-
#140
by
FutureSpaceTourist
on 28 Oct, 2016 09:22
-
-
#141
by
Ronsmytheiii
on 16 Jan, 2017 10:21
-
This weekend our #SES10 #satellite was shipped from @AirbusDS facilities in Toulouse to Cape Canaveral for its forthcoming launch w. @SpaceX
Twitter.com/SES_Satellites
-
#142
by
Ben the Space Brit
on 16 Jan, 2017 11:26
-
So, SES are willing to fly on an unmodified F9 v.1.2 with just the altered prop and He load procedure?
-
#143
by
kevinof
on 16 Jan, 2017 11:28
-
Yep, and their Insurers.
So, SES are willing to fly on an unmodified F9 v.1.2 with just the altered prop and He load procedure?
-
#144
by
gongora
on 16 Jan, 2017 12:22
-
So, SES are willing to fly on an unmodified F9 v.1.2 with just the altered prop and He load procedure?
If any mods were made to the Iridium booster because of the accident investigation (I don't know if there were any), then I'd expect those same mods to be made to the SES-10 booster.
-
#145
by
FutureSpaceTourist
on 16 Jan, 2017 13:20
-
-
#146
by
oldAtlas_Eguy
on 17 Jan, 2017 20:14
-
If the payload has been shipped that usually indicates a launch ~ 30 days later. Putting a SES launch at end of Feb. It is possible that by the end of Feb the launch count for the year could be 4
-
#147
by
envy887
on 17 Jan, 2017 20:19
-
If the payload has been shipped that usually indicates a launch ~ 30 days later. Putting a SES launch at end of Feb. It is possible that by the end of Feb the launch count for the year could be 4
That would be hitting the 2 per month pace they reported want.
-
#148
by
gongora
on 17 Jan, 2017 20:50
-
-
#149
by
wannamoonbase
on 17 Jan, 2017 20:54
-
If the payload has been shipped that usually indicates a launch ~ 30 days later. Putting a SES launch at end of Feb. It is possible that by the end of Feb the launch count for the year could be 4
That would be hitting the 2 per month pace they reported want.
That would huge so soon after return to flight. That would be a most impressive cadence and they wouldn't need to improve that to have an incredible year.
-
#150
by
Ben the Space Brit
on 18 Jan, 2017 10:46
-
When you think about it, the AMOS-6 accident didn't really seriously affect the procedures that are really critical to launch cadence: pad flow, production and testing. It just meant that they're going to have to look again and tanking and possibly, in the mid-term, redesign the upper stage LOX and He systems.
So long as they can get the feed of payloads and rockets onto pads that are turning around at the right rate, then there is no reason why they can't manage 2/month. This is especially so given as launches will be spread around LC-39A, -40 and -4E in such a way that the individual HIFs, payload preparation facilities and pads will have longer than 2 weeks between launches.
-
#151
by
Navier–Stokes
on 18 Jan, 2017 13:04
-
SES-10 currently targeting NET February 22 according to Spaceflight Now:
SES 10 telecom satellite in Florida for launch on reused SpaceX rocket Assuming the final launch pad work is completed in the coming days, and SpaceX can launch its next two missions on, or close to, their current target dates, the launch of SES 10 could occur around Feb. 22, at the earliest, an SES official told Spaceflight Now.
-
#152
by
douglas100
on 18 Jan, 2017 16:16
-
When you think about it, the AMOS-6 accident didn't really seriously affect the procedures that are really critical to launch cadence....
Disagree. The loss of use of SLC-40 is bound to affect launch cadence.
...This is especially so given as launches will be spread around LC-39A, -40 and -4E in such a way that the individual HIFs, payload preparation facilities and pads will have longer than 2 weeks between launches...
You can't spread missions between Vandenberg and the other pads. If SLC-4E is out of action then polar missions like Iridium are going to be held up. And you obviously can't spread missions between LC-39A and SLC-40 until 40 is repaired.
-
#153
by
envy887
on 18 Jan, 2017 17:06
-
When you think about it, the AMOS-6 accident didn't really seriously affect the procedures that are really critical to launch cadence....
