-
#240
by
alexw
on 22 Jan, 2011 11:19
-
EDIT: to offer congratulations to the Delta technical and engineering teams! Successfully launching the first ever heavy from the west coast shows how solidly they understand their vehicle and total launch system. Not to say Atlas is any less; just saying thanks to Delta for their competency today.
Hear, hear. Not a great fan of Delta IV Heavy, but they do deserve credit for making it work, work right first time when it absolutely had to, and do so at the beleaguered slick-6.
Now let's hope that whatever replaces the FIA that Boeing botched so badly for high-resolution work is well-managed, 'cause I guess we're all outta Keyholes.
-Alex
-
#241
by
Jim
on 22 Jan, 2011 12:34
-
HA! Check out the "OH NO!" during ignition.
Video isn't available any more. Did anyone has copy?? PM me.
I was a little surprised that it was up for as long as it was. "Do we have to go back to work? Let's drink some wine!" I think the launch was awesome too, but if you are going to be ummm, less than tip-top professional, don't make a movie as you do it and then post it on YouTube...
Considering the sensitive nature of the payload, my jaw dropped that someone would actually make a video like that. Much less post it. May not have been the actual control room and only an outside group that was monitoring the launch, but still they had insight ... I only hope someone doesn't get taken to woodshed too badly over it.
It was the NASA MDC, it had no data, no more than us
-
#242
by
kevin-rf
on 22 Jan, 2011 20:07
-
Now let's hope that whatever replaces the FIA that Boeing botched so badly for high-resolution work is well-managed, 'cause I guess we're all outta Keyholes.
It is interesting that in Chris's write-up this launch went from an Atlas-501 to a Delta IV Heavy. I assume this is part of the FIA botch. Makes one wonder if what ever replaces the last of the Keyholes will even require a West Coast Heavy. Sounds like FIA payloads where lighter.
Has the rumor mill turned out if NRO L-37 will fly from the East or West Coast.
-
#243
by
William Graham
on 22 Jan, 2011 20:28
-
Now let's hope that whatever replaces the FIA that Boeing botched so badly for high-resolution work is well-managed, 'cause I guess we're all outta Keyholes.
The rumours from last year are that the KH-11 will be put back into production, although there is some political discussion over the need for high-res imaging. I don't know what the outcome of the debate was.
-
#244
by
Downix
on 22 Jan, 2011 20:54
-
Now let's hope that whatever replaces the FIA that Boeing botched so badly for high-resolution work is well-managed, 'cause I guess we're all outta Keyholes.
The rumours from last year are that the KH-11 will be put back into production, although there is some political discussion over the need for high-res imaging. I don't know what the outcome of the debate was.
Why the 11 and not the 12?
-
#245
by
alexw
on 22 Jan, 2011 21:09
-
Now let's hope that whatever replaces the FIA that Boeing botched so badly for high-resolution work is well-managed, 'cause I guess we're all outta Keyholes.
The rumours from last year are that the KH-11 will be put back into production, although there is some political discussion over the need for high-res imaging. I don't know what the outcome of the debate was.
Why the 11 and not the 12?
Blackstar can chime in here (hey! we're actually /not/ talking about launch vehicles!), but I have the impression that KH-11 is often used as a shorthand for the entire post-MOL Keyhole fleet. Presumably they've gone through a lot of sensor changes over the past four decades as CCDs have change immensely, plus avionics, plus taking advantage of modern TDRS, etc., even if the basic optical chassis and propulsion has remained similar. I'm not sure what difference -12 really indicates as a particular subclass within a larger family of multiple variants.
GW, where did you hear those rumors? One would think it wouldn't be easy to put the Keyholes back into full production, having been so long since the major components were manufactured and tooling perhaps gone. The story of the resurrection of NROL-49 will be interesting to read (hiring folks out of retirement?) in, oh, 30 years. Presumably, would also mean a major commitment to SLC-6 DIVH. Perhaps we'll be able to tell by the order book.
-Alex
-
#246
by
William Graham
on 22 Jan, 2011 22:21
-
Why the 11 and not the 12?
Because there is no such thing. To cut a long story short, "KH-12" is not a real designation, but an unofficial one applied to Block III and IV KH-11 satellites.
GW, where did you hear those rumors? One would think it wouldn't be easy to put the Keyholes back into full production, having been so long since the major components were manufactured and tooling perhaps gone. The story of the resurrection of NROL-49 will be interesting to read (hiring folks out of retirement?) in, oh, 30 years. Presumably, would also mean a major commitment to SLC-6 DIVH. Perhaps we'll be able to tell by the order book.
Sorry, it was 2009, not last year. The new KH-11s were mentioned in one of Blackstar's articles at TSR:
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1400/1 There were also a few articles on other websites, but I can't remember where.
-
#247
by
mr. mark
on 22 Jan, 2011 23:15
-
Just caught the video and wow the rocket was on fire, could have been worse. I just find it funny that the Spacex Falcon 9 launch gets 5 pages about a fuel hose leak and this gets nearly a mention when the dang rocket is on fire.
