07/31/2013 01:08 pm
They should gain experience and hardware with the up coming Orbcomm and Iridium launches. Both will involve multiple launches with multiple payload adapters.
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : Early 2019
Post by: subzero788 on 07/31/2013 03:04 pm

Does SpaceX have a suitable standard multiple payload dispenser in development or will a one off hardware solution for deploying three satellites  need to be devised for this mission?


SpaceX have a deal with Spaceflight Inc. to supply a Seconday Payload System for the Falcon 9, but this I believe is for small secondary sats only. Whether they will outsource the payload dispenser for this mission as well is anyone's guess.

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2012/06/spacex-deal-falcon-9s-secondary-payload-manifest/
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : Early 2019
Post by: Lars_J on 07/31/2013 04:40 pm
They should gain experience and hardware with the up coming Orbcomm and Iridium launches. Both will involve multiple launches with multiple payload adapters.

The FH demo flight will have multiple payloads as well.
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : Early 2019
Post by: joek on 08/01/2013 01:55 am
Does SpaceX have a suitable standard multiple payload dispenser in development or will a one off hardware solution for deploying three satellites  need to be devised for this mission?
Presumably something is in development as they have two dual GEO satellite launches scheduled for circa 2014-2015 on F9,  SpaceX Signs Launch Agreements with Asia Broadcast Satellite and Satmex (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=28328.0):
Quote
Together with Satmex, our co-launch partner, we embark upon an innovative prospect of dual launching four medium-powered satellites on two launches on the Falcon 9.
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : Early 2019
Post by: Jim on 08/01/2013 02:04 am
Does SpaceX have a suitable standard multiple payload dispenser in development or will a one off hardware solution for deploying three satellites  need to be devised for this mission?
Presumably something is in development as they have two dual GEO satellite launches scheduled for circa 2014-2015 on F9,  SpaceX Signs Launch Agreements with Asia Broadcast Satellite and Satmex (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=28328.0):
Quote
Together with Satmex, our co-launch partner, we embark upon an innovative prospect of dual launching four medium-powered satellites on two launches on the Falcon 9.

No dual adapter is needed for those spacecraft.  They are made to stack on each other
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : Early 2019
Post by: joek on 08/01/2013 02:13 am
No dual adapter is needed for those spacecraft.  They are made to stack on each other
Interesting, thanks.  Anyone know if these RCM sats are also "stackable"?
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : Early 2019
Post by: Skyrocket on 12/14/2015 07:55 pm
A few days ago, the RCM mission has disappeared from the SpaceX launch manifest website (http://www.spacex.com/missions).

Just a web site mistake or was the launch contract (or even the RCM mission itself) cancelled?

Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : Early 2019
Post by: nadreck on 12/14/2015 08:19 pm
A few days ago, the RCM mission has disappeared from the SpaceX launch manifest website (http://www.spacex.com/missions).

Just a web site mistake or was the launch contract (or even the RCM mission itself) cancelled?

I see a launch described as RADARSAT in the Customer column
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : Early 2019
Post by: Skyrocket on 12/14/2015 10:15 pm
A few days ago, the RCM mission has disappeared from the SpaceX launch manifest website (http://www.spacex.com/missions).

Just a web site mistake or was the launch contract (or even the RCM mission itself) cancelled?

I see a launch described as RADARSAT in the Customer column

Ah, my mistake: i saw the MDA entry disappear, but did not notice the Radarsat entry appearing
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : Early 2019
Post by: Kaputnik on 01/16/2016 09:36 am
Is there an argument for changing the thread title, as presumably this will not be on a v1.1 but a FT?
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : Early 2019
Post by: Jakusb on 01/16/2016 01:21 pm
Is there an argument for changing the thread title, as presumably this will not be on a v1.1 but a FT?

Als per request of SpaceX, it should simply be Falcon9 of F9 for short.  After Jason3 there is only one version.

