The Air Force has announced the award of an Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) launch service contract. Space Exploration Technologies Corporation (SpaceX) has been awarded a $130 million firm-fixed price contract for launch services to deliver Air Force Space Command (AFSPC)-52 satellite to the intended orbit. The contract provides the Government with a total launch solution for this mission, which includes launch vehicle production, mission integration and launch operations. This mission is planned to be launched from Kennedy Space Center, Florida.
This is the fifth competitive procurement under the current Phase 1A strategy. These launch service contract awards strike a balance between meeting operational needs and lowering launch costs through reintroducing competition for National Security Space missions.
“The competitive award of this EELV launch service contract directly supports Space and Missile Systems Center’s (SMC) mission of delivering resilient and affordable space capabilities to our Nation while maintaining assured access to space,” said Lt. Gen. John Thompson, Air Force program executive officer for Space and SMC commander.
AFSPC-52 is a classified mission projected to launch in late Fiscal Year 2020.
The Air Force Space Command's Space and Missile Systems Center, located at the Los Angeles Air Force Base, California, is the U.S. Air Force's center of excellence for acquiring and developing military space systems. Its portfolio includes the Global Positioning System, military satellite communications, defense meteorological satellites, space launch and range systems, satellite control networks, space based infrared systems, and space situational awareness capabilities.
Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (SpaceX), Hawthorne, California, has been awarded a $130,000,000 firm-fixed-price contract, for launch services to deliver the Air Force Space Command-52 satellite to its intended orbit. This launch service contract will include launch vehicle production and mission, as well as integration, launch operations and spaceflight worthiness activities. Work will be performed in Hawthorne, California; Kennedy Space Center, Florida; and McGregor, Texas, and is expected to be completed by September 2020. This award is the result of a competitive acquisition, and two proposals were received. Fiscal 2018 space procurement funds in the amount of $130,000,000 will be obligated at the time of award. The Contracting Division, Launch Systems Enterprise Directorate, Space and Missile Systems Center, Los Angeles Air Force Base, California, is the contracting activity (FA8811-18-C-0003). (Awarded June 20, 2018)
What was the alternative? Atlas 5 or a Delta IV?previously listed on the NSF US schedule as flying on an Atlas V 500 series with other sites listing it as an AV551.
Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (SpaceX), Hawthorne, California, has been awarded a $130,000,000 firm-fixed-price contract, for launch services to deliver the Air Force Space Command-52 satellite to its intended orbit. This launch service contract will include launch vehicle production and mission, as well as integration, launch operations and spaceflight worthiness activities. Work will be performed in Hawthorne, California; Kennedy Space Center, Florida; and McGregor, Texas, and is expected to be completed by September 2020. This award is the result of a competitive acquisition, and two proposals were received. Fiscal 2018 space procurement funds in the amount of $130,000,000 will be obligated at the time of award. The Contracting Division, Launch Systems Enterprise Directorate, Space and Missile Systems Center, Los Angeles Air Force Base, California, is the contracting activity (FA8811-18-C-0003). (Awarded June 20, 2018)
So the question is, what kind of Falcon Heavy flight does $130 million buy? All 3 cores recovered, or exended core?Q; All 3 cores recovered, or exended core?
So the question is, what kind of Falcon Heavy flight does $130 million buy? All 3 cores recovered, or exended core?The requirements seem to suggest that this was borderline doable on a Falcon 9 expendable. Therefore, I am guessing that this will be a fully recoverable Falcon Heavy launch. However, all three of the cores will be brand new plus the other AF requirements (thus the higher price).
So the question is, what kind of Falcon Heavy flight does $130 million buy? All 3 cores recovered, or exended core?The requirements seem to suggest that this was borderline doable on a Falcon 9 expendable. Therefore, I am guessing that this will be a fully recoverable Falcon Heavy launch. However, all three of the cores will be brand new plus the other AF requirements (thus the higher price).
Previous discussion here :originally i think it was to be a transfer orbit and could now be direct insertion
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=43266.msg1728038#msg1728038
Interesting choice, the requirements seemed borderline for F9. Good win for SpaceX.
Previous discussion here :originally i think it was to be a transfer orbit and could now be direct insertion
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=43266.msg1728038#msg1728038
Interesting choice, the requirements seemed borderline for F9. Good win for SpaceX.
originally i think it was to be a transfer orbit and could now be direct insertionThat would make a Delta IV Heavy bid slightly more likely on ULA's part. It really on the payload mass though.
So the question is, what kind of Falcon Heavy flight does $130 million buy? All 3 cores recovered, or exended core?The requirements seem to suggest that this was borderline doable on a Falcon 9 expendable. Therefore, I am guessing that this will be a fully recoverable Falcon Heavy launch. However, all three of the cores will be brand new plus the other AF requirements (thus the higher price).
Why? Would they have to give up the core? They advertise four times that payload to GTO.Previous discussion here :originally i think it was to be a transfer orbit and could now be direct insertion
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=43266.msg1728038#msg1728038
Interesting choice, the requirements seemed borderline for F9. Good win for SpaceX.
Could be, but I doubt it for $130 million.
So the question is, what kind of Falcon Heavy flight does $130 million buy? All 3 cores recovered, or exended core?The requirements seem to suggest that this was borderline doable on a Falcon 9 expendable. Therefore, I am guessing that this will be a fully recoverable Falcon Heavy launch. However, all three of the cores will be brand new plus the other AF requirements (thus the higher price).
So the USAF certified the FH for EELV payloads after only one flight? ??? SpaceX hasn't even flown the launch the USAF procured as a FH demo yet.
So the USAF certified the FH for EELV payloads after only one flight? ??? SpaceX hasn't even flown the launch the USAF procured as a FH demo yet.
So the USAF certified the FH for EELV payloads after only one flight? ??? SpaceX hasn't even flown the launch the USAF procured as a FH demo yet.
By the time AFSPC-52 is scheduled to launch FH will have flown at least three times.
Also, at least two recent missions (FH maiden launch and a F9 mission) had test objectives to satisfy USAF certification requirements.
So the USAF certified the FH for EELV payloads after only one flight? ??? SpaceX hasn't even flown the launch the USAF procured as a FH demo yet.
By the time AFSPC-52 is scheduled to launch FH will have flown at least three times.
Also, at least two recent missions (FH maiden launch and a F9 mission) had test objectives to satisfy USAF certification requirements.
The statement from Shotwell indicated that FH was already certified, not that certification was pending. So that would mean the USAF certified the FH after only one flight if we take Shotwell's statement at face value.
"On behalf of all of our employees, I want to thank the Air Force for certifying Falcon Heavy"
The statement from Shotwell indicated that FH was already certified, not that certification was pending. So that would mean the USAF certified the FH after only one flight if we take Shotwell's statement at face value.
"On behalf of all of our employees, I want to thank the Air Force for certifying Falcon Heavy"
It can be read both ways, but it really doesn't matter, they've got the contract and by launch time the paperwork will be in order. That's what's important.
So the USAF certified the FH for EELV payloads after only one flight? ??? SpaceX hasn't even flown the launch the USAF procured as a FH demo yet.
By the time AFSPC-52 is scheduled to launch FH will have flown at least three times.
Also, at least two recent missions (FH maiden launch and a F9 mission) had test objectives to satisfy USAF certification requirements.
The statement from Shotwell indicated that FH was already certified, not that certification was pending. So that would mean the USAF certified the FH after only one flight if we take Shotwell's statement at face value.
"On behalf of all of our employees, I want to thank the Air Force for certifying Falcon Heavy"
The Falcon Heavy beat United Launch Alliance’s Delta 4 in a competition under the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle program. The launch will take place at Kennedy Space Center, Florida.This seems to answer the question as to which LV ULA bid. I would have to think that further implies that the requirements were out of spec for an Atlas V launch, so a direct injection seems likely.
So the USAF certified the FH for EELV payloads after only one flight? ??? SpaceX hasn't even flown the launch the USAF procured as a FH demo yet.
By the time AFSPC-52 is scheduled to launch FH will have flown at least three times.
Also, at least two recent missions (FH maiden launch and a F9 mission) had test objectives to satisfy USAF certification requirements.
The statement from Shotwell indicated that FH was already certified, not that certification was pending. So that would mean the USAF certified the FH after only one flight if we take Shotwell's statement at face value.
"On behalf of all of our employees, I want to thank the Air Force for certifying Falcon Heavy"
It can be read as "being in the process of being certified" as well.
Yes, I know, semantics. But concluding that FH is already certified, based on the ambiguous statement from Gwynne alone, is far-fetched.
From SpaceNews:QuoteThe Falcon Heavy beat United Launch Alliance’s Delta 4 in a competition under the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle program. The launch will take place at Kennedy Space Center, Florida.This seems to answer the question as to which LV ULA bid. I would have to think that further implies that the requirements were out of spec for an Atlas V launch, so a direct injection seems likely.
Why? Would they have to give up the core? They advertise four times that payload to GTO.Previous discussion here :originally i think it was to be a transfer orbit and could now be direct insertion
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=43266.msg1728038#msg1728038
Interesting choice, the requirements seemed borderline for F9. Good win for SpaceX.
Could be, but I doubt it for $130 million.
So the USAF certified the FH for EELV payloads after only one flight? ??? SpaceX hasn't even flown the launch the USAF procured as a FH demo yet.
The current stated contracting policy for the AF which has not changed is that prior to contract award the LV must be AF certified. This is only excepted by demo's and some experimental payload waivers: example STP-2.It will have the required flights by September 2020.
The AF may have delayed the award to gain the time to complete certification of FH since that was the LV that the source selection favored.
You are confusing AF contracting policy with NASA. If the LV has not been certified it cannot be awarded a contract (AF contracting policy). If AF did not follow this policy then ULA can sue and probably win and be awarded the contract by the courts.The current stated contracting policy for the AF which has not changed is that prior to contract award the LV must be AF certified. This is only excepted by demo's and some experimental payload waivers: example STP-2.It will have the required flights by September 2020.
The AF may have delayed the award to gain the time to complete certification of FH since that was the LV that the source selection favored.
The FH is a configuration of the F9. It only requires a review of what is different from that of the F9. It does not really require 3 flights.
Wow,what kind of payload needs the lifting power of FalconHeavy?
That must be a very large satellite. :o
You are confusing AF contracting policy with NASA. If the LV has not been certified it cannot be awarded a contract (AF contracting policy). If AF did not follow this policy then ULA can sue and probably win and be awarded the contract by the courts.The current stated contracting policy for the AF which has not changed is that prior to contract award the LV must be AF certified. This is only excepted by demo's and some experimental payload waivers: example STP-2.It will have the required flights by September 2020.
The AF may have delayed the award to gain the time to complete certification of FH since that was the LV that the source selection favored.
We have high confidence (higher than I could portray in this article) that FH beat out Atlas V 551, not Delta.
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2018/06/falcon-9-static-fire-test-crs-15/
It's 6350 kg. I believe SpaceX going forward will not be expending rockets unless absolutely necessary and Elon intimated at the press conferences surrounding the FH demo launch that going forward the price for an expendable Falcon 9 is the same as the price for a reusable Falcon Heavy.
Falcon 9 is capable of this launch - its largest GTO launch was 6761 kg with Intelsat-35e - but it would have to be expended. Therefore, SpaceX bid Falcon Heavy.
There's probably also some measure of wanting to establish the market for Falcon Heavy.
How does ULA ever win another contract?They're hoping to do so with Vulcan. Whether that will be too little, too late is another question entirely. For another forum thread, not this one.
How does ULA ever win another contract? If FH can beat the Atlas, there is nothing ULA can do but cut their price and their profit. I guess we'll find out what their profit margin has been all these years.
How does ULA ever win another contract? If FH can beat the Atlas, there is nothing ULA can do but cut their price and their profit. I guess we'll find out what their profit margin has been all these years.
DOD will spread the contracts around regardless of price difference. They can't afford to have ULA go out of business and lose an alternative supplier.
Aren't there multiple providers aiming for the next round of EELV? The DoD doesn't have enough launches to spread around to float that many companies. They said as much in the hearing.
How does ULA ever win another contract?They're hoping to do so with Vulcan. Whether that will be too little, too late is another question entirely. For another forum thread, not this one.
If that's true The Air Force is not going to save much money, which is their other stated goal. Unlike commercial launches, government contracts are public record. When SpaceX loses to ULA, they then know the price to charge for the next contract bid. That is exactly what SpaceX did in the most recent round of contracts for CRS supply missions. SpaceX suddenly discovered that they had not been charging enough.
DOD will spread the contracts around regardless of price difference. They can't afford to have ULA go out of business and lose an alternative supplier.
How does ULA ever win another contract? If FH can beat the Atlas, there is nothing ULA can do but cut their price and their profit. I guess we'll find out what their profit margin has been all these years.
DOD will spread the contracts around regardless of price difference. They can't afford to have ULA go out of business and lose an alternative supplier.
Aren't there multiple providers aiming for the next round of EELV? The DoD doesn't have enough launches to spread around to float that many companies. They said as much in the hearing.
“It would need to be certified by the time that we awarded the contract,” Leon said. “We want to see one flight, and before we would actually fly a mission we would want to see three flights.”
If that's true The Air Force is not going to save much money, which is their other stated goal. Unlike commercial launches, government contracts are public record. When SpaceX loses to ULA, they then know the price to charge for the next contract bid. That is exactly what SpaceX did in the most recent round of contracts for CRS supply missions. SpaceX suddenly discovered that they had not been charging enough.
DOD will spread the contracts around regardless of price difference. They can't afford to have ULA go out of business and lose an alternative supplier.
But there is Blue and Orbital that could come into the mix if the price was right. Who else?
After the AFSPC-44 launch, the Air Force plans another Falcon Heavy mission with SpaceX in the spring 0f 2021, Bongiovi said. That launch, designated AFSPC-52, was previously planned to lift off by September 2020, but in a briefing with reporters earlier this month, Bongiovi twice said the AFSPC-44 mission is the Air Force’s next Falcon Heavy mission.
Now that the government has agreed to do GPS missions on reflown stages, I'm curious to see if this mission will still use new side boosters.
Now that the government has agreed to do GPS missions on reflown stages, I'm curious to see if this mission will still use new side boosters.
