Author Topic: SpaceX Falcon 9 - Iridium NEXT Flight 1 DISCUSSION (Jan. 14 2017)  (Read 336169 times)

Offline MarekCyzio

"Next week" instead of "Sunday" or "Monday". Still no FAA license?

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4309
  • Liked: 2275
  • Likes Given: 1308

1.  How many F9 launches did we have a situation where you can see 10 minutes in advance that you would like to move the T0 by a few minutes to get a better odds of a GO - trying to fly between the clouds...?

2. Was there ever a F9 launch scrubbed because the weather was RED at T0 but they could have gotten a GREEN had they been able to adjust the T0 10 minutes in advance?


1.  Boat in the box, bad weather, range problem, GSE problem, etc.  Many things that could clear up in few minutes instead of scrub for an instantaneous window.

2.  yes.
SES-9 had a hold at for a boat in the range; it was recycled and another attempt made about 30 minutes later but the LOX had warmed too much. http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=39348.160

Offline mn

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 319
  • United States
  • Liked: 158
  • Likes Given: 61

1.  How many F9 launches did we have a situation where you can see 10 minutes in advance that you would like to move the T0 by a few minutes to get a better odds of a GO - trying to fly between the clouds...?

2. Was there ever a F9 launch scrubbed because the weather was RED at T0 but they could have gotten a GREEN had they been able to adjust the T0 10 minutes in advance?


1.  Boat in the box, bad weather, range problem, GSE problem, etc.  Many things that could clear up in few minutes instead of scrub for an instantaneous window.

2.  yes.

1. You would need to know at least 10 minutes in advance (before entering terminal count) that there's going to be a boat in 10 minutes that will not be there in 12 minutes or 8 minutes. At most you can say if there is a boat already in the box before the terminal count they can push the T0 by a few minutes and hope for the best, possible but I don't recall that happening.

If you say yes it did happen, I'll trust you on it, not going to go back to review each launch, in that case it's rather surprising that they didn't do this yet, unless you really think they can't (not whether the vehicle can do it now)

Offline mn

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 319
  • United States
  • Liked: 158
  • Likes Given: 61

1.  How many F9 launches did we have a situation where you can see 10 minutes in advance that you would like to move the T0 by a few minutes to get a better odds of a GO - trying to fly between the clouds...?

2. Was there ever a F9 launch scrubbed because the weather was RED at T0 but they could have gotten a GREEN had they been able to adjust the T0 10 minutes in advance?


1.  Boat in the box, bad weather, range problem, GSE problem, etc.  Many things that could clear up in few minutes instead of scrub for an instantaneous window.

2.  yes.
SES-9 had a hold at for a boat in the range; it was recycled and another attempt made about 30 minutes later but the LOX had warmed too much. http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=39348.160

Hold was called at T-1:33 so they are forced to a full recycle, Had it been an instantaneous window, a few minutes of flexibility would not have helped.

I think we are far enough off topic without starting to disect individual launches, unless a mod wants to create a new thread to discuss this separately.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32329
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 10983
  • Likes Given: 326

At most you can say if there is a boat already in the box before the terminal count they can push the T0 by a few minutes and hope for the best, possible but I don't recall that happening.


That is the scenario

Offline 3Davideo

  • Member
  • Posts: 24
  • Whittier CA
  • Liked: 9
  • Likes Given: 14
i have a question.  I live in the Greater Los Angeles area, about 200 miles ESE of the Vandenburg Range.  Assuming clear skies, nominal flight, and a view clear of obstructions, is there any chance I might be able to see any of the higher altitude flight?  Since this would be at about 10:30 in the morning locally, would I have any better or worse luck seeing future flights at different times of day, such as in the middle of the night?

Offline vulture4

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1000
  • Liked: 308
  • Likes Given: 90
It might be visible at that distance if you have clear weather over the entire area between you and the launch pad.



Offline Space Ghost 1962

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2783
  • Whatcha gonna do when the Ghost zaps you?
  • Liked: 2903
  • Likes Given: 2249
For those interested in yaw steering, suggest you google "yaw steering patent". Many. Likely difficult litigation too.

