SpaceX Falcon 9 v1.1 - SES-8 - DISCUSSION THREAD

[docmordrid]

Question: are there any secondary payloads other than the CHIRP sensor? 

Tried a search & came up empty.

[ww2planes1]

Question: are there any secondary payloads other than the CHIRP sensor? 

Tried a search & came up empty.

CHIRP launched on SES-2 back in 2011: http://www.orbital.com/SatellitesSpace/Communications/SES/ 
I haven't seen anything about a secondary payload on SES-8.

[beancounter]

Question: are there any secondary payloads other than the CHIRP sensor? 

Tried a search & came up empty.

CHIRP launched on SES-2 back in 2011: http://www.orbital.com/SatellitesSpace/Communications/SES/ 
I haven't seen anything about a secondary payload on SES-8.

No secondaries.  This is an SES-only flight and SpaceX have promised the total resources of the launch single satellite.

[Galactic Penguin SST]

Question: are there any secondary payloads other than the CHIRP sensor? 

Tried a search & came up empty.

CHIRP launched on SES-2 back in 2011: http://www.orbital.com/SatellitesSpace/Communications/SES/ 
I haven't seen anything about a secondary payload on SES-8.

No secondaries.  This is an SES-only flight and SpaceX have promised the total resources of the launch single satellite.

GTO/GEO bound launches rarely get small secondary payloads - the only cases I can remember are a handful of Ariane and H-II series launches.

[ChefPat]

Our forum's padrat reports that the new erector at SLC-40 was vertical for the first time yesterday:

Padrat ‏@LH2Padrat
Here's some progress for ya. T/E vertical for the first time pic.twitter.com/dbceisJpIk

It looks shorter. It might be how it's oriented, but it appears to have fewer vertical segments than the Vandenberg T/E.

[Lars_J]

Our forum's padrat reports that the new erector at SLC-40 was vertical for the first time yesterday:

Padrat ‏@LH2Padrat
Here's some progress for ya. T/E vertical for the first time pic.twitter.com/dbceisJpIk

It looks shorter. It might be how it's oriented, but it appears to have fewer vertical segments than the Vandenberg T/E.

Yes, the top piece appears to be missing. The old T/E and the VAFB one both seem modular (top piece replaceable), so presumably this one is too. There could be a separate Dragon compatible top piece, and a different one for the 5.2m fairing.

[douglas100]

Also not as broad and with a different hydraulic set up from the Vandenberg T/E.

[russianhalo117]

Also not as broad and with a different hydraulic set up from the Vandenberg T/E.

It is for F9R only NOT F9H-R as the base is not wide enough for three first stage cores.

[kevin-rf]

Uuum... without some major concrete work, the current pad can not accommodate 3 cores, so why is it surprising the T/E can not support three cores?

I suspect that Texas and the additional fourth pad Mr. Musk recently alluded to will be for the heavy.

[guckyfan]

Uuum... without some major concrete work, the current pad can not accommodate 3 cores, so why is it surprising the T/E can not support three cores?

I suspect that Texas and the additional fourth pad Mr. Musk recently alluded to will be for the heavy.

See this thread. The topic is OT here.

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=32074.msg1110524#msg1110524

It seems they want to modify the pad for FH.

[kevin-rf]

Uuum... without some major concrete work, the current pad can not accommodate 3 cores, so why is it surprising the T/E can not support three cores?

See this thread. The topic is OT here.

The new T/E needed for this mission not being able to support three cores, and countering the implications up thread that SpaceX did the T/E wrong because it does not support three cores is OT?

More interesting to me is this is first time it has been raised. Since the original plan to have had SES-8 already have flown, in support of this mission I am kinda surprised it was not raised for the first time months ago.

[guckyfan]

The new T/E needed for this mission not being able to support three cores, and countering the implications up thread that SpaceX did the T/E wrong because it does not support three cores is OT?

Certainly, in the SES-8 thread.

[Wetmelon]

So, slipped to Nov 22.  That's a full month out from today.  Any speculations? :O

[kevin-rf]

I wonder if they fell behind on getting the GSE ready... It is either that, or they are still analyzing the relight data.

[beancounter]

I wonder if they fell behind on getting the GSE ready... It is either that, or they are still analyzing the relight data.

I think Shotwell pretty much discounted that theory.  IIRC said it wasn't something unexpected, they had a fix and were implementing it.  Of course, I may have misinterpreted that. 

[dcporter]

I wonder if they fell behind on getting the GSE ready... It is either that, or they are still analyzing the relight data.

I think Shotwell pretty much discounted that theory.  IIRC said it wasn't something unexpected, they had a fix and were implementing it.  Of course, I may have misinterpreted that. 

Or she may have been optimistic.

[Norm38]

Why does the interstage have RCS thrusters if they're not doing a recovery on this flight?  And why install the hardware?
Are they not connected, just the housing?  Or are they doing maneuvering tests but not a burn?

[Robotbeat]

They're cold-gas thrusters. They're super cheap. Probably just aluminum.

[Lars_J]

Why does the interstage have RCS thrusters if they're not doing a recovery on this flight?  And why install the hardware?
Are they not connected, just the housing?  Or are they doing maneuvering tests but not a burn?

It is simpler to just have one model with as much in common as possible - one interstage model to build. Just like the CASSIOPE F9 had bottom leg joints despite not having any legs attached.

And they are probably doing some tests post-step, the stage coasts for a while before it hits the atmosphere.

[Zardar]

Why does the interstage have RCS thrusters if they're not doing a recovery on this flight?  And why install the hardware?
Are they not connected, just the housing?  Or are they doing maneuvering tests but not a burn?

It is simpler to just have one model with as much in common as possible - one interstage model to build. Just like the CASSIOPE F9 had bottom leg joints despite not having any legs attached.

And they are probably doing some tests post-step, the stage coasts for a while before it hits the atmosphere.

Well, they are not supposed to be attempting re-entry on the SES flight since they have promised 100% stage performance to the customer, but since you can't risk running the engines dry for MECO, perhaps they will have enough dregs in the tanks (and put just enough cold-gas in the RCS) to align and settle the stage for a brief re-light of the main engines as an engineering test.