-
#140
by
Rik ISS-fan
on 13 Jan, 2017 19:18
-
-
#141
by
oldAtlas_Eguy
on 14 Jan, 2017 19:05
-
Do we have all the sats at VAFB or are they still to be shipped. I would not expect launch until 30 days after all of them are integrated into the SHERPA.
There is no other launches for VAFB until the Iridium Next Flt 2 at NET April 15.
Launch of Formosat-5 could be as late as 15 March without any impacts at all on the next Iridium launch.
-
#142
by
gongora
on 14 Jan, 2017 19:28
-
The sats on SHERPA are integrated before it is shipped to Vandenberg.
-
#143
by
oldAtlas_Eguy
on 14 Jan, 2017 20:33
-
The sats on SHERPA are integrated before it is shipped to Vandenberg.
Thanks.
So SpaceX treats the SHERPA as if it was a single sat payload in their handling and processing flow. So think of what other payload arrivals at launch site time period before launch would be.
So do we have any indication of when SI is planning to ship the SHERPA to VAFB?
-
#144
by
wsl2005
on 19 Jan, 2017 06:40
-
-
#145
by
FutureSpaceTourist
on 19 Jan, 2017 06:54
-
NASA Canyval-X fact sheet attached.
-
#146
by
DOCinCT
on 19 Jan, 2017 13:17
-
Canyval-X
Don't understand what this has to do with Formosat5/SHERPA???
-
#147
by
gongora
on 19 Jan, 2017 13:43
-
Canyval-X
Don't understand what this has to do with Formosat5/SHERPA???
It's one of the cubesats on SHERPA.
-
#148
by
IanThePineapple
on 29 Jan, 2017 23:20
-
I'm assuming a late summer/early winter Formosat launch, it's almost on FH-levels of delays.
-
#149
by
mtakala24
on 30 Jan, 2017 11:04
-
You mean that it won't be the next SpaceX launch from Vandenberg? Is there any documentation to support your assumption?
-
#150
by
shooter6947
on 31 Jan, 2017 00:06
-
With all of the LC-39A and LC-40 delays back East, why doesn't SpaceX send some cores to their working pad LC-4E out West and launch the Sherpa mission sooner rather than later? I realize that they've gotta wait 90 days for more Iridium launches, but might as well work through the polar orbit backlog, too...
-
#151
by
Herb Schaltegger
on 31 Jan, 2017 01:23
-
With all of the LC-39A and LC-40 delays back East, why doesn't SpaceX send some cores to their working pad LC-4E out West and launch the Sherpa mission sooner rather than later? I realize that they've gotta wait 90 days for more Iridium launches, but might as well work through the polar orbit backlog, too...
Because orbital launches require an active commercial launch license with the FAA, an active license with the FCC for TT&C (tracking, telemetry and control), clearance and coordination with the launch range operator, and detailed mission planning and coordination with the customer, launch crews, and mission management teams. You can't just swap these things around like running a bus route.
-
#152
by
envy887
on 31 Jan, 2017 01:34
-
Are the payloads ready for this launch?
-
#153
by
manoweb
on 31 Jan, 2017 02:58
-
Because orbital launches require an active commercial launch license with the FAA, an active license with the FCC for TT&C (tracking, telemetry and control), clearance and coordination with the launch range operator, and detailed mission planning and coordination with the customer, launch crews, and mission management teams. You can't just swap these things around like running a bus route.
Ironically, today they just swapped around flights on LC-39A (Echostar23 with Dragon10), so I would be very surprised if the government red tape is really the reason for backlog. I think SpaceX attorney team is well versed in getting the necessary FCC licenses...
I think the real reason is more like, there is a big overlap of personnel that is required for a polar launches from Vandenberg and the one that needs to work on LC39A, LC40, Boca Chica, etc...
-
#154
by
old_sellsword
on 31 Jan, 2017 03:27
-
Because orbital launches require an active commercial launch license with the FAA, an active license with the FCC for TT&C (tracking, telemetry and control), clearance and coordination with the launch range operator, and detailed mission planning and coordination with the customer, launch crews, and mission management teams. You can't just swap these things around like running a bus route.
Ironically, today they just swapped around flights on LC-39A (Echostar23 with Dragon10), so I would be very surprised if the government red tape is really the reason for backlog. I think SpaceX attorney team is well versed in getting the necessary FCC licenses...
I think the real reason is more like, there is a big overlap of personnel that is required for a polar launches from Vandenberg and the one that needs to work on LC39A, LC40, Boca Chica, etc...
The red tape was already done away with for those two missions. Really all they did was push EchoStar 23 back, which happens quite frequently.
-
#155
by
cscott
on 31 Jan, 2017 04:23
-
-
#156
by
gongora
on 03 Feb, 2017 16:10
-
Another update on the payloads for this mission:
The UAE's Nayiv-1 cubesat has been moved from the Falcon-9/FORMOSAT-5/SHERPA launch to the PSLV C37 launch
-
#157
by
WHAP
on 06 Feb, 2017 21:49
-
-
#158
by
old_sellsword
on 06 Feb, 2017 22:14
-
-
#159
by
IanThePineapple
on 06 Feb, 2017 22:30
-
Just hopped onto this thread, why wasn't FORMOSAT/SHERPA launched in early Summer 2016 like planned, and why does it keep getting delayed? Will it launch anytime soon?