That will be interesting to see. They've already tested reused side boosters on a DoD launch (although it wasn't under the NSSL program).
Now that the government has agreed to do GPS missions on reflown stages, I'm curious to see if this mission will still use new side boosters.
That will be interesting to see. They've already tested reused side boosters on a DoD launch (although it wasn't under the NSSL program).
The following Falcon Heavy mission, another classified payload named USSF-52, will also require three new stages. That mission is expected to enable the recovery of all three stages: both side boosters and the center core.https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2020/09/spacex-manifest-falcon-heavy-arrives-mcgregor/
Why three ASDSses? Maybe the boosters can RTLS and the code can land on an ASDS.QuoteThe following Falcon Heavy mission, another classified payload named USSF-52, will also require three new stages. That mission is expected to enable the recovery of all three stages: both side boosters and the center core.https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2020/09/spacex-manifest-falcon-heavy-arrives-mcgregor/
Just wanted to point out that since all three boosters will be recovered, they must use three ASDS for this mission.
Therefore A Shortfall Of Gravitas *must* enter service before this mission.
I think this flight might be in October now.
https://fcc.report/IBFS/SES-STA-INTR2021-01859
The spacecraft will be launched on or about October 9th, 2021 on a Falcon Heavy from the Kennedy Space Center. USUVL will rideshare on the vehicle with an unspecified US military spacecraft. USUVL will be injected into super-sync orbit on or about November 27th thru December 8th at which time USN will begin S- band support. The spacecraft is inclined at 2.8 degrees as to minimize potential interference with other geo spacecraft. The operators of USUVL have begun and will coordinate with other operators as to not cause interference as it moves around the geo-belt.
I think this flight might be in October now.
https://fcc.report/IBFS/SES-STA-INTR2021-01859
Here’s the relevant bit if you don’t want to dig:QuoteThe spacecraft will be launched on or about October 9th, 2021 on a Falcon Heavy from the Kennedy Space Center. USUVL will rideshare on the vehicle with an unspecified US military spacecraft. USUVL will be injected into super-sync orbit on or about November 27th thru December 8th at which time USN will begin S- band support. The spacecraft is inclined at 2.8 degrees as to minimize potential interference with other geo spacecraft. The operators of USUVL have begun and will coordinate with other operators as to not cause interference as it moves around the geo-belt.
Looks like launch targeting 09 October 2021.
Multiple USA launch updates from SFN Launch Schedule (https://spaceflightnow.com/launch-schedule/), updated June 7
Falcon Heavy / USSF-52
Launch date: Early 2022
Launch time: TBD
Launch site: LC-39A, Kennedy Space Center, Florida
The Space Systems Command spokesperson said the USSF-52 mission, the next national security launch on a Falcon Heavy, is scheduled for the second quarter of 2022.
With JRTI back in the que. The FH mission can go forward if the payload is ready. But once you get past the mid Mar for a launch date. All of the Crew Dragon and cargo Dragon flights one right after another would mean that it is either now (after the 3 Mar flight) or mid to late May.USSF-44 is not happening until next quarter [Q2 2022] at the earliest.
Is there info as to if the payload is ready or not?
Assuming USSF-52 still follows USSF-44, it would now be NET June [2022]?
How long is a Falcon Heavy launch campaign?
Edit: 40 days from Crew DM1 to Arabsat-6A, in 2019, is the minimum thus far.
I assume/hope it will take less time now?
Cross-post:With JRTI back in the que. The FH mission can go forward if the payload is ready. But once you get past the mid Mar for a launch date. All of the Crew Dragon and cargo Dragon flights one right after another would mean that it is either now (after the 3 Mar flight) or mid to late May.USSF-44 is not happening until next quarter [Q2 2022] at the earliest.
Is there info as to if the payload is ready or not?
Assuming USSF-52 still follows USSF-44, it would now be NET June [2022]?
How long is a Falcon Heavy launch campaign?
Edit: 40 days from Crew DM1 to Arabsat-6A, in 2019, is the minimum thus far.
I assume/hope it will take less time now?
https://spaceflightnow.com/2021/10/04/payload-issue-delays-spacexs-next-falcon-heavy-launch-to-early-2022/ (https://spaceflightnow.com/2021/10/04/payload-issue-delays-spacexs-next-falcon-heavy-launch-to-early-2022/)QuoteThe Space Systems Command spokesperson said the USSF-52 mission, the next national security launch on a Falcon Heavy, is scheduled for the second quarter of 2022.
This contradicts the “next national security launch” statement from October.https://spaceflightnow.com/2021/10/04/payload-issue-delays-spacexs-next-falcon-heavy-launch-to-early-2022/ (https://spaceflightnow.com/2021/10/04/payload-issue-delays-spacexs-next-falcon-heavy-launch-to-early-2022/)QuoteThe Space Systems Command spokesperson said the USSF-52 mission, the next national security launch on a Falcon Heavy, is scheduled for the second quarter of 2022.
From where was it learned that the order has been reversed?
This contradicts the “next national security launch” statement from October.https://spaceflightnow.com/2021/10/04/payload-issue-delays-spacexs-next-falcon-heavy-launch-to-early-2022/ (https://spaceflightnow.com/2021/10/04/payload-issue-delays-spacexs-next-falcon-heavy-launch-to-early-2022/)QuoteThe Space Systems Command spokesperson said the USSF-52 mission, the next national security launch on a Falcon Heavy, is scheduled for the second quarter of 2022.
From where was it learned that the order has been reversed?
The Space Systems Command spokesperson said the USSF-52 mission, the next national security launch on a Falcon Heavy after USSF-44, is scheduled for the second quarter of 2022.
I wouldn't even be surprised if they move it after Psyche if -44 keeps being delayed.Yes, spacecraft with interplanetary launch windows take priority.
https://twitter.com/nextspaceflight/status/1498494197183041538That is a normal wartime (Cold War) response given the current situation and global theatres picture.
https://spaceflightnow.com/launch-schedule/USSF-52 launching before or after Psyche?
[March 9 update]Quote<snip>
2nd Quarter • Falcon Heavy • USSF 44
Launch time: TBD
Launch site: LC-39A, Kennedy Space Center, Florida
...
Mid-2022 • Falcon Heavy • USSF 52
Launch time: TBD
Launch site: LC-39A, Kennedy Space Center, Florida
Cross-post re: next two Falcon Heavy launches:Psyche is planetary. They will probably get top pad priority.https://spaceflightnow.com/launch-schedule/USSF-52 launching before or after Psyche?
[March 9 update]Quote<snip>
2nd Quarter • Falcon Heavy • USSF 44
Launch time: TBD
Launch site: LC-39A, Kennedy Space Center, Florida
...
Mid-2022 • Falcon Heavy • USSF 52
Launch time: TBD
Launch site: LC-39A, Kennedy Space Center, Florida
NextSpaceFlight (https://nextspaceflight.com/launches/details/110) indicates the following configuration for the Falcon Heavy boosters:
B1064: Side Booster
B1070: Center Core
B1065: Side Booster
Maybe that makes sense...
NextSpaceFlight (https://nextspaceflight.com/launches/details/110) indicates the following configuration for the Falcon Heavy boosters:
B1064: Side Booster
B1070: Center Core
B1065: Side Booster
Furthermore it says, in the nomenclature from the Manifest:
B1064: Side Booster 1064-2 ?
B1070: Center Core 1070-1 X
B1065: Side Booster 1065-2 ?
We may have known all this but it helps to be explicit.
B1070
One and done
How 20th century ;)
.....No, it just means the Falcon upper stage isn't big enough to enable downrange recovery for the center core for high energy launches.
B1070
One and done
How 20th century ;)
Weren't there people who claimed there was no point to having the Falcon Heavy? That it was too big for any currently foreseeable payloads? I expect to see this same thing happen within a couple of years of Starship being available for launches. Build it bigger, somebody will make a payload for it. Just ask the ghost of the AN-225........No, it just means the Falcon upper stage isn't big enough to enable downrange recovery for the center core for high energy launches.
B1070
One and done
How 20th century ;)
Yes, saying the Falcon Heavy, the world's more powerful operational launcher is under performing is amusing. :)
:) Of course there is a need for larger payloads. Otherwise, why wouldWeren't there people who claimed there was no point to having the Falcon Heavy? That it was too big for any currently foreseeable payloads? I expect to see this same thing happen within a couple of years of Starship being available for launches. Build it bigger, somebody will make a payload for it. Just ask the ghost of the AN-225........No, it just means the Falcon upper stage isn't big enough to enable downrange recovery for the center core for high energy launches.
B1070
One and done
How 20th century ;)
Yes, saying the Falcon Heavy, the world's more powerful operational launcher is under performing is amusing. :)
Does the indefinite USSF-44 delay mean that USSF-52 will launch first, possibly with the boosters that were originally meant to fly first on USSF-44?You are presuming that USSF-52 encounters no schedule shift to the right.
Weren't there people who claimed there was no point to having the Falcon Heavy? That it was too big for any currently foreseeable payloads? I expect to see this same thing happen within a couple of years of Starship being available for launches. Build it bigger, somebody will make a payload for it. Just ask the ghost of the AN-225...
Not aware of that, not sure they would care about changing those since they're all expendable anywaysYeah it was previously planned for them to use the same side boosters on all [the upcoming USSF] missions but back then the order was 44, 52, and 67. Now it appears to be the opposite so [USSF-67] will likely fly those side boosters as new boosters and then proceed with 52 and 44 reusing themHas the center core assignments changed for these missions?
Another Space Force satellite delivery mission booked on a Falcon Heavy, codenamed USSF-52, is now planned to launch in the second quarter of 2023 — between April 1 and June 30.
Next Spaceflight (https://nextspaceflight.com/launches/details/110) now shows NET Apr 10, 2023 launch.
Is that just April 1 with a typo?
There are two more Falcon Heavy missions scheduled for launch in the spring. One will launch the first ViaSat 3 internet satellite to beam broadband service over the Americas for Viasat, and the other will launch the USSF-52 mission for the Space Force.
Falcon Heavy | USSF-52
NET: Jun, 2023 UTC
https://nextspaceflight.com/launches/details/110
What is the current thinking on whether the boosters on this mission will be RTLS, going to (dual) ASDS, or fully expended?We can guess this is going direct to GEO. If it was just GTO, then Arabsat-6 shows they could easily do this with side RLTS and recovered core.
What is the current thinking on whether the boosters on this mission will be RTLS, going to (dual) ASDS, or fully expended?We can guess this is going direct to GEO. If it was just GTO, then Arabsat-6 shows they could easily do this with side RLTS and recovered core.
But even if it it's going direct to GEO, that does not narrow the options much. RTLS sides + expended core is *guessed* to be able to put about 6000kg to GEO. USSF-52 is though to be about 6350 kg, possibly within the margin of error. ASDS sides or fully expended can do this without trouble.
Given the military likes to have lots of margin, I'm guessing they paid for ASDS sides or fully expended. If two droneships are not available, SpaceX could chose to save one side booster and let the other fall into the ocean. Even wilder, given their recent landing accuracy, SpaceX could try to land both boosters on the same ASDS, but I doubt they will try this, cool as it would be.
So overall my guess is all expended, or ASDS of one or both side boosters. Likely not RTLS. However this is all speculation, none of this is known.
What is the current thinking on whether the boosters on this mission will be RTLS, going to (dual) ASDS, or fully expended?We can guess this is going direct to GEO. If it was just GTO, then Arabsat-6 shows they could easily do this with side RLTS and recovered core.
But even if it it's going direct to GEO, that does not narrow the options much. RTLS sides + expended core is *guessed* to be able to put about 6000kg to GEO. USSF-52 is though to be about 6350 kg, possibly within the margin of error. ASDS sides or fully expended can do this without trouble.
Given the military likes to have lots of margin, I'm guessing they paid for ASDS sides or fully expended. If two droneships are not available, SpaceX could chose to save one side booster and let the other fall into the ocean. Even wilder, given their recent landing accuracy, SpaceX could try to land both boosters on the same ASDS, but I doubt they will try this, cool as it would be.
So overall my guess is all expended, or ASDS of one or both side boosters. Likely not RTLS. However this is all speculation, none of this is known.
Expending one side booster, and landing the other one seems unlikely to me. Just like landing both side boosters on a single drone ship seems unlikely to me. We will know for sure when SpaceX' files the STA Request. Recent STA Requests are for launches NET Late-May, so hopefully we won't have to wait much longer.
This site (https://spacelaunchnow.me/launch/falcon-heavy-ussf-52/) claims ASDS for side cores, on two separate droneships, core will be expended.The cores have no legs.
This is not the thread for todays FH viasat launch, this is for a later FH launch.This site (https://spacelaunchnow.me/launch/falcon-heavy-ussf-52/) claims ASDS for side cores, on two separate droneships, core will be expended.The cores have no legs.
Is there any source at all for this mission being to GEO?No, it's an inference. We know the core is to be expended, but the sides are not RTLS. FH with RTLS sides and
Is there any source at all for this mission being to GEO?No, it's an inference. We know the core is to be expended, but the sides are not RTLS. FH with RTLS sides and expended center already put a heavier satellite (Arabsat-6) into a quite super-synchronous orbit. This implies the target orbit for USSF-52 is higher energy than even a very aggressive GTO. The guess is GEO, but presumably it could be some other type of high-energy orbit.
Is there any source at all for this mission being to GEO?No, it's an inference. We know the core is to be expended, but the sides are not RTLS. FH with RTLS sides and expended center already put a heavier satellite (Arabsat 6A) into a quite super-synchronous orbit. This implies the target orbit for USSF-52 is higher energy than even a very aggressive GTO. The guess is GEO, but presumably it could be some other type of high-energy orbit.
I must have missed the source for side boosters not being RTLS.Source is here (SpaceLaunchNow) (https://spacelaunchnow.me/launch/falcon-heavy-ussf-52/). I have no idea how good their inside track sources are.
Is there any source at all for this mission being to GEO?No, it's an inference. We know the core is to be expended, but the sides are not RTLS. FH with RTLS sides and expended center already put a heavier satellite (Arabsat-6) into a quite super-synchronous orbit. This implies the target orbit for USSF-52 is higher energy than even a very aggressive GTO. The guess is GEO, but presumably it could be some other type of high-energy orbit.
