SpaceX Falcon Heavy : Arabsat 6A : LC-39A : April 11, 2019 - DISCUSSION

[pb2000]

Have them ship to your hotel?

That's one of the options I'm looking at, but I was really hoping to book flights and hotels after the static fire.

Hello PB2000 - At last year's Heavy launch we had several NSF'ers with the same problem.  Since I'm local to the area (New Smyrna Beach) some of the users here had their launch packages shipped to me.  We met up at the NSF get-together the night before the launch.

I'd be more than happy to help out!

Chris M (yeah, there's a lot of Chris's here)

Offer is much appreciated, but I ended up biting the bullet on flights and hotels. Here's hoping the dates hold!

[penguin44]

Caught the tle on our tour yesterday.

[c]

Chris G has put up a poll regarding another NSF pre-launch meetup similar to last years (we had a great turn-out at Fishlips in Port Canaveral the night before launch). You can find this year's poll in SpaceX General HERE.

Please take a minute to fill-out the poll if you're planning to go to the launch. Poll closes 2019-03-27.

Chris M

[Roy_H]

Shouldn't Arabsat 6A be listed as GEO not GTO?

I don't recall any sources saying that Arabsat 6A is being placed directly into GEO.

I'm pretty convinced that it'll only be a GTO trajectory with all three boosters being recovered.

If that is true then using the FH is serious over-kill, an F9 could perform this mission still recovering the booster.

[ZachS09]

All we can do is wait and see, Roy_H. Let's give them twelve more days.

[Alexphysics]

Shouldn't Arabsat 6A be listed as GEO not GTO?

I don't recall any sources saying that Arabsat 6A is being placed directly into GEO.

I'm pretty convinced that it'll only be a GTO trajectory with all three boosters being recovered.

If that is true then using the FH is serious over-kill, an F9 could perform this mission still recovering the booster.

But it only would be able to put it on a sub-synchronous GTO. FH can put it on a supersynchronous GTO.

[smoliarm]

Shouldn't Arabsat 6A be listed as GEO not GTO?

I don't recall any sources saying that Arabsat 6A is being placed directly into GEO.

I'm pretty convinced that it'll only be a GTO trajectory with all three boosters being recovered.

If that is true then using the FH is serious over-kill, an F9 could perform this mission still recovering the booster.

Well, here are some facts - to estimate the seriousness of overkill:
1.
Lockheed Martin made Arabsat 6A using its LM2100 bus, which is designed for GTO injection, not GEO.
Accordingly to Gunters page, Arabsat 6A shares same type of bus with HellasSat 4.
HellasSat 4 was launched by Ariane on 02/05/2019 into classical GTO (250 x 35800 x 3.0°)
2.
The launch contract for Arabsat 6A was announced on 09/14/2015 (and it was negotiated even earlier).
At that time - mid 2015 - there was only Falcon 9 v1.1 available, which had performance of about 4 metric tons to GTO.
So, at the time of contract, this was a substantial step-up in performance.
2a.
Also it should be noted, that in mid-2015 SpaceX had a launch failure (CRS-7), all Falcon launches were suspended, and consequently,  the plans for up-rated Falcon 9 FT were uncertain too. So, again, it seems reasonable to believe that the Arabsat contract was signed with CURRENTLY achieved performance in mind.
3.
Right now, with the launch of Arabsat 6A SpaceX is fulfilling their contractual obligation - and that's it.
Anything else is OPTIONAL.

Given all the above, I would expect this launch to place the satellite into GTO or (more likely) to GTO-plus.
And I would not be surprised if the post-flight calculations show the demonstrated Falcon Heavy performance only slightly above modern performance for Falcon 9 FT with ASDS.

[envy887]

Shouldn't Arabsat 6A be listed as GEO not GTO?

I don't recall any sources saying that Arabsat 6A is being placed directly into GEO.

I'm pretty convinced that it'll only be a GTO trajectory with all three boosters being recovered.

If that is true then using the FH is serious over-kill, an F9 could perform this mission still recovering the booster.

Well, here are some facts - to estimate the seriousness of overkill:
1.
Lockheed Martin made Arabsat 6A using its LM2100 bus, which is designed for GTO injection, not GEO.
Accordingly to Gunters page, Arabsat 6A shares same type of bus with HellasSat 4.
HellasSat 4 was launched by Ariane on 02/05/2019 into classical GTO (250 x 35800 x 3.0°)
2.
The launch contract for Arabsat 6A was announced on 09/14/2015 (and it was negotiated even earlier).
At that time - mid 2015 - there was only Falcon 9 v1.1 available, which had performance of about 4 metric tons to GTO.
So, at the time of contract, this was a substantial step-up in performance.
2a.
Also it should be noted, that in mid-2015 SpaceX had a launch failure (CRS-7), all Falcon launches were suspended, and consequently,  the plans for up-rated Falcon 9 FT were uncertain too. So, again, it seems reasonable to believe that the Arabsat contract was signed with CURRENTLY achieved performance in mind.
3.
Right now, with the launch of Arabsat 6A SpaceX is fulfilling their contractual obligation - and that's it.
Anything else is OPTIONAL.

