Author Topic: SpaceX F9 : Zuma : January 7/8, 2018, CCAFS : DISCUSSION  (Read 557123 times)

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9634
  • UK
  • Liked: 1818
  • Likes Given: 183
Re: SpaceX F9 : Zuma : January 7/8, 2018, CCAFS : DISCUSSION
« Reply #180 on: 10/20/2017 06:37 AM »
FWIW, Eric Berger mentioned last night that [[[Zuma]]] is an NRO mission.
Then why doesn't it carry an NROL designation?

Because the launch is not contracted via NRO, but via the manufacturer (similar as with the NEMESIS satellites PAN and CLIO)
NROL-76 was procured via the contractor, Ball.
Not all NRO payloads have received NRO L numbers

Iíve already told the OP that.

Offline psionedge

  • Member
  • Posts: 87
  • Liked: 59
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: SpaceX F9 : Zuma : January 7/8, 2018, CCAFS : DISCUSSION
« Reply #181 on: 10/20/2017 05:16 PM »
I'm just asking for some evidence to back up the claims and the best I'm getting in return is some hand-wavy "it's an exception to the rule" type stuff.

I think it's fair that I can reasonably say I'm unconvinced.

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3774
  • US
  • Liked: 3129
  • Likes Given: 1841
Re: SpaceX F9 : Zuma : January 7/8, 2018, CCAFS : DISCUSSION
« Reply #182 on: 10/20/2017 05:24 PM »
I'm just asking for some evidence to back up the claims and the best I'm getting in return is some hand-wavy "it's an exception to the rule" type stuff.

I think it's fair that I can reasonably say I'm unconvinced.

You're unlikely to get the evidence you want.

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9634
  • UK
  • Liked: 1818
  • Likes Given: 183
Re: SpaceX F9 : Zuma : January 7/8, 2018, CCAFS : DISCUSSION
« Reply #183 on: 10/20/2017 05:59 PM »
I'm just asking for some evidence to back up the claims and the best I'm getting in return is some hand-wavy "it's an exception to the rule" type stuff.

I think it's fair that I can reasonably say I'm unconvinced.

You're unlikely to get the evidence you want.

They can always try and spend the rest of their life in a federal prison.

Offline Graham

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 220
  • Aerospace Engineer
  • New York
  • Liked: 215
  • Likes Given: 113
Re: SpaceX F9 : Zuma : January 7/8, 2018, CCAFS : DISCUSSION
« Reply #184 on: 10/20/2017 06:02 PM »
I'm just asking for some evidence to back up the claims and the best I'm getting in return is some hand-wavy "it's an exception to the rule" type stuff.

I think it's fair that I can reasonably say I'm unconvinced.

The only reason we know what PAN and CLIO are for sure is because of Edward Snowden. We will never know for sure what this launch is, but we do know that PAN and CLIO so far have a lot of similarities in their pre launch build ups, so Occam's Razor then suggests this is some type of government mission along the same lines.
I have loved the stars too fondly to be fearful of the night
- Sarah Williams

Offline Space Ghost 1962

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2783
  • Whatcha gonna do when the Ghost zaps you?
  • Liked: 2905
  • Likes Given: 2249
Re: SpaceX F9 : Zuma : January 7/8, 2018, CCAFS : DISCUSSION
« Reply #185 on: 10/20/2017 06:08 PM »
FWIW the current administration is on a push to displace parts of the NSS side, just like efforts by Peter Thiel to push Palantir to commercialize intelligence gathering/analysis (he's being considered as a WH intelligence advisor).

So why not the same for potential "black commercial space"? 

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9634
  • UK
  • Liked: 1818
  • Likes Given: 183
Re: SpaceX F9 : Zuma : January 7/8, 2018, CCAFS : DISCUSSION
« Reply #186 on: 10/20/2017 06:49 PM »
FWIW the current administration is on a push to displace parts of the NSS side, just like efforts by Peter Thiel to push Palantir to commercialize intelligence gathering/analysis (he's being considered as a WH intelligence advisor).

So why not the same for potential "black commercial space"?

Reconnaissance will always have an element of public ownership of the means of data collection.

