SpaceX Falcon 9 FT - ORBCOMM-2 - Dec. 21, 2015 (Return To Flight) DISCUSSION

[Comga]

Dragging this discussion back to the topic in the title.....

There is a page of the July FPIP in a ISS document linked in an ISS Status thread.  It has the SpX-8 details greyed out, but the SpX-9 and SpX-10 flights are unchanged.

The next Visiting Vehicle listed after HTV5 departs on 9/26 is the arrival of Orb-4 on 12/6.  The launch of SpX-8 could be delayed by up to 68 days to 11/5, stay at the ISS the full 30 days, and still not overlap with Orb-4 or the scheduled SpX-9 berthing.

There is a beta angle >60 deg cut-out 10/28-11/03.  My guess for the SpX-8 launch remains around the latter date.

sure, they need the docking adaptor & Beam is a test module.

Excuse me but what does your comment about IDA and BEAM have to do with the Return to Flight date?

[Kabloona]

Cross Orbcomm off the list of RTF candidates:

Peter B. de Selding –  ‏@pbdes

Orbcomm CEO: Our SpaceX launch of 11 final 2d-gen sats could be as early as November. We'll be 2d or 3d launch of improved-power Falcon 9.

[Jose Martinez]

Chris article pointing to possible SpaceX RTF in October, near the end of this cool article about Cygnus.

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/08/orb-4-cygnus-set-atlas-v-ride-ahead-antares-return/

[Wonger]

Cross Orbcomm off the list of RTF candidates:

Peter B. de Selding –  ‏@pbdes

Orbcomm CEO: Our SpaceX launch of 11 final 2d-gen sats could be as early as November. We'll be 2d or 3d launch of improved-power Falcon 9.

Of the remaining likely candidates - SES, Jason-3, and CRS-8 - it would seem to me that Jason-3 represents the best candidate.  Since it's the last F9 v1.1, it doesn't have the additional complication of being a v1.2 and all that that entails.  Jason-3 is already built so SpaceX needs to replace the stage 2 and stage 1 struts with the new struts (probably not easy but straightforward) and they can proceed.  The only additional complication if it is Jason-3 for RTF is that the West Coast ASDS needs to be ready but that process seems to be well underway.

[Jim]

The only additional complication if it is Jason-3 for RTF is that the West Coast ASDS needs to be ready but that process seems to be well underway.

That has no bearing on the launch date.  NASA doesn't care if it is ready or not.

[Wonger]

The only additional complication if it is Jason-3 for RTF is that the West Coast ASDS needs to be ready but that process seems to be well underway.

That has no bearing on the launch date.  NASA doesn't care if it is ready or not.

But SpaceX does care.  We know they piggyback their efforts to land the S1 on launches paid by their customers, thereby cutting their development costs dramatically.   If Jason-3 is ready to launch on the given launch date and the ASDS is not ready, I think you are right and they would launch.  Plus SpaceX needs to get its revenue stream going again, after all.  But judging by the level of activity we've seen on the west coast ASDS, it appears SpaceX is trying hard to have the ASDS ready.

edit - reworded

[Jim]

  If Jason-3 is ready to launch on the given launch date and the ASDS is not ready, I think you are right and they would launch.

I am right, that is how it would happen

[Sesquipedalian]

That's how it has happened, too.  SpaceX launched DSCOVR even though the weather at the ASDS was no-go.

[meekGee]

Landing considerations will remain secondary until reusability becomes part of the deal.

Right now the pricing is for expendable launches, so the customer has to be incredibly generous to agree to a delay on account of reusability conditions...

After reusability becomes the new normal, then it will be exactly like a jet not taking off because of bad weather at the destination airport.

[rcoppola]

Landing considerations will remain secondary until reusability becomes part of the deal.

Right now the pricing is for expendable launches, so the customer has to be incredibly generous to agree to a delay on account of reusability conditions...

After reusability becomes the new normal, then it will be exactly like a jet not taking off because of bad weather at the destination airport.

Once reusability becomes normal, I'd expect the landing destination to be the same general area of the launch origination and thus, weather would be more in balance since the first stage would be back at the general launch area around 9 minutes post launch.

