SpaceX COTS Demo 1 Updates

[Jim]

I predict static fire will be sometime around Oct 25-28, safely before Shuttle takes the range and leaving plenty of time for Dragon hyper loading and final preps.  Could even be late next week at the earliest.

Why would range availability affect a static fire test? They aren't launching anything.

There are road blocks, RSS tests, comm, telemetry downlink etc provided by the range.

[CitabriaFlyer]

Question for Jim or whoever:  Why is the range so limited?  Why can't it support multiple launches a day from different boosters?  What could be done to make it function more like an airport with multiple launches per day using a variety of vehicles?

[Jim]

Question for Jim or whoever:  Why is the range so limited?  Why can't it support multiple launches a day from different boosters?  What could be done to make it function more like an airport with multiple launches per day using a variety of vehicles?

$

[mmeijeri]

HA! A new record for brevity!

[Jim]

The range is only staffed for 5/40 per week, with overtime and some pre/post shifting to over off hours and weekends.

Same goes for other resources, which were designed to support only one launch at a time, like comm lines, telemetry receivers and range control centers.

[mr. mark]

It's quite clear that NASA has to reshape their thinking for the 21st century and embrace a more commercial way of doing things. Can you imagine a store that could only run for 8 hours 5 days a week. Look at Spaceport America, they are planning multiple launches daily. I'm not stating Cape operations are as simple as theirs. What i am stating is that new ways need to be looked at to perform multiple launches on a given day.

[Jorge]

It's quite clear that NASA has to reshape their thinking for the 21st century and embrace a more commercial way of doing things. Can you imagine a store that could only run for 8 hours 5 days a week. Look at Spaceport America, they are planning multiple launches daily. I'm not stating Cape operations are as simple as theirs. What i am stating is that new ways need to be looked at to perform multiple launches on a given day.

NASA has nothing to do with the launch rate at Cape Canaveral. That is controlled by USAF 45th SW.

[Jim_LAX]

Mr. Mark has a valid and important point:  Passenger service on commercial airlines would be unthinkable with the launh rate currently supported by the cape.  Standardization of ground equipent and operating procedures and full staffing is needed to support takeoffs (and landings?) like any commercial airport.  As we approach this goal costs to launch and recover will drop steadily.

[Lars_J]

Expendable rocket launch operations are not comparable to airliner operations, and I don't think they'll ever will be.

Once we (hopefully) have true RLVs, *then * we can start questioning when the spaceport will be running like an airport.

[Jorge]

Mr. Mark has a valid and important point:  Passenger service on commercial airlines would be unthinkable with the launh rate currently supported by the cape.

My point is also valid and important: no matter how much people rag on NASA and no matter how much NASA itself is reformed, it will not affect the launch rate at the Cape one bit, because the USAF controls the Cape, not NASA.

[Robotbeat]

If the launch rate were increased, the increased number of range fees collected would probably allow the range resources to be expanded to handle the greater flight rate. Back in the Cold War, the Cape saw a much higher flight rate than today.

[Antares]

Jeez, folks, this is simple tax/spending policy.  Do you want to pay people to sit around and do nothing during the 90% of the year when there aren't multiple flights trying to use the same range?

Now, if there were a way to have them doing something needed when there's not a range glut, that is something that should be pursued.

[DigitalMan]

My point is also valid and important: no matter how much people rag on NASA and no matter how much NASA itself is reformed, it will not affect the launch rate at the Cape one bit, because the USAF controls the Cape, not NASA.

The FY2011 request included the following, did any of this make it into the authorization?  I don't recall seeing it.  All this probably needs its own thread.

21st Century Launch Complex: The President’s FY 2011 Budget seeks to modernize the
Kennedy Space Center and Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS), transforming them to
provide the capabilities this Nation’s 21st century space programs will need. The effort is
intended to augment NASA’s current and future operations to achieve safe, increased operational
efficiency and reduced launch costs for all customers (industry, NASA, national security, etc).

The goal of the enhanced complex is to facilitate multiple launches of different vehicle types
from different companies carrying both humans and cargo to space in a cost-effective and timely
manner. Other important projects include enhancements to the range, payload processing
capabilities and environmental clean up activities.

[spacetraveler]

The FY2011 request included the following, did any of this make it into the authorization?  I don't recall seeing it.

The bill includes $1.3 billion over the 3 years for the "NASA launch support and infrastructure modernization program."

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c111:1:./temp/~c111OjzdoI:e15069:

[Lars_J]

Almost all of that will probably go towards improving and/or modernizing existing assets, rather than increasing capacity to handle more launches. There does not seem to be any need for increased capacity currently.

I guess it is up to SpaceX to prove that more capacity is needed. 

[Jim]

Mr. Mark has a valid and important point:  Passenger service on commercial airlines would be unthinkable with the launh rate currently supported by the cape.  Standardization of ground equipent and operating procedures and full staffing is needed to support takeoffs (and landings?) like any commercial airport.  As we approach this goal costs to launch and recover will drop steadily.

It is fully staffed..... to support 8/40.  The flight rates don't justify anymore.

The range has standard operating procedure and equipment.  It is the launch vehicles that aren't.

[spacetraveler]

This flight has slipped to NET Nov 18th. Hope it can still go in Nov.

[aquarius]

If launch remains scheduled for Nov.18, engineers plan to roll the Falcon 9 rocket to the launch pad for a preflight engine firing Nov.13.

http://www.spaceflightnow.com/falcon9/002/101026launchdate/

[KSC Sage]

If launch remains scheduled for Nov.18, engineers plan to roll the Falcon 9 rocket to the launch pad for a preflight engine firing Nov.13.

http://www.spaceflightnow.com/falcon9/002/101026launchdate/

Launch window is from 0855 to 1205 EST.

[corrodedNut]

SpaceX: With every launch new (regulatory) discoveries are made!

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/asd/2010/10/28/06.xml&headline=SpaceX%20Dragon%20Cleared%20For%20Launch&channel=space