I must have missed the source for side boosters not being RTLS. There's not even an FCC permit for the mission yet. We got surprised by Viasat-3 being all expendable, I think it's wise to just wait for that to drop and then make assumptions cause otherwise we might get surprised again.
1005-EX-ST-2023 (https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/els/reports/STA_Print.cfm?mode=current&application_seq=124433&RequestTimeout=1000)
Falcon Heavy, Mission 1491
NET June
RTLS side cores, expendable center core
The next Falcon Heavy will launch the USSF-52 mission for the U.S. Space Force from pad 39A on July 7. The two side boosters will land back at the Cape about eight minutes after launch.
Ben Cooper's Launch Photography Viewing Guide (https://www.launchphotography.com/Launch_Viewing_Guide.html), updated June 18:Quote<snip>
The next Falcon Heavy will launch the USSF-52 mission for the U.S. Space Force from pad 39A on July 7 at the earliest.
<snip>
NextSpaceflight (https://nextspaceflight.com/launches/details/110), updated June 22:
NET September
Center core = 1074.1
Swapping launch slot and center core with Jupiter 3.
LikelyNextSpaceflight (https://nextspaceflight.com/launches/details/110), updated June 22:
NET September
Center core = 1074.1
Swapping launch slot and center core with Jupiter 3.
Does this have implications for Psyche too, since they are supposedly using the same side boosters? Would possibly be a <1 month turnaround as Psyche is NET Oct 5th. Also NXSF has 1064 and 1065 listed for their 3rd flight on both USSF-52 and Psyche, probably a mistake.
NextSpaceflight (https://nextspaceflight.com/launches/details/110), updated June 22:
NET September
Center core = 1074.1
Swapping launch slot and center core with Jupiter 3.
Does this have implications for Psyche too, since they are supposedly using the same side boosters? Would possibly be a <1 month turnaround as Psyche is NET Oct 5th. Also NXSF has 1064 and 1065 listed for their 3rd flight on both USSF-52 and Psyche, probably a mistake.
NextSpaceflight (Updated July 19th)
Launch NET October 2023
https://nextspaceflight.com/launches/details/110
Tonight's launch will be the third of five Falcon Heavy missions scheduled this year. NASA's Psyche mission is slated to launch no earlier than Oct. 5.
The Space Force confirmed this week that the USSF-52 mission, originally slated for this month, is now in Q4.
NextSpaceflight (https://nextspaceflight.com/launches/details/6944) now has B1074 as the Center Core.Number on center core says 74 per close up photos from the pad remotes.
B1079.1 instead of B1084.1? Has B1084 been transported from McGregor to the Cape?B1084 is still vertical at McGregor --> https://nsf.live/mcgregorB1064 and B1065 for this mission (confirmed again), will also be reused (and expended) on the Europa Clipper launch:NextSpaceflight (https://nextspaceflight.com/launches/details/3951), updated August 11?:QuoteEverything is coming together for launch of NASA’s mission to a metal asteroid (https://arstechnica.com/space/2023/08/everything-is-coming-together-for-launch-of-nasas-mission-to-a-metal-asteroid/)
8/11/2023
[...]
All of the major components for SpaceX's Falcon Heavy rocket are undergoing launch preparations at the Kennedy Space Center or Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, according to Jim Hall, a senior mission manger for NASA's Launch Services Program, which brokers rides for NASA spacecraft on commercial rockets.
The Falcon Heavy's two reusable side boosters for the Psyche mission returned from their previous launch on July 28 with a commercial communications satellite. SpaceX is refurbishing those boosters—each with three flights on their record—for the Psyche launch. The side-mounted rockets will be recovered again at SpaceX's Cape Canaveral landing zones after the Psyche launch, and they'll be reused and expended on the launch of NASA's Europa Clipper mission in October 2024.
The center core of the Falcon Heavy rocket slated to launch Psyche is also in Florida for final launch preps, as are the two new aeroshells for the rocket's payload fairing. This will be the eighth flight of a Falcon Heavy rocket, but the first Falcon Heavy with a payload heading for another planetary body.
[...]
Expendable center core B1079.1
NextSpaceflight (Updated August 3rd)
Launch NET 30 November 2023
https://nextspaceflight.com/launches/details/110
QuoteIntuitive Machines says their first lunar lander mission, IM-1, is scheduled for launch on Nov. 15, the start of a six-day launch window.
https://investors.intuitivemachines.com/news-releases/news-release-details/intuitive-machines-reports-second-quarter-2023-financial-results/
QuoteCEO Steve Altemus says the Falcon 9 has a window from Nov. 15-Nov. 20. If there's bad weather, or a high priority NASA or DOD mission takes precedence, there is a backup launch opportunity in December. Going to be close with Astrobotic's Peregrine, which is NET December launch.
I know there's been quite a lot of confusing jumps on the schedule of certain classified missions for SpaceX. This is not just for them but also ULA and such and if you remember it's also been a problem for a while as well (see USSF-44 being delayed 2 years). Not sure what's going on but it doesn't look like military payloads have had the best of luck lately trying to be on schedule.
This is in relation with the USSF-124 mission jumping back and forth on nextspaceflight from NET November to NET October 31st, etc. We'll see what happens with that mission - same with USSF-52 and friends.
2113-EX-ST-2023 (https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/els/reports/STA_Print.cfm?mode=current&application_seq=128818&RequestTimeout=1000)
Extends the permit for Mission 1491 (USSF-52), which currently expires December 22.
NextSpaceflight (Updated October 19th/20th)
Launch NET December 2023
https://nextspaceflight.com/launches/details/1915
USSF-52 is still listed for November 30th, so it sounds like USSF-52 will take priority over IM-1.
A Falcon Heavy will launch the USSF-52 mission for the U.S. Space Force from pad 39A on December. The side boosters will land back at the Cape eight minutes after launch.https://www.launchphotography.com/Launch_Viewing_Guide.html
Starting Nov. 9, a Falcon 9 is scheduled to launch the 29th SpaceX Commercial Resupply Services (CRS-29) mission to the ISS, which will send thousands of pounds of cargo and science experiments up to the crew on orbit. That is expected to be followed by the fifth and final Falcon Heavy of 2023: the USSF-52 national security mission.Nov 10 UTC + 21 days = Dec 1
It takes about three weeks to convert the launch pad from a Falcon 9 to a Falcon Heavy configuration.
Department of the Air Force Scheduled to Launch Seventh X-37B Mission
Published Nov. 8, 2023
By SAF/PA Staff Writer
ARLINGTON, Va. (AFNS) --
The Department of the Air Force Rapid Capabilities Office, in partnership with the United States Space Force, is scheduled to launch the seventh mission of the X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle Dec. 7, 2023 from Kennedy Space Center, Florida.
The X-37B Mission 7 will launch on a SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket for the first time, designated USSF-52, with a wide range of test and experimentation objectives. These tests include operating the reusable spaceplane in new orbital regimes, experimenting with future space domain awareness technologies, and investigating the radiation effects on materials provided by NASA.
“We are excited to expand the envelope of the reusable X-37B’s capabilities, using the flight-proven service module and Falcon Heavy rocket to fly multiple cutting-edge experiments for the Department of the Air Force and its partners,” said Lt. Col. Joseph Fritschen, the X-37B Program Director.
X-37B Mission 7, also known as OTV-7, will expand the United States Space Force’s knowledge of the space environment by experimenting with future space domain awareness technologies. These tests are integral in ensuring safe, stable, and secure operations in space for all users of the domain.
Chief of Space Operations, Gen. B. Chance Saltzman hailed these experiments as “groundbreaking,” saying, “The X37B continues to equip the United States with the knowledge to enhance current and future space operations. X-37B Mission 7 demonstrates the USSF’s commitment to innovation and defining the art-of-the-possible in the space domain.”
The NASA experiment onboard will expose plant seeds to the harsh radiation environment of long-duration spaceflight. Known as “Seeds-2,” the experiment will build upon the successes of prior experiments, paving the way for future crewed space missions.
Previously, X-37B Mission 6 was the first mission to introduce a service module that expanded the capabilities of the spacecraft and allowed it to host more experiments than any of the previous missions. The spacecraft carried the Naval Research Laboratory’s Photovoltaic Radio-frequency Antenna Module experiment, which transformed solar power into radio frequency microwave energy, and two NASA experiments to study the results of radiation and other space effects on a materials sample plate and seeds used to grow food. The X-37B Mission 6 also deployed FalconSat-8, a small satellite developed by the U.S. Air Force Academy and sponsored by the Air Force Research Laboratory.
The Director of the DAF RCO, William D. Bailey, praised the collaborative partnership with industry, noting, “The X-37B government and Boeing teams have worked together to produce a more responsive, flexible, and adaptive experimentation platform. The work they’ve done to streamline processes and adapt evolving technologies will help our nation learn a tremendous amount about operating in and returning from a space environment.”
http://www.losangeles.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/1328975/final-rfp-released-for-afspc-52-launch-services-contract/#.Wc2JJNwG0Ks.facebook
Final RFP Released for AFSPC-52 Launch Services Contract
...
The solicitation is at:
https://www.fbo.gov/spg/USAF/AFSC/SMCSMSC/FA8811-17-R-0005/listing.html
The mission requirements appear to be classified. Quickly skimmed a couple of the documents, the only interesting information I saw so far is:QuoteFor unclassified proposal responses, the Offeror shall reference the payload as the “AFSPC-52 Payload” and the aft end shall be referred to as the “aft end of the Payload” if referencing is required.
...
If an Offeror is unable to perform calculations utilizing the requirements contained in the Interface Requirements Document (IRD) Table 3.2.2-1, the Offeror may utilize the reference orbit for calculations (27°, 6,350kg to a GTO of at least 35,188km X 185km). If an Offeror chooses this reference orbit, sufficient supporting data to include engineering analysis, technical justification and rationale must be provided to demonstrate the ability to meet the actual orbital accuracy requirement (Ref IRD Table 3.2.2-1).
Um so this is an X-37B launch . . .
https://www.spaceforce.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/3583347/department-of-the-air-force-scheduled-to-launch-seventh-x-37b-mission/QuoteDepartment of the Air Force Scheduled to Launch Seventh X-37B Mission
Published Nov. 8, 2023
By SAF/PA Staff Writer
<snip>
The X-37B Mission 7 will launch on a SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket for the first time, designated USSF-52, with a wide range of test and experimentation objectives. These tests include operating the reusable spaceplane in new orbital regimes, experimenting with future space domain awareness technologies, and investigating the radiation effects on materials provided by NASA.
<snip>
Seems like they could have recovered the center core for this mission then, if they hadn't decided to make them all expendable.
That's just a "reference orbit", probably to track performance capability of the LV. (not necessarily the mass OR the orbit)Will the X-37B goes to a higher orbit? Why Falcon Heavy?
Draft solicitation said the launch was 6,350 kg to GTO, which is just a bit too heavy for Falcon 9 to be able to do if I'm correct.
Will the X-37B goes to a higher orbit? Why Falcon Heavy?
Draft solicitation said the launch was 6,350 kg to GTO, which is just a bit too heavy for Falcon 9 to be able to do if I'm correct.
Weight of the service module?Yes, assuming same mass and dimensions as service module used for OTV-6.
But would that fit in the fairing?
No. Launch ID name/number would "disappear", not to be reused.Will the X-37B goes to a higher orbit? Why Falcon Heavy?
Draft solicitation said the launch was 6,350 kg to GTO, which is just a bit too heavy for Falcon 9 to be able to do if I'm correct.
That number probably for another satellite originally thought to use this launch number.
It's very unlikely that X-37B will be able to return from GEO and land on an airport.
Um so this is an X-37B launch . . .Also at:
https://www.spaceforce.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/3583347/department-of-the-air-force-scheduled-to-launch-seventh-x-37b-mission/ (https://www.spaceforce.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/3583347/department-of-the-air-force-scheduled-to-launch-seventh-x-37b-mission/)Quote
Department of the Air Force Scheduled to Launch Seventh X-37B Mission
Published Nov. 8, 2023
By SAF/PA Staff Writer
ARLINGTON, Va. (AFNS) --
The Department of the Air Force Rapid Capabilities Office, in partnership with the United States Space Force, is scheduled to launch the seventh mission of the X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle Dec. 7, 2023 from Kennedy Space Center, Florida.
The X-37B Mission 7 will launch on a SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket for the first time, designated USSF-52, with a wide range of test and experimentation objectives. These tests include operating the reusable spaceplane in new orbital regimes, experimenting with future space domain awareness technologies, and investigating the radiation effects on materials provided by NASA.
“We are excited to expand the envelope of the reusable X-37B’s capabilities, using the flight-proven service module and Falcon Heavy rocket to fly multiple cutting-edge experiments for the Department of the Air Force and its partners,” said Lt. Col. Joseph Fritschen, the X-37B Program Director.
X-37B Mission 7, also known as OTV-7, will expand the United States Space Force’s knowledge of the space environment by experimenting with future space domain awareness technologies. These tests are integral in ensuring safe, stable, and secure operations in space for all users of the domain.
Chief of Space Operations, Gen. B. Chance Saltzman hailed these experiments as “groundbreaking,” saying, “The X37B continues to equip the United States with the knowledge to enhance current and future space operations. X-37B Mission 7 demonstrates the USSF’s commitment to innovation and defining the art-of-the-possible in the space domain.”
The NASA experiment onboard will expose plant seeds to the harsh radiation environment of long-duration spaceflight. Known as “Seeds-2,” the experiment will build upon the successes of prior experiments, paving the way for future crewed space missions.
Previously, X-37B Mission 6 was the first mission to introduce a service module that expanded the capabilities of the spacecraft and allowed it to host more experiments than any of the previous missions. The spacecraft carried the Naval Research Laboratory’s Photovoltaic Radio-frequency Antenna Module experiment, which transformed solar power into radio frequency microwave energy, and two NASA experiments to study the results of radiation and other space effects on a materials sample plate and seeds used to grow food. The X-37B Mission 6 also deployed FalconSat-8, a small satellite developed by the U.S. Air Force Academy and sponsored by the Air Force Research Laboratory.
