SpaceX Falcon 9 : GPS III-3 : Cape Canaveral : June 30, 2020

[Draggendrop]

The covers may still be in place for aerodynamics or an item to remain in place for sealing.

Then why B1054 didn't have them?

That would be one data point...the true answer of which I have no idea.

Echostar 23 and Intelsat 35e are 2 data points for another reason that I am not sure of.

Just my opinion but I still think we need a better answer on this matter.

[Semmel]

Maybe the requirement of an expendable launch has nothing to do with the residual dV for landing. I dont know what else could prevent a landing attempt but maybe there are other reasons.

[Draggendrop]

Ramblings...

At this point in time, I have no idea if this launch will be expendable or returned to an ASDS. There appears to be views to support both outcomes. My gut instinct (WAG) is "expendable" due to AF margin requirements although there was disscusion of relaxing demands for future recoverable launches in the GPS III SV01 thread.

The payload mass when/if officially released, may come in at under 4000 kg to MEO. I am leaning towards the belief that there may be no technical reason why this booster could not be recovered "if" planned as a civilian payload. There are a few experts on this forum who may answer that at a later time.

If this booster is expendable, it may be due to the wish of the customer for which they have that right. The AF may want to run this booster near/to depletion again to confirm margin.

The loss of a booster...today, represents the possibility of 3 more booster use cases. In another couple years this number may double and make the present situation less palatable.

GPS III is extremely important and I realize that SpaceX is making a premium on this one launch. If it's expendable, I'll still be grumpy...ruffling feathers...observing water towers and staring at the night sky

[gongora]

They put extra fuel in the first satellite, which bumped up the mass.  They also apparently wanted to verify Falcon 9's performance to that orbit.  SV03 may not have the same wet mass as SV01.  Hopefully in the pre-launch briefings they'll give the mass.

[Smrg]

Ramblings...

The loss of a booster...today, represents the possibility of 3 more booster use cases. In another couple years this number may double and make the present situation less palatable.

Technically, if the Block5 is as advertised, losing a booster is the equivalent of needing to refurbish another booster after it gets to its 10th (?) use.
Maybe not so big a cost or runaround as it seemed. I doubt they will end up using more than another 100 launches of F9 before SS can replace it.
That's a few years worth.

[gtae07]

Either way, I'm sure the replacement cost and future revenue potential are being compensated for in the higher pricing for an expendable mission... unless SpaceX is running it as a loss-leader to try and ensure future business from Uncle Sam.

[woods170]

Ramblings...

The loss of a booster...today, represents the possibility of 3 more booster use cases. In another couple years this number may double and make the present situation less palatable.

Technically, if the Block5 is as advertised, losing a booster is the equivalent of needing to refurbish another booster after it gets to its 10th (?) use.
Maybe not so big a cost or runaround as it seemed. I doubt they will end up using more than another 100 launches of F9 before SS can replace it.
That's a few years worth.

The first several GPS-III launches were sold to USAF with worst-case scenario (in other words: expendable) in mind because F9 hadn't been certified for reuse - by USAF - at that time. SpaceX is already implementing a policy which they first publically announced in 2016: customers will have to pay an additional fee if they wish to fly on a brand new booster. It is one of several reasons why this second SpaceX GPS-III launch is costing the USAF quite a few dollars more than the first one.

Despite this increase, launching a GPS-III bird on a F9 is still very significantly cheaper than flying on Atlas V or Delta IV.

[ZachS09]

I don't know if this discussion is deviating from the actual mission because I saw Alexphysics ask why we're still talking about the booster's fate.

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=42527.msg2034105#msg2034105

Either way, I never meant for it to get this far.

[zubenelgenubi]

Cross-post, update of January 13:

https://spaceflightnow.com/launch-schedule/

April • Falcon 9 • GPS 3 SV03
Launch window: TBD
Launch site: Cape Canaveral, Florida

[gongora]

https://twitter.com/AF_SMC/status/1225950052255879168

The U.S. Space Force’s Space and Missile Systems Center and its mission partners successfully delivered the third GPS III satellite, SV03 "Columbus" from Buckley Air Force Base, CO to Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, FL, Feb. 5, 2020. #SMC  #SpaceStartsHere  #USSF  #GPSIIISV03

[vaporcobra]

Some new photos of SV03 being packaged for shipment, apparently taken five months ago.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lockheedmartin/

[gongora]

[Spaceflight Now: February 16, 2020] Next GPS satellite lands in Florida for April launch

Liftoff of the GPS SV03 spacecraft is currently scheduled for April 29 some time during a four-hour launch period opening at 7 a.m. EDT (1100 GMT). An exact launch time will be announced later.

[gongora]

https://twitter.com/AF_SMC/status/1230619712066768897

SpaceX's Falcon 9 recently completed a full duration static fire test Feb. 13 at the company's rocket development facility in McGregor, Texas ahead of
@AF_SMC
 's next GPS III mission for
@spaceforcedod
 (Photo courtesy SpaceX) #SMC #SpaceStartsHere #USSF #GPSIIISV03

[vaporcobra]

https://twitter.com/AF_SMC/status/1230619712066768897

SpaceX's Falcon 9 recently completed a full duration static fire test Feb. 13 at the company's rocket development facility in McGregor, Texas ahead of
@AF_SMC
 's next GPS III mission for
@spaceforcedod
 (Photo courtesy SpaceX) #SMC #SpaceStartsHere #USSF #GPSIIISV03

Aaaaand a video! First official static fire vid in ages.

https://twitter.com/AF_SMC/status/1230635850397970432

[ChrisC]

AF_SMC Twitter:

SpaceX's Falcon 9 recently completed a full duration static fire test

Aaaaand a video! First official static fire vid in ages.

"Full duration" but only 1m15s in length?

[Alexphysics]

Booster will be recovered: https://www.facebook.com/220248861339169/posts/3027086803988680/

From the post it says at the end:

"The newest satellite GPS III-SV3 is scheduled to launch aboard a Falcon 9 from Cape Canaveral AFS in April. This launch marks the first time a booster is planned to land on a drone ship during a NSS launch."

[AC in NC]

AF_SMC Twitter:

SpaceX's Falcon 9 recently completed a full duration static fire test

Aaaaand a video! First official static fire vid in ages.

"Full duration" but only 1m15s in length?

Noticed that.  2x Playback?  IDK

[ugordan]

AF_SMC Twitter:

SpaceX's Falcon 9 recently completed a full duration static fire test

Aaaaand a video! First official static fire vid in ages.

"Full duration" but only 1m15s in length?

Full duration acceptance test which for SpaceX operational 1st stages (i.e. not qualification or test boosters) lasts about this long.

[Norm38]

Glad to hear this will be a recovered booster.  Landings still aren't automatic, SpaceX can't afford to throw away boosters if they're going to build up their fleet.

[FutureSpaceTourist]

https://twitter.com/joroulette/status/1242482687576809473

Col. Bongiovi [Air Force SMC's launch enterprise director] says SMC is "closely engaged with SpaceX" ahead of the GPS III mission in April to determine the cause of Falcon 9's early engine shutdown issue in this month's Starlink mission, ensuring, as for any company, that the rocket can deliver its defense payload to orbit.