On the SpaceX Manifest thread, it says that the launch date is May 3rd. Could SpaceX pull off two launches in five days?
Am I right in saying that these are the two SEP-powered spacecraft that only need to be launched into LEO?
So, give the wildly much too optimistic assumption of two building, two rockets and two complete crews form SpaceX and satellite vendors to work on them, what is the rate limiting work on the pad itself? I'm guessing the umbilicals have to be replaced and RP-1 and chilled LOX talks have to be brought back up to capacity, what else?
Quote from: Okie_Steve on 04/20/2016 03:04 pmSo, give the wildly much too optimistic assumption of two building, two rockets and two complete crews form SpaceX and satellite vendors to work on them, what is the rate limiting work on the pad itself? I'm guessing the umbilicals have to be replaced and RP-1 and chilled LOX talks have to be brought back up to capacity, what else?One building, one erector and one pad. Only one set of stages can fit in the SLC-40 HIF at a time.
Is it pretty much impossible to do "most of the work" in the 39a HIF and then transfer? I'm thinking once they mate the second stage they''re not going to move from one HIF to another...?
Would it be practical to prep Eutelsat/ABS in LC-39A's HIF while JCSAT is tying up SLC-40?Actually I guess CRS-8's booster will be occupying 39A for a while, but more generally, if LC-39A isn't in the middle of a launch campaign, would it be practical to use its HIF to parallel process a second F9 and/or payload, and move it over to SLC-40 once the first F9 is launched and 40's HIF is clear?I imagine in the future with, say, 4 Dragon launches (3 cargo, 1 crew) and some number of additional NASA, AF or other gov't payloads, 39A will be fairly busy and its facilities won't be sitting idle for long stretches. And if they are idle, then SpaceX could just launch a commercial sat from 39A and not bother with transferring the vehicle to 40, so I guess this current period is an anomaly and using 39A to prep a launch for 40 wouldn't be a normal procedure.
Quote from: GreenShrike on 04/20/2016 03:37 pmWould it be practical to prep Eutelsat/ABS in LC-39A's HIF while JCSAT is tying up SLC-40?Actually I guess CRS-8's booster will be occupying 39A for a while, but more generally, if LC-39A isn't in the middle of a launch campaign, would it be practical to use its HIF to parallel process a second F9 and/or payload, and move it over to SLC-40 once the first F9 is launched and 40's HIF is clear?I imagine in the future with, say, 4 Dragon launches (3 cargo, 1 crew) and some number of additional NASA, AF or other gov't payloads, 39A will be fairly busy and its facilities won't be sitting idle for long stretches. And if they are idle, then SpaceX could just launch a commercial sat from 39A and not bother with transferring the vehicle to 40, so I guess this current period is an anomaly and using 39A to prep a launch for 40 wouldn't be a normal procedure.They don't move completed vehicles between facilities.
Eutelsat: Launch of Eutelsat 117 West B telecom satellite on SpaceX Falcon 9 with ABS 2A co-passenger still expected before the end of June.
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=40231.msg1531465#msg1531465My opinion... this one will go expendable... see above post I made in the Manifest thread... I may be wrong... just my opinion... On edit much later... I am likely wrong on this.. not as heavy as I was led to believe..
Peter B. de Selding @pbdes 10m10 minutes agoHere's Eutelsat launch plan. Add 115 West B, launched for LatAm. Co believes in HTS for consumer brdbnd only.
Peter B. de Selding @pbdes 21m21 minutes agoEutelsat says SpaceX launch of its 117W B sat (w/ ABS-2A) in mid-June. This is 2d pair of Boeing all-elect sats riding together on Falcon 9.