Landing deals with an finite element model of an elastic vehicle in an inertial frame on a ballistic arc, to specific target(s). Yaw steering involves dynamic orbital mechanics to optimally, iteratively apply know vehicle performance to achieve multiple and concurrent degenerate flight guidance solutions compensating for missed propulsion "opportunities". Apples and oranges. Both are sinks for the same vehicle performance capability, which when you are maxing out with minimal margins, have limited benefit. Oh, and certain necessary performance characteristics have to be designed into the LV for the ability to "catch up" in certain orbital insertions.

You'd want to do this on a mature vehicle, not one under significant development.

As to launch, California is about to receive heavy rain storms from the north. Best day looks like Tuesday the 10th, which is not one of the days listed (9,11,12). And with these storms, launch visibility might be problematic.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32329
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 10983
  • Likes Given: 326
i have a question.  I live in the Greater Los Angeles area, about 200 miles ESE of the Vandenburg Range.  Assuming clear skies, nominal flight, and a view clear of obstructions, is there any chance I might be able to see any of the higher altitude flight?  Since this would be at about 10:30 in the morning locally, would I have any better or worse luck seeing future flights at different times of day, such as in the middle of the night?

I lived in LA and saw launches from San Pedro, El Segundo (LAAFB) and Palos Verdes.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28177
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 7976
  • Likes Given: 5323
For those interested in yaw steering, suggest you google "yaw steering patent". Many. Likely difficult litigation too.

Landing deals with an finite element model of an elastic vehicle in an inertial frame on a ballistic arc, to specific target(s). Yaw steering involves dynamic orbital mechanics to optimally, iteratively apply know vehicle performance to achieve multiple and concurrent degenerate flight guidance solutions compensating for missed propulsion "opportunities". Apples and oranges.
Sure, but landing is actually MORE dynamic as the parameter space is much larger in multiple dimensions. With yaw steering, the only thing changing is time of launch, which determines precisely where the launch vehicle and satellite are with respect to one another. This can be calculated in closed form, actually, though you then need to generate a launch solution, but you have to do that anyway. In principle, you could just pre-calculate a look-up table of solutions ahead of time. But with landing, the parameter space is much larger and doesn't change in just 1 dimensions (time) but basically all the other ones simultaneously, so cheating with pre-computed tables is impossible.
Quote
Both are sinks for the same vehicle performance capability, which when you are maxing out with minimal margins, have limited benefit. Oh, and certain necessary performance characteristics have to be designed into the LV for the ability to "catch up" in certain orbital insertions.

You'd want to do this on a mature vehicle, not one under significant development.
...
No argument there! Completely agree.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline sfxtd

  • Slow, but Sure User
  • Member
  • Posts: 88
  • Los Angeles, CA
  • Liked: 26
  • Likes Given: 40
i have a question.  I live in the Greater Los Angeles area, about 200 miles ESE of the Vandenburg Range.  Assuming clear skies, nominal flight, and a view clear of obstructions, is there any chance I might be able to see any of the higher altitude flight?  Since this would be at about 10:30 in the morning locally, would I have any better or worse luck seeing future flights at different times of day, such as in the middle of the night?

Yes.  Weather is, of course, key. Given a clear sky the flight (exhaust trail, and perhaps even the vehicle itself with binoculars.) should be visible to the west. The sun angle should be good.

The classic Vandenberg launch scene is for sunset launches westward into the Pacific. The swirling high-altitude trails in the setting sunlight are spectacular. They were common during the cold-war heyday of missile development and training. I once saw clearly a westward night flight and staging from the San Fernando Valley (Birthplace of Rocketdyne and Lockheed.)

Offline darkenfast

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 810
  • Liked: 465
  • Likes Given: 1148
F9 is vertical and going for an attempt today.

Will update again if we hear of a firing. HOWEVER, as per usual, only SpaceX (or Iridium as the customer) can declare a good static fire, usually via Twitter. Then it'll be data review and LRR.

Are they doing the static fire with the payload attached? :'D


Chris Beargin has spoken!

Online woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8233
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 4413
  • Likes Given: 1374
F9 is vertical and going for an attempt today.

Will update again if we hear of a firing. HOWEVER, as per usual, only SpaceX (or Iridium as the customer) can declare a good static fire, usually via Twitter. Then it'll be data review and LRR.

