SpaceX Falcon 9 : NASA/CNES SWOT : Vandenberg : 16 December 2022 (11:46 UTC)

[Rondaz]

NASA and CNES teams are now moving into pre-launch testing for the SWOT mission, launching on a SpaceX Falcon 9 next year to study Earth's water.

https://twitter.com/TGMetsFan98/status/1464683631608225802

[GWR64]

Thales Alenia Space
@Thales_Alenia_S
Stunning images of SWOT’s solar panels being
deployed in @Thales_Alenia_S ’ clean rooms of Cannes.
A joint mission between @CNES & @NASA, with
contributions from @csa_asc & @spacegovuk , #SWOT
satellite will literally revolutionize modern
oceanography. Stay tuned! @NASAJPL

https://twitter.com/Thales_Alenia_S/status/1487094928660439047?cxt=HHwWjoC5oa29nKMpAAAA

[markbike528cbx]

Contract mod has an interesting data point on those nebulous "additional services" a launch provider can charge for.

MOD 101: The purpose of this modification is to remove MUS 3.0, Post-Encapsulation Fairing Access from Section B, Table B-8.3: IDIQ Launch Service Task Order for the Surface Water Ocean Topography (SWOT) Mission for a full refund, update Section B, Section 2.1 Total Contract Amount, and Table C-1.3: CLIN 3 SWOT Launch Service Payment Schedule.
a. As a result, the following changes are being made:
1. Section B, Section 2.1 Total Contract Amount is being corrected from $313,037,564 to $313,047,564. In addition, as a result of the MUS 3.0 removal for the SWOT mission the total contract amount has been reduced by $396,108 from $313,047,564 to $312,651,456.
2. MUS 3.0 Post-Encapsulation Fairing Access is removed from Section B, Table B-8.3: IDIQ Launch Service Task Order, CLIN 3C for the SWOT Mission for a full refund.

So 312,651,456 is the launch price paid by NASA to SpaceX?

But.  FY 2019 PRESIDENT'S BUDGET REQUEST page ES-30
Says Launch service, current FY is 107 million.

I'm not to good at math, but those numbers seem different. Would someone explain this?

[gongora]

The $300M was probably the total on their NASA Launch Services II contract at the time (it's over $600M now), not for a single mission.

[zubenelgenubi]

April 28, 2021 NASA SMSR schedule shows this as November 2022 launch.

Updated SMSR Integrated Master Schedule, dated June 7, 2021.

First (?) source for November 15, 2022 launch.

SFN Launch Schedule update, March 25 (one of many):
SWOT launch confirmed on November 15, 2022 from Vandenberg SFB SLC-4E, with ASDS landing.

[Conexion Espacial]

https://twitter.com/nextspaceflight/status/1512498083350736897

[ZachS09]

Preferably one that is making its second or third flight?

Don’t know if NASA is looking at boosters reaching the ten-flight point.

[Conexion Espacial]

Preferably one that is making its second or third flight?

Don’t know if NASA is looking at boosters reaching the ten-flight point.

At this point any booster could launch this mission, NASA will use a booster used three times for a manned flight and later one that has flown four times, so for an unmanned mission anyone could be a candidate, although I think except for those that have flown more flights. I think NASA will choose one that has launched a mission for them before.

[ZachS09]

Preferably one that is making its second or third flight?

Don’t know if NASA is looking at boosters reaching the ten-flight point.

At this point any booster could launch this mission, NASA will use a booster used three times for a manned flight and later one that has flown four times, so for an unmanned mission anyone could be a candidate, although I think except for those that have flown more flights. I think NASA will choose one that has launched a mission for them before.

You never know. But I'll be darned if NASA goes with one flying for the eighth or ninth time.

[Surfdaddy]

Preferably one that is making its second or third flight?

Don’t know if NASA is looking at boosters reaching the ten-flight point.

At this point any booster could launch this mission, NASA will use a booster used three times for a manned flight and later one that has flown four times, so for an unmanned mission anyone could be a candidate, although I think except for those that have flown more flights. I think NASA will choose one that has launched a mission for them before.

You never know. But I'll be darned if NASA goes with one flying for the eighth or ninth time.

How many flights have been reflown (not first time flights) to date?
Seems like they are building quite a track record of flawless launches on reflown boosters.

