Author Topic: SpaceX Falcon Heavy : Arabsat 6A : LC-39A : April 11, 2019 - DISCUSSION  (Read 308856 times)

Offline Alexphysics

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1625
  • Spain
  • Liked: 6027
  • Likes Given: 952
Has it been confirmed what sort of burns are expected for this mission? A GPS-III type burn profile was being discussed at the meetup last night, but I didn't catch if that was just being discussed as hypothetical or the actual plan?

I would expect a simple two burn mission for the second stage. First orbital insertion, coast to equator and then another burn to raise apogee and lower inclination.

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8166
  • Liked: 6836
  • Likes Given: 2972
I'm just thinking outside the box here and reasons that would cause extra time to be taken on new rocket engines... with the new thrust numbers Elon announced, were they prepared for that news or do they have to go back and make a ton of adjustments according to the more power the block V produces.

Prepared for the news? They are not really "new" engines any more. This is basically the same engine variant that flew on the first Block 5 almost a year ago, potential NASA-mandated turbine changes notwithstanding.

The same Block 5 thrust numbers (within a couple percent) have been listed on the SpaceX Falcon Heavy web page since around June 2016, almost 3 years ago.

Offline Vettedrmr

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1682
  • Hot Springs, AR
  • Liked: 2282
  • Likes Given: 3420
Does anyone know for sure why the delay? Obviously weather being a factor but what about FH itself? Would SpaceX been ready to go if conditions were clear? Just find the minimal communication a little wierd...

It's only the 2nd flight in this configuration, and the 1st with Block 5 hardware.  My flight testing experience would say the work done for this 2nd flight is going quite smoothly.

Quote
Also, how old are the computer systems? I wonder if they are still using old systems for a newer rocket, so adjustments and such still have to be done in which a matter that it takes time.

Hardware?  Age doesn't really come into play unless the systems can't get the job done anymore.  Software?  I expect they had quite a few changes, just based on data from the 1st flight and, again, due to the new B5 configuration.

HTH, and have a good one,
Mike
Aviation/space enthusiast, retired control system SW engineer, doesn't know anything!

Offline jcalls

  • Member
  • Posts: 2
  • Green Bay, WI
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
One Feel the Heat ticket available to anyone who contacts me, brother couldn't make re-schedule date. Must have friend with parking placard or ride in/out with me. Text me at 920-246-0446, staying at KSC Campground.

Offline aero1310

  • Member
  • Posts: 10
  • Appleton, WI
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 1
I'm not trying to come off as they dont know what they are doing or this was big surprise to them. Since I've started reading the forums about 6 months ago, it seems like confidence is up there due to past success and performance and I played into that. This is my first time following along with the process and I got the gist that after static fire they make needed adjustments and so on and we're ready to go within a week. Then I got to thinking about everything being new and all the different factors of launch and land that come into play. By the words extra caution, how long and far does that extend?

With my comment on the computer systems, I think of the old phrase "if it ain't broke, dont change it." I know SpaceX is always upgrading, making changes, and tweaking things. So the thought behind the question was do they have brand new rockets that are going to run on 10 year old systems, so making adjustments may not be as quick and simple as we might expect.

I'm still new to all of this and have alot to learn. Thank you for the explanations so far.

Offline jcalls

  • Member
  • Posts: 2
  • Green Bay, WI
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
One Feel the Heat ticket available to anyone who contacts me, brother couldn't make re-schedule date. Must have friend with parking placard or ride in/out with me. Text me at 920-246-0446, staying at KSC Campground.

Offline intelati

"if it ain't broke, dont change it." I know SpaceX is always upgrading, making changes, and tweaking things. So the thought behind the question was do they have brand new rockets that are going to run on 10 year old systems, so making adjustments may not be as quick and simple as we might expect.

1. Very good point.

2. Keeping my conversation to Falcon Heavy (FH) as this is the mission discussion.

This is to me a big jump for SpaceX. It's a brand new core (Block 5 heavy core) with no prior knowledge of the effects of the mission.

That being said, SpaceX has data for the Block 3/4 FH to compare with the Block 3/4 cores, so perhaps you can use the comparison data with the Block 5 cores to model the effects of the FH with the new Block 5 cores.

With the incremental improvements, SpaceX isn't required to model an entire new system for each mission (Looking at you SLS). As long as you don't make too large of a change, then it doesn't take many missions to build confidence.

