-
#300
by
shuttlefan
on 16 Feb, 2017 21:14
-
-
#301
by
spacenut
on 16 Feb, 2017 21:16
-
What time will the live stream be on? I have somewhere to go on Saturday afternoon.
-
#302
by
IanThePineapple
on 16 Feb, 2017 21:25
-
What time will the live stream be on? I have somewhere to go on Saturday afternoon.
It will start around 9:40 AM, and probably end near 10:30.
-
#303
by
Comga
on 16 Feb, 2017 23:07
-
We're we able to see if they kept the rocket horizontal as it climbed the launch mount hill or did they let it go slightly inverted?
If it was kept horizontal they must have modified the late load vehicle because it would be much higher above the tracks.
-
#304
by
Flying Beaver
on 16 Feb, 2017 23:47
-
We're we able to see if they kept the rocket horizontal as it climbed the launch mount hill or did they let it go slightly inverted?
If it was kept horizontal they must have modified the late load vehicle because it would be much higher above the tracks.
Rocket pointed upside-down. That's not something you see unless things are going really, really wrong
.
-
#305
by
Orbiter
on 17 Feb, 2017 00:07
-
Lights at LC-39A are on. Did SpaceX keep the xenon lights that lit up the Shuttle?
-
#306
by
IanThePineapple
on 17 Feb, 2017 00:10
-
Lights at LC-39A are on. Did SpaceX keep the xenon lights that lit up the Shuttle?
I'm pretty sure they did, why toss them when they work, and work really well?
-
#307
by
DaveS
on 17 Feb, 2017 01:55
-
Lights at LC-39A are on. Did SpaceX keep the xenon lights that lit up the Shuttle?
Those lights are not the Xenon lights but the pad stadium lights. What gives that away is the greenish tint to the color. The Xenons have a red tint to them.
-
#308
by
Flying Beaver
on 17 Feb, 2017 03:03
-
Falcon and Dragon on LC39.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/spacex
Note, no core number strangely.
Also just look how complex a pad that is. Kudos to the pad rats, incredible work making this happen.
-
#309
by
ZachS09
on 17 Feb, 2017 04:16
-
Wow. Those pad photos are majestic. Not gonna lie.
-
#310
by
PahTo
on 17 Feb, 2017 05:59
-
Sorry to go a little OT, especially given 39A and kerosene, but I want to see those rainbirds with an FH...
...then again, I reckon an F9 to start will do...
-
#311
by
M.E.T.
on 17 Feb, 2017 06:26
-
So forgive the stupid question (which obviously reveals me as a complete layman, albeit a tremendously enthusiastic one).
Looking at the pictures above, am I right in saying that there is no fairing on missions involving the Dragon capsule? And if so, is there a significant performance gain from this? If so, this gain would obviously apply to all missions involving a more robust payload like the Dragon. I'm thinking here of the Red Dragon mission. No fairing probably means greater performance, or not?
-
#312
by
Steven Pietrobon
on 17 Feb, 2017 06:47
-
Looking at the pictures above, am I right in saying that there is no fairing on missions involving the Dragon capsule? And if so, is there a significant performance gain from this? If so, this gain would obviously apply to all missions involving a more robust payload like the Dragon. I'm thinking here of the Red Dragon mission. No fairing probably means greater performance, or not?
There are small fairings covering the nose of the capsule and the solar panels on the two sides.
Attached is enhanced photo of the second image, showing the base detail a little better.
-
#313
by
M.E.T.
on 17 Feb, 2017 07:02
-
Looking at the pictures above, am I right in saying that there is no fairing on missions involving the Dragon capsule? And if so, is there a significant performance gain from this? If so, this gain would obviously apply to all missions involving a more robust payload like the Dragon. I'm thinking here of the Red Dragon mission. No fairing probably means greater performance, or not?
There are small fairing covering the nose of the capsule and the solar panels on the two sides.
Attached is enhanced photo of the second image, showing the base detail a little better.
Thank you.
-
#314
by
Hankelow8
on 17 Feb, 2017 10:03
-
Looking at the pictures above, am I right in saying that there is no fairing on missions involving the Dragon capsule? And if so, is there a significant performance gain from this? If so, this gain would obviously apply to all missions involving a more robust payload like the Dragon. I'm thinking here of the Red Dragon mission. No fairing probably means greater performance, or not?
There are small fairings covering the nose of the capsule and the solar panels on the two sides.
Attached is enhanced photo of the second image, showing the base detail a little better.
I shudder to think what the repair bill would be on this pad !!
-
#315
by
Kaputnik
on 17 Feb, 2017 10:05
-
So forgive the stupid question (which obviously reveals me as a complete layman, albeit a tremendously enthusiastic one).
Looking at the pictures above, am I right in saying that there is no fairing on missions involving the Dragon capsule? And if so, is there a significant performance gain from this? If so, this gain would obviously apply to all missions involving a more robust payload like the Dragon. I'm thinking here of the Red Dragon mission. No fairing probably means greater performance, or not?
There is no (complete) fairing because the payload is robust enough not to need one. This will apply to Red Dragon just as much as it does to any other Dragon mission.
Interestingly, Orion does use a fairing of sorts- a Boost Protect Cover, which is jettisoned along with the launch escape system.
Dragon 2 is supposed to have a hinged nose cap which appears to be retained and reused.
-
#316
by
Bob Shaw
on 17 Feb, 2017 10:09
-
I hope they have cameras on the old LUT tower - we've never had the classic views of a Falcon launch like we had if Saturns and the Shuttle.
-
#317
by
deruch
on 17 Feb, 2017 10:45
-
https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/licenses_permits/media/LLS%2014-087_%20(Order%20D%20rev2)_07_15_2016.pdf
FAA launch license for crs10 has been signed and approved
I noticed that in several of the documents it refers to a launch from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS). Since this launch is from Launch Complex 39A at Kennedy Space Center does the FAA consider KSC and CCAFS interchangeable as it pertains to launch sites?
No. The old FAA license (linked in the quoted comment) is strictly for launches from SLC-40. In order to use it for launches from LC-39A, they need to get it revised to add -39A (KSC) as a launch site or, in the case that the FAA won't allow a single license to cover multiple pads (even from the same range), they need either a new license for -39A or to revise the old one to totally swap. In which case, they couldn't subsequently use it for CRS launches at SLC-40 once that pad is repaired and reactivated. We'll soon see what they decide to do.
-
#318
by
StuffOfInterest
on 17 Feb, 2017 12:24
-
I really like the look of the new TEL, especially finally next to a rocket. Hopefully a similar design is used for the new SLC-40 one.
-
#319
by
KaiFarrimond
on 17 Feb, 2017 12:38
-
I really like the look of the new TEL, especially finally next to a rocket. Hopefully a similar design is used for the new SLC-40 one.
Me too, but I also really liked how SLC-40 looked.
.