-
#248
by
Nick L.
on 23 Jan, 2011 00:11
-
Just caught the video and wow the rocket was on fire, could have been worse. I just find it funny that the Spacex Falcon 9 launch gets 5 pages about a fuel hose leak and this gets nearly a mention when the dang rocket is on fire.
Except the rocket is designed to handle being on fire.
(And by my reckoning there has been at least five pages, not continuously though, of discussions about this.)
-
#249
by
Jim
on 23 Jan, 2011 00:16
-
No TDRSS used, see SDS
-
#250
by
Jim
on 23 Jan, 2011 00:20
-
Just caught the video and wow the rocket was on fire, could have been worse. I just find it funny that the Spacex Falcon 9 launch gets 5 pages about a fuel hose leak and this gets nearly a mention when the dang rocket is on fire.
More Spacex amazing people snarky comments
D-IV and H2 fires have been known since static firings at Stennis and CCAFS
-
#251
by
mr. mark
on 23 Jan, 2011 00:52
-
Yes, It's all a plot...not sure what to make of your comment. Please, I'm not a Spacex fan boy and while I do support both Spacex and ULA as well as all launch companies, it's unfair to single me out for just observing something.
-
#252
by
Lars_J
on 23 Jan, 2011 01:26
-
Just caught the video and wow the rocket was on fire, could have been worse. I just find it funny that the Spacex Falcon 9 launch gets 5 pages about a fuel hose leak and this gets nearly a mention when the dang rocket is on fire.
More Spacex amazing people snarky comments
D-IV and H2 fires have been known since static firings at Stennis and CCAFS
Yes, but it seemed like ULA had gotten the issue under more control since the first heavy launch. (the latter ones having far less flames and insulation charring)
Presumably the dispersion of H2 had been addressed by pad mods (?, correct me if I am wrong here), so I am surprised that ULA did not apply the lessons learned to this pad/launch.
-
#253
by
Antares
on 23 Jan, 2011 03:32
-
Interesting parallel: data vs video in public perception of rockets vs engineering reality and data vs tv news in politics vs reality.
-
#254
by
Lars_J
on 23 Jan, 2011 04:52
-
By all means, Antares, if you have some data on this subject, feel free to share it.
-
#255
by
Antares
on 23 Jan, 2011 18:12
-
It's just that people conjecture based on what we see on the internet and TV when in reality we have no clue what is in the actual telemetry. Worse, we don't just conjecture, we conclude. When it comes to rockets, everything but Shuttle is eye-tar and proprietary and thus couldn't be shared even if one had access to proof of what is really going on.
-
#256
by
mr. mark
on 23 Jan, 2011 18:48
-
Please don't scold me for this but, if you want to human rate a launcher such as the Delta IV Heavy the last thing you want to see is the rocket on fire at launch no matter what the reason or excuse. It's just not a seling point visually, especially to a public that is evenly split on HSF and is looking for budget cuts. So I agree that public perception versus data is far apart.
-
#257
by
Downix
on 23 Jan, 2011 18:57
-
Please don't scold me for this but, if you want to human rate a launcher such as the Delta IV Heavy the last thing you want to see is the rocket on fire at launch no matter what the reason or excuse. It's just not a seling point visually, especially to a public that is evenly split on HSF and is looking for budget cuts. So I agree that public perception versus data is far apart.
Two of the changes for man-rating would eliminate this
-
#258
by
Lars_J
on 23 Jan, 2011 19:01
-
It's just that people conjecture based on what we see on the internet and TV when in reality we have no clue what is in the actual telemetry. Worse, we don't just conjecture, we conclude. When it comes to rockets, everything but Shuttle is eye-tar and proprietary and thus couldn't be shared even if one had access to proof of what is really going on.
I agree, and that applies to us all when we comment on things that we don't have hard data on ourselves. But hey, this is an open internet forum, so conjecture (and many erroneous conclusions) are par for the course. And to be expected, at least in the non-L2 areas.
Just one addendum... videos/photos are data elements as well. Even if they have to be evaluated in their proper context to be able to draw accurate conclusions from them. But they are a piece of the puzzle, and the most accessible piece for us outside observers. And as far as my point of it "applying to everyone", we have on these forums a few people with access to ULA data that have not been shy about drawing conclusions about launches from other commercial (& foreign) providers based on just visual data.
-
#259
by
Jim
on 23 Jan, 2011 19:39
-
It's just that people conjecture based on what we see on the internet and TV when in reality we have no clue what is in the actual telemetry. Worse, we don't just conjecture, we conclude. When it comes to rockets, everything but Shuttle is eye-tar and proprietary and thus couldn't be shared even if one had access to proof of what is really going on.
I agree, and that applies to us all when we comment on things that we don't have hard data on ourselves. But hey, this is an open internet forum, so conjecture (and many erroneous conclusions) are par for the course. And to be expected, at least in the non-L2 areas.
Just one addendum... videos/photos are data elements as well. Even if they have to be evaluated in their proper context to be able to draw accurate conclusions from them. But they are a piece of the puzzle, and the most accessible piece for us outside observers. And as far as my point of it "applying to everyone", we have on these forums a few people with access to ULA data that have not been shy about drawing conclusions about launches from other commercial (& foreign) providers based on just visual data.
Those that have access to ULA data, have access to Spacex's too