Disagree. The loss of use of SLC-40 is bound to affect launch cadence.
...This is especially so given as launches will be spread around LC-39A, -40 and -4E in such a way that the individual HIFs, payload preparation facilities and pads will have longer than 2 weeks between launches...
You can't spread missions between Vandenberg and the other pads. If SLC-4E is out of action then polar missions like Iridium are going to be held up. And you obviously can't spread missions between LC-39A and SLC-40 until 40 is repaired.
Polar missions can't launch from the Cape. And getting payloads on-site fast enough might be an issue. Iridium can't launch again until April.
But each pad has on average 4 weeks (or 6, once 40 is back up) to prepare a mission to keep the total flight rate at once every 2 weeks. They were getting missions through as fast as once every 3 weeks at LC-40 last year. Is there any evidence that SLC-4 and LC-39A will not be able to match that if the launch vehicles and spacecraft are available?
-
#154
by
M.E.T.
on 18 Jan, 2017 17:51
-
When you think about it, the AMOS-6 accident didn't really seriously affect the procedures that are really critical to launch cadence....
Disagree. The loss of use of SLC-40 is bound to affect launch cadence.
...This is especially so given as launches will be spread around LC-39A, -40 and -4E in such a way that the individual HIFs, payload preparation facilities and pads will have longer than 2 weeks between launches...
You can't spread missions between Vandenberg and the other pads. If SLC-4E is out of action then polar missions like Iridium are going to be held up. And you obviously can't spread missions between LC-39A and SLC-40 until 40 is repaired.
Polar missions can't launch from the Cape. And getting payloads on-site fast enough might be an issue. Iridium can't launch again until April.
But each pad has on average 4 weeks (or 6, once 40 is back up) to prepare a mission to keep the total flight rate at once every 2 weeks. They were getting missions through as fast as once every 3 weeks at LC-40 last year. Is there any evidence that SLC-4 and LC-39A will not be able to match that if the launch vehicles and spacecraft are available?
Well it seems to me they are targeting an even faster turnaround than that. Currently it seems that just LC39A will be targeting a launch every 2 weeks, at least as far as the first 3 launches are concerned. Currently we are tentatively looking at 26 Jan, 8 Feb and 22 Feb, all from LC39A.
So anyting from Vandenberg will be on top of that.
-
#155
by
guckyfan
on 18 Jan, 2017 19:17
-
Well it seems to me they are targeting an even faster turnaround than that. Currently it seems that just LC39A will be targeting a launch every 2 weeks, at least as far as the first 3 launches are concerned. Currently we are tentatively looking at 26 Jan, 8 Feb and 22 Feb, all from LC39A.
So anyting from Vandenberg will be on top of that.
I am quite sure with a sufficiently large pad crew they can have turn around times of even less than 2 weeks. But on average weather,
pad range availability, ISS related shifts, installing the crew access arm and getting FH launch ready will slow them down a lot.
-
#156
by
gongora
on 19 Jan, 2017 14:43
-
-
#157
by
gongora
on 20 Jan, 2017 20:29
-
This appears to be the
FCC application for the SES-10 landing, since the operational start date is Feb. 20. I still don't see an application for the EchoStar 23 landing?
North 28 15 19 West 74 1 18 Autonomous Drone Ship, within 10 nautical miles
-
#158
by
docmordrid
on 21 Jan, 2017 03:25
-
This appears to be the FCC application for the SES-10 landing, since the operational start date is Feb. 20. I still don't see an application for the EchoStar 23 landing?
North 28 15 19 West 74 1 18 Autonomous Drone Ship, within 10 nautical miles
Another first: the first re-landing of a stage.
-
#159
by
Flying Beaver
on 21 Jan, 2017 03:27
-
This appears to be the FCC application for the SES-10 landing, since the operational start date is Feb. 20. I still don't see an application for the EchoStar 23 landing?
North 28 15 19 West 74 1 18 Autonomous Drone Ship, within 10 nautical miles
Another first: the first re-landing of a stage.
Hopefully, heaviest GTO mission to date.
