Author Topic: SpaceX Falcon 9 FT - ORBCOMM-2 - Dec. 21, 2015 (Return To Flight) DISCUSSION (Read 1360672 times)

Kabloona · « **Reply #940 on:** 12/12/2015 04:19 pm »

To avoid more clutter of this thread, please take all future arguments for why SpaceX should/could/would add uplink capability to the first stage for in-flight landing retargeting to this new thread:

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=39011.0

This subject has nothing to do with OBCOMM/RTF mission.

rcoppola · « **Reply #941 on:** 12/12/2015 04:44 pm »

Quote from: Johnnyhinbos on 12/12/2015 03:23 pm

Any speculation about the changes to the landing legs? Looks like the stowed attachment point is different, and there are dual protrusions along each side...

The dual protrusions that help keep the legs stowed against the stage on each side of the legs have always been there. The fairing caps at the tip of the legs look a bit chunkier. Hard to tell from this angle but are probably the result of extruding the only part that actually touches ground.

Edit: If you're also referring to where the tip of the legs attach to the stage, I think that's a result of the forced perspective of the picture. It looks to be about the same distance up the stage. Typically they end about where the C in SpaceX is painted. It looks further up but again the perspective of the picture make it hard to judge.

oiorionsbelt · « **Reply #942 on:** 12/12/2015 06:13 pm »

Quote from: Jim on 12/11/2015 06:17 pm

The FTS is moving to an autonomous system and it won't use receivers.

Interesting.

Johnnyhinbos · « **Reply #943 on:** 12/12/2015 06:33 pm »

I was told by a guy working on the RTF booster that the fairing in front of the grid fins isn't being used.

Jim · « **Reply #944 on:** 12/12/2015 07:51 pm »

Quote from: oiorionsbelt on 12/12/2015 06:13 pm

Quote from: Jim on 12/11/2015 06:17 pm
The FTS is moving to an autonomous system and it won't use receivers.

Interesting.

That is a range initiative and not Spacex

Arb · « **Reply #945 on:** 12/12/2015 07:53 pm »

Anyone know what the yellow pyramid is used for?

russianhalo117 · « **Reply #946 on:** 12/12/2015 07:58 pm »

Quote from: Arb on 12/12/2015 07:53 pm

Anyone know what the yellow pyramid is used for?

looks like a uline do not do not double stack warning placard for the top of a loaded pallet.

Johnnyhinbos · « **Reply #947 on:** 12/12/2015 08:45 pm »

Quote from: Arb on 12/12/2015 07:53 pm

Anyone know what the yellow pyramid is used for?

Funny - I was wondering same thing. Looks like an ant trap (but I know it's not...)

Arb · « **Reply #948 on:** 12/12/2015 09:49 pm »

Quote from: russianhalo117 on 12/12/2015 07:58 pm

Quote from: Arb on 12/12/2015 07:53 pm
Anyone know what the yellow pyramid is used for?
looks like a uline do not do not double stack warning placard for the top of a loaded pallet.

So it is (http://www.uline.com/BL_2156/Pallet-Cones).

Many thanks.

Lars-J · « **Reply #949 on:** 12/13/2015 12:49 am »

Quote from: Johnnyhinbos on 12/12/2015 03:23 pm

Any speculation about the changes to the landing legs? Looks like the stowed attachment point is different, and there are dual protrusions along each side...

No, the legs look the same as before.

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #950 on:** 12/14/2015 02:10 pm »

ORBCOMM mission overview video (just tweeted - but looks like a previous SpaceX video):

Roy_H · « **Reply #951 on:** 12/14/2015 04:57 pm »

Quote from: Jim on 12/12/2015 07:51 pm

Quote from: oiorionsbelt on 12/12/2015 06:13 pm
Quote from: Jim on 12/11/2015 06:17 pm
The FTS is moving to an autonomous system and it won't use receivers.

Interesting.
That is a range initiative and not Spacex

I am surprised to hear that. I was so sure it was initiated by SpaceX, although obviously would have to be approved by Range. Actually I thought it might not be approved and only used at Boca Chica.

oldAtlas_Eguy · « **Reply #952 on:** 12/14/2015 05:18 pm »

Quote from: Roy_H on 12/14/2015 04:57 pm

Quote from: Jim on 12/12/2015 07:51 pm
Quote from: oiorionsbelt on 12/12/2015 06:13 pm
Quote from: Jim on 12/11/2015 06:17 pm
The FTS is moving to an autonomous system and it won't use receivers.

Interesting.
That is a range initiative and not Spacex

I am surprised to hear that. I was so sure it was initiated by SpaceX, although obviously would have to be approved by Range. Actually I thought it might not be approved and only used at Boca Chica.

