I believe the Airforce would want to preserve the first reused hardware ever flown on a DoD mission instead of reusing it; therefore, it’s more likely imo that the side boosters are put on display at the Cape than reused for a future mission.
Quote from: Star One on 06/25/2019 08:13 amQuote from: HeartofGold2030 on 06/25/2019 08:00 amQuote from: eeergo on 06/25/2019 07:55 amQuote from: Draggendrop on 06/25/2019 07:48 am[They caught the fairing!]Had they succeeded in avoiding that last-second issue with the center core, this launch would have meant the world's most powerful rocket in service to be recovered for reuse! Extraordinary every time I stop to reflect about it.None of this rocket is getting reused, the next launch is a classified mission for the airforce in over a years time and will require a clean sheet booster.Is that an NRO mission?AFSC-152 for the Airforce Space Command, it’s a direct to GEO mission.
Quote from: HeartofGold2030 on 06/25/2019 08:00 amQuote from: eeergo on 06/25/2019 07:55 amQuote from: Draggendrop on 06/25/2019 07:48 am[They caught the fairing!]Had they succeeded in avoiding that last-second issue with the center core, this launch would have meant the world's most powerful rocket in service to be recovered for reuse! Extraordinary every time I stop to reflect about it.None of this rocket is getting reused, the next launch is a classified mission for the airforce in over a years time and will require a clean sheet booster.Is that an NRO mission?
Quote from: eeergo on 06/25/2019 07:55 amQuote from: Draggendrop on 06/25/2019 07:48 am[They caught the fairing!]Had they succeeded in avoiding that last-second issue with the center core, this launch would have meant the world's most powerful rocket in service to be recovered for reuse! Extraordinary every time I stop to reflect about it.None of this rocket is getting reused, the next launch is a classified mission for the airforce in over a years time and will require a clean sheet booster.
Quote from: Draggendrop on 06/25/2019 07:48 am[They caught the fairing!]Had they succeeded in avoiding that last-second issue with the center core, this launch would have meant the world's most powerful rocket in service to be recovered for reuse! Extraordinary every time I stop to reflect about it.
[They caught the fairing!]
Quote from: Lars-J on 06/25/2019 06:48 amQuote from: catdlr on 06/25/2019 06:44 amLook to me that the first stage started to spin wildly on the leftmost monitor. Guessing one of the Grid fines did not deploy and went wild.Doubtful, IMO. If your theory was correct, then it would never have made it as close to landing as it did. Understand. Just a guess based on this video.
Quote from: catdlr on 06/25/2019 06:44 amLook to me that the first stage started to spin wildly on the leftmost monitor. Guessing one of the Grid fines did not deploy and went wild.Doubtful, IMO. If your theory was correct, then it would never have made it as close to landing as it did.
Look to me that the first stage started to spin wildly on the leftmost monitor. Guessing one of the Grid fines did not deploy and went wild.
Some weird lighting effect!
Quote from: Steven Pietrobon on 06/25/2019 09:52 amSome weird lighting effect!Thrusters firing to settle propellant.
Quote from: ugordan on 06/25/2019 10:01 amQuote from: Steven Pietrobon on 06/25/2019 09:52 amSome weird lighting effect!Thrusters firing to settle propellant.https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=48325.0;attach=1566541;imageAre you certain it's just ullage?
I understand that there is an MVac chill down prior to first ignition. Does that chill down happen prior to later ignition s as well? If so then what happens to the propellant used for cooling?
AFSC-152 for the Airforce Space Command, it’s a direct to GEO mission.
Quote from: Asteroza on 06/25/2019 07:03 amHard to tell, but did all 4 legs deploy properly? I could see it aborting if a leg didn't come down and lock.We're going to have to see. Could be a throttle issue, could be legs, could be a sensor issue. Most likely cause is the hot entry, but I don't think we are going to hear anything more until Elon tweets
Hard to tell, but did all 4 legs deploy properly? I could see it aborting if a leg didn't come down and lock.
Quote from: CorvusCorax on 06/25/2019 07:12 amQuote from: Asteroza on 06/25/2019 07:03 amHard to tell, but did all 4 legs deploy properly? I could see it aborting if a leg didn't come down and lock.We're going to have to see. Could be a throttle issue, could be legs, could be a sensor issue. Most likely cause is the hot entry, but I don't think we are going to hear anything more until Elon tweets If it wasn't a deliberate evasive burn due to too much vertical velocity (it didn't really look to me that it was going to lawn-dart OCISLY, though), I'm wondering if it was a center engine gimbal failure.
Quote from: whitelancer64 on 06/24/2019 10:39 pmIs SpaceX still putting tail numbers on each booster? Is soot obscuring them or am I looking in the wrong place?They're little numbers below the grid fins. I haven't seen a picture from today that is clear enough to read them.
Is SpaceX still putting tail numbers on each booster? Is soot obscuring them or am I looking in the wrong place?
Quote from: gongora on 06/24/2019 10:58 pmQuote from: whitelancer64 on 06/24/2019 10:39 pmIs SpaceX still putting tail numbers on each booster? Is soot obscuring them or am I looking in the wrong place?They're little numbers below the grid fins. I haven't seen a picture from today that is clear enough to read them.The answer to this is on L2Also, for the next FH mission (the AFSPC 52) I would expect double side booster droneship landing and center core expended, pretty much what they initially planned for this mission before dropping the second stage deorbit burn.
