-
#20
by
IanThePineapple
on 16 Feb, 2017 20:06
-
I would imagine core allocation comes down to a financial calculation. As I understand it, launch contracts usually include a penalty for the provider for missing the contractual launch date. So, SpaceX likely allocates cores and other constrained resources to whichever site will minimize the total penalties accrued.
The penalty minimizing allocation will change as you slip further behind on one pad vs. another and will favor sending cores to a site that is further behind and/or has a larger backlog.
I imagine if SES-10 is successful with a reused booster, there will be some arm twisting with some customers to get them to jump queue on a 'flight proven' booster and free up new boosters for others. Ie, wait six months for a new booster at x penalty, or launch in a month with x discount on a flight proven one. That approach could help the manifest for everyone.
I'm sure one of the last Iridium missions will be reused, possibly the rideshares.
-
#21
by
wardy89
on 16 Feb, 2017 21:15
-
I would imagine core allocation comes down to a financial calculation. As I understand it, launch contracts usually include a penalty for the provider for missing the contractual launch date. So, SpaceX likely allocates cores and other constrained resources to whichever site will minimize the total penalties accrued.
The penalty minimizing allocation will change as you slip further behind on one pad vs. another and will favor sending cores to a site that is further behind and/or has a larger backlog.
I imagine if SES-10 is successful with a reused booster, there will be some arm twisting with some customers to get them to jump queue on a 'flight proven' booster and free up new boosters for others. Ie, wait six months for a new booster at x penalty, or launch in a month with x discount on a flight proven one. That approach could help the manifest for everyone.
I'm sure one of the last Iridium missions will be reused, possibly the rideshares.
I am not so sure about that the Iridium CEO has said on numerous occasions that all of there launches will be on NEW booster.
-
#22
by
Comga
on 16 Feb, 2017 23:38
-
I'm sure one of the last Iridium missions will be reused, possibly the rideshares.
I am not so sure about that the Iridium CEO has said on numerous occasions that all of there launches will be on NEW booster.
Reread Ian's post wargy89
He said the boosters for the Iridium launches will get reused, not that Iridium will be the launches on the reused ("flight proven") first stages.
"Reused" vs "reuse"
Edit: or maybe not. Ian?
-
#23
by
wardy89
on 16 Feb, 2017 23:53
-
I'm sure one of the last Iridium missions will be reused, possibly the rideshares.
I am not so sure about that the Iridium CEO has said on numerous occasions that all of there launches will be on NEW booster.
Reread Ian's post wargy89
He said the boosters for the Iridium launches will get reused, not that Iridium will be the launches on the reused ("flight proven") first stages.
"Reused" vs "reuse"
Edit: or maybe not. Ian?
Look at the context he is taking about the later missions and specifically mentions the ride share mission. I think he is suggesting that the a later mission or ride shame mission would fly on a reused booster. Why would they wait for one of the later mission boosters to re fly first as they already have one recovered iridium booster and we assume they will try and land all of them.
-
#24
by
IanThePineapple
on 17 Feb, 2017 00:13
-
I said the Iridium missions might [Edit: forgot to add "might " to the original message] use flight-proven boosters, as once the first few reused missions fly they may notice the good reliability and choose to modify the launch contract.
-
#25
by
Sam Ho
on 17 Feb, 2017 21:58
-
I said the Iridium missions might [Edit: forgot to add "might " to the original message] use flight-proven boosters, as once the first few reused missions fly they may notice the good reliability and choose to modify the launch contract.
Your original statement not only left out "might," but said "I'm sure." It made the statement much more authoritative than the new version. For some of our posters, an authoritative statement is truly authoritative, because they work in the industry, and are very careful to only say things they know are both true and allowed to talk about. It would help reduce confusion if you phrase your statements with the appropriate degree of certainty.
In any case, Matt Desch has been quite clear that they are planning on new boosters and they currently see no schedule benefit from launching with used.
No, but a reused booster isn't available before our new one in June anyway.
Being assured we'll be launching every 8 weeks or so starting later this year with new, so not much to jump.
https://twitter.com/IridiumBoss/status/832571794238427136
-
#26
by
FutureSpaceTourist
on 23 Feb, 2017 12:47
-
-
#27
by
mn
on 23 Feb, 2017 14:10
-
IRDM CEO: SpaceX says rocket-build rhythm improves after June & we shld get quicker rate for our 65 to-be-launched sats on 7 Falcon 9s.
https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/834759735668772864
a: This at least confirms that the delay was due to a shortage of rockets.
b: That still leaves me wondering what changed in middle of Feb?