The Director of the DAF RCO, William D. Bailey, praised the collaborative partnership with industry, noting, “The X-37B government and Boeing teams have worked together to produce a more responsive, flexible, and adaptive experimentation platform. The work they’ve done to streamline processes and adapt evolving technologies will help our nation learn a tremendous amount about operating in and returning from a space environment.”
https://www.spaceforce.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/3583347/department-of-the-air-force-scheduled-to-launch-seventh-x-37b-mission/So on mass and volume side should not much different that OTV-6 launch.Quotethe flight-proven service module
https://www.spaceforce.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/3583347/department-of-the-air-force-scheduled-to-launch-seventh-x-37b-mission/So on mass and volume side should not much different that OTV-6 launch.Quotethe flight-proven service module
The gap between the missions could be for refurbishing the service module. The vehicle should be the one from OTV-5, that's a long time for whatever additional work.
But if the original launch plan in 2020 Sept holds. Then it will not be able to use a refurbished service module due to OTV-6 was just launched in May 2020.
https://www.spaceforce.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/3583347/department-of-the-air-force-scheduled-to-launch-seventh-x-37b-mission/So on mass and volume side should not much different that OTV-6 launch.Quotethe flight-proven service module
The gap between the missions could be for refurbishing the service module. The vehicle should be the one from OTV-5, that's a long time for whatever additional work.
But if the original launch plan in 2020 Sept holds. Then it will not be able to use a refurbished service module due to OTV-6 was just launched in May 2020.
https://www.spaceforce.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/3583347/department-of-the-air-force-scheduled-to-launch-seventh-x-37b-mission/So on mass and volume side should not much different that OTV-6 launch.Quotethe flight-proven service module
The gap between the missions could be for refurbishing the service module. The vehicle should be the one from OTV-5, that's a long time for whatever additional work.
But if the original launch plan in 2020 Sept holds. Then it will not be able to use a refurbished service module due to OTV-6 was just launched in May 2020.
Huh? flight proven does not equate to reuse. the service module was not recovered.
why is this going on FH? it has to be going to a higher orbit otherwise they would not be using the falcon heavy! is it going to MEO maybe?
the last one had a service module too and it launched on a atlas V 501 (which the f9 beats in mass to orbit). there is no way that the service module is 10+ tons (the rough amount to need a falcon heavy)why is this going on FH? it has to be going to a higher orbit otherwise they would not be using the falcon heavy! is it going to MEO maybe?
not true
Service module mass
[If] most of the increased mass is the service module, and they are using a flight proven SM design, does that suggest the SM was previously underfueled and it's being mostly or fully fueled this time around?
Well then, it's gonna be one heck of a fuel load. Since X-37B heatshield is the limit (so no GTO / GEO ultra high energy orbit) then: that X-37B gonna have one heck of orbital manoeuvering capability. Such as huge plane changes.
Non-SM X-37B weight: 5 tons
Atlas 501 payload to orbit: 7 tons
F9 payload to orbit: 23 tons
FH payload to LEO: 64 tons
WDF will they do, with all that launch energy and service module propellants ? :o :o :o :o
Well then, it's gonna be one heck of a fuel load. Since X-37B heatshield is the limit (so no GTO / GEO ultra high energy orbit) then: that X-37B gonna have one heck of orbital manoeuvering capability. Such as huge plane changes.A huge fuel load is consistent with the evidence. Various sources (such as here (https://spaceflight101.com/spacecraft/x-37b-otv/)) indicate a maneuvering capability of 3.1 km/sec. Assuming an ISP of 270 for pressure fed hypergolic propellants, this needs a mass ratio of e^(3100/270/9.80), or 3.23. X-37B is suspect to mass about 5000 kg, so it needs at least 3.23 * (5000 + empty service module) kg. This is likely 18 tonnes or more, or more than a plain F9 can lift (especially to an inclined orbit). Hence the FH.
Non-SM X-37B weight: 5 tons
Atlas 501 payload to orbit: 7 tons
F9 payload to orbit: 23 tons
FH payload to LEO: 64 tons
WDF will they do, with all that launch energy and service module propellants ? :o :o :o :o
wasn't that on the original x-37b?Well then, it's gonna be one heck of a fuel load. Since X-37B heatshield is the limit (so no GTO / GEO ultra high energy orbit) then: that X-37B gonna have one heck of orbital manoeuvering capability. Such as huge plane changes.A huge fuel load is consistent with the evidence. Various sources (such as here (https://spaceflight101.com/spacecraft/x-37b-otv/)) indicate a maneuvering capability of 3.1 km/sec. Assuming an ISP of 270 for pressure fed hypergolic propellants, this needs a mass ratio of e^(3100/270/9.80), or 3.23. X-37B is suspect to mass about 5000 kg, so it needs at least 3.23 * (5000 + empty service module) kg. This is likely 18 tonnes or more, or more than a plain F9 can lift (especially to an inclined orbit). Hence the FH.
Non-SM X-37B weight: 5 tons
Atlas 501 payload to orbit: 7 tons
F9 payload to orbit: 23 tons
FH payload to LEO: 64 tons
WDF will they do, with all that launch energy and service module propellants ? :o :o :o :o
This is also consistent with their desire to try a wider variety of orbits.
Well then, it's gonna be one heck of a fuel load. Since X-37B heatshield is the limit (so no GTO / GEO ultra high energy orbit)
Assuming the heat shield is only good for LEO speeds (7788 m/s or so), and X-37 has stated 3100 m/s of delta-V, then what orbits can it return from (assuming FH launches into the initial orbit):Well then, it's gonna be one heck of a fuel load. Since X-37B heatshield is the limit (so no GTO / GEO ultra high energy orbit)We can't rule out a high energy orbit, even if the heat shield is limited to entry from LEO. They could be carrying enough prop to transfer from GEO to a sufficiently low orbit. Or multi-pass aerobraking from GTO down to a low orbit.
Assuming the heat shield is only good for LEO speeds (7788 m/s or so), and X-37 has stated 3100 m/s of delta-V, then what orbits can it return from (assuming FH launches into the initial orbit):Well then, it's gonna be one heck of a fuel load. Since X-37B heatshield is the limit (so no GTO / GEO ultra high energy orbit)We can't rule out a high energy orbit, even if the heat shield is limited to entry from LEO. They could be carrying enough prop to transfer from GEO to a sufficiently low orbit. Or multi-pass aerobraking from GTO down to a low orbit.
GTO (200 x 37000): This works fine. Takes about 2450 m/s to re-circularize, then re-enter.
GEO (35800 x 35800): Does not work. Takes about 1500 m/s to get back to GTO, then about 2450 to circularize at bottom.
GPS (20200 x 20200): Does not quite work. Takes about 1435 to get perigee down to 200 km, then 2074 to re-circularize.
Molniya (200 x 40000) Works fine. Just need about 2530 to circularize at perigee.
Of course the heat shield may be somewhat better than LEO only. Also, if they are adventurous they could use aerobraking to circularize. If so they could return from the more aggressive orbits in this group.
It would be adventurous since, as a military asset, they would not use the well proven few-meters-per-second at a time aero-braking, with the overall process taking months to complete. They would want to dive pretty deep into the atmosphere so they could bleed off speed in only a few passes. This part of the aerobraking regime, especially with an aerodynamic vehicle, has little or no experience base I am aware of.Of course the heat shield may be somewhat better than LEO only. Also, if they are adventurous they could use aerobraking to circularize. If so they could return from the more aggressive orbits in this group.Why would you consider aerobraking 'adventurous' in this context? Other spacecraft have performed multi-pass aerobraking. Without heat shields. It seems that for this spacecraft it is a pretty straightforward way to lessen the loads on the heat shield for the final reentry.
I think the key words in the press release are "expanding the envelope". Think higher. Boeing has already stated the service ceiling of 500 miles, but the other words about working with Boeing on this mission would seem to imply that number may grow. Previous flights have maxed out at 260 miles.
Going to be fascinating to see how high this mission ends up going. Spotters are going to be working hard on this one.
I guess I don't understand why you think they would have to do deep atmosphere passes vs. multi month. A theoretical x-37 GEO mission would spend months or years in the *Mission* orbit. When it's done and leaves the mission orbit, and the mission is over.It would be adventurous since, as a military asset, they would not use the well proven few-meters-per-second at a time aero-braking, with the overall process taking months to complete. They would want to dive pretty deep into the atmosphere so they could bleed off speed in only a few passes. This part of the aerobraking regime, especially with an aerodynamic vehicle, has little or no experience base I am aware of.Of course the heat shield may be somewhat better than LEO only. Also, if they are adventurous they could use aerobraking to circularize. If so they could return from the more aggressive orbits in this group.Why would you consider aerobraking 'adventurous' in this context? Other spacecraft have performed multi-pass aerobraking. Without heat shields. It seems that for this spacecraft it is a pretty straightforward way to lessen the loads on the heat shield for the final reentry.
I guess I don't understand why you think they would have to do deep atmosphere passes vs. multi month. A theoretical x-37 GEO mission would spend years in the *Mission* orbit. When it's done and leaves the mission orbit, and the mission is over.It would be adventurous since, as a military asset, they would not use the well proven few-meters-per-second at a time aero-braking, with the overall process taking months to complete. They would want to dive pretty deep into the atmosphere so they could bleed off speed in only a few passes. This part of the aerobraking regime, especially with an aerodynamic vehicle, has little or no experience base I am aware of.Of course the heat shield may be somewhat better than LEO only. Also, if they are adventurous they could use aerobraking to circularize. If so they could return from the more aggressive orbits in this group.Why would you consider aerobraking 'adventurous' in this context? Other spacecraft have performed multi-pass aerobraking. Without heat shields. It seems that for this spacecraft it is a pretty straightforward way to lessen the loads on the heat shield for the final reentry.
It could take 6 months to return, or hours. Doesn't really matter. The *mission* is over.
Would it be nice to have it back faster? Sure. But the refurb process on these has not been rapid. So really it's going to be years between launches. A few months isn't going to change that *drastically*
I guess I don't understand why you think they would have to do deep atmosphere passes vs. multi month. A theoretical x-37 GEO mission would spend years in the *Mission* orbit. When it's done and leaves the mission orbit, and the mission is over.A major point of a military space plane (with large maneuvering capability) is rapid response. So you want it to change orbits rapidly, not over the course of months. Perhaps it has another task after returning from a higher orbit. And in any case you can't relaunch it for another target until it returns. Agreed it has not been refurbished fast *yet*, but it is not yet a mature system.
It could take 6 months to return, or hours. Doesn't really matter. The *mission* is over.
Would it be nice to have it back faster? Sure. But the refurb process on these has not been rapid. So really it's going to be years between launches. A few months isn't going to change that *drastically*
A major point of a military space plane (with large maneuvering capability) is rapid response.
I doubt this is the last vehicle to fly so it’s been on the ground for years so plenty of time to upgrade the heat shield for higher orbits. Plus that NASA experiment flying seeds, putting them long term at a higher orbit would be useful for future manned missions which is what that the press release indicates the experiment is for.
Deep passes would face a heat soak problem that probably can't be addressed by the existing radiator, so you either are committing to landing somewhat soon after a deep pass (skipping stone reentry), or stuck with light passes.
What about a dual payload and X-37 dropped off at a lower altitude.
No, there is room for moreWhat about a dual payload and X-37 dropped off at a lower altitude.
In that case, fairing has to be expanded. Comparing with Falcon 9, if available mass is higher, volume isn't if fairing is the same.
This hypothesis requires the payloads to be stacked.
No, there is room for moreWhat about a dual payload and X-37 dropped off at a lower altitude.
In that case, fairing has to be expanded. Comparing with Falcon 9, if available mass is higher, volume isn't if fairing is the same.
This hypothesis requires the payloads to be stacked.
Maybe the service module got some thermal protection on the windward side and deployable radiator array(s) on the leeward side for shallow dips in the atmosphere.Deep passes would face a heat soak problem that probably can't be addressed by the existing radiator, so you either are committing to landing somewhat soon after a deep pass (skipping stone reentry), or stuck with light passes.Not even heat soak. Just operating for long periods without the radiators deployed will be an issue. Also, the service module isn't going to ride along for any dip in the atmosphere.
These are reasonable concerns, but only if you did deep dips without designing for it. Presumably, if they did this intentionally, they could close the doors just before the pass, and open them afterwards, so the radiators are only offline for a short time. And the service module would be designed for dips. It's quite strongly attached, and presumably could have at least some heat shielding on the exposed side - just enough for the dips, not re-entry level shielding.Deep passes would face a heat soak problem that probably can't be addressed by the existing radiator, so you either are committing to landing somewhat soon after a deep pass (skipping stone reentry), or stuck with light passes.Not even heat soak. Just operating for long periods without the radiators deployed will be an issue. Also, the service module isn't going to ride along for any dip in the atmosphere.
Not sure of this logic. If you want fast response, presumably you want an asset already in orbit with considerable maneuvering capability (and hence a huge fuel load). So you'd launch it on a big rocket (which is not fast response) so it's on orbit when you need it.A major point of a military space plane (with large maneuvering capability) is rapid response.Not when it is placed on a Falcon Heavy.
These are reasonable concerns, but only if you did deep dips without designing for it. Presumably, if they did this intentionally, they could close the doors just before the pass, and open them afterwards, so the radiators are only offline for a short time. And the service module would be designed for dips. It's quite strongly attached, and presumably could have at least some heat shielding on the exposed side - just enough for the dips, not re-entry level shielding.Deep passes would face a heat soak problem that probably can't be addressed by the existing radiator, so you either are committing to landing somewhat soon after a deep pass (skipping stone reentry), or stuck with light passes.Not even heat soak. Just operating for long periods without the radiators deployed will be an issue. Also, the service module isn't going to ride along for any dip in the atmosphere.
I very much doubt they will try this, but if they if they did they would design for it, and I suspect could use much deeper dips than those used by unprotected spacecraft.
No, there is room for moreWhat about a dual payload and X-37 dropped off at a lower altitude.
In that case, fairing has to be expanded. Comparing with Falcon 9, if available mass is higher, volume isn't if fairing is the same.
This hypothesis requires the payloads to be stacked.
There is room alright. X-37B and its service module can be mounted at least another 1 meter higher up into the fairing compared to the time it flew on Falcon 9.
