-
#160
by
jjyach
on 06 Feb, 2017 23:32
-
-
#161
by
WHAP
on 07 Feb, 2017 03:35
-
-
#162
by
gongora
on 07 Feb, 2017 03:54
-
-
#163
by
mme
on 07 Feb, 2017 04:02
-
I have the worst question ever. Does anyone on base really call it Vandy? I'm not asking if "outsiders" call it that.
-
#164
by
woods170
on 07 Feb, 2017 06:13
-
I have the worst question ever. Does anyone on base really call it Vandy? I'm not asking if "outsiders" call it that.
AirForce folks filming Delta launches referred to it as Vandy as early as 1983.
-
#165
by
dglow
on 07 Feb, 2017 06:27
-
I have the worst question ever. Does anyone on base really call it Vandy? I'm not asking if "outsiders" call it that.
I've heard people from Lompoc call it 'Vandy' or just 'the base'. Not AF, but I wouldn't say they're outsiders.
-
#166
by
mme
on 07 Feb, 2017 06:52
-
I have the worst question ever. Does anyone on base really call it Vandy? I'm not asking if "outsiders" call it that.
AirForce folks filming Delta launches referred to it as Vandy as early as 1983.
Thanks, that was what I was looking for.
-
#167
by
Jim
on 07 Feb, 2017 13:11
-
I have the worst question ever. Does anyone on base really call it Vandy? I'm not asking if "outsiders" call it that.
AirForce folks filming Delta launches referred to it as Vandy as early as 1983.
Thanks, that was what I was looking for.
It isn't widespread, it is used by few insiders. And outsiders don't use it.
-
#168
by
Herb Schaltegger
on 07 Feb, 2017 13:38
-
I have the worst question ever. Does anyone on base really call it Vandy? I'm not asking if "outsiders" call it that.
AirForce folks filming Delta launches referred to it as Vandy as early as 1983.
Thanks, that was what I was looking for.
It isn't widespread, it is used by few insiders. And outsiders don't use it.
Besides, everyone knows "Vandy" is Vanderbilt University (one of my alma maters).
-
#169
by
Galactic Penguin SST
on 07 Feb, 2017 15:56
-
Returning back to news updates, I decided to check out what's going on with Formosat-5 - it's still in Taiwan, though apparently ready for shipping. So at least this is not what holding the launch.
These kids participating in a winter camp last month actually got a chance to see Formosat-5 and the Formosat-7 constellation (*) up close. You can see them building a Formosat-5 paper model and taking group photos in front of a not-so-precise F9 model.
(*) The 1st 6 are going up on FH/STP-2
-
#170
by
cscott
on 07 Feb, 2017 20:44
-
Originally payload availability and FCC licensing, then the range closure, then FCC licensing, and now probably launch vehicle availability.
p.s. The "red tape" mentioned above was not SpaceX specific, and not long term. It actually wasn't red tape at all, but had to do with the western range setup.
The end of your first paragraph is contradicted by your second paragraph. "Now probably *range setup*" (not launch vehicle availability).
-
#171
by
gongora
on 07 Feb, 2017 21:03
-
Originally payload availability and FCC licensing, then the range closure, then FCC licensing, and now probably launch vehicle availability.
p.s. The "red tape" mentioned above was not SpaceX specific, and not long term. It actually wasn't red tape at all, but had to do with the western range setup.
The end of your first paragraph is contradicted by your second paragraph. "Now probably *range setup*" (not launch vehicle availability).
I don't see any contradiction. I don't think the mission is ready to fly. There has been no indication it will launch anytime soon. The current range issue is completely irrelevant in that case.
-
#172
by
IanThePineapple
on 07 Feb, 2017 22:03
-
-
#173
by
cscott
on 08 Feb, 2017 01:27
-
Originally payload availability and FCC licensing, then the range closure, then FCC licensing, and now probably launch vehicle availability.
p.s. The "red tape" mentioned above was not SpaceX specific, and not long term. It actually wasn't red tape at all, but had to do with the western range setup.
The end of your first paragraph is contradicted by your second paragraph. "Now probably *range setup*" (not launch vehicle availability).
I don't see any contradiction. I don't think the mission is ready to fly. There has been no indication it will launch anytime soon. The current range issue is completely irrelevant in that case.
They've got not one but two falcons ready to go and queued up at 39A waiting for the pad to be ready. We know vandy has range issues. I don't think the vehicle is the long stick in this tent.