Offline psionedge

  • Member
  • Posts: 87
  • Liked: 59
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: SpaceX F9 : Zuma : January 7/8, 2018, CCAFS : DISCUSSION
« Reply #187 on: 10/20/2017 08:11 PM »
FWIW the current administration is on a push to displace parts of the NSS side, just like efforts by Peter Thiel to push Palantir to commercialize intelligence gathering/analysis (he's being considered as a WH intelligence advisor).

So why not the same for potential "black commercial space"?

Reconnaissance will always have an element of public ownership of the means of data collection.
Not sure what you mean by this. There are a number of commercial space imagery companies with contracts to sell their products to the government. Where's the public ownership (taxpayer/gov ownership)of DigitalGlobe?

Offline zubenelgenubi

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1711
  • Arc to Arcturus, then Spike to Spica
  • Commonwealth of Virginia
  • Liked: 440
  • Likes Given: 1332
Re: SpaceX F9 : Zuma : January 7/8, 2018, CCAFS : DISCUSSION
« Reply #188 on: 10/20/2017 08:38 PM »
I'm just asking for some evidence to back up the claims and the best I'm getting in return is some hand-wavy "it's an exception to the rule" type stuff.

I think it's fair that I can reasonably say I'm unconvinced.

You're unlikely to get the evidence you want.

They can always try and spend the rest of their life in a federal prison.

(A suggestion offered in good faith, but with a little ;D )

File FOIA release requests for the information.  You'll eventually get a rejection.

File again once a year, every year following.

After (n)th filing, receive fully declassified answer in 20XX.

Celebrate with a victory lap in your Tesla Jetson-mobile!

« Last Edit: 10/20/2017 08:42 PM by zubenelgenubi »
Support your local planetarium!

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3774
  • US
  • Liked: 3129
  • Likes Given: 1841
Re: SpaceX F9 : Zuma : January 7/8, 2018, CCAFS : DISCUSSION
« Reply #189 on: 10/21/2017 05:39 PM »
From SpaceFlight Now Launch Schedule:
Quote
Launch window: 0100-0300 GMT on 16th (8:00-10:00 p.m. EST on 15th)

Online Brovane

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1110
  • United States
  • Liked: 605
  • Likes Given: 1137
Re: SpaceX F9 : Zuma : January 7/8, 2018, CCAFS : DISCUSSION
« Reply #190 on: 10/23/2017 03:02 PM »
My apologies if this has already been shared.

This is a nice article from last year about PAN/NEMESIS.

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/3095/1
« Last Edit: 10/23/2017 03:02 PM by Brovane »
"Look at that! If anybody ever said, "you'll be sitting in a spacecraft naked with a 134-pound backpack on your knees charging it", I'd have said "Aw, get serious". - John Young - Apollo-16

Offline .Scott

  • Member
  • Posts: 26
  • NH
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 17
Re: SpaceX F9 : Zuma : January 7/8, 2018, CCAFS : DISCUSSION
« Reply #191 on: 10/25/2017 11:18 AM »
NRO says that Zuma is not NRO.

http://aviationweek.com/awinspace/nro-spacex-zuma-payload-not-its-bird

Per Aviation Week:
Quote
CAPE CANAVERALóThe U.S. National Reconnaissance Office says a mystery payload known as Zuma, which is slated to fly on a SpaceX Falcon 9 next month, does not belong to the ..

Sorry, but I don't subscribe to Aviation Week - so all I have is this teaser.

So, it would appear that Zuma is "US Government" but not military reconnaissance.
« Last Edit: 10/25/2017 11:23 AM by .Scott »

Online jebbo

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 623
  • Cambridge, UK
  • Liked: 254
  • Likes Given: 240
Re: SpaceX F9 : Zuma : January 7/8, 2018, CCAFS : DISCUSSION
« Reply #192 on: 10/25/2017 11:24 AM »
So, is it even a national security launch?

--- Tony

Offline .Scott

  • Member
  • Posts: 26
  • NH
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 17
Re: SpaceX F9 : Zuma : January 7/8, 2018, CCAFS : DISCUSSION
« Reply #193 on: 10/25/2017 11:48 AM »
So, is it even a national security launch?
It's really hard to imagine a non-military agency of the US government keeping a secret satellite.
I mean REALLY hard.  Would anyone really believe that the FBI, DEA, or ICE would ever get past the planning stage before this would be public?

