SpaceX F9 : SES-10 with reuse of CRS-8 Booster SN/1021 : 2017-03-30 : DISCUSSION

[mme]

The Eastern Range may not be the only organization that could eventually have problems with high launch rates, SpaceX still doesn't have an FAA license for SES-10 flight yet.

I feel like people worry about the FAA license every launch and every launch they get the license.

[ChrisGebhardt]

The Eastern Range may not be the only organization that could eventually have problems with high launch rates, SpaceX still doesn't have an FAA license for SES-10 flight yet.

FAA licenses to SpaceX are not issued - historically - until a day or two before launch.  This is absolutely nothing new, and it 100% is not an issue.

[WizZifnab]

Per this update in the Atlas thread, OA-7 is now delayed "indefinitely".  Can SpaceX move up to March 27th now?

What is the gain for SpaceX?  Starting up a rocket for launch isn't like starting your car in the morning. 

No need to rush the process flow, just because you can.

The gain in moving the launch cycle forward is for all the other launches that they have queued up.  Including other launches utilizing the range.  Each little delay adds up.  Gaining a day or so here could reduce the impact of a day lost later for something else.  So its more like why wait if you don't have too.

That said, if there are specific reasons they can't or should't try to move up, then of course don't.

But its a reasonable thought.

[meekGee]

Per this update in the Atlas thread, OA-7 is now delayed "indefinitely".  Can SpaceX move up to March 27th now?

What is the gain for SpaceX?  Starting up a rocket for launch isn't like starting your car in the morning. 

No need to rush the process flow, just because you can.

The gain in moving the launch cycle forward is for all the other launches that they have queued up.  Including other launches utilizing the range.  Each little delay adds up.  Gaining a day or so here could reduce the impact of a day lost later for something else.  So its more like why wait if you don't have too.

That said, if there are specific reasons they can't or should't try to move up, then of course don't.

But its a reasonable thought.

How much is the date for the next launch affected by this one? 

Right now, the rocket is occupying the TEL, but the beginning of the flow is done on dollies, right?

If the rocket is ready and is just waiting for the range, can't the pad hands start the flow on the next one?

[ehb]

Every schedule change adjusts timelines and employee expectations and there is
an associated mental cost above and beyond simple time accounting.  They were
just told that there are two more days and now we are suggesting to change it back?
In this situation, my feeling is the best choice would be to keep the 29th, it's soon enough.
 

[georgegassaway]

I agree the likelihood of SpaceX getting 3/27 back AND being able to meet that date are slim, though not impossible.  And I get that this is your overall point.  But let's not compare apples and oranges to arrive at that conclusion.  A mission that was already processing toward 3/27 with a rocket and pad and personnel and Range ready to support a 3/27 launch is not at all the same as EPA regulations/permits/etc. needed to for brand new landing pad construction, nor is it the same as building a brand new pad while juggling other issues and flights.

Good point. However if one wants to fly a rocket in say 6 months, one should be planning to have everything else ready by the time 6 months arrives (The EPA thing is so silly to wait so long to even file anything and be stuck for months without being able to start the work. But that's part of why I don't see FH till Q1 2018 anyway, not just due to the 2nd landing pad thing, only one of many factors. I'd like for it to be earlier.....).   There are certainly many other slips of less notariety that have occurred, of a type that would be more direct apples to apples comparisons that could be made.

Anyway back to this launch,  I will note that they originally were planning on the 27th, before Echostar's launch slipped two days. So the later slip of this to the 29th (2 days) seemed inevitable, regardless of range date conflicts, many expected a slip (they had never done back-to-back launches in that short a timeframe and Echostar was only the 2nd launch from 39A. Though the "throwback" of the TE has to help, and they may have learned some other things from LC-40 and Vandenberg  to design 39A's Falcon Roost to be easier & faster to repair/prepare between flights).

[Ben the Space Brit]

I guess that I'm kind of surprised that anyone would consider an ISS resupply flight to be a lower priority than a comsat launch. The time criticality of the two payloads cannot be seriously compared.

[douglas100]

How much is the date for the next launch affected by this one? 

Right now, the rocket is occupying the TEL, but the beginning of the flow is done on dollies, right?

If the rocket is ready and is just waiting for the range, can't the pad hands start the flow on the next one?