Are they doing the static fire with the payload attached? :'D
Ever since AMOS-6 there is a couple hundred million dollars worth of reasons to NOT have your payload attached to the rocket for the static fire. It is likely that just about every SpaceX customer will now use that option by default.
« Last Edit: 01/06/2017 07:59 AM by woods170 »

Offline high road

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 777
  • Europe
  • Liked: 219
  • Likes Given: 54
Can the FAA give the green light during the weekend? Or would it have to be today for SpaceX to be able to launch monday?

Offline jacqmans

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17377
  • Houten, The Netherlands
  • Liked: 3114
  • Likes Given: 191
F9 is vertical and going for an attempt today.

Will update again if we hear of a firing. HOWEVER, as per usual, only SpaceX (or Iridium as the customer) can declare a good static fire, usually via Twitter. Then it'll be data review and LRR.

Are they doing the static fire with the payload attached? :'D
Ever since AMOS-6 there is a couple hundred million dollars worth of reasons to NOT have your payload attached to the rocket for the static fire. It is likely that just about every SpaceX customer will now use that option by default.

I never understood why they did the static fires with the payload in the first place, there is always the risk, but SpaceX would have their reasons to do so.. (saving time is a bad reason as it is only 1 extra day in the flow...)

But that is another discussion....

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28177
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 7976
  • Likes Given: 5323
F9 is vertical and going for an attempt today.

Will update again if we hear of a firing. HOWEVER, as per usual, only SpaceX (or Iridium as the customer) can declare a good static fire, usually via Twitter. Then it'll be data review and LRR.

Are they doing the static fire with the payload attached? :'D
Ever since AMOS-6 there is a couple hundred million dollars worth of reasons to NOT have your payload attached to the rocket for the static fire. It is likely that just about every SpaceX customer will now use that option by default.
It was just a joke, y'all! :)
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28177
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 7976
  • Likes Given: 5323
Quote
"The FAA has not yet issued a license to SpaceX for a launch in January," the Federal Aviation Administration said on Thursday. "The FAA continues to work closely with SpaceX as they conduct the investigation and prepare for future Falcon 9 launches."
http://money.cnn.com/2017/01/05/news/elon-musk-spacex-launch/
Hmmm...

What's up, I wonder? Is the FAA trying to take on mission assurance as well?

EDIT: Not likely going to be a problem.
« Last Edit: 01/06/2017 12:43 PM by Robotbeat »
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4309
  • Liked: 2275
  • Likes Given: 1308
Quote
"The FAA has not yet issued a license to SpaceX for a launch in January," the Federal Aviation Administration said on Thursday. "The FAA continues to work closely with SpaceX as they conduct the investigation and prepare for future Falcon 9 launches."
http://money.cnn.com/2017/01/05/news/elon-musk-spacex-launch/
Hmmm...

What's up, I wonder? Is the FAA trying to take on mission assurance as well?

EDIT: Not likely going to be a problem.

How can not having a launch license be anything other than a problem.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28177
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 7976
  • Likes Given: 5323
Quote
"The FAA has not yet issued a license to SpaceX for a launch in January," the Federal Aviation Administration said on Thursday. "The FAA continues to work closely with SpaceX as they conduct the investigation and prepare for future Falcon 9 launches."
http://money.cnn.com/2017/01/05/news/elon-musk-spacex-launch/
Hmmm...

What's up, I wonder? Is the FAA trying to take on mission assurance as well?

EDIT: Not likely going to be a problem.

How can not having a launch license be anything other than a problem.
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=41538.msg1626734#new
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline mn

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 319
  • United States
  • Liked: 158
  • Likes Given: 61
Quote
"The FAA has not yet issued a license to SpaceX for a launch in January," the Federal Aviation Administration said on Thursday. "The FAA continues to work closely with SpaceX as they conduct the investigation and prepare for future Falcon 9 launches."
http://money.cnn.com/2017/01/05/news/elon-musk-spacex-launch/
Hmmm...

What's up, I wonder? Is the FAA trying to take on mission assurance as well?

EDIT: Not likely going to be a problem.

How can not having a launch license be anything other than a problem.

Perhaps they just want some data from the static fire before issuing the license?

Tags: