SpaceX Falcon 9 v1.1 - CASSIOPE - September, 2013 - GENERAL DISCUSSION THREAD

[Lars_J]

A 'bad omen'? By what connection? A rocket once failed to clear its launch pad?

I'll be honest guys, this flight has me the most concerned out of all of SpaceX's so far.

More than the first F9 flight? The first Dragon to ISS? The first few F1 flights? Have you forgotten those, or worse - think SpaceX have forgotten?

[AJW]

All of their flights make me nervous and certainly there is a lot riding on this one as well.  In May, Musk pointed out, “A rocket's first stage accounts for three-quarters of its total price tag."  If SpaceX can bring the CASSIOPE V1.1 first stage in for a hover and a soft water landing, we may be very close to seeing a rapid and historical shift in the industry.

[Jarnis]

All of their flights make me nervous and certainly there is a lot riding on this one as well.  In May, Musk pointed out, “A rocket's first stage accounts for three-quarters of its total price tag."  If SpaceX can bring the CASSIOPE V1.1 first stage in for a hover and a soft water landing, we may be very close to seeing a rapid and historical shift in the industry.

I wonder if we will get any footage of the 1st stage doing its antics post-separation? I would assume SpaceX will chest-beat with a sizzle reel on a later date if everything goes according to plan, but it would be a sweet surprise if we get to see anything related to that as-it-happens. I would imagine that the 1st stage will have cameras on it (duh) and I would be surprised if they didn't at least try to take video also from the ground/sea/air.

[Lars_J]

Tracking cameras at VAFB might be able to observe the 1st stage rotation and first 3-engine retro burn if the weather is clear enough, but I imagine the launch web/broadcast will focus on the core mission. The first stage recovery experiments are a bonus. But SpaceX will probably also have cameras on the stage as well, so who knows...

[Downix]

A 'bad omen'? By what connection? A rocket once failed to clear its launch pad?

I'll be honest guys, this flight has me the most concerned out of all of SpaceX's so far.

More than the first F9 flight? The first Dragon to ISS? The first few F1 flights? Have you forgotten those, or worse - think SpaceX have forgotten?

Yes, more than those.

It is precisely because I remember them that makes this one more nerve-wracking. And if this flight is not nerve-wracking for you, then you are not aware of what is at stake here. This is literally a make-it-or-break-it shift for SpaceX. I am not concerned because I feel they will fail, but because failure *at this point* would be catastrophic for them precisely due to their previous steps. Note my first element, the launch insurance. This is a huge part of my nerves. Once upon a time I worked for an insurance underwriter. If this launch fails, SpaceX will be instantly toxic. The cost to launch on a SpaceX vehicle will skyrocket because the cost to insure the payload will skyrocket. This in turn will price them out of the market.

This has happened before, look at the issues SeaLaunch has undergone after their failures. Already the launch insurance industry is on-edge after the Proton failure just a few weeks ago. A rate jump from the current 7% to 25% or higher is not unheard of *and is perfectly normal after a launch failure of a new system*. On a $400 million satellite, having to pay 25% instead of 7% is an additional $72 million per launch, suddenly making the Atlas V at $50 million more than the Falcon 9 suddenly much more cost effective.

And don't forget, SpaceX already burned one insurance policy from its failure to deliver its secondary payload to the proper orbit.

My nerves are due to knowing this. SpaceX has delt with government contracts, which do their own underwriting. This launch is commercial, it is being underwritten by an independent underwriter, which means much more pressure on them, and with every other factor in place, this puts them with their feet to the fire.

[Lars_J]

I'll be honest guys, this flight has me the most concerned out of all of SpaceX's so far.

More than the first F9 flight? The first Dragon to ISS? The first few F1 flights? Have you forgotten those, or worse - think SpaceX have forgotten?

Yes, more than those.

More than a truly 100% all new vehicle (F9 flight 1), built with far less experience... Yeah, whatever.