Edit: not sure about short F9 part, but seems logical
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : Early 2019
Post by: FutureSpaceTourist on 12/16/2017 08:54 am
Great spot by GWH, this mission will use a flight proven booster:

And another one, Canadian eh:
https://spaceq.ca/radarsat-constellation-mission-to-fly-on-refurbished-spacex-falcon-9-rocket/
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : Early 2019
Post by: gongora on 12/19/2017 02:04 pm
Tweet from Peter B. de Selding (https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/943096392435884032):
Quote
Maxar @sslmda CEO Howard L. Lance to CNBC: All 3 Canadian govt Radarsat Constellation Mission sats (~ 475kg each) to launch on single previously flown @spacex Falcon 9 in 2018.
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : Early 2019
Post by: IanThePineapple on 12/19/2017 02:08 pm
Tweet from Peter B. de Selding (https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/943096392435884032):
Quote
Maxar @sslmda CEO Howard L. Lance to CNBC: All 3 Canadian govt Radarsat Constellation Mission sats (~ 475kg each) to launch on single previously flown @spacex Falcon 9 in 2018.

Wow, if they're that light and flying on a Block 4, it'll likely RTLS
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : Early 2019
Post by: gongora on 12/19/2017 02:12 pm
Tweet from Peter B. de Selding (https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/943096392435884032):
Quote
Maxar @sslmda CEO Howard L. Lance to CNBC: All 3 Canadian govt Radarsat Constellation Mission sats (~ 475kg each) to launch on single previously flown @spacex Falcon 9 in 2018.

Wow, if they're that light and flying on a Block 4, it'll likely RTLS

Not likely to be Block 4 in the second half of 2018.
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : Early 2019
Post by: gongora on 01/18/2018 02:54 am
This video shows the custom RUAG dispenser for the mission.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWu2fjevhFg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWu2fjevhFg)
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : Early 2019
Post by: Steven Pietrobon on 01/18/2018 06:59 am
Screen grabs. The dispenser firsts tilts the satellites and then separates them. Ruag have had 100% success with their adaptors.
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : Early 2019
Post by: gongora on 01/23/2018 01:21 am
Tweet from MDA_SatSystems: (https://twitter.com/MDA_SatSystems/status/955531262483095552)
Quote
#MDA was delighted to host @SherryRomanado, @Gabriel_SMarie, and @MarjBoutinSweet at our #Montreal facility on 19-Jan to show off the @csa_asc #RADARSAT Constellation Mission satellites being built.
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : Early 2019
Post by: rocket-chris on 01/23/2018 07:39 pm
I'm wondering a bit about the mass of the sats which is in some sources as well as in this Thread specified with ~475kg.

At the CSA website the "Total mass at launch" is given with 1602kg. And the sats are based on the Canadian SmallSat Bus which has a mass of 760kg only for the bus...

1602kg per sat would give around 4800kg for all three which make a F9 launch more logical than an F9 launch with a payload weight less than 1500kg in total.

http://www.asc-csa.gc.ca/pdf/eng/publications/radarsat-constellation-eng.pdf

https://directory.eoportal.org/web/eoportal/satellite-missions/r/rcm
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : Early 2019
Post by: sewebster on 01/23/2018 07:59 pm
I'm wondering a bit about the mass of the sats which is in some sources as well as in this Thread specified with ~475kg.

At the CSA website the "Total mass at launch" is given with 1602kg. And the sats are based on the Canadian SmallSat Bus which has a mass of 760kg only for the bus...

1602kg per sat would give around 4800kg for all three which make a F9 launch more logical than an F9 launch with a payload weight less than 1500kg in total.

http://www.asc-csa.gc.ca/pdf/eng/publications/radarsat-constellation-eng.pdf

https://directory.eoportal.org/web/eoportal/satellite-missions/r/rcm

It looks to me like the mass of each satellite is around 1400 kg. This is just based on web searches and trying to interpret various presentations etc. There is one very old CBC article that seems to suggest 1200 kg/sat more definitively (i.e., vs total launch mass for all three: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/mda-awarded-contract-to-design-satellite-fleet-1.721135). Most sources just list a mass without mentioning per sat or not... but generally they are comparing Radarsat 1, 2, and now RCM... seems most logical to me to compare the individual satellites, but hard to say really, because when comparing something like revisit time, they will often say daily, but that is for the constellation...
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : Early 2019
Post by: sewebster on 01/24/2018 06:36 am
https://directory.eoportal.org/web/eoportal/satellite-missions/r/rcm

Just read this link more thoroughly, originally posted by rocket-chris. It seems rather specific that the mass is 1400 kg/spacecraft and also specifies the bus mass and payload mass separately, both of which mass more than the 475 kg figure that has also been mentioned. Search for "mass" on the page.

Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : Early 2019
Post by: gongora on 03/06/2018 05:57 pm
I hope that 3t includes the container...

Tweet from RUAGSpace (https://twitter.com/RuagSpace/status/969148714936864769):
Quote
Over 3 metric tons rolled away from our #Linköping facility,
carrying the heaviest piece of hardware ever developed there. Container held a major structure for a dispenser that will launch three spacecrafts simultaneously this year. Safe travels to sunny @California #HeavyLoad

(I'm guessing this is for RCM)
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : Early 2019
Post by: sewebster on 03/06/2018 09:43 pm
(I'm guessing this is for RCM)

It says "RCM Dispenser" on the container, so I think you are correct!
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : Early 2019
Post by: Nehkara on 03/06/2018 10:02 pm
Looks like it's 1400 kg per spacecraft plus the dispenser.  I'm guessing that means this mission will lift probably between 6200 and 8200 kg (depending on how much of that 3 metric tons is the payload adapter).
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : Early 2019
Post by: Freddedonna on 05/10/2018 11:23 am
Pretty cool video posted by the CSA about the Radarsat integration process, filmed inside the MDA factory : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbxMC2tX4fQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbxMC2tX4fQ)
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : Early 2019
Post by: eriblo on 06/08/2018 12:50 pm
Attended a presentation by Daniel De Lisle (CSA) on June 6 where he stated that the current "focus date" for launch is November 7th, one week into the contracted one month launch period. Should be able to at least say NET November.
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : Early 2019
Post by: gongora on 06/22/2018 04:56 pm
This news report says late November.

https://globalnews.ca/video/4290161/spacex-launches-canadian-surveillance-satellites

I'm not really believing that all of the SpaceX Vandenberg payloads saying they'll launch this year are actually going to launch this year.  It will be interesting to see if SpaceX can step up their West Coast launch rate.
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : Early 2019
Post by: vaporcobra on 09/13/2018 10:04 pm
From the WSBW Earth Observation segment:

Quote
At #WSBW Earth observation track, Wayne Hoyle of MDA says the Radarsat Constellation Mission spacecraft should be ready to ship to the launch site at the end of this month; working with SpaceX to set a launch date.

https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/1040146506286870529
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : Early 2019
Post by: SwissCheese on 10/16/2018 02:59 pm
Just got news that RCM mission has now been officially delayed to February.

There's also a new blog post on the Canadian Space Agency website about the mission status:

http://www.asc-csa.gc.ca/eng/blog/2018/10/16/radarsat-constellation-a-major-milestone-reached.asp?utm_source=website&utm_medium=banner-txt&utm_campaign=rcm&utm_content=major-milestone&utm_term=home-page

edit/gongora: linked blog has "Launch window: Week of February 18, 2019"
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : February 2019
Post by: Billium on 11/13/2018 01:00 pm
Here is a CBC article about the mission. It’s actually pretty good. No insurance was one interesting bit of information.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/satellite-constellation-radarsat-space-agency-canada-falcon-spacex-1.4895428
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : February 2019
Post by: SolSystem on 12/22/2018 07:56 pm
So I spoke with Michel Doyon, Manager, Flight Operations at the Canadian Space Agency today and the RCM flight is going to be delayed again. How long I don't know. He said RCM was supposed to use the NASA CRS-16 mission booster (B1050) which had the grid fin issue and "softly" landed in the water.

Discussions between MDA, who contracted for the launch, and SpaceX are ongoing. Has anyone heard anything on a possible new launch date? Also which booster might it use? A previously flown own or new? I understand from other threads here that the B1050 booster is not likely to fly again??

Thanks
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : February 2019
Post by: Alexphysics on 12/22/2018 08:09 pm
So I spoke with Michel Doyon, Manager, Flight Operations at the Canadian Space Agency today and the RCM flight is going to be delayed again. How long I don't know. He said RCM was supposed to use the NASA CRS-16 mission booster (B1050) which had the grid fin issue and "softly" landed in the water.

