SpaceX COTS Demo 2/3 Updates (THREAD 2)

[Comga]

Any idea when we'll see a launch date set for COTS2/3?

Over in the ISS section anik has removed the SpaceX and Orbital flights from his calendar saying that the dates are too "fluid".  The last target date I saw and believed was around the end of January, but that's unattirbuted and unreliable.

A program with which I am associated has hardware that is nominally planed for a Dragon flight to the ISS in 2014.  The team is "less optimistic about the planned SpaceX launch date."  They said the COTS-2/3 flight "look(s) like they are going to slip into February of 2012." and that "NASA is compressing the launch schedule to ISS to try and keep the future dates."

We will jsut have to wait and see.

[Rocket Guy]

Several NASA sources show January 12 as the current NET date (not just that MSDB website). But it could easily move again.

[Lars_J]

Once the next ISS crew arrives the schedule should solidify, I imagine.

[Orbiter]

Several NASA sources show January 12 as the current NET date (not just that MSDB website). But it could easily move again.

So I take it a 2011 launch is now out the window?

If we're talking mid to late January 2012, are we talking a day launch or a night launch?

Orbiter

[Rocket Guy]

They aren't launching before Soyuz does, as Lars noted, and that launch is December 21. December 19 was just a planning date. Both Musk and Bowersox said a couple of months ago January was the real NET.

[mr. mark]

Will NASA be releasing a patch for this mission. If so i'd really like to get one.

[Jason1701]

For SpaceX's other flights, the patch has been released just a few days before launch.

[mr. mark]

A new picture of COTS 2/3 Dragon undergoing testing at Pad 40.

[jabe]

interesting comment from twitter

SpaceX says they will fly COTS 2 on 1/7/2012

and

Complex 39A is possible SpaceX Falcon 9 crew lunch site - per Henderson (SpaceX)

edit:henderson is talking at a museum I guess

Listening to Scott Henderson (SpaceX) presentation at the USAF Museum.

[go4mars]

Complex 39A is possible SpaceX Falcon 9 crew lunch site - per Henderson (SpaceX)

A fine enough place for the crew to eat lunch I suppose... 

I assume he means launch.   Great!  I guess 2 pads is easier logistically than 2 integration hangars at pad 40.  Unless SpaceX still might to do 2 hangars at 40 in addition to 39A.  The crewy one at 39A, FH unmanned and regular F9 (unmanned) at 40.  Might be that 40 is just plain lacking something required for crew, and that building an access tower (and whatever else is needed) would place the current manifest at excessive risk.  Hence a new pad for crew. 

Since there seems to be no rush on crew capability from a customer stand-point, I wonder if they'll take their time and plan-in elements that grasshopper (boostback reusable stages) would require.  Like a landing pad and a reverse-strongback on wheels instead of rails. 

[Antares]

I don't think the second customer would want their launcher that close in an unhardened building anyway.

[go4mars]

I don't think the second customer would want their launcher that close in an unhardened building anyway.

Might only need to harden the area of the building where the payload is during the other rocket's launch.  I know Murphy well, and he does seem to claim a lot of undue victories with his much-accursed law, but some statistics can be drawn around the odds of something landing perfectly to smite the other mission.  I'm sure insurance types could quote a rate...

[Ben the Space Brit]

A new picture of COTS 2/3 Dragon undergoing testing at Pad 40.

NASA has red tags and it appears that SpaceX has pink tags.

Interesting news about 39A.  Does this mean both LC-39 pads are going to be made launcher-agnostic 'clean' pads?

[MikeAtkinson]

Complex 39A is possible SpaceX Falcon 9 crew lunch site - per Henderson (SpaceX)

Using the word possible, means that nothing is decided, they are probably just evaluating Complex 39A. There is no way of knowing whether that is:
 - just due dilligence (we think we have a better option, but lets investigate Complex 39A just to make sure),
 - or whether it is their preferred option (Complex 39A looks good but we haven't finished our investigation yet)
 - or whether Complex 39A has been chosen (we want to go with Complex 39A, but we haven't signed any contracts yet)

[Jim]

I don't think the second customer would want their launcher that close in an unhardened building anyway.

Might only need to harden the area of the building where the payload is during the other rocket's launch.  I know Murphy well, and he does seem to claim a lot of undue victories with his much-accursed law, but some statistics can be drawn around the odds of something landing perfectly to smite the other mission.  I'm sure insurance types could quote a rate...

That doesn't help.  one side will still be open.  Statistics would say don't have another spacecraft there.

[Nate_Trost]

Are they going to static fire the F9 at the pad again, or are they finally done with that?

[archangel689]

I wonder how much infrastructure they'll be able to reuse or sell for scrap at Complex 39A    I also wonder if they'll build the hanger falcon heavy sized.

[Lars_J]

I suspect the LC-39 comments are more about "if you (NASA) want it, and give us enough $$$ we'll consider it", and to not wanting to ruffle local political feathers.

As for not having spacecraft at the current launch site while another rocket is blasting off - Didn't SpaceX sign an agreement to use an additional facility on CCAFS grounds? It seems like that might be a good place for prep payloads, and then bring them to the pad integration building when the last mission has departed.

[Chris Bergin]

This is about C2/C3, which is not flying from Complex 39, thus this is all off topic.

[PahTo]

Speaking of, and sorry if I've missed it, but has the combined mission (effectively making it an operational mission to ISS with actual deliverables) been approved?  By NASA?  By RosCosmos?  What's the latest expected launch date per SpaceX?
Thanks!