FAA License for SpaceX is like the hydrogen vent fin for Atlas V....take a drink....
FAA License for SpaceX is like the hydrogen vent fin for Atlas V....take a drink....
At least the nozzle stiffener ring questions have abated somewhat. Though if you want to get drunk, take a shot every time someone asks about a visible chunk of ice after a launch (especially around SECO and relight).
What is the gain for SpaceX? Starting up a rocket for launch isn't like starting your car in the morning.
The gain is something that can make the difference between a thriving company and bankruptcy. If the backlog is too long, it's going to be harder for new customers to sign up and have cash flow. SpaceX expenses are huge and the are investing in a lot of directions; having fresh money coming in is vital.
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 all seriousness, if that is a problem for the employees, they should probably apply for a government job...
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.
What would be the reason that a government launch to ISS cannot be seriously compared to a commercial one? Both have equal importance, for different reasons.
In all seriousness, if that is a problem for the employees, they should probably apply for a government job...
In all seriousness, you are wrong on both accounts. People have lives outside of work. I have no problem stopping my life and going all out supporting a launch, but that only happens a few times a year for me. If the launch frequency is more than one a month, then the manpower has to be enough where people can plan a life (i.e. if it is not launching on a certain crew's shift, then the next crew has to pick it up).
And why the snipe on government job?
In all seriousness, if that is a problem for the employees, they should probably apply for a government job...
In all seriousness, you are wrong on both accounts. People have lives outside of work. I have no problem stopping my life and going all out supporting a launch, but that only happens a few times a year for me. If the launch frequency is more than one a month, then the manpower has to be enough where people can plan a life (i.e. if it is not launching on a certain crew's shift, then the next crew has to pick it up).
And why the snipe on government job?
Word.
There is only so much you can safely ask out of your people. In critical operations like aviation (and I presume space launch) human fatigue is serious business.
That being said, if they need more sets of eyes and hands... then put me in coach.
There is only so much you can safely ask out of your people. In critical operations like aviation (and I presume space launch) human fatigue is serious business.
Exactly. I often listen to LiveATC.net streaming audio during my work commute - helps ease the road rage when traffic is snarled on the interstate to know SOMEONE professional is controlling some kind of traffic nearby, lol. That said, you'll note if you listen to ATC much that controllers at a busy airfield only handle short shifts at any one station (e.g., Tower, Ground, Arrivals/Departures from one direction or another, etc.). For instance, at BNA which is local to me, Approach and Departure controllers may handle one station for only 15 - 30 minutes during busy morning and afternoon/evening hours before rotating to another station. That's to keep them mentally fresh and prevent them from becoming too focused on any one situation or aircraft at the expense of others in their responsibility.
What is the gain for SpaceX? Starting up a rocket for launch isn't like starting your car in the morning.
The gain is something that can make the difference between a thriving company and bankruptcy. If the backlog is too long, it's going to be harder for new customers to sign up and have cash flow. SpaceX expenses are huge and the are investing in a lot of directions; having fresh money coming in is vital.
What makes you think that SpaceX is anywhere near bankruptcy?
Shotwell said during the press conference before the CRS-10 launch, SpaceX is extremely healthy financially and has no debt. From a financial perspective SpaceX is extremely strong.
What is the gain for SpaceX? Starting up a rocket for launch isn't like starting your car in the morning.
The gain is something that can make the difference between a thriving company and bankruptcy. If the backlog is too long, it's going to be harder for new customers to sign up and have cash flow. SpaceX expenses are huge and the are investing in a lot of directions; having fresh money coming in is vital.
What makes you think that SpaceX is anywhere near bankruptcy?
Shotwell said during the press conference before the CRS-10 launch, SpaceX is extremely healthy financially and has no debt. From a financial perspective SpaceX is extremely strong.
Maybe you should try reading all the words. He didn't say anything like that. He was just making a general, perfectly true, observation that applies to lot of companies.
What is the gain for SpaceX? Starting up a rocket for launch isn't like starting your car in the morning.
The gain is something that can make the difference between a thriving company and bankruptcy. If the backlog is too long, it's going to be harder for new customers to sign up and have cash flow. SpaceX expenses are huge and the are investing in a lot of directions; having fresh money coming in is vital.
What makes you think that SpaceX is anywhere near bankruptcy?
Shotwell said during the press conference before the CRS-10 launch, SpaceX is extremely healthy financially and has no debt. From a financial perspective SpaceX is extremely strong.
Maybe you should try reading all the words. He didn't say anything like that. He was just making a general, perfectly true, observation that applies to lot of companies.
It is also important to know when to push a schedule and not push a schedule. Speaking as a Project Manager, after adjusting a schedule for a complicated technical deployment I would not want to bring in a Project end date when I am only a week out from deployment. If you think about it, each F9 launch is basically a
very complicated Project and the deployment is launch day. You don't want to make schedule changes this close to the project end unless you have a really good reason.
Considering the implications of another "Anomaly" for SpaceX they did the smart thing by continue to stick with the adjust launch flow timeline.
I know we all want to see SpaceX start rapid launches of "Flight proven" F9's out of LC39A but with launching rockets, a million things have to go right and only one thing has to go wrong for you to have a very bad day.
