SpaceX Falcon 9 v1.1 - Thaicom 6 - DISCUSSION THREAD

[edkyle99]

Review of video seems to me to show a roughly 350 second long stage 2 burn, which is about 15 seconds longer than the time listed in the press kit and the post launch press release.  Another puzzle.

 - Ed Kyle

[sdsds]

So why was there a "FTS safed" call at 8:20 or so in the video? Isn't that kinda late? Is there an FTS on the second stage also? Things that make you go hmm.

Yes, there is FTS on the second stage and it isn't safed until the vehicle is orbital

The range requires the ability to protect lives in Africa, too!

[yg1968]

See also below:

Full launch webcast video (about 50 minutes):

[NovaSilisko]

Review of video seems to me to show a roughly 350 second long stage 2 burn, which is about 15 seconds longer than the time listed in the press kit and the post launch press release.  Another puzzle.

 - Ed Kyle

First stage engine loss like CRS-1 maybe?

[Jarnis]

Review of video seems to me to show a roughly 350 second long stage 2 burn, which is about 15 seconds longer than the time listed in the press kit and the post launch press release.  Another puzzle.

 - Ed Kyle

First stage engine loss like CRS-1 maybe?

No, 1st stage would have burned longer (which it did not)

[fatjohn1408]

Parking orbit was 497x173x27.7

[fatjohn1408]

Review of video seems to me to show a roughly 350 second long stage 2 burn, which is about 15 seconds longer than the time listed in the press kit and the post launch press release.  Another puzzle.

 - Ed Kyle

Ed, in the update thread you stated that the first stage burned only 177s. Isn't that three seconds less than normal, the ses launch? That could explain the discrepancy.

[Jarnis]

Review of video seems to me to show a roughly 350 second long stage 2 burn, which is about 15 seconds longer than the time listed in the press kit and the post launch press release.  Another puzzle.

 - Ed Kyle

Ed, in the update thread you stated that the first stage burned only 177s. Isn't that three seconds less than normal, the ses launch? That could explain the discrepancy.

3 seconds times 9 engines would be quite many seconds with one engine for another test on "how to pass maxQ with as little braking as possible on the way down"... (wild speculation, I have no info that they would have made any attempt, just speculating based on the numbers)

[Hauerg]

Did anyone else notice that the F9 was drifting to the "left" by about 2 meters from liftoff to clearing the towers?
Wind?

As seen here:

[Ben the Space Brit]

Wind is most likely; the vehicle was noticeably rocking on the pad due to the surface level winds after the strong-back retracted. There is a safety limit to winds because of this effect. Although dramatic here, the ignition would have been aborted if there was any likelihood of the vehicle contacting either the lightning protection system or the strong-back during early ascent.

[input~2]

SpaceX press kit says the mass of Thaicom-6 was 3016 kg while Orbital says it was 3330 kg

[Jakusb]

Orbital press release
http://www.orbital.com/NewsInfo/MissionUpdates/Thaicom6/index.shtml

The  Thaicom 6 commercial communications satellite, designed, built and tested by  Orbital for Thaicom PLC, was launched from Cape Canaveral,  Florida on January 6, 2014. The satellite will undergo several weeks of in-orbit testing and verification that all subsystems are operating as planned. Once testing is complete and the spacecraft is positioned at its final orbital location of 78.5 degrees East Longitude, day-to-day control of THAICOM 6 will be handed over to THAICOM's satellite operations staff.
At launch, THAICOM 6 weighed approximately 3,330 Kg. It carries a hybrid Ku- and C-band payload that will operate on approximately 3.5 kilowatts of payload power. The Ku-band payload is comprised of eight active transponders (9x36-MHz Transponder Equivalent) providing services to Thailand, Laos, Cambodia, and Myanmar. The C-band payload features 12 active C-band transponders providing services via a regional beam to Southeast Asia and six active C-band transponders (12x36-MHz TPE) providing services to Africa.
 About  Orbital GEOStar Satellites
The THAICOM 6 communications satellite is based on Orbital's highly successful GEOStar spacecraft platform, which is able to accommodate all types of commercial communications payloads and is compatible with all major commercial launchers. The GEOStar design is optimized for satellite missions requiring up to 7.5 kilowatts of payload power. In many instances, the affordable GEOStar satellites can be built and delivered in 24 months or less.

Nice of them to mention SpaceX.

[Zaran]

Nice of them to mention SpaceX.

On twitter they linked to a re-stream of the webcast rather than the SpaceX direct feed. Feels somewhat petty to me.

[smoliarm]

SpaceX press kit says the mass of Thaicom-6 was 3016 kg while Orbital says it was 3330 kg

Yes, I noted this too, wanted post a question myself - but you are fast

May be this is because of payload adapter?
I.e., SpaceX presser gives the mass of sat itself, while Orbital presser gives the mass of the sat PLUS payload adapter.
Is it reasonable for PL adapter to be 300 kg?

[Avron]

SpaceX press kit says the mass of Thaicom-6 was 3016 kg while Orbital says it was 3330 kg

Yes, I noted this too, wanted post a question myself - but you are fast

May be this is because of payload adapter?
I.e., SpaceX presser gives the mass of sat itself, while Orbital presser gives the mass of the sat PLUS payload adapter.
Is it reasonable for PL adapter to be 300 kg?

maybe fueled vs un- fueled .   When is the next orbital sat launch by SpaceX?

[jeff.findley]

Congrats to all involved with this launch and payload!

[smoliarm]

SpaceX press kit says the mass of Thaicom-6 was 3016 kg while Orbital says it was 3330 kg

Yes, I noted this too, wanted post a question myself - but you are fast

May be this is because of payload adapter?
I.e., SpaceX presser gives the mass of sat itself, while Orbital presser gives the mass of the sat PLUS payload adapter.
Is it reasonable for PL adapter to be 300 kg?

maybe fueled vs un- fueled .   When is the next orbital sat launch by SpaceX?

>>fueled vs un- fueled
No, the SpaceX presser says "spacecraft weighs 3,016 kg at launch." -- i.e., fueled.

>>When is the next orbital sat launch by SpaceX
So far, none. SES-8 and Thaicom-6 were the only two PLs made by Orbital in manifest.

[rockinghorse]

SpaceX press kit says the mass of Thaicom-6 was 3016 kg while Orbital says it was 3330 kg

I am quite confident to my memory that in SpaceX's Webcast Molly or someone else said that Thaicom-satellite weights 3300 kg. Also Wikipedia says that it weights 3325 kg. Therefore it is good to be critical on sources and that 3016 kg is probably just simple mistake. People often makes this kind of mistakes, because they are not accurate with numbers.

[LouScheffer]

Good job SpaceX!

2 Objects have now been catalogued by USSTRATCOM.
Object A: 2014-002A/39500 at 0051UTC was in 376 x 90039 km x 22.46° (tentatively Thaicom-6)
Object B: 2014-002B/39501 at 2336UTC was in 457 x 91590 km x 22.39°

This still seems weird to me.  I'd think that after releasing the satellite, they would use any remaining delta-V/venting/RCS to reduce the perigee, not increase it. That would help create a quicker re-entry and less space junk with its chance of collision.  Raising the perigee would seem to do exactly the opposite....

[Elmar Moelzer]

Congrats to SpaceX! Great launch!