In principle it sounds possible. But the presence of the TEL in the hangar might restrict exactly what ops can be carried out on the next vehicle in the flow. Width wise there should be plenty of room for a second vehicle, but the TEL takes up almost the whole width of the hangar at the end nearest the pad. That might restrict having a fully assembled first and second stage on the floor lengthwise. However as soon as the TEL has rolled out there should be no restrictions on working on the next vehicle (apart from on static fire and launch days, of course!)

[Johnnyhinbos]

The Atlas launch is delayed, but not indefinitely. That word was used by the OP. That said, there's now a possibility, tho perhaps slim, that the issue gets resolved and it stomps on the new SES-10 launch date. Perhaps that might be a motivator to slide the launch forward to the 27th...

[Jim]

Right now, the rocket is occupying the TEL, but the beginning of the flow is done on dollies, right?

If the rocket is ready and is just waiting for the range, can't the pad hands start the flow on the next one?

TEL occupies the space where the dollies are.

[old_sellsword]

Right now, the rocket is occupying the TEL, but the beginning of the flow is done on dollies, right?

If the rocket is ready and is just waiting for the range, can't the pad hands start the flow on the next one?

TEL occupies the space where the dollies are.

When the TE rolls in, how many first stages can they fit in the HIF? And do second stages fit as well?

[spacenut]

I'm confused.  Is Atlas now delayed?  What does it do for SpaceX?  Is it still on for the 27th?  If so what time?  Nothing on SpaceX website. 

[Ben the Space Brit]

When the TE rolls in, how many first stages can they fit in the HIF? And do second stages fit as well?

I'm guessing that there is enough room to at least store (but not necessarily work on) two other stacks because of the space needed to accommodate FH.

[Ben the Space Brit]

I'm confused.  Is Atlas now delayed?  What does it do for SpaceX?  Is it still on for the 27th?  If so what time?  Nothing on SpaceX website.

According to Orbital-ATK, the launch has been postponed indefinitely due to a fault on the Atlas-V. It won't take long for that delay to slip over 3/29 and for SES-10 to be the next spacecraft cleared to launch. There is no question of SpaceX being asked (or consenting) to indefinitely delay launching their customer's payload due to another provider's technical problems.

[mn]

I'm confused.  Is Atlas now delayed?  What does it do for SpaceX?  Is it still on for the 27th?  If so what time?  Nothing on SpaceX website.

I suspect you missed some updates. This launch WAS tentatively scheduled for the 27th but got pushed to the 29th by OA-7. Now that OA-7 is delayed there is discussion of this launch possibly coming back to the 27th.

(SpaceX never confirmed that they will be ready for the 27th after the Echostar Launch, so this discussion is largely hypothetical)

[JamesH65]

I guess that I'm kind of surprised that anyone would consider an ISS resupply flight to be a lower priority than a comsat launch. The time criticality of the two payloads cannot be seriously compared.

Every day a satellite launch is delayed costs revenue. Not the same for the ISS supply flight. There are stocks of food and water and oxygen to last quite some time on the ISS.  Hence the delay after the SpaceX RUD wasn't a huge problem.

And late load cargo won;t have been loaded yet.

[Jim]

And late load cargo won;t have been loaded yet.

It was loaded days before it left the processing facility.

[mn]

I guess that I'm kind of surprised that anyone would consider an ISS resupply flight to be a lower priority than a comsat launch. The time criticality of the two payloads cannot be seriously compared.

Every day a satellite launch is delayed costs revenue. Not the same for the ISS supply flight. There are stocks of food and water and oxygen to last quite some time on the ISS.  Hence the delay after the SpaceX RUD wasn't a huge problem.

And late load cargo won;t have been loaded yet.

A: I think that when a ISS launch takes precedence over a comsat launch (as is CRS-10 pulling rank over Echostar 23) it is more often because of the complexity of the ISS schedule than an urgent need for something to arrive at the ISS.

B: for this launch I don't see anyone suggesting that the ISS launch is a lower priority, not sure where you saw that. This launch was pushed back to make room for OA-7.

[Thorny]

The Atlas launch is delayed, but not indefinitely. That word was used by the OP.

"Indefinite" simply means no new date was set, which is the case here.

[baldusi]

The Eastern Range may not be the only organization that could eventually have problems with high launch rates, SpaceX still doesn't have an FAA license for SES-10 flight yet.

FAA licenses to SpaceX are not issued - historically - until a day or two before launch.  This is absolutely nothing new, and it 100% is not an issue.

Do the FAA license take the LRR result into consideration or is it because of other reasons that is issued at the point in the timeline?