Does that make any sense?

Edit: TL,DR: SpaceX has an advantage by making large number of launches with the same base vehicle, resulting in changes that may be easily verified for the model
« Last Edit: 04/09/2019 08:12 pm by intelati »
Starships are meant to fly

Online yokem55

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 653
  • Oregon (Ore-uh-gun dammit)
  • Liked: 468
  • Likes Given: 13
Has it been confirmed what sort of burns are expected for this mission? A GPS-III type burn profile was being discussed at the meetup last night, but I didn't catch if that was just being discussed as hypothetical or the actual plan?

I would expect a simple two burn mission for the second stage. First orbital insertion, coast to equator and then another burn to raise apogee and lower inclination.
And the press kit confirms this - a straight 2 burn GTO mission.

Offline Jcc

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1196
  • Liked: 404
  • Likes Given: 203
Patch from press kit

Nice patch design. Shape of an oud (Arab guitar).

Offline John Alan

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 958
  • Central IL - USA - Earth
    • Home of the ThreadRipper Cadillac
  • Liked: 721
  • Likes Given: 2735
I notice from the press kit pdf they have 61 seconds of center core burn time between BECO and MECO...
IIRC, that is quite a bit more then the demo flight was (like 30ish seconds IIRC)
Must really be throttling back the center core during boost phase to have that much prop left over...  ???

On edit... went and found the FH demo press kit... 35 seconds (I was close)
SO...
THAT extra 26 seconds of center core thrust between BECO and MECO will REALLY make things interesting I think... 
8)

More edit...
Oh... and SECO-1 is a full minute BEFORE the center core lands on the ASDS... 
:o
« Last Edit: 04/10/2019 12:26 am by John Alan »

Offline John Alan

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 958
  • Central IL - USA - Earth
    • Home of the ThreadRipper Cadillac
  • Liked: 721
  • Likes Given: 2735
Has it been confirmed what sort of burns are expected for this mission? A GPS-III type burn profile was being discussed at the meetup last night, but I didn't catch if that was just being discussed as hypothetical or the actual plan?
As far as I know the trajectory has not been announced.  There are several ways increased performance could be used to reduce the delta-V needed by the satellite to reach GEO:
(a) Super-synchronous apogee, to make the plane change less costly
(b) Reduce inclination at GTO injection burn
(c) increased perigee, as GPS did.

or even some combination of these.  (a) depends on if the operator wants it, and the satellite can handle it.  (b) is less efficient that (a), but easy for both the satellite (it's a traditional GTO) and the rocket (just two burns).  (c) usually requires a third burn after satellite release to dispose of the second stage. 

Given the additional complexities of (a) and (c), and since it's an early use of the FH, I'm guessing (b).  But the others are certainly possible.

Given the above (I agree on b) and the press kit hints what's coming,,,
I wonder just how much inclination they can brut force cancel during the second burn on S2...  ???
If they can show final GEO-xxx.x orbit numbers that beat A5 launches from South America...
Then I think, some folks in Europe are going to have a "moment of clarity"...  ;)
« Last Edit: 04/10/2019 12:50 am by John Alan »

Offline AC in NC

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2484
  • Raleigh NC
  • Liked: 3630
  • Likes Given: 1950
Has it been confirmed what sort of burns are expected for this mission? A GPS-III type burn profile was being discussed at the meetup last night, but I didn't catch if that was just being discussed as hypothetical or the actual plan?
As far as I know the trajectory has not been announced.  There are several ways increased performance could be used to reduce the delta-V needed by the satellite to reach GEO:
(a) Super-synchronous apogee, to make the plane change less costly
(b) Reduce inclination at GTO injection burn
(c) increased perigee, as GPS did.

or even some combination of these.  (a) depends on if the operator wants it, and the satellite can handle it.  (b) is less efficient that (a), but easy for both the satellite (it's a traditional GTO) and the rocket (just two burns).  (c) usually requires a third burn after satellite release to dispose of the second stage. 

Given the additional complexities of (a) and (c), and since it's an early use of the FH, I'm guessing (b).  But the others are certainly possible.