Discussions between MDA, who contracted for the launch, and SpaceX are ongoing. Has anyone heard anything on a possible new launch date? Also which booster might it use? A previously flown own or new? I understand from other threads here that the B1050 booster is not likely to fly again??

Thanks

That's weird because they have B1052 and B1053 out there and could use it :/

They could always fly B1046 for a fourth time :)
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : February 2019
Post by: SolSystem on 12/22/2018 08:26 pm
So I spoke with Michel Doyon, Manager, Flight Operations at the Canadian Space Agency today and the RCM flight is going to be delayed again. How long I don't know. He said RCM was supposed to use the NASA CRS-16 mission booster (B1050) which had the grid fin issue and "softly" landed in the water.

Discussions between MDA, who contracted for the launch, and SpaceX are ongoing. Has anyone heard anything on a possible new launch date? Also which booster might it use? A previously flown own or new? I understand from other threads here that the B1050 booster is not likely to fly again??

Thanks

That's weird because they have B1052 and B1053 out there and could use it :/

They could always fly B1046 for a fourth time :)

Maybe it's a cost issue. They were getting a good deal on the proven booster.
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : February 2019
Post by: russianhalo117 on 12/22/2018 08:33 pm
So I spoke with Michel Doyon, Manager, Flight Operations at the Canadian Space Agency today and the RCM flight is going to be delayed again. How long I don't know. He said RCM was supposed to use the NASA CRS-16 mission booster (B1050) which had the grid fin issue and "softly" landed in the water.

Discussions between MDA, who contracted for the launch, and SpaceX are ongoing. Has anyone heard anything on a possible new launch date? Also which booster might it use? A previously flown own or new? I understand from other threads here that the B1050 booster is not likely to fly again??

Thanks

That's weird because they have B1052 and B1053 out there and could use it :/

They could always fly B1046 for a fourth time :)

Maybe it's a cost issue. They were getting a good deal on the proven booster.
No. Cost has nothing to do with it.

Remanifesting of Booster Cores will be in order if sticking with a reused core.
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : February 2019
Post by: Lar on 12/23/2018 12:32 pm
Maybe it's a cost issue. They were getting a good deal on the proven booster.
No. Cost has nothing to do with it.

Remanifesting of Booster Cores will be in order if sticking with a reused core.
Given that for block 4 they would sometimes take into account what mission was flown the first time, I'm not sure I would expect them to step away from that. Do you have a source?
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : February 2019
Post by: Jakusb on 12/23/2018 02:25 pm
So I spoke with Michel Doyon, Manager, Flight Operations at the Canadian Space Agency today and the RCM flight is going to be delayed again. How long I don't know. He said RCM was supposed to use the NASA CRS-16 mission booster (B1050) which had the grid fin issue and "softly" landed in the water.

Discussions between MDA, who contracted for the launch, and SpaceX are ongoing. Has anyone heard anything on a possible new launch date? Also which booster might it use? A previously flown own or new? I understand from other threads here that the B1050 booster is not likely to fly again??

Thanks

That's weird because they have B1052 and B1053 out there and could use it :/

They could always fly B1046 for a fourth time :)

Maybe it's a cost issue. They were getting a good deal on the proven booster.
No. Cost has nothing to do with it.

Remanifesting of Booster Cores will be in order if sticking with a reused core.

Good to know 1050 was supposed to go West.
We still have 1052 and 1053, and very maybe 1055 (although getting more and more doubtful)...
One will have to go West, unless they are getting comfortable with flying cores a 3rd time.
In that case we have available 1047 and 1049.

In case they dare flying a core for 4th time, 1046 will have had plenty of time to get checked out.

My money is on either 1052 or 1053 being re-assigned to West coast duty...


Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : February 2019
Post by: Jakusb on 12/23/2018 02:33 pm
So I spoke with Michel Doyon, Manager, Flight Operations at the Canadian Space Agency today and the RCM flight is going to be delayed again. How long I don't know. He said RCM was supposed to use the NASA CRS-16 mission booster (B1050) which had the grid fin issue and "softly" landed in the water.

Discussions between MDA, who contracted for the launch, and SpaceX are ongoing. Has anyone heard anything on a possible new launch date? Also which booster might it use? A previously flown own or new? I understand from other threads here that the B1050 booster is not likely to fly again??

