SpaceX Falcon 9 - EchoStar 23 - March 16, 2017 - DISCUSSION

[Brovane]

The legless Falcon 9 for EchoStar 23 has (had - but is still active) a Range Approved Static Fire NET Feb. 24. Clearly won't stick, but let's see how close they get after 39A checks. Shakedown check (as they call it) is Tuesday.

I'm curious why would it clearly be delayed. I know it would be record turn-around but It doesn't seem completely out of the realm of possibility to me, especially given how smoothly the pad functioned on Saturday and Sunday and that the rocket and payload are by all accounts basically ready to go. What am I missing?

Maybe they are still hung-over after the party on Sunday after the launch.   

Considering all the pressure the SpaceX teams was under the last several months to get LC39A, let's ease off the accelerator a little. 

[Lar]

no go fever here, but it will be interesting to what dates they announce and what they slip and what they eventually do.

[enzo]

I'm curious why would it clearly be delayed. I know it would be record turn-around but It doesn't seem completely out of the realm of possibility to me, especially given how smoothly the pad functioned on Saturday and Sunday and that the rocket and payload are by all accounts basically ready to go. What am I missing?

Maybe they are still hung-over after the party on Sunday after the launch.   

Considering all the pressure the SpaceX teams was under the last several months to get LC39A, let's ease off the accelerator a little.

By all means I hope they take a break, but frankly they already booked the range, and there was only a 1 day delay in the macro schedule imposed by the Saturday scrub — so I too am curious whether it's "clear" that they can't make it.

[mme]

no go fever here, but it will be interesting to what dates they announce and what they slip and what they eventually do.

Agreed. I'd be surprised if they turn around that fast but I'd also be surprised if they scheduled something that they did not think is (hugely optimistically) possible.

[Kansan52]

Someone surmised that since the HIF can handle 3 cores, the next booster may be ready. Then pad and TE readiness becomes the limiting factor.

[macpacheco]

My conjecture is the pad construction people probably could use a week rest.
But the Falcon/launch/payload integration people, why would they be so tired they couldn't press on ?
I would understand that LC40 work might not make any progress this week, and that's fine, but how should that affect the EchoStar launch ?

[FutureSpaceTourist]

[...] and that LC40 work might not make any progress this week, and that's fine, but how should that affect the EchoStar launch ?

Depends on extent of any damage to 39A from the launch and thus refurbishment required, especially as this was the first launch from effectively a new pad.

[Coastal Ron]

The legless Falcon 9 for EchoStar 23 has (had - but is still active) a Range Approved Static Fire NET Feb. 24. Clearly won't stick, but let's see how close they get after 39A checks. Shakedown check (as they call it) is Tuesday.

I'm curious why would it clearly be delayed. I know it would be record turn-around but It doesn't seem completely out of the realm of possibility to me, especially given how smoothly the pad functioned on Saturday and Sunday and that the rocket and payload are by all accounts basically ready to go. What am I missing?

Maybe they are still hung-over after the party on Sunday after the launch.   

Considering all the pressure the SpaceX teams was under the last several months to get LC39A, let's ease off the accelerator a little.

Shotwell said they are planning to fly every 2-3 weeks, so that is the plan the company will have staffed to operate at.

These are professionals, so let's assume they did not party all night long since they knew they had the next launch to prepare for.  With two successful post accident flights in a row now they need to focus on operational tempo - and I have no doubt everyone knows that is the goal.

For the events that they can control, I think they are going to try and achieve the dates they previously announced.

[Danny452]

If Echostar 23 launches on or before Saturday March 4 in the early morning, this will be the fastest turnaround between launches for SpaceX.

We'll see how quick they can turn around 39A. The new re-enforced TEL should help.

In the post-launch press conference for CRS10 Jessica Jensen of Spacex was asked how long it would take to turn around pad 39A between launches.  She said about two weeks.

[Steven Pietrobon]

I think so...

That image looks like a new core with a used interstage.

[Paul_G]

That image looks like a new core with a used interstage.

If the interstage is mostly covered in cork (my assumption), then I guess the first stage might be easier to clean the soot off of - that might explain why the stage looks like new, but the interstage slightly singed.

Paul

[vanoord]

IIRC that's the Orbcomm 2 core part-way through being cleaned up for display at Hawthorne?

From left to right: CRS-8 / JCSAT-14 / THAICOM-8 / Orbcomm-2.



edit: typo

[DOCinCT]

That image looks like a new core with a used interstage.

If the interstage is mostly covered in cork (my assumption), then I guess the first stage might be easier to clean the soot off of - that might explain why the stage looks like new, but the interstage slightly singed.

Paul

Why is the interstage covered in cork? referring to the inside which takes some damage from the VacMerlin?
BTW the interstage is an aluminum honeycomb with a carbon fiber over rap

[cscott]

The entire exterior of the rocket is covered in TPS.  Re-entry may look easy but it gets hot...

[Nick L]

The legless Falcon 9 for EchoStar 23 has (had - but is still active) a Range Approved Static Fire NET Feb. 24. Clearly won't stick, but let's see how close they get after 39A checks. Shakedown check (as they call it) is Tuesday.

Any news about the results of shakedown checks?

[intrepidpursuit]

That image looks like a new core with a used interstage.

If the interstage is mostly covered in cork (my assumption), then I guess the first stage might be easier to clean the soot off of - that might explain why the stage looks like new, but the interstage slightly singed.

Paul

Why is the interstage covered in cork? referring to the inside which takes some damage from the VacMerlin?
BTW the interstage is an aluminum honeycomb with a carbon fiber over rap

The interstage is a completely different construction than the tanks. It may be that the SPAM doesn't stick well to carbon fiber or causes some reaction, or perhaps cork is cheaper and easier on a smaller area. Since it is a separate assembly it would have a different set of engineering trade offs so a different conclusion is no surprise.

[intrepidpursuit]

Can anyone offer insight into how much prep would have been done to the Echostar stage in preparation for the static fire that never happened? It seems like if the stage is in the HIF and was days away from static fire that they could freeze it there and pick back up fairly quickly once CRS-10 stopped hogging the strongback.

Are S1 and S2 mated? Would it already be back on the strongback? How much prep is required once the rocket is on the strongback? I assume all of this relies on what kind of shape the strongback is in after CRS-10 since I'd assume it has to be flight ready before they even load up the rocket. Now that the launch platform stays at the pad (right?) it seems repairs to it and preps for the rocket could proceed in parallel, improving turn around time further.

[Jim]

Can anyone offer insight into how much prep would have been done to the Echostar stage in preparation for the static fire that never happened? It seems like if the stage is in the HIF and was days away from static fire that they could freeze it there and pick back up fairly quickly once CRS-10 stopped hogging the strongback.

Are S1 and S2 mated? Would it already be back on the strongback? How much prep is required once the rocket is on the strongback? I assume all of this relies on what kind of shape the strongback is in after CRS-10 since I'd assume it has to be flight ready before they even load up the rocket. Now that the launch platform stays at the pad (right?) it seems repairs to it and preps for the rocket could proceed in parallel, improving turn around time further.

TEL with platform and tower are not be separated again.  Unless to be modified.

[M.E.T.]

Am I just naive, to experience such disappointment when SpaceX miss their target dates by such big margins?

Why say you are aiming for a launch every two weeks when the range is obviously not available for 3 weeks? Why say your first re-used launch is happening in March, when the preceding launch is NET 12 March, and you know that a 2 week cadence is long term aspirational, while a 3 week turnaround is the absolute best you can currently achieve?

I'm a big SpaceX fan, but I simply don't understand what they gain from such overly optimistic timeframe declarations.

[whitelancer64]

Am I just naive, to experience such disappointment when SpaceX miss their target dates by such big margins?

Why say you are aiming for a launch every two weeks when the range is obviously not available for 3 weeks? Why say your first re-used launch is happening in March, when the preceding launch is NET 12 March, and you know that a 2 week cadence is long term aspirational, while a 3 week turnaround is the absolute best you can currently achieve?

I'm a big SpaceX fan, but I simply don't understand what they gain from such overly optimistic timeframe declarations.

The obvious answer is they didn't know it would be 3 weeks at the time they were asked at the presser.

3 weeks is not the absolute best they can currently achieve. SpaceX has done 14 and 13 day turnarounds before.