SPACEX: No rocket damage link to Razaksat delayBy Rob Coppinger on April 22, 2009 12:19 AMSpace Exploration Technologies has responded to Hyperbola's enquiry about the last minute announcement of the delay to the company's first commercial launch with its Falcon 1 rocket, scheduled for 20 April, and denied there is any damage to the rocket:We are re-evaluating predicted launch vehicle environments on the satellite to ensure all systems are ready to support a successful launch. As for this being a "late" find, flushing out this type of potential issue is exactly why we do pre-launch tests and checkouts. Contrary to other reports, there is no damage to the launch vehicle (all prelaunch checks were accomplished successfully, including the successful static test fire of the vehicle last Wednesday). We are evaluating the extent of the delay, and I will let you know as soon as we have a new date for both RazakSAT and Falcon 9.
Flights 20 & 21 are out of order Great effort mate!
Quote from: mikelepage on 08/05/2016 08:28 amFlights 20 & 21 are out of order Great effort mate!Thanks for your kind words! the flights are out of order because I have grouped launches by rocket type, so I had to put flight 21 before flight 20 in order to keep it in the F9 v1.1 group.
Flight 24 booster is missing its 3 so far static fires at McGregor.
Falcon 9 Flight 28 - JCSAT-16 (not verified)payload mass: 4,600 kilograms, orbit: geosynchronous  F) 2016-08-11, Successful static fire (no payload)   L) 2016-08-14, Successful launch (the one with the first GTO 1 engine landing burn)  BR) 2016-08-14, Successful landing at OCISLY (1 engine landing burn) 
Is there a reason that when the landing fails the barge is called ASDS and when it succeeds it is called by it's name OCISLY?