Thanks

That's weird because they have B1052 and B1053 out there and could use it :/

They could always fly B1046 for a fourth time :)

Maybe it's a cost issue. They were getting a good deal on the proven booster.

If cost was a big issue, they would get probably an even better deal if flying 1046 a fourth time.. ;)

Edit: If 1050 caused a delay, it would indicate that there is no obvious other solution than waiting for 1052 to launch CRS-17 frist? Or possibly 1051? If they really want a once-flown core..
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : February 2019
Post by: vanoord on 12/23/2018 08:20 pm
B1047.3 would be a candidate?
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : NET February 2019
Post by: pb2000 on 01/15/2019 03:41 pm
As much as I detest using CBC as a spaceflight news source, they seemed to have confirmed that a launch in February is no longer in the cards, even going so far as to say "postponed ... indefinitely".

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/spacex-musk-radarsat-constellation-mission-falcon9-1.4977512

I'm guessing the indefinite bit, means they are going back into the queue to wait for a new or gently used booster.

Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : NET February 2019
Post by: PM3 on 02/15/2019 01:07 pm
http://www.spaceflightfans.cn/event/falcon-9-rocket-launch-radarsat?instance_id=2321

Quote from: Google Translate
Falcon 9 • Radarsat C-1/2/3
...
[February 15, 2019] Vandenberg news, no earlier than March 9, if the core level is confirmed as B1046.4, it is the fourth flight of the same core level.
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : NET March 2019
Post by: crandles57 on 02/16/2019 02:48 pm
http://www.sworld.com.au/steven/space/uscom-man.txt

has Mar 6th

spaceflightfans seems down.
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : NET March 2019
Post by: Michael Baylor on 02/16/2019 03:24 pm
http://www.sworld.com.au/steven/space/uscom-man.txt

has Mar 6th

spaceflightfans seems down.
Yes, but the source for that might also be spaceflightfans? I don't think March 6th is accurate. SpaceX has not opened media accreditation yet, and they typically would have done so by now.
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : NET March 2019
Post by: Steven Pietrobon on 02/17/2019 04:31 am
http://www.sworld.com.au/steven/space/uscom-man.txt

has Mar 6th

spaceflightfans seems down.

That's my website. I got the date from here, which got it from spaceflightfans! Now, I had thought it was 6 March, but going back to the post and the website, it says 9 March. Looks like I copied the date wrong. I'll change it to 9 March, although I don't put much faith in that date, since its from a Chinese web site with out any sources. Bing translation

"Vandenberg news, not earlier than March 9 (? ), if the core level is confirmed as B1046.4, it is the 4th flight of the same core class."
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : NET March 2019
Post by: PM3 on 02/18/2019 12:12 am
Agree that Chinese information on US launches is not that reliable. It's unlikely that Radarsat will launch on a 3rd or even 4th flight - there should have been boosters already available for that. Teslarati / Eric Ralph speculated that CSA has a contract for a low-worn booster for their billion dollars satellites.

What a difference a day of bad weather can make. On 6 March 2018, SpaceX could not recover B1044 (Hispasat). One spare booster missing, and this propagated through a year of launch schedule up to Radarsat, where no replacement was available for the crash-landed B1050.
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : NET March 2019
Post by: smoliarm on 02/18/2019 12:02 pm
Agree that Chinese information on US launches is not that reliable. It's unlikely that Radarsat will launch on a 3rd or even 4th flight - there should have been boosters already available for that. Teslarati / Eric Ralph speculated that CSA has a contract for a low-worn booster for their billion dollars satellites.

...


First, the launch contract for RSM was signed quite a bit ago, in 2013 (https://www.spacex.com/press/2013/07/30/spacex-awarded-launch-reservation-contract-largest-canadian-space-program).
At that time there was no Falcon 9 v1.1 flying, let aside Falcon 9 FT with any of its *blocks*. Also, even the concept of "low-warn booster" pricing did not exist, it emerged couple years later. Also, the contract was originally made for the launch in 2018, five years in advance. Therefore, I suspect its language had a fair amount of freedom for both provider and buyer. And finally, in 2013 the advertised price for launch with Falcon 9 was $54 M, it was very inexpensive option at the time.