[Downix]

I'll be honest guys, this flight has me the most concerned out of all of SpaceX's so far.

More than the first F9 flight? The first Dragon to ISS? The first few F1 flights? Have you forgotten those, or worse - think SpaceX have forgotten?

Yes, more than those.

More than a truly 100% all new vehicle (F9 flight 1), built with far less experience... Yeah, whatever.

The F9 flight 1 was government paid for, without a real payload. It literally could have blown up on the pad and everyone would have shrugged and moved onto the next launch without a care in the world, because we understand that launching rockets is hard.

Now, its not SpaceX's nor the governments money on the line.

[Jarnis]

I would put the success at far better than 50:50 odds as I consider SpaceX in general to be competent at this "launching rockets into space" business but it sure ain't a routine launch of a proven LV. Will definitely be watching how it goes...

Some minor glitches are probably unavoidable (and I would be positively surprised if it goes up without a scrub on the first try) but what really counts is how those are handled and if the primary mission gets done.

If they get all that done without major issues *and* the 1st stage lands gently on water, I will be giving some virtual high-fives for SpaceX for an amazing job.

[meekGee]

.. and failure will not be catastrophic either.   5/5 on F9 1.0 was an unexpected treat.  It has built them credit.  (and regrettably, that 5 in the numerator is rounded up, because of the off-nominal flights).

They can lose a rocket and survive fine, but it will hurt.

Losing the first F9 1.0 might have been the end of them though.  And I believe if you go back on the threads, you might find similar opinions about how "this one is make or break".

If you want an easy non-suspensful ride, you're in the wrong forum

[woods170]

The F9 flight 1 was government paid for, without a real payload. It literally could have blown up on the pad and everyone would have shrugged and moved onto the next launch without a care in the world, because we understand that launching rockets is hard.

Now, its not SpaceX's nor the governments money on the line.

Won't make a difference in the end. This new version of F9 still has to perform multiple CRS missions. If flight 1 has a catastrophic failure it might scare some of the commercial clients away, but NASA will stay, shrug and wait for the first succesfull flight.

[cambrianera]

The stage (if intact) should float close to horizontal, barely touching the water with the interstage and dipping about half a meter on the engine side.

Do you have numbers or is this speculation? If so, it seems pretty close to me. After all, the tanks will provide about 458 tonnes of buoyancy, and the empty stage only weighs about 28 tonnes. True, around 8 tonnes of that 28 tonnes is engine and thrust structure attached to the end of the 42.6 meter long stage, but that won't sink the stage, or even cause it to float upright, (I think). That's because the other 20 tonnes of stage 1 dry mass acts at the center of buoyancy. That should be enough data to calculate the attitude of the floating stage, but someone else can run the numbers, I hope.

I did the math some time ago. Also explained on another thread, but can't find the reference.

[malu5531]

My prediction would be earth escape, mostly because it doesn't leave the 2nd stage in orbit as debris. Additionally, with the light payload, my guess is there's plenty of propellant to attain a minimum c3. Any additional burn time simply adds energy to the orbit, which doesn't really matter.

What if SpaceX will perform a TMI with a small payload with the upper stage? Something containing a simple camera, solar panels, cold gas thrusters and high gain antenna? I believe the performance should be enough to do this.

It's been announced that, beside CASSIOPE, there will be 5 secondary payloads. Four are known, which leaves a fifth "unknown";

Payload	Mass
CASSIOPE	490 kg
CUSat-1	41 kg
CUSat-2	41 kg
DANDE	50 kg
POPACS, 3U	4 kg
Unknown (Mars probe?)	~200 kg
Mounting hw	~174 kg
Total	~1000 kg

My calculations, shows this might be possible with the following Delta-V margins;

Orbit	Payload, kg	Dv from 300 circ	Dv margin, m/s
300x1500 80°	676 kg	2250 m/s	~94 m/s
300x60000000 80°	200 kg	3200 m/s	~531 m/s	Passes Mars orbit

http://tinyurl.com/CassiopeMars
(Disclaimer; IANARS + guesstimates; please correct me if I'm wrong)

Note; The sattelite could not enter into orbit around Mars, only a possible fly-by in case Mars "happens" to be close enough to use residual delta-v in upper stage to "take aim" early in flight, which might be possible considering the time is almost right for optimal TMI.