It is also important to know when to push a schedule and not push a schedule. Speaking as a Project Manager, after adjusting a schedule for a complicated technical deployment I would want to bring in a Project end date
But the schedule changes for SES-10 launch have nothing to do, in this case, with any issue to the actual project. It was an external, unrelated, totally decoupled reason (some ULA launch that has nothing to do with SES-10).
SpaceX has already moved a launch to the left in the past. *IF* there is any issue with the booster, they should not anticipate the date. *IF* they are ready to go and the range is free, why wait?
About the issue that people have their own life etc: launches very often scrub or are delayed for various reasons, weather, small issues, etc. It's part of the job. Why would anticipating a launch be any different? They are probably going to be happy!
It is also important to know when to push a schedule and not push a schedule. Speaking as a Project Manager, after adjusting a schedule for a complicated technical deployment I would want to bring in a Project end date
But the schedule changes for SES-10 launch have nothing to do, in this case, with any issue to the actual project. It was an external, unrelated, totally decoupled reason (some ULA launch that has nothing to do with SES-10).
SpaceX has already moved a launch to the left in the past. *IF* there is any issue with the booster, they should not anticipate the date. *IF* they are ready to go and the range is free, why wait?
About the issue that people have their own life etc: launches very often scrub or are delayed for various reasons, weather, small issues, etc. It's part of the job. Why would anticipating a launch be any different? They are probably going to be happy!
Schedule changes based on Range sharing and Range availability and the other missions on the Eastern Range manifest are 100% "an issue with the actual project." It doesn't matter if SES-10 and OA-7 are by two different companies; they are coupled by the fact that they operate from the exact same Range -- which makes it part of the project.
Space X has moved one launch to the left in the past. And the circumstances for why that launch was able to move to the left are completely different than what we have today. The entire technical operations and procedures in place have evolved since SpaceX last did that. They evolve each time as more information is learned from each launch. Just because they did it once doesn't mean they can automatically do it every single time. And something that is consistently overlooked here is that while SpaceX said that 39A would have been able to support a 3/27 launch of SES-10, neither the requested static fire nor the launch date for that schedule to get to 3/27 was actually approved by the Range. It was always listed as "under review". Now, to the that if there's "any issue with the booster, they should not anticipate the date," that's not how anything works. That's like saying you shouldn't plan a vacation, book the dates, make hotel reservations, and spend a bunch of money to prepare for it if you're not 100% certain that you're going to get to the airport and the flight will leave. Things happen that delay launches and cause realignments. That doesn't mean you don't anticipate a date, let your workforce know, and issue No Earlier Than dates so schedules can be planned accordingly, so that the incredibly complex tasks of preparing a rocket for flight can all be conducted safely. Also, who said that the Range is now free for the 27th? Just because Atlas V delayed from the 27th doesn't automatically mean that the Range (i.e. all the personnel who are still needed to support a launch) is now free that day. A rocket moving off a specific day does not automatically free up that day for another customer -- especially when that date (as requested by SpaceX) was not formally approved in the first place.
Being scrubbed and delayed (i.e. moving to the right) is a lot different than a launch being accelerated and moved to the left. Delays are known and are planned for. Advancements to the left by 2 to 3 days in this case, when you include the static fire, are massively disruptive to people's schedules and can have a direct negative correlation to work performance.
SpaceX has already moved a launch to the left in the past. *IF* there is any issue with the booster, they should not anticipate the date. *IF* they are ready to go and the range is free, why wait?
Because they planned other work and other assignments to make up for the delay.
SpaceX has already moved a launch to the left in the past. *IF* there is any issue with the booster, they should not anticipate the date. *IF* they are ready to go and the range is free, why wait?
Because they planned other work and other assignments to make up for the delay.
And it is not just Spacex involved. There is the payload customer, the payload contractor, the payload control center, payload tracking sites, there is the range, the FAA, the Coast Guard,
SpaceX has already moved a launch to the left in the past. *IF* there is any issue with the booster, they should not anticipate the date. *IF* they are ready to go and the range is free, why wait?
OCISLY has to be in place to catch the booster. It usually leaves about five days in advance.
SpaceX has already moved a launch to the left in the past. *IF* there is any issue with the booster, they should not anticipate the date. *IF* they are ready to go and the range is free, why wait?
OCISLY has to be in place to catch the booster. It usually leaves about five days in advance.
And a quick check of MarineTraffic.com and "the webcam never named here" shows OCISLY and Elsbeth III resting quietly in port... Launching on the 27th is not happening... Period...
This is an interesting tweet from Elon just now. He's in a rare fit of tweet storming re the Model 3, but during that he was asked:
@elonmusk how excited are you about the SES launch next week?! I don't know how you're focused on model 3 with that ahead! #makinghistory
His response:
@BlueBowles If fate is on our side, it will be amazing. Will talk about that in detail next week.
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/845290713776451584Emphasis mine, and am looking forward to those details!
Bloomberg article on SES-10 booster re-use: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-03-24/spacex-launch-of-first-reused-rocket-to-mark-milestone-for-musk
Has this:
If the launch goes off without a hitch -- and the rocket booster is once again recovered on the drone ship -- SES will get its own piece of space flight history as a memento.
“Gwynne has promised us parts of the rocket,” Halliwell said. “We want them for the SES board room.”
What Gwynne neglected to point out is there are many ways in which those parts can come to rest on the ASDS. Let's hope they arrive assembled!
Let's hope they arrive assembled!
So far they always did. Sometimes they underwent a rapid disassembly after touchdown.