Second, as I recall RSM satellites are not that expensive, they do not belong to a "billion dollars satellites" class. The whole project cost may be something around that number (in Canadian $), but it includes R&D money, the cost of ground infrastructure and other "items", which are not satellites. If we are considering launch failure and evaluating possible losses - we are calculating REPLACEMENT cost, and it is typically much lower than the cost of the whole project.
Specifically, eoportal.org gives $110 M Cdn as a price tag for all three sats:
"Sept. 4, 2013: The Magellan Aerospace Corporation (Magellan) was awarded a contract of $110 million Cdn. From MDA for the manufacture of the three RCM spacecraft."
(the hyperlink to the source at eoportal does not work, here is the correct one (https://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/magellan-aerospace-awarded-110-million-contract-for-radarsat-constellation-manufacture-512876591.html))

The bottom line, IMHO:
There is no ground for speculations about "low-worn booster" thing existing in contract. It may be right, it may be wrong - we just do not know, and we have no evidence to support.

Hopefully this will change - eventually :)
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : NET March 2019
Post by: webdan on 02/18/2019 12:16 pm
Agree that Chinese information on US launches is not that reliable. It's unlikely that Radarsat will launch on a 3rd or even 4th flight - there should have been boosters already available for that. Teslarati / Eric Ralph speculated that CSA has a contract for a low-worn booster for their billion dollars satellites.

...


First, the launch contract for RSM was signed quite a bit ago, in 2013 (http://"https://www.spacex.com/press/2013/07/30/spacex-awarded-launch-reservation-contract-largest-canadian-space-program").
At that time there was no Falcon 9 v1.1 flying, let aside Falcon 9 FT with any of its *blocks*. Also, even the concept of "low-warn booster" pricing did not exist, it emerged couple years later. Also, the contract was originally made for the launch in 2018, five years in advance. Therefore, I suspect its language had a fair amount of freedom for both provider and buyer. And finally, in 2013 the advertised price for launch with Falcon 9 was $54 M, it was very inexpensive option at the time.

Second, as I recall RSM satellites are not that expensive, they do not belong to a "billion dollars satellites" class. The whole project cost may be something around that number (in Canadian $), but it includes R&D money, the cost of ground infrastructure and other "items", which are not satellites. If we are considering launch failure and evaluating possible losses - we are calculating REPLACEMENT cost, and it is typically much lower than the cost of the whole project.
Specifically, eoportal.org gives $110 M Cdn as a price tag for all three sats:
"Sept. 4, 2013: The Magellan Aerospace Corporation (Magellan) was awarded a contract of $110 million Cdn. From MDA for the manufacture of the three RCM spacecraft."
(the hyperlink to the source at eoportal does not work, here is the correct one (http://"https://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/magellan-aerospace-awarded-110-million-contract-for-radarsat-constellation-manufacture-512876591.html"))

The bottom line, IMHO:
There is no ground for speculations about "low-worn booster" thing existing in contract. It may be right, it may be wrong - we just do not know, and we have no evidence to support.

Hopefully this will change - eventually :)

Link is still wrong (extra chars). This should be correct:

https://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/magellan-aerospace-awarded-110-million-contract-for-radarsat-constellation-manufacture-512876591.html
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : NET March 2019
Post by: PM3 on 02/18/2019 12:22 pm
Right, the number of (more than) a billion dollars refers to the whole Radarsat project, including operation; see CBC article (https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/satellite-constellation-radarsat-space-agency-canada-falcon-spacex-1.4895428).

Eric Ralphs speculation on boosters: https://www.teslarati.com/spacex-next-west-coast-launch-indefinitely-postponed-failed-falcon-9-landing/

Quote from: Eric Ralph
Although each rocket SpaceX builds can be quite different from each other in terms of general quirks and bugs, the only obvious difference between B1050 and any other flight-proven Falcon 9 booster in SpaceX’s fleet was its low-energy CRS-16 trajectory, something that would have enabled a uniquely gentle reentry and landing shortly after launch. In other words, likely out of heaps of caution and conservatism if it is the case, customers CSA and MDA may have requested (or contractually demanded) that SpaceX launch the Radarsat constellation on a flight-proven Falcon 9 with as little wear and tear as possible, in which case B1050 would have been hard to beat.