Why would this be done? To measure performance of Upper Stage, and snap some pics for Musk to tweet casually next year.

[baldusi]

Just a thought. The tanks are pressurized, or vented, aren't they?

Falcon v1.0 were pressurized at 50psi. Those tanks were almost (but not quite) balloon tanks. They could transport and move them around unpressurized, but they had to be pressurized to tolerate any sort of working effort. I don't know about the v1.1 tanks, but since they have the same flow and claim amazing dry mass fraction, I think they are keeping that.

[smoliarm]

...
It's been announced that, beside CASSIOPE, there will be 5 secondary payloads. Four are known, which leaves a fifth "unknown";

The fifth one:
SNAPS - a 0.5 kg Stanford nanosatellite
http://www.amsatuk.me.uk/iaru/formal_detail.php?serialnum=289

It is quite light, so your mass breakdown is still the same.

...
Why would this be done? To measure performance of Upper Stage, and snap some pics for Musk to tweet casually next year.

"To measure performance of Upper Stage" they do not need to aim for TMI: if the second stage burn-to-depletion results in escape V - they get the necessary confirmation WITHOUT any additional equipment/mission complication.
To "snap some pics for Musk to tweet" they do not need TMI just as well. Look this thread up and try to make a list of all the important things they REALLY have to demonstrate this time - with all the "firsts" it is going to be a LONG list. And I agree with Ed Kyle: bullet #1 in this list should be
#1 Clear the pad without big boom;
It's a new pad, and a new rocket.

As for TMI - I'm sure they will have another shot at it

[douglas100]

...Note; The satellite could not enter into orbit around Mars, only a possible fly-by in case Mars "happens" to be close enough to use residual delta-v in upper stage to "take aim" early in flight, which might be possible considering the time is almost right for optimal TMI...

(My bold.)

1. The time isn't right. The Mars launch window doesn't open until November.

2. If the second stage is burned to depletion as planned there will be an unknown error in the injection velocity.

Two reasons why a Mars payload on this launch is a non-starter. There are others. A payload into solar orbit is possible but I doubt it.

And what smoliarm said.

[wjbarnett]

Interesting insights into SpaceX's support for media with this launch (ie none). And the general problem perhaps too.

http://www.americaspace.com/?p=41515

[mr. mark]

Interesting insights into SpaceX's support for media with this launch (ie none). And the general problem perhaps too.

http://www.americaspace.com/?p=41515

And there you go. Little or no hangar photos or WDR coverage. Possibly the first time we will see the rocket is at launch.  (that's if they allow live video of the launch.)

[WHAP]

MDA constraining anything relating to hanger or WDR, if the spacecraft isn't mated yet, seems a little shady to me.  JMHO

[mr. mark]

One thing is clear, no pictures. We have not seen one picture from the hangar or involving hangar assembly as we normally do with SpaceX launches. We are less than two weeks away (September 10th). My opinion, Don't expect much.

[king1999]

Interesting insights into SpaceX's support for media with this launch (ie none). And the general problem perhaps too.

http://www.americaspace.com/?p=41515

And there you go. Little or no hangar photos or WDR coverage. Possibly the first time we will see the rocket is at launch.  (that's if they allow live video of the launch.)

"For his part, SpaceX’s Chief Executive Officer Musk has had a well-reported history in his dealings with the media. During the course of researching this article, a journalist with another outlet relayed how they had received a profanity-laced email stating that the journalist’s efforts were outdated and best-suited to NASA and other commercial space companies. Then of course there are the issues he has had with the New York Times and Barron’s."

Anyone guesses what's in Elon's email?