Given the above (I agree on b) and the press kit hints what's coming,,,
I wonder just how much inclination they can brut force cancel during the second burn on S2...  ???
If they can show final GEO-xxx.x orbit numbers that beat A5 launches from South America...
Then I think, some folks in Europe are going to have a "moment of clarity"...  ;)

Do it like a boss and deliver to GEO+42

Offline Joffan

I notice from the press kit pdf they have 61 seconds of center core burn time between BECO and MECO...
IIRC, that is quite a bit more then the demo flight was (like 30ish seconds IIRC)
Must really be throttling back the center core during boost phase to have that much prop left over...  ???

On edit... went and found the FH demo press kit... 35 seconds (I was close)
SO...
THAT extra 26 seconds of center core thrust between BECO and MECO will REALLY make things interesting I think... 
Yeah, I remember being slightly disappointed at how brief the centre-core-only boost was on the Demo mission (on a day when I was thrilled by practically everything else). That extra time sounds like it'll really show off the capabilities of the Heavy - it's about 40% of the total time that a single-core Falcon first stage burns, but starting from high and fast instead of stationary on the ground.
Getting through max-Q for humanity becoming fully spacefaring

Offline Wolfram66

Still haven’t seen confirmation that FH has been rolled out. How long prior to F9 is the vehicle rolled out and Erected?

Offline Orbiter

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3001
  • Florida
  • Liked: 1556
  • Likes Given: 1390
Still haven’t seen confirmation that FH has been rolled out. How long prior to F9 is the vehicle rolled out and Erected?

It'll probably rollout over night just like for the static fire.
KSC Engineer, astronomer, rocket photographer.

Offline aceshigh

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 792
  • Liked: 269
  • Likes Given: 22
I am sorry if this is not the place... but I see people seeling "Feel The Heat" tickets.

my father just arrived in Miami this night. Maybe he could go to Cape Canaveral for the experience of a life time.

How does it works to see a SpaceX launch? Kennedy Space Center visitor center closes pretty early, so I guess you canīt watch a launch as a simple KSC visitor?

Offline DigitalMan

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1701
  • Liked: 1201
  • Likes Given: 76
I am sorry if this is not the place... but I see people seeling "Feel The Heat" tickets.

my father just arrived in Miami this night. Maybe he could go to Cape Canaveral for the experience of a life time.

How does it works to see a SpaceX launch? Kennedy Space Center visitor center closes pretty early, so I guess you canīt watch a launch as a simple KSC visitor?

I seem to recall having to be at the visitors center by a certain time for the maiden FH feel the heat tickets

I think it was closed for regular visitors
« Last Edit: 04/10/2019 02:47 am by DigitalMan »

Offline aceshigh

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 792
  • Liked: 269
  • Likes Given: 22
I am sorry if this is not the place... but I see people seeling "Feel The Heat" tickets.

my father just arrived in Miami this night. Maybe he could go to Cape Canaveral for the experience of a life time.

How does it works to see a SpaceX launch? Kennedy Space Center visitor center closes pretty early, so I guess you canīt watch a launch as a simple KSC visitor?

I seem to recall having to be at the visitors center by a certain time for the maiden FH feel the heat tickets

I think it was closed for regular visitors

https://www.kennedyspacecenter.com/-/media/DNC/KSCVC/PDFs/Falcon-Heavy/Feel-the-Heat-Pacakge-FAQs-for-SpaceX-Falcon-Heavy-January-2018.ashx?la=en

it seems you must buy the ticket before the launch day. KSC is closed to visitors in launch days except those with the Feel the Heat card on their windshield.


I wonder if KSC closing on launch days will keep happening if launches become weekly in the future (or even more frequent)

Offline Wolfram66

I am sorry if this is not the place... but I see people seeling "Feel The Heat" tickets.

my father just arrived in Miami this night. Maybe he could go to Cape Canaveral for the experience of a life time.

How does it works to see a SpaceX launch? Kennedy Space Center visitor center closes pretty early, so I guess you canīt watch a launch as a simple KSC visitor?

You can always view from just outside CCAFS gate at Port Canaveral. They even have bleachers on which to sit. Also provides best view of LZ1 LZ2 for the returning side boosters!

Offline ranma

Placed this in the wrong thread  :'( Why is Space X using a Falcon Heavy to launch such a light payload? I must be missing something as a Falcon 9 can place this into GTO with mass to spare. According to the space X website it can carry enough mass to place 4 of these sats in GTO. It can place 2 of them in Martian orbit! So what is going on? I am very well confused.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1