-
#174
by
gongora
on 08 Feb, 2017 01:32
-
Originally payload availability and FCC licensing, then the range closure, then FCC licensing, and now probably launch vehicle availability.
p.s. The "red tape" mentioned above was not SpaceX specific, and not long term. It actually wasn't red tape at all, but had to do with the western range setup.
The end of your first paragraph is contradicted by your second paragraph. "Now probably *range setup*" (not launch vehicle availability).
I don't see any contradiction. I don't think the mission is ready to fly. There has been no indication it will launch anytime soon. The current range issue is completely irrelevant in that case.
They've got not one but two falcons ready to go and queued up at 39A waiting for the pad to be ready. We know vandy has range issues. I don't think the vehicle is the long stick in this tent.
They have more payloads than launch vehicles, and will for at least the next year.
-
#175
by
WHAP
on 08 Feb, 2017 03:46
-
Originally payload availability and FCC licensing, then the range closure, then FCC licensing, and now probably launch vehicle availability.
p.s. The "red tape" mentioned above was not SpaceX specific, and not long term. It actually wasn't red tape at all, but had to do with the western range setup.
The end of your first paragraph is contradicted by your second paragraph. "Now probably *range setup*" (not launch vehicle availability).
I don't see any contradiction. I don't think the mission is ready to fly. There has been no indication it will launch anytime soon. The current range issue is completely irrelevant in that case.
They've got not one but two falcons ready to go and queued up at 39A waiting for the pad to be ready. We know vandy has range issues. I don't think the vehicle is the long stick in this tent.
We do not "know Vandy has range issues". There were no range issues affecting the Atlas launch when it was originally scheduled for January, nor is there a range issue affecting the March date. SpaceX may have issues with the range, but VAFB does not have range issues.
-
#176
by
manoweb
on 08 Feb, 2017 05:23
-
SpaceX may have issues with the range, but VAFB does not have range issues.
What kind of issues SpaceX has at Vandenberg? They launched recently, something went wrong in that occasion?
-
#177
by
Comga
on 08 Feb, 2017 06:23
-
I believe the answers to
SpaceX may have issues with the range, but VAFB does not have range issues.
What kind of issues SpaceX has at Vandenberg? They launched recently, something went wrong in that occasion?
As far as I have read, nothing went wrong with the Iridium launch.
The answer to all of these questions and speculations may be in L2. There is no mystery about why SpaceX is not launching next from Vandenberg.
-
#178
by
gongora
on 15 Feb, 2017 15:40
-
-
#179
by
old_sellsword
on 02 Mar, 2017 23:00
-
A MESSAGE FROM SPACEFLIGHT PRESIDENT CURT BLAKE ON THE FORMASAT-5/SHERPA LAUNCHOne of our biggest, and most valued, differentiators in the market is that Spaceflight is dedicated to providing our customers an array of launch options to meet their deployment needs. Never has this come into play more than it did these last several weeks.
Here’s the challenge: Getting to space is hard. All launch vehicles experience delays and failures – and this pain is felt by the entire launch industry – no one is spared. On the flipside, when launches happen (like many have recently), it’s cause for all to celebrate. Revolutionizing commercial space is hard, but it’s exactly what we all signed up to do.
We applaud the work that SpaceX has done, and is continuing to do on behalf of the industry. We couldn’t be more thrilled to see them solve some of the toughest challenges of our time and always look forward to working with them. However, they recently communicated their 2017 manifest and the impact on the Formosat-5 mission is significant. We learned our launch would occur potentially much later than expected. (As a secondary rideshare on this mission, our control of the schedule is far less than when we’re the primary like on our SSO-A dedicated mission later this year.)
Our response: Our job, first and foremost, is to satisfy our customers’ needs to get into space as quickly and cost-effectively as possible. While delays are inevitable in the launch business, we made the decision to rebook all our customers slated to launch on the FormoSat-5 mission.
The result: We found each of our customers an alternative launch that was within the same time frame. It took a huge effort, but within two weeks, the team hustled to have all customers who wanted to be rebooked confirmed on other launches!
This flexibility and access to other LVs, the standardization of technology, and the expertise of our team is indeed the “secret sauce” of Spaceflight. Because we work with many launch providers around the world, we can give our customers the most options to meet their needs. I am incredibly proud of our team. They worked tirelessly with all our launch partners to rebook our customers so quickly. Our customers can be sure that we will always go above and beyond to fulfill our commitment to get them to space.
Onward and upward,
Curt Blake