The hardware is already existing and qualified since 2013. This was a AF ORS project called AFSS (Automated Flight Safety System).
http://ors.csd.disa.mil/media/AFSS_Factsheet_A001%20final.pdf

Kabloona · « **Reply #953 on:** 12/14/2015 05:25 pm »

Quote from: oldAtlas_Eguy on 12/14/2015 05:18 pm

Quote from: Roy_H on 12/14/2015 04:57 pm
Quote from: Jim on 12/12/2015 07:51 pm
Quote from: oiorionsbelt on 12/12/2015 06:13 pm
Quote from: Jim on 12/11/2015 06:17 pm
The FTS is moving to an autonomous system and it won't use receivers.

Interesting.
That is a range initiative and not Spacex

I am surprised to hear that. I was so sure it was initiated by SpaceX, although obviously would have to be approved by Range. Actually I thought it might not be approved and only used at Boca Chica.
The hardware is already existing and qualified since 2013. This was a AF ORS project called AFSS (Automated Flight Safety System).
http://ors.csd.disa.mil/media/AFSS_Factsheet_A001%20final.pdf

The hardware exists but hasn't been fully implemented. There is still a MFCO in the loop. Eventually the idea is to transition to the point that the AFSS can automatically issue the destruct signal with no human in the loop. See graphic on page 13 of link below.

https://www.aiaa.org/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=7550

Jim · « **Reply #954 on:** 12/14/2015 06:57 pm »

Quote from: Roy_H on 12/14/2015 04:57 pm

I am surprised to hear that. I was so sure it was initiated by SpaceX, although obviously would have to be approved by Range. Actually I thought it might not be approved and only used at Boca Chica.

The FAA uses the same rules as the Range and so there wouldn't be any differences between FL and TX

Mike_1179 · « **Reply #955 on:** 12/15/2015 09:18 am »

From the Update thread

Quote from: Flying Beaver on 12/15/2015 05:51 am

ORBCOMM OG2 Mission 2 Launch Update (From Orbcomm)

SpaceX has integrated the two stages of the Falcon 9 rocket and encapsulated the fairing around the satellite stack. The encapsulated fairing is targeted to be mated to the Falcon 9 early tomorrow (Tuesday, December 15). SpaceX is currently aiming for a static fire of the Falcon 9 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida on Wednesday, December 16.

Has SpaceX had the payload attached for previous hot fires? Looking at pictures from DSCOVR in January and TurkmenAlem52E/MonacoSat back in April, the payload isn't there. The Jason-3 thread also notes that the payload is getting attached now, several weeks before launch.

Why the change? What benefit is there to earlier payload attachment? Why would you change the order of that operation if you have to wheel the vehicle back into the HIF after a hot fire anyway.

Hauerg · « **Reply #956 on:** 12/15/2015 10:09 am »

Either to simply minimize the time between hotfire and launch or to get additional data becaus hotfire is now representative for the whole stack?
Or both?

Kabloona · « **Reply #957 on:** 12/15/2015 10:35 am »

Quote from: Mike_1179 on 12/15/2015 09:18 am

Why would you change the order of that operation if you have to wheel the vehicle back into the HIF after a hot fire anyway.

Maybe not going back to the HIF this time? That's one way to speed up the flow on this and future missions: mate payload, roll out to pad, hot fire, then launch.

Mike_1179 · « **Reply #958 on:** 12/15/2015 10:55 am »

Quote from: Kabloona on 12/15/2015 10:35 am

Quote from: Mike_1179 on 12/15/2015 09:18 am
Why would you change the order of that operation if you have to wheel the vehicle back into the HIF after a hot fire anyway.

Maybe not going back to the HIF this time? That's one way to speed up the flow on this and future missions: mate payload, roll out to pad, hot fire, then launch.

SpaceX has run 3 days from hot fire to launch for the last several missions, no time savings.

mfck · « **Reply #959 on:** 12/15/2015 11:50 am »

Quote from: Mike_1179 on 12/15/2015 09:18 am

From the Update thread

Quote from: Flying Beaver on 12/15/2015 05:51 am
ORBCOMM OG2 Mission 2 Launch Update (From Orbcomm)

SpaceX has integrated the two stages of the Falcon 9 rocket and encapsulated the fairing around the satellite stack. The encapsulated fairing is targeted to be mated to the Falcon 9 early tomorrow (Tuesday, December 15). SpaceX is currently aiming for a static fire of the Falcon 9 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida on Wednesday, December 16.

Has SpaceX had the payload attached for previous hot fires? Looking at pictures from DSCOVR in January and TurkmenAlem52E/MonacoSat back in April, the payload isn't there. The Jason-3 thread also notes that the payload is getting attached now, several weeks before launch.

Why the change? What benefit is there to earlier payload attachment? Why would you change the order of that operation if you have to wheel the vehicle back into the HIF after a hot fire anyway.

Considering it is structurally different stack from 1.1* and the engines would run at 100% instead of usual 85%(?) they may want to see what acoustic environment the payload is experiencing. Just a guess...

Edit:

* stretched S2, new interstage composition, new payload sep. mechanism, maybe more?