SpaceX Falcon 9 : BulgariaSat-1 : June 23, 2017 : DISCUSSION

[cppetrie]

Looks like they've figured out just what the aluminum fins will put up with. And almost found out if the stage can tolerate losing a fin midflight.

And really demonstrated why they needed to transition to the Titanium ones which still look brand new after flight.

[Herb Schaltegger]

Looks like they've figured out just what the aluminum fins will put up with. And almost found out if the stage can tolerate losing a fin midflight.

And really demonstrated why they needed to transition to the Titanium ones which still look brand new after flight.

They look brand new after Iridium flights. The proof will be how well they handle a super-synchronous mission profile such as BulgariaSat. I have little doubt they'll hold up a lot better; but I do have doubts they will be infinitely reusable.

Time of course will tell.

[Ben the Space Brit]

Combining the fin damage with the landing gear collapse, I think that we can safety say that a BulgariaSat-1-like super-synchronous mission profile represents the furthest you can push the block-3 core. Whether the titanium-finned block-4s can manage better is a question to be answered but not one I would feel confident telling Mr Musk to try too quickly.

[FutureSpaceTourist]

Reddit user FellowHumanBean noticed an amendment to the FCC launch license for Bulgariasat:

SpaceX BulgariaSat liability insurance
I missed this at the time, but on June 16, the FAA modified SpaceX's liability insurance see LLS 17-101 for the BulgariaSat mission to $68MM, while other missions covered by the same license remain at $30MM.

That's a great spot! Not obvious to me why the change. Wasn't SES-10, i.e. first booster re-use, under the original version of this licence? So why the change for BulgariaSat?

[su27k]

Reddit user FellowHumanBean noticed an amendment to the FCC launch license for Bulgariasat:

SpaceX BulgariaSat liability insurance
I missed this at the time, but on June 16, the FAA modified SpaceX's liability insurance see LLS 17-101 for the BulgariaSat mission to $68MM, while other missions covered by the same license remain at $30MM.

That's a great spot! Not obvious to me why the change. Wasn't SES-10, i.e. first booster re-use, under the original version of this licence? So why the change for BulgariaSat?

I think BulgariaSat skipped McGregor testing? It also had a longer than usual static fire.

[macpacheco]

I think BulgariaSat skipped McGregor testing? It also had a longer than usual static fire.

Refurbishments are being done 100% at the CAPE. The booster never leaves back to McGregor or Hawthorne.
Every information available says the first time the booster engine fires again is at the static fire.

The very first refurb might have been different, but apparently it was the exception.

[IanThePineapple]

I think BulgariaSat skipped McGregor testing? It also had a longer than usual static fire.

The very first refurb might have been different, but apparently it was the exception.

Yep, CRS-8 went back to McGregor for a full duration static fire (I don't know if it went all the way to Hawethorne though).

[Robotbeat]

I think BulgariaSat skipped McGregor testing? It also had a longer than usual static fire.

Refurbishments are being done 100% at the CAPE. The booster never leaves back to McGregor or Hawthorne.
Every information available says the first time the booster engine fires again is at the static fire.

The very first refurb might have been different, but apparently it was the exception.

So the answer is "yes"?

[billh]

After seeing the condition of the grid fins I went back and reviewed the video coverage. If the on-screen telemetry is accurate, when the first stage for BulgariaSat-1 started its entry burn its velocity was 8500 km/h. Even at the end of the burn it was still 6600 km/h. Compare that to CRS-11 (which also did a boostback burn): 4500 km/h at the start of the entry burn and 3500 km/h at the end. That's a whale of a big difference in kinetic energy that has to be dissipated by drag forces. It's really amazing this stage survived at all!

[craiglv2]

Still eagerly awaiting release of the landing video..

[Paul_G]

Still eagerly awaiting release of the landing video..

I think SpaceX want to focus on mission success for Intelsat before they show off their own 'wild' stuff. Its noticeable on the last few webcasts that they are giving their launch customers air time, which is nice for us to understand what the primary missions are all about.

Paul

[mlow]

Still eagerly awaiting release of the landing video..

I think SpaceX want to focus on mission success for Intelsat before they show off their own 'wild' stuff. Its noticeable on the last few webcasts that they are giving their launch customers air time, which is nice for us to understand what the primary missions are all about.

Paul

Have we had official release of some of the sporty landings? Thaicom landing for instance was the other sporty landing that comes to mind.

[old_sellsword]

Still eagerly awaiting release of the landing video..

I think SpaceX want to focus on mission success for Intelsat before they show off their own 'wild' stuff. Its noticeable on the last few webcasts that they are giving their launch customers air time, which is nice for us to understand what the primary missions are all about.

Paul

Have we had official release of some of the sporty landings? Thaicom landing for instance was the other sporty landing that comes to mind.

We sort of got landing footage for Thaicom 8. Not what most here would prefer, but better than nothing.

[Bernadov]

Any news on a landing video of the 1029.2. booster?

[cferreir]

Not letting this die until we get a video or story from SpaceX. Come on...we learn from our failures! We learn more from being open.........That is what we love from SpaceX!!! Lets see that awesome video!

[tvg98]

Not letting this die until we get a video or story from SpaceX. Come on...we learn from our failures! We learn more from being open.........That is what we love from SpaceX!!! Lets see that awesome video!

Don't get your hopes up. Multiple people who claim to know employees who have seen the video have said it is highly unlikely people like you or I will get to see it.

[JebK]

If we don't see it (and if they haven't released it yet they're likely not going to) it won't be the first time they haven't released landing video.  Sure they showed initial failures, but they only released video of an attempt if it showed progress from a previous one, if this looks iffy it would look like a step backward even though the landing was successful.  Unfortunately ts all about Corporate PR, not "look how cool this is fellow rocket nerds!".

[cscott]

We'll probably see each excerpt in Elon's September lecture.  Gwynne also likes to compile summary videos for her talks.

[Notleslie]

Anyone have any idea what just happened to the R/B from this launch? Did they perform a de-orbit manoever???


1 42802U 17038B   17293.72551647  .00027554  34224-5  23039-2 0  9996
2 42802  24.5026  10.7656 8296019 214.1455  24.5398  1.15434098  1332
1 42802U 17038B   17298.50320531 -.00000191  22902-6  00000+0 0  9993
2 42802  24.2449   8.5033 5926106 217.8158 334.7218  4.30932446  1399
1 42802U 17038B   17298.50320531 -.00000191  22902-6  00000+0 0  9993
2 42802  24.2449   8.5033 5926106 217.8158 334.7218  4.30932446  1399
1 42802U 17038B   17298.50320531 -.00000191  22902-6  00000+0 0  9993
2 42802  24.2449   8.5033 5926106 217.8158 334.7218  4.30932446  1399
1 42802U 17038B   17298.50320531 -.00000191  22902-6  00000+0 0  9993
2 42802  24.2449   8.5033 5926106 217.8158 334.7218  4.30932446  1399
1 42802U 17038B   17299.50658123  .00002909 -18328-4  00000+0 0  9999
2 42802  24.1857   6.6360 2957658 221.3868 298.2410  9.85103635  1432

[gwiz]

With its very eccentric orbit and low perigee, it's vulnerable to combinations of lunar/solar gravity perturbations and atmospheric variations that can give a significant aerobraking effect.