Not sure of this logic. If you want fast response, presumably you want an asset already in orbit with considerable maneuvering capability (and hence a huge fuel load). So you'd launch it on a big rocket (which is not fast response) so it's on orbit when you need it.A major point of a military space plane (with large maneuvering capability) is rapid response.Not when it is placed on a Falcon Heavy.
I always thought (but of course cannot confirm) that this is how imaging satellites work. They launch on a big (not rapid response) launcher so they can later get where they are needed, when they are needed.
I too have never heard of a plane change. I have heard informal comments (obviously unconfirmed) that they could and did maneuver in-plane to change the time of overflights, and to allow quite low perigees for critical imaging, plus a subsequent reboost. All rumors, but seem plausible. The use of timing to avoid satellite overflights is well known (https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/ADA049561), and a low but unsustainable perigee could double or triple resolution.Not sure of this logic. If you want fast response, presumably you want an asset already in orbit with considerable maneuvering capability (and hence a huge fuel load). So you'd launch it on a big rocket (which is not fast response) so it's on orbit when you need it.
I always thought (but of course cannot confirm) that this is how imaging satellites work. They launch on a big (not rapid response) launcher so they can later get where they are needed, when they are needed.
No,they keep the same basic orbit. There is no "considerable maneuvering capability" i.e plane change in LEO
I too have never heard of a plane change. I have heard informal comments (obviously unconfirmed) that they could and did maneuver in-plane to change the time of overflights, and to allow quite low perigees for critical imaging, plus a subsequent reboost. All rumors, but seem plausible. The use of timing to avoid satellite overflights is well known (https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/ADA049561), and a low but unsustainable perigee could double or triple resolution.
What about a dual payload and X-37 dropped off at a lower altitude.Jim, I get the idea of the opportunity on FH to do a dual-payload launch, but help me understand how that would align with the "expanding the envelope" and "new orbital regimes" comments in the press release.
I don't think there is any contradiction between "new orbital regimes" and a secondary payload. A fully fueled X-37 can be guessed at about 20 tonnes (5 tonnes bare + 3100 m/s maneuvering fuel). FH can put this into any practical orbit (it's rated at 26 tonnes to GTO) and still have payload mass to spare. And new orbital regimes could be quite a bit less drastic than GTO.What about a dual payload and X-37 dropped off at a lower altitude.Jim, I get the idea of the opportunity on FH to do a dual-payload launch, but help me understand how that would align with the "expanding the envelope" and "new orbital regimes" comments in the press release.
Thanks for the insights!
NextSpaceflight (Updated November 14th)
Launch NET 8 December 2023
https://nextspaceflight.com/launches/details/110
Does this mean we can assume launch December 7th local time and December 8th UTC?
Here is a first look at the USSF-52 X-37B OTV-7 mission patch.do they have the wrong falcon heavy configuration on the patch? or is there some experimental landing or something?
I too have never heard of a plane change. I have heard informal comments (obviously unconfirmed) that they could and did maneuver in-plane to change the time of overflights, and to allow quite low perigees for critical imaging, plus a subsequent reboost. All rumors, but seem plausible. The use of timing to avoid satellite overflights is well known (https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/ADA049561), and a low but unsustainable perigee could double or triple resolution.Not sure of this logic. If you want fast response, presumably you want an asset already in orbit with considerable maneuvering capability (and hence a huge fuel load). So you'd launch it on a big rocket (which is not fast response) so it's on orbit when you need it.
I always thought (but of course cannot confirm) that this is how imaging satellites work. They launch on a big (not rapid response) launcher so they can later get where they are needed, when they are needed.
No,they keep the same basic orbit. There is no "considerable maneuvering capability" i.e plane change in LEO
NextSpaceflight (Updated November 25th)
Launch NET December 2023
https://nextspaceflight.com/launches/details/110
Ben Cooper's Launch Photography Viewing Guide (https://www.launchphotography.com/Launch_Viewing_Guide.html), updated November 24:
https://www.launchphotography.com/Launch_Viewing_Guide.htmlQuoteThe next SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket will launch a Starlink batch from pad 40 on November 27 at 11:00 p.m. EST or later. Upcoming launches include more Starlink batches from pad 40. A Falcon Heavy will launch the seventh OTV X-37B spaceplane mission for the U.S. Space Force from pad 39A on December. The side boosters will land back at the Cape eight minutes after launch.
<snip>Guess the X-37B is getting some new hardware installed and maybe some old hardware removed.
I wonder what happened.
<snip>Guess the X-37B is getting some new hardware installed and maybe some old hardware removed.
I wonder what happened.
Don't think the Falcon Heavy is the cause of the launch date becoming uncertain. SpaceX already launch 4 of them this year.
How late can USSF-52 slip before impingeing on the IM-1 launch campaign? Circa the week before Christmas? 🎄 Two/2.5 weeks to shift GSE/pad from Falcon Heavy to Falcon 9?Does IM-1 require LC-39A, or could it move to SLC-40? Apparently, SX-3 may launch from SLC-40 instead of LC-39A now that SLC-40 has its shiny new crew access arm. AX-3 appears to have a bit more scheduling flexibility than IM-1, but I have lost track of all the constraints fro each of these missions.
How late can USSF-52 slip before impingeing on the IM-1 launch campaign? Circa the week before Christmas? 🎄 Two/2.5 weeks to shift GSE/pad from Falcon Heavy to Falcon 9?Does IM-1 require LC-39A, or could it move to SLC-40? Apparently, SX-3 may launch from SLC-40 instead of LC-39A now that SLC-40 has its shiny new crew access arm. AX-3 appears to have a bit more scheduling flexibility than IM-1, but I have lost track of all the constraints for each of these missions.
August 14, Lukas C.H. tweetsQuoteLaunch will take place from LC-39A aboard a SpaceX Falcon 9. Because the lander uses liquid methane as its fuel, it needs to be fueled as late as possible. In order to do this, SpaceX will modify the strongback to be able to fuel the lander while it's inside the payload fairing.
Does USSF-52 impose the "must have time to evaluate the prior launch" rule?Good question. I don't know. If so, it would be a DOD/Space Force requirement, not NASA.
Do we know a launch window on this yet?
NextSpaceflight (Updated November 14th)
Launch NET 8 December 2023
https://nextspaceflight.com/launches/details/110
Does this mean we can assume launch December 7th local time and December 8th UTC?
Yep. Evening launch local time, will be on the 8th in UTC. It'll be more clear once the launch window is announced.
United States Space Force Prepares X-37B for Launch (https://www.spaceforce.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/3599989/united-states-space-force-prepares-x-37b-for-launch/)
Nov. 29, 2023
The Department of the Air Force Rapid Capabilities Office, in partnership with the United States Space Force and SpaceX, is making final preparations to launch the seventh mission of the X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle. Due to launch delays and pad availability, USSF-52 will now launch on Dec. 10, 2023.
The seventh mission of the X-37B, also known as OTV-7, will be the first to launch on a SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket—designated USSF-52—with a wide range of test and experimentation objectives. These tests include operating in new orbital regimes, experimenting with space domain awareness technologies and investigating the radiation effects to NASA materials.
These tests are key to ensuring safe and responsible operations in space for all users of the space domain. Secretary of the Air Force Frank Kendall said about the mission, “this seventh flight of the X-37B continues to demonstrate the innovative spirit of the United States Space Force.”
[...]
QuoteUnited States Space Force Prepares X-37B for Launch (https://www.spaceforce.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/3599989/united-states-space-force-prepares-x-37b-for-launch/)
Nov. 29, 2023
The Department of the Air Force Rapid Capabilities Office, in partnership with the United States Space Force and SpaceX, is making final preparations to launch the seventh mission of the X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle. Due to launch delays and pad availability, USSF-52 will now launch on Dec. 10, 2023.
The seventh mission of the X-37B, also known as OTV-7, will be the first to launch on a SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket—designated USSF-52—with a wide range of test and experimentation objectives. These tests include operating in new orbital regimes, experimenting with space domain awareness technologies and investigating the radiation effects to NASA materials.
These tests are key to ensuring safe and responsible operations in space for all users of the space domain. Secretary of the Air Force Frank Kendall said about the mission, “this seventh flight of the X-37B continues to demonstrate the innovative spirit of the United States Space Force.”
[...]
QuoteUnited States Space Force Prepares X-37B for Launch (https://www.spaceforce.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/3599989/united-states-space-force-prepares-x-37b-for-launch/)
Nov. 29, 2023
The Department of the Air Force Rapid Capabilities Office, in partnership with the United States Space Force and SpaceX, is making final preparations to launch the seventh mission of the X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle. Due to launch delays and pad availability, USSF-52 will now launch on Dec. 10, 2023.
The seventh mission of the X-37B, also known as OTV-7, will be the first to launch on a SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket—designated USSF-52—with a wide range of test and experimentation objectives. These tests include operating in new orbital regimes, experimenting with space domain awareness technologies and investigating the radiation effects to NASA materials.
These tests are key to ensuring safe and responsible operations in space for all users of the space domain. Secretary of the Air Force Frank Kendall said about the mission, “this seventh flight of the X-37B continues to demonstrate the innovative spirit of the United States Space Force.”
[...]
Assuming that picture is not file footage, for the tea leaf watchers does the X-37b look like it's sitting a little higher than in previous encapsulation photos? If they don't show the rear end/payload adapter interface and it's sitting higher, that feeds more speculation on what is hanging out on the bottom...
QuoteUnited States Space Force Prepares X-37B for Launch (https://www.spaceforce.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/3599989/united-states-space-force-prepares-x-37b-for-launch/)
Nov. 29, 2023
The Department of the Air Force Rapid Capabilities Office, in partnership with the United States Space Force and SpaceX, is making final preparations to launch the seventh mission of the X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle. Due to launch delays and pad availability, USSF-52 will now launch on Dec. 10, 2023.
The seventh mission of the X-37B, also known as OTV-7, will be the first to launch on a SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket—designated USSF-52—with a wide range of test and experimentation objectives. These tests include operating in new orbital regimes, experimenting with space domain awareness technologies and investigating the radiation effects to NASA materials.
These tests are key to ensuring safe and responsible operations in space for all users of the space domain. Secretary of the Air Force Frank Kendall said about the mission, “this seventh flight of the X-37B continues to demonstrate the innovative spirit of the United States Space Force.”
[...]
Assuming that picture is not file footage, for the tea leaf watchers does the X-37b look like it's sitting a little higher than in previous encapsulation photos? If they don't show the rear end/payload adapter interface and it's sitting higher, that feeds more speculation on what is hanging out on the bottom...
QuoteUnited States Space Force Prepares X-37B for Launch (https://www.spaceforce.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/3599989/united-states-space-force-prepares-x-37b-for-launch/)
Nov. 29, 2023
The Department of the Air Force Rapid Capabilities Office, in partnership with the United States Space Force and SpaceX, is making final preparations to launch the seventh mission of the X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle. Due to launch delays and pad availability, USSF-52 will now launch on Dec. 10, 2023.
The seventh mission of the X-37B, also known as OTV-7, will be the first to launch on a SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket—designated USSF-52—with a wide range of test and experimentation objectives. These tests include operating in new orbital regimes, experimenting with space domain awareness technologies and investigating the radiation effects to NASA materials.
These tests are key to ensuring safe and responsible operations in space for all users of the space domain. Secretary of the Air Force Frank Kendall said about the mission, “this seventh flight of the X-37B continues to demonstrate the innovative spirit of the United States Space Force.”
[...]
Assuming that picture is not file footage, for the tea leaf watchers does the X-37b look like it's sitting a little higher than in previous encapsulation photos? If they don't show the rear end/payload adapter interface and it's sitting higher, that feeds more speculation on what is hanging out on the bottom...
do we have images from otv-5?
Falcon Heavy in the hangar at Launch Complex 39A in Florida
SpaceX's Falcon Heavy is heading to 39A's pad for its Static Fire test ahead of the USSF-52 (OTV-7) mission.
nsf.live/spacecoast
QuoteSpaceX's Falcon Heavy is heading to 39A's pad for its Static Fire test ahead of the USSF-52 (OTV-7) mission.
nsf.live/spacecoast
does this booster have the stripe?
SpaceX is planning to test fire a Falcon Heavy at launch pad 39A at the Kennedy Space Center on Sunday. Ignition and a short burn of the 27 Merlin first stage engines is expected around midday (approx. 1700 UTC). The static fire test comes a week ahead of the planned launch of the U.S. military's secretive X-37B spaceplane.
T-22 minute vent. (Yes, it's 22 for FH, 20 for F9)
STATIC FIRE! Falcon Heavy fires up at 39A ahead of USSF-52.
nsf.live/spacecoast
NextSpaceflight (Updated November 14th)
Launch NET 8 December 2023
https://nextspaceflight.com/launches/details/110
Does this mean we can assume launch December 7th local time and December 8th UTC?
Yep. Evening launch local time, will be on the 8th in UTC. It'll be more clear once the launch window is announced.
061024Z DEC 23
NAVAREA IV 1414/23(GEN).
WESTERN NORTH ATLANTIC.
FLORIDA
1. HAZARDOUS OPERATIONS, ROCKET LAUNCHING
110001Z TO 110431Z DEC, ALTERNATE
0001Z TO 0431Z DAILY 12 THRU 17 DEC
IN AREAS BOUND BY:
A. 28-39.16N 080-37.80W, 29-12.00N 079-57.00W,
29-10.00N 079-55.00W, 28-36.00N 080-15.00W,
28-29.00N 080-24.00W, 28-27.60N 080-31.55W,
28-27.94N 080-31.75W.
B. 30-30.00N 078-35.00W, 30-58.00N 078-09.00W,
30-52.00N 077-58.00W, 30-24.00N 078-23.00W.
C. 36-07.00N 071-37.00W, 38-06.00N 069-34.00W,
38-17.00N 068-32.00W, 38-13.00N 068-27.00W,
37-32.00N 068-50.00W, 35-58.00N 071-28.00W.
2. CANCEL THIS MSG 170531Z DEC 23.//
1/x
Navigational Warnings have appeared which I believe are for the USSF-52 #OTV7 X-37B mission.
They point to (initial) launch into a 48.25 degree inclined orbit.
Map depicts 185 km parking orbit variant and direct 185 x 35188 Km insertion variant
2/x
There is a possibility that at soime point it makes a dogleg into a ~64 degree HEO orbit
Mission to GEO, after all.its not geo! its GSO! geo is 0 degree inclination
Or a NOSS/Molniya HEO.
Well, well.
As Kosh says: "And so it begins."
Mission to GEO, after all.its not geo! its GSO! geo is 0 degree inclination
Or a NOSS/Molniya HEO.
Well, well.
As Kosh says: "And so it begins."
Mission to GEO, after all.its not geo! its GSO! geo is 0 degree inclination
Or a NOSS/Molniya HEO.
Well, well.
As Kosh says: "And so it begins."
No, GSO is 0 degree inclination. Any other inclination is not "stationary"
Do we know if the X-37 is rated for a GTO reentry?
[...] Also, no gray band on the second stage, so no extended mission for the second stage.
GTO, I think not.[...] Also, no gray band on the second stage, so no extended mission for the second stage.Does the absence of a gray band rule out a launch to GTO?
3/x
A second possibly related Navigational Warning has appeared for what is likely the 2nd stage disposal.
The shape and location does indicate a dogleg to a high inclination. #USSF52 #OTV7 #X37B
Will analyse further later today.
@planet4589 @DutchSpace
The X-37B launch is set for Dec 10, 2023 (Sunday) at 8:14 pm ET. 10 minute launch window.
Mission to GEO, after all.its not geo! its GSO! geo is 0 degree inclination
Or a NOSS/Molniya HEO.
Well, well.
As Kosh says: "And so it begins."
No, GSO is 0 degree inclination. Any other inclination is not "stationary"
gso is geosyncrinous ourbit not geostationary orbit! geo (geostationary orbit) is zero degrees GSO is not
071019Z DEC 23
NAVAREA XII 846/23(16,17,19).
EASTERN NORTH PACIFIC.
1. HAZARDOUS OPERATIONS, SPACE DEBRIS
110001Z TO 111615Z DEC, ALTERNATE
0001Z TO 1615Z DAILY 12 THRU 17 DEC
IN AREA BOUND BY
51-04N 152-41W, 53-27N 141-07W,
41-40N 136-32W, 38-43N 146-53W
2. CANCEL THIS MSG 171715Z DEC 23.//
its the opposite GSO is Geosynchronous Earth orbit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geosynchronous_orbitMission to GEO, after all.its not geo! its GSO! geo is 0 degree inclination
Or a NOSS/Molniya HEO.
Well, well.
As Kosh says: "And so it begins."
No, GSO is 0 degree inclination. Any other inclination is not "stationary"
gso is geosyncrinous ourbit not geostationary orbit! geo (geostationary orbit) is zero degrees GSO is not
GSO is Geostationary orbit. GEO is Geosynchronous Earth orbit.
NGA Rocket Launching notice.
This NGA Space Debris notice referenced a few posts above does not appear to me to be related to this launch, but I could be wrong.
🚀 FALCON HEAVY LAUNCH VIEWING CHARTER LATEST UPDATE: Marine and launch weather forecasts are both unfavorable for Sunday’s evening launch. The Space Force predicts a 90% chance of precipitation, 60% probability of lightning, and the possibility of severe storms during the afternoon and evening hours.
🌊 Additionally, winds could gust up to 35 knots (≈40 mi/hr, ≈65 km/h) with waves reaching four to five feet high. Due to these conditions, a launch is unlikely as scheduled. It could also be unsafe to be out on the water.
Falcon Heavy is rolling out to 39A, while a former Shuttle MLP (Mobile Launch Platform) is being taken for a spin.
nsf.live/spacecoast
This NGA Space Debris notice referenced a few posts above does not appear to me to be related to this launch, but I could be wrong.Quote from: NGA071019Z DEC 23
NAVAREA XII 846/23(16,17,19).
EASTERN NORTH PACIFIC.
1. HAZARDOUS OPERATIONS, SPACE DEBRIS
110001Z TO 111615Z DEC, ALTERNATE
0001Z TO 1615Z DAILY 12 THRU 17 DEC
IN AREA BOUND BY
51-04N 152-41W, 53-27N 141-07W,
41-40N 136-32W, 38-43N 146-53W
2. CANCEL THIS MSG 171715Z DEC 23.//
081805Z DEC 23
NAVAREA XII 854/23(16,17,19).
EASTERN NORTH PACIFIC.
1. HAZARDOUS OPERATIONS, SPACE DEBRIS
111253Z TO 111354Z DEC, ALTERNATE
1252Z TO 1354Z DAILY 12 THRU 17 DEC
IN AREA BOUND BY
51-34.00N 141-57.00W, 49-51.00N 150-42.00W,
40-55.00N 146-02.00W, 42-38.00N 138-36.00W.
2. CANCEL NAVAREA XII 846/23.
3. CANCEL THIS MSG 171454Z DEC 23.
081842Z DEC 23
NAVAREA IV 1420/23(GEN).
WESTERN NORTH ATLANTIC.
FLORIDA.
1. HAZARDOUS OPERATIONS, ROCKET LAUNCHING
110114Z TO 110155Z DEC, ALTERNATE 0113Z TO 0155Z
DAILY 12 THRU 17 DEC IN AREAS BOUND BY:
A. 28-39.16N 080-37.80W, 29-12.00N 079-57.00W,
29-10.00N 079-55.00W, 28-36.00N 080-15.00W,
28-29.00N 080-24.00W, 28-27.59N 080-31.55W,
28-27.94N 080-31.75W.
B. 30-30.00N 078-35.00W, 30-58.00N 078-09.00W,
30-52.00N 077-58.00W, 30-24.00N 078-23.00W.
C. 36-07.00N 071-37.00W, 38-06.00N 069-34.00W,
38-17.00N 068-32.00W, 38-13.00N 068-27.00W,
37-32.00N 068-50.00W, 35-58.00N 071-28.00W.
2. CANCEL NAVAREA IV 1414/23.
3. CANCEL THIS MSG 170255Z DEC 23.
Issued a little more than a half-hour later than the one I just posted above (which was delayed because I was away from the computer for a while) is this cancel-and-replace Rocket Launching notice, which has a smaller time window reflective of the ten-minute launch window announced by the SSC.Quote from: NGA081842Z DEC 23
NAVAREA IV 1420/23(GEN).
WESTERN NORTH ATLANTIC.
FLORIDA.
1. HAZARDOUS OPERATIONS, ROCKET LAUNCHING
110114Z TO 110155Z DEC, ALTERNATE 0113Z TO 0155Z
DAILY 12 THRU 17 DEC IN AREAS BOUND BY:
A. 28-39.16N 080-37.80W, 29-12.00N 079-57.00W,
29-10.00N 079-55.00W, 28-36.00N 080-15.00W,
28-29.00N 080-24.00W, 28-27.59N 080-31.55W,
28-27.94N 080-31.75W.
B. 30-30.00N 078-35.00W, 30-58.00N 078-09.00W,
30-52.00N 077-58.00W, 30-24.00N 078-23.00W.
C. 36-07.00N 071-37.00W, 38-06.00N 069-34.00W,
38-17.00N 068-32.00W, 38-13.00N 068-27.00W,
37-32.00N 068-50.00W, 35-58.00N 071-28.00W.
2. CANCEL NAVAREA IV 1414/23.
3. CANCEL THIS MSG 170255Z DEC 23.
Issued a little more than a half-hour later than the one I just posted above (which was delayed because I was away from the computer for a while) is this cancel-and-replace Rocket Launching notice, which has a smaller time window reflective of the ten-minute launch window announced by the SSC.Quote from: NGA081842Z DEC 23
NAVAREA IV 1420/23(GEN).
WESTERN NORTH ATLANTIC.
FLORIDA.
1. HAZARDOUS OPERATIONS, ROCKET LAUNCHING
110114Z TO 110155Z DEC, ALTERNATE 0113Z TO 0155Z
DAILY 12 THRU 17 DEC IN AREAS BOUND BY:
A. 28-39.16N 080-37.80W, 29-12.00N 079-57.00W,
29-10.00N 079-55.00W, 28-36.00N 080-15.00W,
28-29.00N 080-24.00W, 28-27.59N 080-31.55W,
28-27.94N 080-31.75W.
B. 30-30.00N 078-35.00W, 30-58.00N 078-09.00W,
30-52.00N 077-58.00W, 30-24.00N 078-23.00W.
C. 36-07.00N 071-37.00W, 38-06.00N 069-34.00W,
38-17.00N 068-32.00W, 38-13.00N 068-27.00W,
37-32.00N 068-50.00W, 35-58.00N 071-28.00W.
2. CANCEL NAVAREA IV 1414/23.
3. CANCEL THIS MSG 170255Z DEC 23.
Curious, why is this update not listed on the NGA website ?
https://msi.nga.mil/queryResults?publications/broadcast-warn?navArea=4&msgNumber=1420&msgYear=2023&output=html (https://msi.nga.mil/queryResults?publications/broadcast-warn?navArea=4&msgNumber=1420&msgYear=2023&output=html)
Targeting Sunday, December 10 for launch of USSF-52 to orbit. Teams are keeping an eye on weather conditions, which are currently 40% favorable for liftoff → spacex.com/launches
SpaceX is targeting Sunday, December 10 at 8:14 p.m. ET for Falcon Heavy’s launch of the USSF-52 mission to orbit from Launch Complex 39A (LC-39A) at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida. A backup launch opportunity is available during the same time on Monday, December 11.
A live webcast of this mission will begin on X @SpaceX about 15 minutes prior to liftoff. Watch live.
This will be the fifth launch and landing of these Falcon Heavy side boosters, which previously supported USSF-44, USSF-67, Hughes JUPTER 3, and NASA’s Psyche mission. Following booster separation, Falcon Heavy’s two side boosters will land on SpaceX’s Landing Zones 1 and 2 (LZ-1 and LZ-2) at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station in Florida.
Sunset shot of Falcon Heavy at Launch Complex 39A in Florida ahead of tomorrow's launch of USSF-52
Ready to go! On December 10th the United States Space Force is scheduled to launch USSF-52 carrying the X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle from Kennedy Space Center, Florida onboard a Falcon Heavy rocket. #SpaceStartsHere #PartnersInSpace #SpaceSystemsCommand
Opinions vary but if you search forMission to GEO, after all.its not geo! its GSO! geo is 0 degree inclination
Or a NOSS/Molniya HEO.
Well, well.
As Kosh says: "And so it begins."
No, GSO is 0 degree inclination. Any other inclination is not "stationary"
gso is geosyncrinous ourbit not geostationary orbit! geo (geostationary orbit) is zero degrees GSO is not
GSO is Geostationary orbit. GEO is Geosynchronous Earth orbit.
SPACE-X USSF-52, KENNEDY SPACE CTR, FL
PRIMARY: 12/12 0114Z-0155Z
BACKUPS: 12/13 0113Z-0154Z
12/14 0113Z-0154Z
12/15 0113Z-0154Z
12/16 0113Z-0154Z
Now targeting Monday, December 11 for Falcon Heavy’s launch of the USSF-52 mission, with weather conditions forecasted to improve to 70% favorable for liftoff on Monday night. The team will use the time to complete additional pre-launch check outs → spacex.com/launches
SpaceX is targeting Monday, December 11 at 8:14 p.m. ET for Falcon Heavy’s launch of the USSF-52 mission to orbit from Launch Complex 39A (LC-39A) at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida. A backup launch opportunity is available during the same time on Tuesday, December 12.
In the fading sunlight, Falcon Heavy returned to vertical ahead of tomorrow night's launch attempt for the USSF-52 mission.
📸: @WeAreSpaceScout
Is it x37b 1 or 2. Nextspaceflight says 2 but x37b spaceflight nerd dutchspace says x37b 1
Upcoming launch of #USSF52 mission via #SpaceX's #FalconHeavy vehicle
#Space #USSF #X37B
Boosters supporting this mission
Space Force X-37B spaceplane is slated to launch its seventh mission overall and first on SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy, headed to a unique orbit as soon as 8:14pm ET tonight
Falcon Heavy
SpaceX recovery ship Doug is steaming towards the fairing recovery site for tonight's Falcon Heavy launch.
The vessel was sheltering close to Norfolk. Both side boosters will RTLS. Center core will be expended.
SpaceX Falcon Heavy set to launch the US Department of Defense's X-37B spaceplane. USSF-52, the fifth Falcon Heavy flight of the year, is scheduled to fly at 8:14 PM EST (01:14 UTC Dec. 12) from KSC 39A.
nasaspaceflight.com/2023/12/otv-7/
Overview by Justin Davenport (@Bubbinski).
Lead photo from Max Evans (@_mgde_) - who will be part of the NSF team at KSC to livestream the launch.
Operation “mega space plane yeet” (USSF-52/OTV-7), the seventh flight of the Space Force’s X-37B, is taking center stage tonight aboard SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy rocket.
T-0 remains at 8:14pm local time from historic LC-39A.
📸 - @NASASpaceflight
👓 - nasaspaceflight.com/2023/12/otv-7/
Such a strange feeling, this - seeing the X-37B’s patch/logo on the fairing of a rocket that’s orders of magnitude more powerful than what it has flown on previously (Atlas V 501 and Block 4 Falcon 9).
Veteran.
SpaceX Mission Patch & images from SpaceX' website:
SpaceX Mission Patch & images from SpaceX' website:
Can anyone post image of mission patch like on the fairing?
Thank you!
It's a livestream doubleheader!
Via our teams and cameras at KSC and the Cape, first up is Falcon Heavy with USSF-52 from 39A, before we head to SLC-40 for the Falcon 9 launch with Starlink 6-34.
youtube.com/watch?v=yRUQxH…
FH/X-37B: This will be SpaceX's 94th launch this year and the 9th Falcon Heavy overall; side boosters 1064 and 65, used to launch NASA's Psyche probe in October, are both making their 5th flight and both will attempt landings at the Cape Canaveral SFS; the core booster, making its 1st flight, will not be recovered
Has it been said why this launch requires a Falcon Heavy? ???
