Is this going into polar orbit? If not, launching from Vanderberg, couldn't they land the FS down range at the Cape instead of RTLS?
Your guess would be wrong.
Has the Jason-3 LV been delivered to Vandenberg yet?
@flatoday_jdean While awaiting EELV certification, SpaceX Falcon 9 this week won NASA certification to launch Jason-3 mission this summer from Vandenberg.https://www.twitter.com/flatoday_jdean/status/598908964689043456
Quote from: docmordrid on 05/14/2015 05:58 pm@flatoday_jdean While awaiting EELV certification, SpaceX Falcon 9 this week won NASA certification to launch Jason-3 mission this summer from Vandenberg.https://www.twitter.com/flatoday_jdean/status/598908964689043456Can someone please refresh my memory, is this Category 2 certification and is Jason-3 considered to be in the Class B payload class? For context: http://nodis3.gsfc.nasa.gov/NPD_attachments/AttachmentA_7C.pdf. Assuming it is Category 2, which of the two certification criteria were used (if anyone knows). Thanks!
Category 2 certification. Jason-3 should be Class C (Lifecycle cost < $250million). SpaceX used the 3 flight path but NASA needed additional data from at least 2 subsequent flights.
Major launch vehicle upgrades may require additional NASA technical penetration and/or flight demonstration
So theoretically, SpaceX is one flight five flights [EDIT: forgot that Dragon flights are not common configuration] short of being able to submit for Category 3 certification, using the Alternative 1 approach? That's assuming that the legs don't count as a different configuration (they shouldn't). I am less clear on whether the "Falcon 9 1.2" counts as a launch vehicle configuration common with current F9 1.1... any opinions? It would be a shame if Jason-3 was the only certified launch configuration and SpaceX had to start over again (although hopefully/presumably the process would not take as long this time if so).Quote from: deruch on 05/14/2015 10:16 pmCategory 2 certification. Jason-3 should be Class C (Lifecycle cost < $250million). SpaceX used the 3 flight path but NASA needed additional data from at least 2 subsequent flights.Interesting, where did you hear that? Any idea why they needed data from five flights instead of three? Was this because of the F9 1.0 -> F9 1.1 switcheroo? But based on Dragon not being a "common configuration" with a F9 with a fairing that seems unlikely...Sorry, I know this is a lot of questions to throw out, and not the best organized post.[EDIT] From the updated link (thanks!):QuoteMajor launch vehicle upgrades may require additional NASA technical penetration and/or flight demonstration Will be interesting to see how "major" F91.1->F91.2 is considered to be by NASA.
Yes, Category 2 certification. Jason-3 should be Class C (Lifecycle cost < $250million). SpaceX used the 3 flight path but NASA needed additional data from at least 2 subsequent flights.
Dragon flights are no more different from regular flights of v1.1 than, say, Atlas V 401 are from 501 flights.
Quote from: Robotbeat on 05/15/2015 02:32 amDragon flights are no more different from regular flights of v1.1 than, say, Atlas V 401 are from 501 flights.I think the confusion is that the USAF considers the fairing as part of the common vehicle configuration but NASA doesn't. So, for DoD certification CRS launches can't be counted but for NASA cert. they can be.