So that leave some sort of military support that is not reconnaissance.  Perhaps communications?

Offline Ben the Space Brit

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7140
  • A spaceflight fan
  • London, UK
  • Liked: 662
  • Likes Given: 771
Re: SpaceX F9 : Zuma : January 7/8, 2018, CCAFS : DISCUSSION
« Reply #194 on: 10/25/2017 12:11 PM »
So that leave some sort of military support that is not reconnaissance.  Perhaps communications?

Launch from the East Range suggests me me either:

* Recon asset over fixed target (SIGINT, especially);
* Military communications (Unlikely: These tend to have program names).

[edit]
FWIW, though, this has the feel to me of an experimental payload, not for operational purposes but for assessment/testing.
« Last Edit: 10/25/2017 12:13 PM by Ben the Space Brit »
"Oops! I left the silly thing in reverse!" - Duck Dodgers

~*~*~*~

The Space Shuttle Program - 1981-2011

The time for words has passed; The time has come to put up or shut up!
DON'T PROPAGANDISE, FLY!!!

Offline Jet Black

So, is it even a national security launch?

--- Tony

We can't tell you, because releasing that information would be a breach of national security ;)
For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled. -- Richard Feynman

Offline wannamoonbase

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3076
  • Denver, CO
    • U.S. Metric Association
  • Liked: 733
  • Likes Given: 1200
Re: SpaceX F9 : Zuma : January 7/8, 2018, CCAFS : DISCUSSION
« Reply #196 on: 10/25/2017 01:12 PM »
So that leave some sort of military support that is not reconnaissance.  Perhaps communications?

Launch from the East Range suggests me me either:

* Recon asset over fixed target (SIGINT, especially);
* Military communications (Unlikely: These tend to have program names).

[edit]
FWIW, though, this has the feel to me of an experimental payload, not for operational purposes but for assessment/testing.

Iíve been wondering if this is a rapid response launch.  Maybe to replace an existing bird with a standby payload.  SpaceXís launcher availability and stream lined operations may enable that long sought after dream of DOD.
Jonesing for a copy of 'Tales of Suspense #39'

Offline Shanuson

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 292
  • Liked: 197
  • Likes Given: 595
Re: SpaceX F9 : Zuma : January 7/8, 2018, CCAFS : DISCUSSION
« Reply #197 on: 10/25/2017 01:46 PM »
So that leave some sort of military support that is not reconnaissance.  Perhaps communications?

Launch from the East Range suggests me me either:

* Recon asset over fixed target (SIGINT, especially);
* Military communications (Unlikely: These tend to have program names).

[edit]
FWIW, though, this has the feel to me of an experimental payload, not for operational purposes but for assessment/testing.

Iíve been wondering if this is a rapid response launch.  Maybe to replace an existing bird with a standby payload.  SpaceXís launcher availability and stream lined operations may enable that long sought after dream of DOD.

IIRC we already concluded this is based on an contract between NG and SpaceX from 2015.

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9634
  • UK
  • Liked: 1818
  • Likes Given: 183
Re: SpaceX F9 : Zuma : January 7/8, 2018, CCAFS : DISCUSSION
« Reply #198 on: 10/25/2017 01:57 PM »
Makes you wonder if itís testing some sensitive piece of technology rather than being reconnaissance related.
« Last Edit: 10/25/2017 01:58 PM by Star One »

Online tleski

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 380
  • Washington, DC
  • Liked: 268
  • Likes Given: 364
Re: SpaceX F9 : Zuma : January 7/8, 2018, CCAFS : DISCUSSION
« Reply #199 on: 10/25/2017 02:11 PM »
NRO says that Zuma is not NRO.

http://aviationweek.com/awinspace/nro-spacex-zuma-payload-not-its-bird

Per Aviation Week:
Quote
CAPE CANAVERALóThe U.S. National Reconnaissance Office says a mystery payload known as Zuma, which is slated to fly on a SpaceX Falcon 9 next month, does not belong to the ..

Sorry, but I don't subscribe to Aviation Week - so all I have is this teaser.

So, it would appear that Zuma is "US Government" but not military reconnaissance.

Not sure if we should trust this kind of news. I think that depending on classification level they may be obliged to deny their very involvement in a project even if they in fact are are involved. We may never know.

Tags: