Author Topic: SpaceX Falcon 9 v1.1 - CASSIOPE - GENERAL DISCUSSION THREAD (2) (Read 383744 times)

Ben the Space Brit · « **Reply #80 on:** 09/27/2013 01:59 pm »

Yes it is very small; Cassiope is actually small enough that it could have been carried by the now-indefinitely-deferred Falcon-1e light launch vehicle.

smoliarm · « **Reply #81 on:** 09/27/2013 02:00 pm »

Quote from: kirghizstan on 09/27/2013 01:52 pm

That Patch makes it seem like the fairing is much larger than it needs to be. Maybe I just haven't been paying attention but is this true? Has SpaceX simply decided to offer 1 fairing size for simplicity sake?

SpaceX will use exactly the same fairing for the next mission, SES-8, where the payload is substantially larger than CASSIOPE. So this time they just test the fairing, just like the whole thing below

ChefPat · « **Reply #82 on:** 09/27/2013 02:32 pm »

Quote from: Zaran on 09/27/2013 01:47 pm

As I didn't see it posted here yet, the mission patch for Falcon 9 Flight 6.

Where did you find that? Can you provide a link?

Lars_J · « **Reply #83 on:** 09/27/2013 03:25 pm »

Quote from: kirghizstan on 09/27/2013 01:52 pm

That Patch makes it seem like the fairing is much larger than it needs to be. Maybe I just haven't been paying attention but is this true? Has SpaceX simply decided to offer 1 fairing size for simplicity sake?

Yes. (for now, at least)

kirghizstan · « **Reply #84 on:** 09/27/2013 03:28 pm »

maybe it is the patch but why would the design the base of the rocket to look like the f9 v1 instead of the v1.1?

dcporter · « **Reply #85 on:** 09/27/2013 03:44 pm »

Quote from: kirghizstan on 09/27/2013 03:28 pm

maybe it is the patch but why would the design the base of the rocket to look like the f9 v1 instead of the v1.1?

Looks ambiguous at worst to me. I see three engines in a configuration that looks slightly more like a circle than a square, but doesn't look like the 3x3 OR the octoweb.

LaunchedIn68 · « **Reply #86 on:** 09/27/2013 05:58 pm »

What's the significance of the three (white) stars?

Jason1701 · « **Reply #87 on:** 09/27/2013 06:01 pm »

Quote from: LaunchedIn68 on 09/27/2013 05:58 pm

What's the significance of the three (white) stars?

I was thinking the three Falcon 1s that failed, except there are 6 stars total on that side.

mr. mark · « **Reply #88 on:** 09/27/2013 06:07 pm »

The 3 stars could represent the 3 missions to the ISS. Demo plus CRS1, CRS2? The five stars on the left most likely represent the 5 falcon 1 missions? The stars on the right represent the falcon 9 missions? The gold star represents launch point for the mission?

pippin · « **Reply #89 on:** 09/27/2013 06:11 pm »

5 F9s (left side) plus 6 Canadian sats (right side) maybe?

AJW · « **Reply #90 on:** 09/27/2013 06:28 pm »

Six stars for secondary Payload? CUSat-1 & 2, DANDE and three POPACS? The POPACS are passive, so maybe darker?

Lars_J · « **Reply #91 on:** 09/27/2013 08:50 pm »

Re-posting in here for discussion... Here is an image of the NOTAM for this launch:

(based on NOTAM data posted by StephenB here: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=32685.msg1101683#msg1101683 and theKML file shared by dodo here: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=32685.msg1101804#msg1101804)

Quote

!CARF 09/183 (KZLA A2319/13) ZLA AIRSPACE DCC 2 ROPS AIROP DO-1307 STAGE 1 AND DEBRIS AREA STATIONARY RESERVATION WITHIN AN AREA BNDD BY 3133N/11934W 2848N/11910W 2809N/12000W 2300N/12000W 2300N/12005W 2622N/12104W 3007N/12119W 3133N/12113W SFC-UNL WEF 1309291600-1309291953 !CARF 09/181 (KZLA A2318/13) ZLA AIRSPACE DCC 2 ROPS AIROP DO-1307 DEBRIS DISPERTION AREA STATIONARY RESERVATION WITHIN AN AREA BNDD BY 3445N/12100W 3445N/12034W 3236N/11947W 3133N/11934W 3133N/12113W SFC-UNL WEF 1309291600-1309291930

So I guess the S1 recovery (if successful) will occur in the yellow area, otherwise the stage (and fairing?) will impact in the red area.

Joffan · « **Reply #92 on:** 09/27/2013 09:18 pm »

I read it the other way around, LJ. The yellow area is mostly at risk from range safety and other extreme problem scenarios; typical first-stage debris effects and the possible controlled return of the first stage are in the red area.

Lars_J · « **Reply #93 on:** 09/27/2013 09:23 pm »

Yes, you are probably right here.

cambrianera · « **Reply #94 on:** 09/27/2013 09:28 pm »

But if SpaceX is successful doing the brake burn the first stage will go downrange much less than usual.

smoliarm · « **Reply #95 on:** 09/27/2013 10:08 pm »

Quote from: cambrianera on 09/27/2013 09:28 pm

But if SpaceX is successful doing the brake burn the first stage will go downrange much less than usual.

May be it's like this - see attachment

Comga · « **Reply #96 on:** 09/27/2013 11:11 pm »

Quote from: cambrianera on 09/27/2013 09:28 pm

But if SpaceX is successful doing the brake burn the first stage will go downrange much less than usual.

My understanding wat that the first burn was just to kill off velocity as aerodynamic forces are about to build.
If this is just before significant forces would affect the trajectory, debirs would be landing much farther downrange.

Zed_Noir · « **Reply #97 on:** 09/27/2013 11:21 pm »

Would the ISS crew have a view of the launch?

mlindner · « **Reply #98 on:** 09/28/2013 12:07 am »

Quote from: Zed_Noir on 09/27/2013 11:21 pm

Would the ISS crew have a view of the launch?

No. http://www.heavens-above.com/PassSummary.aspx?satid=25544&lat=34.66258&lng=-120.6031&loc=Unspecified&alt=0&tz=PST

Avron · « **Reply #99 on:** 09/28/2013 12:40 am »

love that patch .. Go Canada..

.. Go SpaceX ... CSA do a great job of product placement.. ok .. maybe not product..