[Elthiryel]

How many flights have been reflown (not first time flights) to date?
Seems like they are building quite a track record of flawless launches on reflown boosters.

If I've done my math correctly, to date there have been 90 flight proven booster flights (including IFA and counting each FH booster as a single flight) and only 66 new booster flights (67 with AMOS-6, but technically not a launch)

[Surfdaddy]

How many flights have been reflown (not first time flights) to date?
Seems like they are building quite a track record of flawless launches on reflown boosters.

If I've done my math correctly, to date there have been 90 flight proven booster flights (including IFA and counting each FH booster as a single flight) and only 66 new booster flights (67 with AMOS-6, but technically not a launch)

That means that reflown boosters have a better success record than most (any?) other boosters which have only flown once.

[Barley]

If I've done my math correctly, to date there have been 90 flight proven booster flights (including IFA and counting each FH booster as a single flight) and only 66 new booster flights (67 with AMOS-6, but technically not a launch)

That means that reflown boosters have a better success record than most (any?) other boosters which have only flown once.

In part that depends on whether you lump all "reflights" in one bucket, or count 2nd, 3rd, ... , reflights in different buckets.   IMHO some of the people still doubting heavily used boosters are implicitly doing the latter.

If for no other reason than fatigue limits of the aluminum alloys there is likely an upper limit somewhere.  It will take a while to accumulate enough high use flights to be statistically confident it's more than 10 or 20 or whatever.  It's likely there will always be users who don't want their payloads on fleet leaders, just as there are airlines that don't want 20 year old planes (but there are also airlines that rely heavily on fifty year old planes).

[markbike528cbx]

If for no other reason than fatigue limits of the aluminum alloys there is likely an upper limit somewhere.  It will take a while to accumulate enough high use flights to be statistically confident it's more than 10 or 20 or whatever.  It's likely there will always be users who don't want their payloads on fleet leaders, just as there are airlines that don't want 20 year old planes (but there are also airlines that rely heavily on fifty year old planes).

Depends on how you define airline and "rely heavily", or if you meant "fifty-ish" :-)
https://www.oldest.org/technology/planes-still-flying/

[scr00chy]

https://twitter.com/nextspaceflight/status/1512498083350736897

The link didn't work for me but I looked it up manually and this is what the modification says:

NASA LAUNCH SERVICES II - SPACE EXPLORATION TECHNOLOGIES. MOD 200: Incorporates the payload processing facility (PPF) in the Surface Water and Ocean Topography (SWOT) mission as well as change from a new first stage booster to a previously flown booster.

[Rondaz]

NASA shifts Earth science mission to previously flown Falcon 9

by Jeff Foust — April 14, 2022

WASHINGTON — <snip>

A contract modification published April 6 for the agency’s NASA Launch Services 2 contract with SpaceX changes the upcoming launch of the Surface Water and Ocean Topography (SWOT) satellite from a new Falcon 9 booster to a previously flown own. The contract modification did not explain that change.
<snip>
“From a SWOT perspective, knowing the booster assignment now (primary and back up) reduces overall schedule risk and enables NASA’s Launch Services Program team the opportunity to start performing vehicle insight early to ensure no increased technical risk,” NASA spokesperson Tylar Greene told SpaceNews.
<snip>
The published contract modification did not change the value of the award. “In addition to the schedule benefits, the government received considerations from SpaceX directly benefiting the SWOT mission,” Greene said. “The specific consideration given to NASA for the switch to previously flown boosters is proprietary to SpaceX.”

It’s unclear what sort of consideration SpaceX could offer that could remain proprietary in an unclassified government contract. SpaceX did not respond to questions about the SWOT contract change. The company infrequently responds to media inquiries.

https://spacenews.com/nasa-shifts-earth-science-mission-to-previously-flown-falcon-9/

[zubenelgenubi: Limited quotes only from copyrighted content]

[scr00chy]

Has this been moved forward? This graphic shows October launch date:
https://twitter.com/StephenClark1/status/1526607162025328642

[Bean Kenobi]

Has this been moved forward? This graphic shows October launch date:
https://twitter.com/StephenClark1/status/1526607162025328642

... and moved from VSFB to KSC ? Same for JPSS

[Alexphysics]

LSP is a KSC program

[ZachS09]

Technically, SWOT can be launched into its planned orbit from Cape Canaveral.