-
#160
by
gongora
on 07 Dec, 2016 18:31
-
Planetary Society: Ground finale? Deployment test moves LightSail 2 closer to handoffThe Planetary Society's LightSail 2 spacecraft completed what may have been its final end-to-end systems test today here at Cal Poly San Luis Obispo...
LightSail 2 is nearly ready to be integrated with its P-POD, the spring-loaded box that will carry it to space. After integration takes place, the loaded P-POD will be shipped to the Air Force Research Laboratory in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Shipping may occur in January. At AFRL, LightSail's P-POD will be installed inside Prox-1, a Georgia Tech-built SmallSat that will hitch a ride to orbit aboard the second flight of SpaceX's new Falcon Heavy rocket.
-
#161
by
gongora
on 25 Jan, 2017 21:35
-
-
#162
by
butters
on 09 Mar, 2017 23:49
-
Is this mission still okay following the last-minute issues with the 2017 authorization bill?
It seemed that the STP program was flagged as one of the concerns for the WH/DOJ?
-
#163
by
tater
on 10 Mar, 2017 01:31
-
-
#164
by
Jim_LAX
on 10 Mar, 2017 16:11
-
Quote from Shotwell at Satelite 2017 on March 8th:
Cape Canaveral’s Space Launch Complex-40 should be operational again this summer.
-
#165
by
woods170
on 10 Mar, 2017 20:19
-
Quote from Shotwell at Satelite 2017 on March 8th:
Cape Canaveral’s Space Launch Complex-40 should be operational again this summer.
August was publically mentioned by SpaceX. After that, SpaceX will need at least 60 days to modify the current LC-39A reaction frame to host the additional TSM's and holddown posts needed for FH. That period is also from public SpaceX statements.
So, assuming LC-40 is back in action this August, and assuming the 60-day modification period goes off without a hitch, it will be NET november 2017 for first FH launch attempt.
But that is assuming that the notorious SpaceX time dilation factor does not rear it's ugly head. If it does (like it almost always does) we could be looking at first FH launch attempt somewhere in Q1 of 2018.
-
#166
by
DOCinCT
on 10 Mar, 2017 21:14
-
Quote from Shotwell at Satelite 2017 on March 8th:
Cape Canaveral’s Space Launch Complex-40 should be operational again this summer.
....After that, SpaceX will need at least 60 days to modify the current LC-39A reaction frame to host the additional TSM's and holddown posts needed for FH. That period is also from public SpaceX statements.
So, assuming LC-40 is back in action this August, and assuming the 60-day modification period goes off without a hitch, ....
Do you have some references for that statement?
-
#167
by
old_sellsword
on 10 Mar, 2017 21:20
-
Quote from Shotwell at Satelite 2017 on March 8th:
Cape Canaveral’s Space Launch Complex-40 should be operational again this summer.
....After that, SpaceX will need at least 60 days to modify the current LC-39A reaction frame to host the additional TSM's and holddown posts needed for FH. That period is also from public SpaceX statements.
So, assuming LC-40 is back in action this August, and assuming the 60-day modification period goes off without a hitch, ....
Do you have some references for that statement?
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/03/spacex-falcon-9-echostar-23-slc-40-return/It was also noted that SpaceX is working a plan that involves returning operations to SLC-40 before then working on 39A to prepare it for the maiden launch of the Falcon Heavy rocket.
This work will take “at least 60 days” to complete, focusing on the 39A TEL table – which is currently specific to the single core Falcon 9 – and Tail Service Masts (TSM).
-
#168
by
Pete
on 11 Mar, 2017 05:58
-
...So, assuming LC-40 is back in action this August, and assuming the 60-day modification period goes off without a hitch, it will be NET november 2018 for first FH launch attempt.
But that is assuming that the notorious SpaceX time dilation factor does not rear it's ugly head.
...
One would have to look hard to find a time dilation factor as bad as yours.
"this August" + 60 days == NET November 2018?
-
#169
by
ugordan
on 11 Mar, 2017 08:13
-
...So, assuming LC-40 is back in action this August, and assuming the 60-day modification period goes off without a hitch, it will be NET november 2018 for first FH launch attempt.
But that is assuming that the notorious SpaceX time dilation factor does not rear it's ugly head.
...
One would have to look hard to find a time dilation factor as bad as yours.
"this August" + 60 days == NET November 2018?
Well, he did get the year right at least...
-
#170
by
woods170
on 11 Mar, 2017 14:50
-
...So, assuming LC-40 is back in action this August, and assuming the 60-day modification period goes off without a hitch, it will be NET november 2018 for first FH launch attempt.
But that is assuming that the notorious SpaceX time dilation factor does not rear it's ugly head.
...
One would have to look hard to find a time dilation factor as bad as yours.
"this August" + 60 days == NET November 2018?
Good catch. Corrected in the original post. And thanks for pointing out.
-
#171
by
sdsds
on 21 Mar, 2017 19:44
-
Although the launcher isn't explicitly mentioned, this article belongs here. (Yes?)
https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?feature=6784Last month, the space agency's next-generation atomic clock was joined to the spacecraft that will take it into orbit in late 2017.
That instrument, the Deep Space Atomic Clock was developed by NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California. On Feb. 17, JPL engineers monitored integration of the clock on to the Surrey Orbital Test Bed spacecraft at Surrey Satellite Technology in Englewood, Colorado.
-
#172
by
gongora
on 25 May, 2017 04:42
-
A recent presentation on the Cosmic-2 payload by Wei Xia-Serafino/NOAA. PDF file is attached below. There is an updated graphic of the STP-2 payload stack, and much information/pictures on Cosmic-2 of course.
-
#173
by
Formica
on 02 Jul, 2017 02:41
-
What is the purpose of the 5 tonnes of ballast on this mission? Is it simply to ensure that FH is capable of meeting the EELV New Entrant specifications?
-
#174
by
woods170
on 02 Jul, 2017 11:50
-
What is the purpose of the 5 tonnes of ballast on this mission? Is it simply to ensure that FH is capable of meeting the EELV New Entrant specifications?
No. The launcher is too powerfull for just the payload alone. It requires additional payload mass (provided by means of ballast) to prevent over-performance.
-
#175
by
Pete
on 02 Jul, 2017 12:38
-
About the date for this mission, it reminds me of a movie .
"Mission Impossible"? no, that's not it
.
"Back to the Future"? closer
.
"Days of our Lives"? almost
.
I have it.. Annie, singing "Tomorrow, Tomorrow, i love ya, your only a day away"
-
#176
by
vaporcobra
on 21 Jul, 2017 12:57
-
-
#177
by
Star One
on 07 Aug, 2017 19:00
-
-
#178
by
gongora
on 07 Aug, 2017 20:26
-
I'm not going to believe any dates on this one yet, let's see how the first couple flights go.
-
#179
by
Star One
on 07 Aug, 2017 20:32
-
I'm not going to believe any dates on this one yet, let's see how the first couple flights go.
Isn't this the second FH flight.