Standing by for launch of USSF-52 carrying the X-37B using a SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket tonight at Kennedy Space Center! #SpaceStartsHere, #SpaceSystemsCommand #USSF #SpaceX #PartnersInSpace
FH/X-37B: It appears SpaceX is re-targeting the Falcon Heavy launch for the end of this evening's 10-minute window, i.e., 8:24pm EST (0124 UTC); no official confirmation yet from SpaceX
Now targeting 8:24 p.m. ET for tonight’s Falcon Heavy launch of USSF-52. Weather is 85% favorable and the webcast will go live ~15 minutes ahead of liftoff → spacex.com/launches
SpaceX is targeting Tuesday, December 12 at 8:14 p.m. ET for Falcon Heavy’s launch of the USSF-52 mission to orbit from Launch Complex 39A (LC-39A) at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida. A backup launch opportunity is available on Wednesday, December 13 if needed.
A live webcast of this mission will begin on X @SpaceX about 15 minutes prior to liftoff. Watch live.
I’ll be streaming this thing, pretty much no matter when it launches!!! So just plan on it 😉 Here’s the new stream link
PDF of online press kit and link to Twitter livestream.
https://twitter.com/i/broadcasts/1kvJpvzkZXwKE
I guess Vulcan’s not the only rocket that had GSE problems.
UPDATE: The launch window for Falcon 9 Starlink 6-34 now opens at 23:00 EDT on Dec. 12 (04:00 UTC on Dec. 13), and will feature a SOUTHERLY TRAJECTORY.
Falcon Heavy USSF-52 launch window now opens at 20:13 EDT on Dec. 13 (01:13 UTC on Dec. 14).
Now targeting no earlier than Wednesday, December 13 for Falcon Heavy to launch USSF-52. The extra time allows teams to complete system checkouts ahead of liftoff. Teams are also keeping an eye on weather, which is 40% favorable for launch → spacex.com/launches
SpaceX is targeting no earlier than Wednesday, December 13 at 8:13 p.m. ET for Falcon Heavy’s launch of the USSF-52 mission to orbit...
That means that the other one gets bumped, too.Not so far. The two launches are unrelated and it appears to be the weather that moved Starlink yesterday. It's more favorable tonight than last night.
SpaceX is currently standing down from a Falcon Heavy launch of USSF-52 to orbit to perform additional system checkouts. The payload remains healthy while teams work toward the next best launch opportunity. We’re also keeping an eye on the weather and will announce a new launch date once confirmed with the Range.
SpaceX recovery ship Doug is returning to Port Canaveral following the delay to the Falcon Heavy USSF-52 mission. The ship was due to recover the fairing.
The ship retuning indicates a long-term delay.
USSF-52 might slip more, as SpaceX has started the process of bringing Falcon Heavy into a horizontal position.
Now the question is if they can perform the needed work on the pad, or if we will see a rollback to the hangar.
Link: nsf.live/spacecoast
r o l l b a c k
SpaceX personnel at LC-39A prepare Falcon Heavy for rollback into the HIF - additional work is needed before launch.
📸 - @NASASpaceflight
Does this mean that the problem was vehicle/spacecraft related?
Or just that after a delay the spacecraft needs additional servicing?
132125Z DEC 23
NAVAREA IV 1442/23(GEN).
WESTERN NORTH ATLANTIC.
FLORIDA.
CANCEL NAVAREA IV 1420/23 AND THIS MSG,
OPERATIONS CANCELED.
132125Z DEC 23
NAVAREA XII 867/23(16,17,19).
EASTERN NORTH PACIFIC.
CANCEL NAVAREA XII 854/23 AND THIS MSG,
OPERATIONS CANCELED.
This is expected to push back the launch until at least late December, perhaps longer. SpaceX and Space Force officials have not divulged details about the problems causing the delay.
https://arstechnica.com/space/2023/12/technical-problems-ground-spacex-launch-of-us-military-spaceplane/Quote from: Stephen ClarkThis is expected to push back the launch until at least late December, perhaps longer. SpaceX and Space Force officials have not divulged details about the problems causing the delay.
SpaceX called off a launch attempt Monday night at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida to resolve a problem with a ground system. A senior Space Force official told Ars on Wednesday that additional issues will cause an additional delay in the launch.
“We’re working through a couple of technical glitches with our SpaceX team that just are going to take a little bit more time to work through," said Col. James Horne, deputy director of the Space Force's Assured Access to Space directorate. "We haven’t nailed down a specific launch date yet, but we’re going to have to roll back into the HIF (Horizontal Integration Facility) and work through some things on the rocket.”
Horne, a senior leader on the Space Force team overseeing military launches like this one, said the ground equipment problem that prevented liftoff Monday night could be fixed as soon as Wednesday. But it will take longer to resolve other issues he declined to specify. "We found some things that we need to run some analysis on, so that’s what’s driving the delay," he said.
Does this mean that the problem was vehicle/spacecraft related?
Or just that after a delay the spacecraft needs additional servicing?
With DOD flights I just always assume it's the payload.
Seen too many that are on the pad ready to go then something comes up and it's month till it's back on the pad.
It looks like Falcon Heavy’s launch of the military’s X-37B spaceplane could slip a few weeks to resolve a few technical glitches.
We’ll know soon [if] this will affect schedules for the IM-1 lunar mission or Axiom’s Ax-3 astronaut mission.
https://arstechnica.com/space/2023/12/technical-problems-ground-spacex-launch-of-us-military-spaceplane/Quote from: Stephen ClarkThis is expected to push back the launch until at least late December, perhaps longer. SpaceX and Space Force officials have not divulged details about the problems causing the delay.
Also, from the same article:QuoteSpaceX called off a launch attempt Monday night at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida to resolve a problem with a ground system. A senior Space Force official told Ars on Wednesday that additional issues will cause an additional delay in the launch.
“We’re working through a couple of technical glitches with our SpaceX team that just are going to take a little bit more time to work through," said Col. James Horne, deputy director of the Space Force's Assured Access to Space directorate. "We haven’t nailed down a specific launch date yet, but we’re going to have to roll back into the HIF (Horizontal Integration Facility) and work through some things on the rocket.”
Horne, a senior leader on the Space Force team overseeing military launches like this one, said the ground equipment problem that prevented liftoff Monday night could be fixed as soon as Wednesday. But it will take longer to resolve other issues he declined to specify. "We found some things that we need to run some analysis on, so that’s what’s driving the delay," he said.
...and work through some things on the rocket...
Now for some speculation: They observed some things on the 'WDR' (aka launch attempt) that the US Space Force wants to review, but possibly things that SpaceX sees regularly on Starlink launches and goes ahead anyway. (But nothing wrong with being extra careful, this payload is quite valuable)
So what's the problem?
Now targeting no earlier than Thursday, December 28 for Falcon Heavy to launch USSF-52 to orbit from Florida → http://spacex.com/launches
SpaceX is targeting no earlier than Thursday, December 28 for Falcon Heavy to launch USSF-52 to orbit from Launch Complex 39A (LC-39A) at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida. The four-hour launch window opens at 7:00 p.m. ET. If needed, a backup opportunity is available on Friday, December 29 during the same window.
The Falcon Heavy Transporter-Erector is rolling out at Launch Complex 39A with no rocket onboard which indicates the rocket for USSF-52 has been taken out of the transporter and being worked on right now. Launch is now no earlier than Dec 28.
nsf.live/spacecoast
While working in the area heard that an engine on one of the cores of the FH needs replaced. Sounds rather far fetched to me.
At pad 39A, the transporter-erector has moved off the launch pad as SpaceX gets ready for the delayed launch of a Falcon Heavy rocket with the U.S. military's X-37B mini-shuttle, currently scheduled for Dec. 28. Watch live views: youtube.com/live/mNRP1y_Ip…
Will an FRF be required prior to the next launch attempt?
Will an FRF be required prior to the next launch attempt?
Because there was an engine replacement, it's highly likely a static fire would need to be conducted before the next launch attempt.
Will an FRF be required prior to the next launch attempt?
Because there was an engine replacement, it's highly likely a static fire would need to be conducted before the next launch attempt.
As a reference, during the ViaSat-3 Americas launch campaign they also needed to replace an engine, and did not perform an additional static fire.
Falcon Heavy, December 28 @ around 8 p.m. EST (pad 39A + LZ-1 landings)= 29 December ~01:00 UTC
The next SpaceX Falcon Heavy will launch the seventh OTV X-37B spaceplane mission for the U.S. Space Force from pad 39A on December 28, around 8 p.m. EST. The launch window stretches 10 minutes.
SPACEX FH USSF-52, CCSFS/KSC, FL
PRIMARY: 12/29/2023 0000Z-0420Z
BACKUP: 12/30/23 0000Z-0420Z
12/31/23 0000Z-0420Z
Departure! Doug is underway from Port Canaveral for attempt #2 at supporting the Falcon Heavy USSF-52 mission.
Doug will recover the fairing, side boosters will RTLS , and the center core will be expended.
251118Z DEC
NAVAREA IV 1499/23(12,13,26).
WESTERN NORTH ATLANTIC.
FLORIDA.
1. HAZARDOUS OPERATIONS, ROCKET LAUNCHING
290001Z TO 290431Z DEC, ALTERNATE
0001Z TO 0431Z DAILY 30 DEC THRU 03 JAN 24
IN AREAS BOUND BY:
A. 28-39.16N 080-37.80W, 29-12.00N 079-57.00W,
29-10.00N 079-55.00W, 28-36.00N 080-15.00W,
28-29.00N 080-24.00W, 28-27.59N 080-31.55W,
28-27.94N 080-31.75W.
B. 30-30.00N 078-35.00W, 30-58.00N 078-09.00W,
30-52.00N 077-58.00W, 30-24.00N 078-23.00W.
C. 36-07.00N 071-37.00W, 38-06.00N 069-34.00W,
38-17.00N 068-32.00W, 38-13.00N 068-27.00W,
37-32.00N 068-50.00W, 35-58.00N 071-28.00W.
2. CANCEL THIS MSG 030531Z JAN 24.
251133Z DEC 23
NAVAREA XII 882/23(16,17,19).
EASTERN NORTH PACIFIC.
1. HAZARDOUS OPERATIONS, SPACE DEBRIS
291139Z TO 291630Z DEC, ALTERNATE
1139Z TO 1630Z DAILY 30 DEC THRU 03 JAN 24
IN AREA BOUND BY
51-04.00N 152-41.00W, 53-27.00N 141-07.00W,
41-40.00N 136-32.00W, 38-43.00N 146-53.00W.
2. CANCEL THIS MSG 031730Z JAN 24.
SpaceX is targeting Thursday, December 28 at 8:07 p.m. ET for Falcon Heavy’s launch of the USSF-52 mission to orbit from Launch Complex 39A (LC-39A) at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida. A backup launch opportunity is available at 8:06 p.m. ET on Friday, December 29.
A live webcast of this mission will begin on X @SpaceX about fifteen minutes prior to liftoff. Watch live.
This will be the fifth launch and landing of these Falcon Heavy side boosters, which previously supported USSF-44, USSF-67, Hughes JUPTER 3, and NASA’s Psyche mission. Following booster separation, Falcon Heavy’s two side boosters will land on SpaceX’s Landing Zones 1 and 2 (LZ-1 and LZ-2) at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station in Florida.
262357Z DEC 23
NAVAREA IV 1504/23(GEN).
WESTERN NORTH ATLANTIC.
FLORIDA.
1. HAZARDOUS OPERATIONS, ROCKET LAUNCHING
290107Z TO 290148Z DEC, ALTERNATE
0102Z TO 0147Z DAILY 30 DEC THRU 04 JAN 24
IN AREAS BOUND BY:
A. 28-39.16N 080-37.80W, 29-12.00N 079-57.00W,
29-10.00N 079-55.00W, 28-36.00N 080-15.00W,
28-29.00N 080-24.00W, 28-27.59N 080-31.55W,
28-27.94N 080-31.75W, 28-39.16N 080-37.80W.
B. 30-30.00N 078-35.00W, 30-58.00N 078-09.00W,
30-52.00N 077-58.00W, 30-24.00N 078-23.00W,
30-30.00N 078-35.00W.
C. 36-07.00N 071-37.00W, 38-06.00N 069-34.00W,
38-17.00N 068-32.00W, 38-13.00N 068-27.00W,
37-32.00N 068-50.00W, 35-58.00N 071-28.00W,
36-07.00N 071-37.00W.
2. CANCEL NAVAREA IV 1499/23.
3. CANCEL THIS MSG 040247Z JAN 24.
270029Z DEC 23
NAVAREA XII 883/23(16,17,19).
EASTERN NORTH PACIFIC.
1. HAZARDOUS OPERATIONS, SPACE DEBRIS
291246Z TO 291346Z, ALTERNATE
1241Z TO 1346Z DAILY 30 DEC TO 04 JAN 24
IN AREA BOUND BY
51-04.00N 152-41.00W, 53-27.00N 141-07.00W,
41-40.00N 136-32.00W, 38-43.00N 146-53.00W.
2. CANCEL NAVAREA XII 882/23.
3. CANCEL THIS MSG 041446Z JAN 24.
Falcon Heavy is rolling out to 39A ahead of Thursday's launch from 39A.
nsf.live/spacecoast
(Also, Starship tower in the clouds!)
Timelapse 😵💫 Falcon Heavy rolls out for a second attempt at launching the USSF-52 mission.
nsf.live/spacecoast
Will the (2nd) FRF take place today?
SpaceX is targeting Thursday, December 28 at 8:07 p.m. ET for Falcon Heavy’s launch of the USSF-52 mission to orbit from Launch Complex 39A (LC-39A) at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida. A backup launch opportunity is available at 8:06 p.m. ET on Friday, December 29.
A live webcast of this mission will begin on X @SpaceX about fifteen minutes prior to liftoff. Watch live.
This will be the fifth launch and landing of these Falcon Heavy side boosters, which previously supported USSF-44, USSF-67, Hughes JUPTER 3, and NASA’s Psyche mission. Following booster separation, Falcon Heavy’s two side boosters will land on SpaceX’s Landing Zones 1 and 2 (LZ-1 and LZ-2) at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station in Florida.
#FalconHeavy should be visible up the east coast tonight as it carries USSF-52 to orbit!
Be sure to sign up to Flight Club's Photographer's Toolkit if you wanna spot it
If you've never used the Toolkit before and wanna try it out, ping me for a free trial!
Traffic is horrendous right now. Don’t be surprised if remote shots are extremely limited. I doubt many if any can make it in time for set.
Falcon Heavy vertical at the pad in Florida ahead of tonight's launch of USSF-52 → spacex.com/launches
Falcon Heavy ready for another try at launching USSF-52 during a ten-minute window opening at 8:07pm ET tonight
Standing by for launch of USSF-52 and the X-37B mission this evening using a SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket at Kennedy Space Center! #SpaceSystemsCommand #USSF #PartnersInSpace
Big shout out to the @SpaceX media team for giving extra time for media to arrive and get our gear ready!
The bois are out and ready to rock and roll; Let’s get this bread! 🍞 🚀
SpaceX "x" Broadcast link: https://twitter.com/i/broadcasts/1ynKOyeDmrwJR
LAUNCH! SpaceX Falcon Heavy launches the USSF-52 X-37B Spaceplane from 39A.
Overview: nasaspaceflight.com/2023/12/otv-7/
NSF Livestream: youtube.com/watch?v=jqeM-C…
Staging - side boosters sep.
Staging. Center core sep.
FALCON HEAVY TRANSITS THE MOON: Tonight’s launch of the USSF-52 mission with seventh mission of the Space Force’s X-37B spaceplane.
Side boosters entry burn.
Falcon Heavy Side Boosters land at LZ-1 and LZ-2.
youtube.com/watch?v=jqeM-C…
Falcon Heavy's Nebula as the side core boosters return to Landing Zone 1 and 2 as @SLDelta45. #USSF52 #X37B #FalconHeavy
An incredible opportunity presented itself tonight. Falcon Heavy with the X-37 (Orbital Test Vehicle) transits a rising moon over Florida’s Space Coast.
📸 me for @considercosmos
Under cold and foggy conditions, the ninth Falcon Heavy takes flight from LC-39A with the X-37B spaceplane for the @SpaceForceDoD.
📸 - @NASASpaceflight
📺 - youtube.com/live/jqeM-CWz2…
Falcon Heavy’s center core rapidly accelerates following BECO and side core separation.
It's tough not being on the space coast during a Falcon Heavy launch, but it was a wonderful view from just outside of Tallahassee @SpaceX @NASAKennedy @SpaceForceDoD #FalconHeavy #X37B
For the final time of 2023, Falcon Heavy soars!
📸: @WeAreSpaceScout
SpaceX successfully completed its second attempt to launch the X-37B spaceplane on the USSF-52 mission on Dec. 28, 8:07 PM EST from Kennedy Space Center. The mission overcame earlier delays due to ground issues.
@theresacross @space_explored
#SpaceX #X37B #USSF52 #FalconHeavy #SpaceForce #SuccessfulLaunch #KennedySpaceCenter”
A long exposure view of Falcon Heavy's side boosters performing boostback burns to land at LZ-1 and LZ-2 🚀
📸: me for @TLPN_Official
Falcon Heavy takes USSF-52 to orbit tonight at 8:07pm.
📸: me for @TLPN_Official
SPACE LASERS!
At 8:07pm (ET), a SpaceX #FalconHeavy rocket carried the USSF52 mission past the Moon and to space, seen here in a 30-sec tracked shot (so the Moon stays stationary in the frame).
Wow. just, wow again
(📷:me from Titusville, FL)
Tonight’s @SpaceX launch was one of the most beautiful things I’ve ever seen across the sky. Wow @elonmusk
#SpaceX 📸 Daytona Beach, Fl
Falcon Heavy 5th launch of 2023.
Photo from Aventhealth Orlando Parking Lot.
Up and back again! SpaceX Falcon Heavy lifts the classified X-37B spaceplane into space, afterwards, the two side cores returned for a landing at CCSFS
27 Merlin engines on Falcon Heavy's three boosters propel the rocket and USSF-52 from LC-39A at 8:07pm ET tonight
🔥🔥🔥: The USSF-52 SpaceX #FalconHeavy clears the tower, powered by 27 Merlin rocket engines.
Roughly estimated, well over ten thousand people lined parks along US-1 in Titusville, on and around the Max Brewer Bridge, as well as on Merritt Island in the Port Canaveral area.
✍️: @TheOldManPar
talkoftitusville.com/2023/12/28/fal…
A little dew but a LOT of punch. Falcon Heavy flying high into the night carrying the Space Force's mini space plane, the X-37B!
MORE pics to come from this mission, but first, another launch with Starlink 6-36!
Rewatch this launch on @nasaspaceflight : youtube.com/live/jqeM-CWz2…
Twenty. Seven. Merlins.
Falcon Heavy lofting USSF-52 to orbit, carrying the X-37B spaceplane to orbit.
#FalconHeavy #USSF52 #X37B g
A few stills from my tracking video of SpaceX Falcon Heavy with X-37B.
One more: Falcon Heavy launches USSF-52 at 8:07pm tonight
Falcon Heavy launches USSF-52 to orbit from Florida
Recent launch of #USSF52 mission via #SpaceX's #FalconHeavy vehicle
#Space #USSF #USAF #X37B
Tri-core goodness.
Falcon Heavy takes flight from LC-39A for USSF-52/OTV-7.
📸 - @NASASpaceflight
Falcon Heavy just before and during stage separation
https://twitter.com/spacex/status/1740602637299646970QuoteFalcon 9 launches 23 @Starlink satellites to orbit from Florida on our 96th, and final, Falcon launch of 2023
https://twitter.com/cbs_spacenews/status/1740540091960037865QuoteFH/X-37B: LIFTOFF! At 8:07pm EST (0107 UTC); this was SpaceX's 95th Falcon-family launch so far this year.
They sent out a press release around 1am EST announcing a successful launch.
They sent out a press release around 1am EST announcing a successful launch.
Do you have a link to this? I can't find it on USSF/USSF SSC/Boeing's pages.
Twin @SpaceX Falcon Heavy side boosters fly home for touchdown at Cape Canaveral last night after launching the USSF-52 Spaceplane mission.
Captured by @erikkuna for Supercluster from Cocoa Beach
Falcon Heavy ascent & boosters landing
Successful launch of the U.S. Space Force USSF-52 mission on a SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket with the X-37B payload on board! Great effort from the entire team of government and industry partners for this launch! #USSF #SpaceStartsHere #SpaceSystemsCommand
Success! 🚀
#X37B will build on its more than 3,774 days in space and 1.3 billion miles traveled during #OTV7 for the @SpaceForceDoD.
Read more about how this mission will contribute to long-term sustainability in orbit.
Boeing-built X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle Embarks on Seventh Mission
- Mission will expand the United States Space Force's knowledge of the space environment by experimenting with future space domain awareness technologies
- Seventh flight follows record-breaking 908-day sixth mission
KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, Fla., Dec. 29, 2023 /PRNewswire/ -- The Boeing [NYSE: BA]-built X-37B autonomous spaceplane launched yesterday aboard a SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket, marking the beginning of its seventh mission.
"The X-37B government and Boeing teams have worked together to produce a more responsive, flexible, and adaptive experimentation platform," said William D. Bailey, Director, Department of the Air Force Rapid Capabilities Office. "The work they've done to streamline processes and adapt evolving technologies will help our nation learn a tremendous amount about operating in and returning from a space environment."
As it has with every mission, the Orbital Test Vehicle will validate new technologies, fostering innovation and pushing the boundaries of space exploration and utility. On this seventh flight, the X-37B will test future space domain awareness technology experiments that are integral in ensuring safe, stable and secure operations in space for all users of the domain.
"The technological advancements we're driving on X-37B will benefit the broader space community, especially as we see increased interest in space sustainability," said Michelle Parker, Space Mission Systems vice president at Boeing Defense, Space & Security. "We are pushing innovation and capability that will influence the next generation of spacecraft."
Since its inaugural launch in April 2010, the X-37B has consistently set new endurance records, surpassing the initial design mission duration of 270 days. Its sixth mission set a new record with an impressive 908-day journey before returning to Earth in November 2022.
The X-37B, which will now build on its more than 1.3 billion miles traveled during its 3,774 days in space, exemplifies the successful partnership between the Department of the Air Force Rapid Capabilities Office and the United States Space Force. Boeing teams deliver program management, engineering, production, test and mission support.
In 2019, the X-37B was awarded the Robert J. Collier Trophy for advancing the performance, efficiency and safety of air and space vehicles.
As a leading global aerospace company, Boeing develops, manufactures and services commercial airplanes, defense products and space systems for customers in more than 150 countries. As a top U.S. exporter, the company leverages the talents of a global supplier base to advance economic opportunity, sustainability and community impact. Boeing's diverse team is committed to innovating for the future, leading with sustainability, and cultivating a culture based on the company's core values of safety, quality and integrity. Join our team and find your purpose at boeing.com/careers.
The fifth #FalconHeavy mission of the year sent off a clandestine payload, X-37B spaceplane into an unknown orbit at 8:07 pm EST (0107 UTC)
Photos by Chuck & @Jenrbriggs for @Gizmodo / @gizspaceflight
Falcon Heavy takes flight with the X-3B space plane, the first leg of the double-header from Florida's #SpaceCoast
Photos by Chuck & @Jenrbriggs for @Gizmodo / @gizspaceflight
Payload flying today.Are we sure that that's the OTV-7 Service Module and not the OTV-6 one? Sure looks like the USAFA's FalconSat8 there.
More perspectives of last night's #FalconHeavy launch of the #X37B now that I got to edit them today. An incredible launch and a fun shoot! Planned with @flightclubio. Couldnt ask for better weather. Only the second launch I've been able to see in person this yr.
#USSF52 #SpaceX
Falcon Heavy transits the 98.2% illuminated moon on its way to space with the X-37B mini-shuttle
They sent out a press release around 1am EST announcing a successful launch.
Do you have a link to this? I can't find it on USSF/USSF SSC/Boeing's pages.
It was emailed to their press mailing list.
It's a military mission. They will only confirm what everyone already knows; it was a successful launch. They didn't want SpaceX to even confirm a 2nd stage orbital insertion. They are not going to say anything else about the mission until the spacecraft returns in a year or 2.
OTV-7 found?I thought this is for an object that probably revolves around the Sun, and thus all these parameters are with respect to it.
Information from SeeSat-L (https://www.projectpluto.com/neocp2/mpecs/A10ZEt3.htm):
perigeum: 301.78927 +/- 4.4
apogeum: 42699.8770 +/- 5563
inclination: 30.77476 +/- 0.31 deg.
Did you know that you can sometimes see Florida rocket launches from here in Atlanta?! It takes the right kind of rocket, and the right kind of launch trajectory, and a nighttime launch, and clear skies, and a location with a good view of the southeast horizon. But if aaaall those line up, there it is!
OTV-7 found?I thought this is for an object that probably revolves around the Sun, and thus all these parameters are with respect to it.
Information from SeeSat-L (https://www.projectpluto.com/neocp2/mpecs/A10ZEt3.htm):
perigeum: 301.78927 +/- 4.4
apogeum: 42699.8770 +/- 5563
inclination: 30.77476 +/- 0.31 deg.
OTV-7 found?I thought this is for an object that probably revolves around the Sun, and thus all these parameters are with respect to it.
Information from SeeSat-L (https://www.projectpluto.com/neocp2/mpecs/A10ZEt3.htm):
perigeum: 301.78927 +/- 4.4
apogeum: 42699.8770 +/- 5563
inclination: 30.77476 +/- 0.31 deg.
Nope, Bill did a geocentric solution. But the referenced link implies a perigee of 5875 x 66768 km not 301 x 42670 km ("a" is semi major axis and "Peri." is argument of perigee, not perigee height)
The @SpaceX launch support vessel Doug is entering Port Canaveral with a full load of fairings from the USSF-52 Falcon Heavy launch on December 28th. That was a northerly trajectory, so the fairings were “up there a-ways”. Welcome back! 👍🏻🚀⛴️
SpaceX support ship Doug finally returned to Port Canaveral with both fairing halves from the Falcon Heavy USSF-52 mission - recovered a mighty 1500km downrange!
nsf.live/spacecoast
Landing zone.
Not much in the news these days, but this WSJ clip popped up today.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/inside-boeing-s-x-37b-space-plane-conducting-secret-missions-for-the-u-s/vi-AA1mQEhc?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=HCTS&cvid=869b165d5b4e49818491b5b7f7cbc0ec&ei=14
Not much in the news these days, but this WSJ clip popped up today.I have wondered about the Molniya orbit possibility. It would be hard for amateurs to track.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/inside-boeing-s-x-37b-space-plane-conducting-secret-missions-for-the-u-s/vi-AA1mQEhc?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=HCTS&cvid=869b165d5b4e49818491b5b7f7cbc0ec&ei=14
Congrats to Tomi Simola for locating the secret X-37B spaceplane. OTV 7 is in a 323 x 38838 km x 59.1 deg orbit. Could be testing out a new HEO IR sensor for future early warning satellites - just a wild speculation on my part here.
But why near 60degree inclination?
Early warning satellites can work on 0 degree pretty fine.
Exciting news!
Orbital Test Vehicle 7 (OTV-7), which was launched to classified orbit last December, was seen by my SatCam!
Here are images from the last two nights!
#OTV7 has apparently been found in HEO by
@tomppa77
.
OTV 7
1 58666U 23210A 24039.74420665 0.00000000 00000-0 00000-0 0 04
2 58666 59.1161 4.8483 7418435 167.3793 193.0310 2.07574710 01
Apogee at 37 degrees south, says JCM. Not a 12-hour Molniya orbit I believe, but long hours hovering above that parallel. So what could be so interesting along 37 South? The southern coast of Australia? Parts of South America? The Indian Ocean and South Pacific? Or, maybe this bit from Wikipedia is relevant?
"This (37 South) parallel approximates that latitude at which solar irradiance equals the planetary average, with higher insolation equatorward and lower poleward."
- Ed Kyle
Apogee at 37 degrees south, says JCM. Not a 12-hour Molniya orbit I believe, but long hours hovering above that parallel. So what could be so interesting along 37 South? The southern coast of Australia? Parts of South America? The Indian Ocean and South Pacific? Or, maybe this bit from Wikipedia is relevant?Depending on how the apsides rotate, eventually perigee will need to be near a latitude close to where it's landing (Florida).
"This (37 South) parallel approximates that latitude at which solar irradiance equals the planetary average, with higher insolation equatorward and lower poleward."
- Ed Kyle