Also, for the next FH mission (the AFSPC 52) I would expect double side booster droneship landing and center core expended, pretty much what they initially planned for this mission before dropping the second stage deorbit burn.
Quote from: Alexphysics on 06/25/2019 12:36 pmQuote from: gongora on 06/24/2019 10:58 pmQuote from: whitelancer64 on 06/24/2019 10:39 pmIs SpaceX still putting tail numbers on each booster? Is soot obscuring them or am I looking in the wrong place?They're little numbers below the grid fins. I haven't seen a picture from today that is clear enough to read them.The answer to this is on L2Also, for the next FH mission (the AFSPC 52) I would expect double side booster droneship landing and center core expended, pretty much what they initially planned for this mission before dropping the second stage deorbit burn.I'm not sure if the booster numbers really are L2-only content, even if the many beautiful high-res photos there certainly are. The side booster positions were assigned identical to the Arabsat-6A mission, with B1052 on the west side on the pad (facing the FSS) and B0153 on the east.Regarding AFSPC-52, the target transfer orbit (185x35188km with a 27° inclination) is nearly the same as Arabsat-6A and the satellite even weighs a bit less, so I'd expect a very similar flight profile.
Quote from: Alexphysics on 06/25/2019 12:36 pmAlso, for the next FH mission (the AFSPC 52) I would expect double side booster droneship landing and center core expended, pretty much what they initially planned for this mission before dropping the second stage deorbit burn.Had this been discussed publicly before? I might have just forgotten seeing it, but I didn't remember this mission being planned to expend the center. (Obviously, this is not a very searchable question)
Quote from: codav on 06/25/2019 01:41 pmQuote from: Alexphysics on 06/25/2019 12:36 pmQuote from: gongora on 06/24/2019 10:58 pmQuote from: whitelancer64 on 06/24/2019 10:39 pmIs SpaceX still putting tail numbers on each booster? Is soot obscuring them or am I looking in the wrong place?They're little numbers below the grid fins. I haven't seen a picture from today that is clear enough to read them.The answer to this is on L2Also, for the next FH mission (the AFSPC 52) I would expect double side booster droneship landing and center core expended, pretty much what they initially planned for this mission before dropping the second stage deorbit burn.I'm not sure if the booster numbers really are L2-only content, even if the many beautiful high-res photos there certainly are. The side booster positions were assigned identical to the Arabsat-6A mission, with B1052 on the west side on the pad (facing the FSS) and B0153 on the east.Regarding AFSPC-52, the target transfer orbit (185x35188km with a 27° inclination) is nearly the same as Arabsat-6A and the satellite even weighs a bit less, so I'd expect a very similar flight profile.Quote from: Prettz on 06/25/2019 01:59 pmQuote from: Alexphysics on 06/25/2019 12:36 pmAlso, for the next FH mission (the AFSPC 52) I would expect double side booster drone ship landing and center core expended, pretty much what they initially planned for this mission before dropping the second stage deorbit burn.Had this been discussed publicly before? I might have just forgotten seeing it, but I didn't remember this mission being planned to expend the center. (Obviously, this is not a very searchable question)And double drone ship landing?
Quote from: Alexphysics on 06/25/2019 12:36 pmAlso, for the next FH mission (the AFSPC 52) I would expect double side booster drone ship landing and center core expended, pretty much what they initially planned for this mission before dropping the second stage deorbit burn.Had this been discussed publicly before? I might have just forgotten seeing it, but I didn't remember this mission being planned to expend the center. (Obviously, this is not a very searchable question)
Also, for the next FH mission (the AFSPC 52) I would expect double side booster drone ship landing and center core expended, pretty much what they initially planned for this mission before dropping the second stage deorbit burn.
Quote from: meekGee on 06/25/2019 02:45 pmQuote from: codav on 06/25/2019 01:41 pmQuote from: Alexphysics on 06/25/2019 12:36 pmQuote from: gongora on 06/24/2019 10:58 pmQuote from: whitelancer64 on 06/24/2019 10:39 pmIs SpaceX still putting tail numbers on each booster? Is soot obscuring them or am I looking in the wrong place?They're little numbers below the grid fins. I haven't seen a picture from today that is clear enough to read them.The answer to this is on L2Also, for the next FH mission (the AFSPC 52) I would expect double side booster droneship landing and center core expended, pretty much what they initially planned for this mission before dropping the second stage deorbit burn.I'm not sure if the booster numbers really are L2-only content, even if the many beautiful high-res photos there certainly are. The side booster positions were assigned identical to the Arabsat-6A mission, with B1052 on the west side on the pad (facing the FSS) and B0153 on the east.Regarding AFSPC-52, the target transfer orbit (185x35188km with a 27° inclination) is nearly the same as Arabsat-6A and the satellite even weighs a bit less, so I'd expect a very similar flight profile.Quote from: Prettz on 06/25/2019 01:59 pmQuote from: Alexphysics on 06/25/2019 12:36 pmAlso, for the next FH mission (the AFSPC 52) I would expect double side booster drone ship landing and center core expended, pretty much what they initially planned for this mission before dropping the second stage deorbit burn.Had this been discussed publicly before? I might have just forgotten seeing it, but I didn't remember this mission being planned to expend the center. (Obviously, this is not a very searchable question)And double drone ship landing? That's if they get "A Shortfall Of Gravitas" ready for that mission.