Author Topic: SpaceX Falcon 9 - EchoStar 23 - March 16, 2017 - DISCUSSION (Read 1995186 times)

yokem55 · « **Reply #440 on:** 03/16/2017 05:15 am »

Quote from: Pete on 03/16/2017 05:12 am

Quite the difference in speed at MECO. 9500 km/h, vs the about 6000km/h when in reusable configuration.

I thought the GTO ASDS missions had staged at ~8 km/hr? Still 1.5 km/hr is nothing to sneeze at.

Edit - units.

M_Puckett · « **Reply #441 on:** 03/16/2017 05:21 am »

Next launch re-uses a booster, correct?

mvpel · « **Reply #442 on:** 03/16/2017 05:22 am »

Quote from: M_Puckett on 03/16/2017 05:21 am

Next launch re-uses a booster, correct?

Correct!

tyrred · « **Reply #443 on:** 03/16/2017 05:23 am »

Quote from: MarekCyzio on 03/16/2017 05:12 am

View from my neighborhood

Your neighborhood looks amazing!

zlsa · « **Reply #444 on:** 03/16/2017 05:25 am »

Quote from: sewebster on 03/16/2017 04:55 am

They just showed a shot on the hosted webcast of the vehicle going up the ramp with the payload "pointing down", i.e. not using the TEL to keep it level...

That was with Dragon (CRS-10), which is possibly capable of handling that orientation. I don't know if EchoStar23 was kept horizontal, and we have no indication either way.

Flying Beaver · « **Reply #445 on:** 03/16/2017 05:25 am »

Bricks/debris from flametrench. Edited up a little video.

https://twitter.com/Flyin_Beaver/status/842259863782662144

tyrred · « **Reply #446 on:** 03/16/2017 05:31 am »

Earth's reflection on the Mvac mylar cover is a nice touch. Never noticed that before.

Seattleite · « **Reply #447 on:** 03/16/2017 05:33 am »

Just curious - why the delay between SECO2 and Payload Separation?

Lars-J · « **Reply #448 on:** 03/16/2017 05:39 am »

Quote from: Seattleite on 03/16/2017 05:33 am

Just curious - why the delay between SECO2 and Payload Separation?

Probably to be 100% sure that the upper stage is in a stable attitude for deploy. Maybe also allows for greater separation from engine shutdown related debris, if the engine would not shut down cleanly.

yokem55 · « **Reply #449 on:** 03/16/2017 05:40 am »

Quote from: mvpel on 03/16/2017 05:38 am

A tank view just after deployment.

They might have been able to get a couple more seconds of burn time with that lox left. It will be curious to see what the final performance was and what, if any, performance they might have not put on the table.

mvpel · « **Reply #450 on:** 03/16/2017 05:43 am »

Quote from: yokem55 on 03/16/2017 05:40 am

They might have been able to get a couple more seconds of burn time with that lox left. It will be curious to see what the final performance was and what, if any, performance they might have not put on the table.

They mentioned they had to throttle S2 back in order to keep the satellite within its g-load limits, so that's at least one batch of table scraps. Leftover prop = deorbit burn?

georgegassaway · « **Reply #451 on:** 03/16/2017 05:49 am »

Great launch. Beautiful view of second stage 2nd burn and afterwards with the sunlit Earth behind.

Two things.

Just before ignition for the second time, there appeared to be a lot of ice accumulation. When the Merlin started up, most of it fell off. There was a smaller piece of ice that was trapped by acceleration, then floated away when the engine cutoff.

Between final shutdown and satellite separation, it seemed to slowly orient itself from parallel, to be diagonal to the line of travel, and perhaps 90 degrees to the line of travel by time of satellite separation (judging by the relative motion of the Earth in the background), If so, why did they do that rather than stay parallel?

darkenfast · « **Reply #452 on:** 03/16/2017 05:53 am »

Very nice doppler effect on the sound right after launch this time (or maybe just the first time I noticed!). sounded rather "sci-fi".

mjcrsmith · « **Reply #453 on:** 03/16/2017 05:58 am »

Technical Broadcast had brief shots from different camera angles. It would be nice to see them in their entirety similar to what we see on NASA TV.

Also looked like a brief view from S1 at sep. If so that footage would be interesting.

Steven Pietrobon · « **Reply #454 on:** 03/16/2017 06:19 am »

Shots I missed during the launch.

Spacecraft in fairing.

Spacecraft just after fairing separation.

LOX at bottom of tank just after MECO-2. Looks like four black cylinders on each corner (these are the old COPVs) and a new white cylinder to the right (let the speculation begin on what that is and what it does!). There also seems to be a rectangular black object with a metal band along the middle between the bottom right COPV and the white tank.

Inside tank showing the LOX nicely pooled at the bottom of the tank.

Just before spacecraft separation.

Spacecraft away, showing the engine.

Inside tank with the LOX going everywhere.

Another shot of inside the tank.

Showing geosynchronous orbit.

Steven Pietrobon · « **Reply #455 on:** 03/16/2017 06:24 am »

Here's an enhanced photo of inside the tank. We can clearly see the four COPVs. There used to be three when they used Helium subcooled below the freezing point of LOX. The white cylinder is probably an aluminium tank, possibly used as a buffer for holding the Helium before that goes into the COPVs (or maybe the other way around).

Lars-J · « **Reply #456 on:** 03/16/2017 06:25 am »

Hmm, that white/metal container is certainly interesting indeed! An experiment with a new type of COPV? Or new top layer for them?

Steven Pietrobon · « **Reply #457 on:** 03/16/2017 06:35 am »

Hosted webcast says the payload mass is 5500 kg (at T-13:18).

georgegassaway · « **Reply #458 on:** 03/16/2017 06:52 am »

(I had asked this, then found it later ) Please provide a link for the technical webcast that provided those inside-the-tank views.

The only Technical webcast I found was a messed up dud lasting 4:22, ending before reaching T-15 minutes.

UPDATE - Found the good one!:

Steven Pietrobon · « **Reply #459 on:** 03/16/2017 07:43 am »

Here are some screen captures of the roll out.