-
#28
by
stcks
on 23 Feb, 2017 14:14
-
b: That still leaves me wondering what changed in middle of Feb?
The messaging
-
#29
by
FutureSpaceTourist
on 17 Mar, 2017 12:35
-
-
#30
by
vanoord
on 17 Mar, 2017 13:54
-
#DYK that there is a 4-leaf clover on each #IridiumNEXT launch patch? #SATSuperstition #StPatricksDay
Is that not usually used on most / all patches where an ASDS recovery is attempted? The Iridium 1 patch had a different clover leaf one it (below for illustration).
There's a clover leaf painted on one of the blast walls on OCISLY, but don't recall if JRTI has one as well?
-
#31
by
cscott
on 17 Mar, 2017 16:13
-
It's on every SpaceX patch since the first successful Falcon 1 launch IIRC after a string of early failures seemed to suggest some extra luck might be useful. It appeared on the ASDS as well following one of the crash landings which did damage to the barge.
-
#32
by
virnin
on 22 Mar, 2017 17:49
-
It's on every SpaceX patch since the first successful Falcon 1 launch IIRC after a string of early failures seemed to suggest some extra luck might be useful. It appeared on the ASDS as well following one of the crash landings which did damage to the barge.
One of the SpaceX employees seen in the Echostar 23 launch video was wearing a black t-shirt with a large green four-leaf clover with a SpaceX logo in the middle. Seems to be a Corporate Standard.
-
#33
by
whitelancer64
on 22 Mar, 2017 18:00
-
It's on every SpaceX patch since the first successful Falcon 1 launch IIRC after a string of early failures seemed to suggest some extra luck might be useful. It appeared on the ASDS as well following one of the crash landings which did damage to the barge.
One of the SpaceX employees seen in the Echostar 23 launch video was wearing a black t-shirt with a large green four-leaf clover with a SpaceX logo in the middle. Seems to be a Corporate Standard.
You can buy that shirt from their online store.
https://shop.spacex.com/mens/men-s-lucky-launch-t-shirt.html
-
#34
by
DaveJes1979
on 02 Apr, 2017 21:12
-
Any word on if this will be the first attempt to land the first stage at Vandenberg? I'd make the drive out to see that.
-
#35
by
KaiFarrimond
on 02 Apr, 2017 21:47
-
Any word on if this will be the first attempt to land the first stage at Vandenberg? I'd make the drive out to see that.
I don't think Iridium could make it back to land. Too heavy.
-
#36
by
e of pi
on 02 Apr, 2017 21:53
-
I don't think Iridium could make it back to land. Too heavy.
Iridiuam NEXT satellites are about 450 kg each, IIRC. Ten would be about 4.5 tons. Even adding the deployment system, I'd wager that's less than an ISS-bound Dragon, and they did RTLS on CRS-9 and CRS-10.
-
#37
by
KaiFarrimond
on 02 Apr, 2017 22:01
-
I don't think Iridium could make it back to land. Too heavy.
Iridiuam NEXT satellites are about 450 kg each, IIRC. Ten would be about 4.5 tons. Even adding the deployment system, I'd wager that's less than an ISS-bound Dragon, and they did RTLS on CRS-9 and CRS-10.
It's alot more than that. Around 9.6 Tonnes. Each sat weighs around 860kg and the dispenser is 1,000kg
-
#38
by
macpacheco
on 03 Apr, 2017 06:38
-
I don't think Iridium could make it back to land. Too heavy.
Iridiuam NEXT satellites are about 450 kg each, IIRC. Ten would be about 4.5 tons. Even adding the deployment system, I'd wager that's less than an ISS-bound Dragon, and they did RTLS on CRS-9 and CRS-10.
Not only the mass is twice as much, but also the target orbit requires even more energy for other reasons. The southerly launch heading and further from the equator, higher target orbit altitude and the job of circularizing is up to F9 2nd stage, each of those items increase effort to the Falcon launch system, but even then, I wouldn't be surprised if a Block V can RTLS, but a Block III might not.
In a ISS launch, Falcon leaves Dragon in a 200Kmx360Km orbit (Dragon raises the perigee). A Iridium launch targets a 625Kmx625Km orbit, all done by the Falcon 9.
I'm not entirely certain an RTLS is out of the question though.
-
#39
by
envy887
on 10 Apr, 2017 15:26
-
Any expectation that the NROL-76 delay will trickle down to VAFB launches? As I understand the current holdup is LV availability which should be tracking through the same even if payloads are held up on the Eastern Range.