[Comga]

  If Jason-3 is ready to launch on the given launch date and the ASDS is not ready, I think you are right and they would launch.

I am right, that is how it would happen

And with that said, unless you want to dispute Jim's assertion, the ASDS and reusability become distractions for the Return to Flight discussion, thank you.

But while we are off-topic, an alarm just went off in my phone for what was supposed to be a launch for SES tomorrow.  Oh well...

Now, back to the RTF.
Ten weeks or so?

[Wonger]

...
And with that said, unless you want to dispute Jim's assertion, the ASDS and reusability become distractions for the Return to Flight discussion, thank you.
...

I am not disputing Jim's assertion.  I agree with Jim.  I must have poor communication/posting skills because this is not the first time it has happened where my intended sentiment gets distorted.  Or maybe it's like the game Telegraph. 

Let's start again.  Based on Kabloona's post that Orbcomm (which was my original guess as to the RTF mission) was not going to be the RTF launch, then I thought it would be Jason-3, for the reasons I listed.

I mentioned that it appeared that SpaceX was "trying hard" to get the west coast ASDS ready.  I did not state that readiness of the ASDS would affect the launch.  It was Jim that stated the ASDS has no bearing on NASA, to which I completely agree.  NASA's goal is to launch Jason-3.  SpaceX's goal is the same, thereby achieving RTF and restoring their launch flow and their income stream. 

However, SpaceX does have a secondary goal to get the west coast ASDS ready in time to attempt a S1 landing.  This is their goal, not NASA's.  If the ASDS isn't ready, obviously they launch anyway.  Readiness of the ASDS does not in any way influence the launch of Jason-3.

...
Now, back to the RTF.
Ten weeks or so?

Poll?

[Nomadd]

The only additional complication if it is Jason-3 for RTF is that the West Coast ASDS needs to be ready but that process seems to be well underway.

That has no bearing on the launch date.  NASA doesn't care if it is ready or not.

It doesn't mean it would affect their decision or it would be a complication, but NASA does "care". Unlike some, most NASA people understand what a returned booster would mean.

[Nomadd]

Poll?

No.

[Jim]

 It doesn't mean it would affect their decision or it would be a complication, but NASA does "care". Unlike some, most NASA people understand what a returned booster would mean.

Not for this launch.  First stage landing will have no bearing on any launch decision.

[cscott]

I'm pretty sure @Nomadd meant "care" as in "will be excited to see RTLS succeed", not "care" as in "would delay Jason-3 to give RTLS a better shot".

[macpacheco]

Is there any possibility the in flight abort for Dragon 2 to be the RTF mission ?
The real question is will it be ready on time.
If it is, it poses the least demand on the F9R booster:
 1 - Its only until MaxQ
 2 - It offers the maximum fuel margins for recovery
 3 - It's planned to reuse the already used Dragon V2
On the downside, as a partial mission, it wouldn't test F9R on a complete mission but it should increase confidence for more takers to go on the follow on mission.

[Jcc]

Is there any possibility the in flight abort for Dragon 2 to be the RTF mission ?
The real question is will it be ready on time.
If it is, it poses the least demand on the F9R booster:
 1 - Its only until MaxQ
 2 - It offers the maximum fuel margins for recovery
 3 - It's planned to reuse the already used Dragon V2
On the downside, as a partial mission, it wouldn't test F9R on a complete mission but it should increase confidence for more takers to go on the follow on mission.

Doubt it. First, aborting mid flight is a poor example of return to flight. Second, they have a whole bunch of commercial launches to get done, and and abort doesn't help with that either. NASA is OK with delaying the abort, since it's better to use a more finished Dragon 2 for it.

[OnWithTheShow]

The inflight abort will be a new Dragon V2, thats why it was delayed. They plan on reusing the inflight abort for the demo mission (or vice versa).

[woods170]

The inflight abort will be a new Dragon V2, thats why it was delayed. They plan on reusing the inflight abort for the demo mission (or vice versa).

Vice Versa: the Dragon 2 from the demo mission will be refurbished afterwards to serve as the in-flight abort test vehicle.