There is no ground for speculations about "low-worn booster" thing existing in contract. It may be right, it may be wrong - we just do not know, and we have no evidence to support.

The evidence is that the launch has been "indefinitely postponed (https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/spacex-musk-radarsat-constellation-mission-falcon9-1.4977512)" after the B1050 landing failure, though there should be some boosters available (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Falcon_9_first-stage_boosters):

- B1046, third landing on 3 December 2018
- B1048, second landing on 8 October 2018
- B1049, third landing on 11 January, 2019
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : NET March 2019
Post by: smoliarm on 02/18/2019 01:52 pm
@PM3
Well yes - this is exactly what I call "no ground for speculation".
So, your first quote gives in my opinion a clear example of what a called (second quote) "may be right, may be wrong".
Let's see on this particular example where are the boundaries between facts and speculations:
FACTS:
*** B1050 landing failure is a fact;
*** The RSM launch was postponed (just "postponed", the "indefinitely postponed" - it is a CBC news type assessment, not a fact)
*** these two facts are obviously linked as cause and consequence.
That's it for facts.
Other things are speculative, or even wrong, including this one: "...though there should be some boosters available..."
- no, all these boosters DO NOT have status "available" - not anymore, not after the landing failure - just because they are of the SAME TYPE, and may have the SAME PROBLEM. They WILL be available, but after SpaceX finds the root cause and the applies the corrective actions - to prevent this type of failure in future.

Let's assume they find a DESIGN FLAW in the B1050 incident, which is not very unlikely as they had so far 12 attempts with 10 successes and two failures. In this case they have to DESIGN the new pump system, TEST it and APPLY this modification to all cores in inventory. That's quite a time, that would definitely justify launches being "indefinitely postponed".
But that's a worst case, after all - 10 successes it's a good line.
So, a PRODUCTION FLAW is more likely in my view. But even in this case SpaceX need SOME TIME to return the status "available" to the cores in inventory. Indeed, first they need to check these cores for the same (or similar) flaws. Second, they need to decide if this production screw-up is 100% preventable OR they better add some redundancy to the system. And this justifies some launch delays just as well.

So, both these "scenarios" induce delays - just like in the speculation about low-worn booster requirement.
The only difference is that the two listed above - they are typical for this industry.

Basically there are two plausible explanation for a launch delay:
1. either customer does want low-worn booster
2. or SpaceX does not want to loose another booster
- and as I said, we have no ground/evidence to chose the right one.
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : NET March 2019
Post by: PM3 on 02/18/2019 02:14 pm
Why would they only postpone Radarsat because of the risk of another hydraulic pump failure, but still launch Iridium (11 January), Nusantara Satu (planned for 22 February) and DM1 (planned for 2 March)? Would they give that low priority to the Canadian Space Agency compared to the other customers?

Note that B1044 - which was equipped (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/43/Hispasat_30W-6_Mission_%2839951085264%29.jpg) with landing legs and grid fins - was expended to serve the customer. They could haved saved it by just waiting for better weather.
Title: Re: SpaceX F9 : RCM (RADARSAT Constellation) : Vandenberg : NET March 2019
Post by: smoliarm on 02/18/2019 03:58 pm
Quote
Why would they only postpone Radarsat because of the risk of another hydraulic pump failure, but still launch Iridium (11 January), Nusantara Satu (planned for 22 February) and DM1 (planned for 2 March)?
Because:
Both Iridium and Nusantara Satu are ASDS-type landings. The hydraulic pump failure occurred on a RTLS-type mission, which has different flight profile and different landing profile. So, it is not unreasonable to suggest this failure mode does not apply to ASDS. Yes, this is speculation - un-grounded - just like your variant. We both do not know the necessary facts (and never will).
In contrast, your last example, SpX-DM1, does not belong to the group for sure, because it's a high profile mission where the schedule - when set - does have very high priority. In other words, SpaceX will definitely prefer to risk the booster landing over another launch delay.

It seems to me you still missing the point (or, likely, I did not do good job with explaining it):
I am NOT trying to say my explanation is right, nor his explanation is wrong - no.
Neither I am trying to say my explanation is better than his.
I gave my variant just to show that his is not the only one.