Given all the above, I would expect this launch to place the satellite into GTO or (more likely) to GTO-plus.
And I would not be surprised if the post-flight calculations show the demonstrated Falcon Heavy performance only slightly above modern performance for Falcon 9 FT with ASDS.

Between the better apogee and lower inclination, it should get around 200 to 400 m/s closer to GEO than F9 Block 5 can do with ASDS landing. That's 4 to 8 years worth of stationkeeping fuel, or a whole bunch more revenue payload for the same fuel. Either way it could easily be worth the extra $30 million for launch.

Lou did a deficit to GEO calc here: https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=40420.msg1907382#msg1907382

[mn]

SpaceX needs another two FH launches to satisfy air force FH certification. (https://spacenews.com/falcon-heavys-first-commercial-launch-to-pave-the-way-for-reusable-rockets-in-national-security-missions/)

Would SpaceX launch this on a FH just for that purpose even if the mission could really be done by a F9?

[envy887]

SpaceX needs another two FH launches to satisfy air force FH certification. (https://spacenews.com/falcon-heavys-first-commercial-launch-to-pave-the-way-for-reusable-rockets-in-national-security-missions/)

Would SpaceX launch this on a FH just for that purpose even if the mission could really be done by a F9?

Perhaps, but SpaceX probably contracted performance that F9 Block 5 cannot reach without expending the booster. If they did, the decision between switching to expended F9 vs. staying on FH is interesting, and also telling about the relative cost of expending boosters.

[spacebleachers]

SpaceX needs another two FH launches to satisfy air force FH certification. (https://spacenews.com/falcon-heavys-first-commercial-launch-to-pave-the-way-for-reusable-rockets-in-national-security-missions/)

Would SpaceX launch this on a FH just for that purpose even if the mission could really be done by a F9?

In this case no. As explained earlier, when the launch went through procurement, the only option was FH. The decision on which vehicle is to be used is agreed upon by both SpaceX (or whomever the launch provider is) and the customer. SpaceX doesn’t have the sole say in determining what booster it’s launched upon. I’m sure the satellite provider is well aware of the orbital data provided by envy887’s reply, and for this mission, was the reason FH remained the booster of choice.

Now, for the upcoming FH launch in June, I would almost guarantee that the payloads chosen were to “help” with the certification process for both the Air Force and NASA.

[lrk]

Is the T/E still at the pad, or has it been rolled back yet?  I expect that it would need to soon to make the April 1st SF date. 

[Michael Baylor]

KSC visitor center has updated this to TBD April.

I am pretty sure the KSCVC site has always said TBD April. If it did change, that would be something notable as they usually require some sort of official news to make a change. However, in this case I am not seeing any indications of  a change in target launch dates.

[Lotsa Space]

KSC visitor center has updated this to TBD April.

I am pretty sure the KSCVC site has always said TBD April. If it did change, that would be something notable as they usually require some sort of official news to make a change. However, in this case I am not seeing any indications of  a change in target launch dates.

Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy : Arabsat 6A : LC-39A : NET April 7, 2019
« Reply #172 on: March 21, 2019, 10:08:35 am »

Viewing packages are now up for sale at KSC Visitor Center !  Woot!  Woot!

I've been monitoring KSCVC site since packages went up for sale, and agree - has always said TBD April.

[joseph.a.navin]

I am guessing that all launches cargo and crewed are now out of firing room 4 correct?

[Alexphysics]

I am guessing that all launches cargo and crewed are now out of firing room 4 correct?

At least for LC-39A launches they have been using it. First time was Es'Hail 2 in November.

[Rondaz]

SpaceX's mighty Falcon Heavy launch set for April 7 from Kennedy Space Center, FAA says

By Chabeli Herrera Contact Reporter
Orlando Sentinel

https://www.orlandosentinel.com/business/space/go-for-launch/os-bz-spacex-falcon-heavy-launch-set-20190329-story.html

[toruonu]

Tesla has sent out event invites for 7th for Heavy viewing for referral award

[ZachS09]

Given that the drone ship will be nearly 1,000 kilometers downrange, will the center core only do two burns (entry and landing)?

[scr00chy]

Given that the drone ship will be nearly 1,000 kilometers downrange, will the center core only do two burns (entry and landing)?

Yes