Author Topic: SpaceX FH : USSF-52 (X-37B OTV-7) : KSC LC-39A : 28/29 December 2023 01:07 UTC (Read 210197 times)

Conexion Espacial · « **Reply #100 on:** 06/23/2022 04:33 am »

NextSpaceflight indicates that the launch is now scheduled for [NET] April 2023.

zubenelgenubi · « **Reply #101 on:** 08/15/2022 08:34 pm »

SFN Launch Schedule update, August 15:
USSF-52 launch TBD.

Falcon Heavy first stage assignments:

Quote from: Alexphysics on 08/15/2022 05:52 pm

Quote from: Josh_from_Canada on 08/15/2022 05:19 pm
Quote from: Alexphysics on 08/15/2022 04:08 pm
Yeah it was previously planned for them to use the same side boosters on all [the upcoming USSF] missions but back then the order was 44, 52, and 67. Now it appears to be the opposite so [USSF-67] will likely fly those side boosters as new boosters and then proceed with 52 and 44 reusing them
Has the center core assignments changed for these missions?
Not aware of that, not sure they would care about changing those since they're all expendable anyways

zubenelgenubi · « **Reply #102 on:** 10/06/2022 07:56 am »

SFN, After a three-year wait, SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy could launch again later this month, October 5

Quote

Another Space Force satellite delivery mission booked on a Falcon Heavy, codenamed USSF-52, is now planned to launch in the second quarter of 2023 — between April 1 and June 30.

scr00chy · « **Reply #103 on:** 10/07/2022 12:07 am »

Next Spaceflight now shows NET Apr 10, 2023 launch.

Is that just April 1 with a typo?

Alexphysics · « **Reply #104 on:** 10/07/2022 01:10 am »

Quote from: scr00chy on 10/07/2022 12:07 am

Next Spaceflight now shows NET Apr 10, 2023 launch.

Is that just April 1 with a typo?

It's been showing April 10th for over a month (I changed it). No, it was not a typo.

Josh_from_Canada · « **Reply #105 on:** 01/05/2023 04:30 pm »

NextSpaceFlight, updated January 5:
Center Core listed as B1079

zubenelgenubi · « **Reply #106 on:** 01/08/2023 03:57 pm »

SFN Launch preps underway for first of up to five Falcon Heavy missions this year, January 7:
Northern hemisphere spring in essence = Q2. Article does not negate NET April 10:

Quote

There are two more Falcon Heavy missions scheduled for launch in the spring. One will launch the first ViaSat 3 internet satellite to beam broadband service over the Americas for Viasat, and the other will launch the USSF-52 mission for the Space Force.

Conexion Espacial · « **Reply #107 on:** 01/26/2023 01:57 pm »

NextSpaceFlight indicates that the launch is now scheduled for June.

Quote

Falcon Heavy | USSF-52
NET: Jun, 2023 UTC
https://nextspaceflight.com/launches/details/110

crandles57 · « **Reply #108 on:** 04/10/2023 07:52 pm »

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

10 April update has this as 23rd June

ChrisC · « **Reply #109 on:** 04/30/2023 04:30 am »

What is the current thinking on whether the boosters on this mission will be RTLS, going to (dual) ASDS, or fully expended?

I have had a trip already planned where I am dragging some kids in the extended family to Kennedy Space Center to do the usual rounds there. I have not targeted a particular launch, rather just scheduled the trip around everyone's availability. With SpaceX's launch cadence, and the occasional other provider launches, I figured there was a better than 50/50 chance we'd get to see a launch anyway, as long as we were in the area for a few days.

I appear to have won the calendar lottery in that our trip dates now coincide with this mission's current target date of June 23rd (of course I know that dates change). I know that the fate of the two side boosters is not yet known, but do we have a sense of which fate is likely?

If they will RTLS, I've been thinking this could be the right trip to finally go out on one of the charter boats and watch it from the water. I'm just wondering what the feeling is right now on the likelihood of RTLS. Opinions?

LouScheffer · « **Reply #110 on:** 04/30/2023 03:54 pm »

Quote from: ChrisC on 04/30/2023 04:30 am

What is the current thinking on whether the boosters on this mission will be RTLS, going to (dual) ASDS, or fully expended?

We can guess this is going direct to GEO. If it was just GTO, then Arabsat-6 shows they could easily do this with side RLTS and recovered core.

But even if it it's going direct to GEO, that does not narrow the options much. RTLS sides + expended core is *guessed* to be able to put about 6000kg to GEO. USSF-52 is though to be about 6350 kg, possibly within the margin of error. ASDS sides or fully expended can do this without trouble.

Given the military likes to have lots of margin, I'm guessing they paid for ASDS sides or fully expended. If two droneships are not available, SpaceX could chose to save one side booster and let the other fall into the ocean. Even wilder, given their recent landing accuracy, SpaceX could try to land both boosters on the same ASDS, but I doubt they will try this, cool as it would be.

So overall my guess is all expended, or ASDS of one or both side boosters. Likely not RTLS. However this is all speculation, none of this is known.

GewoonLukas_ · « **Reply #111 on:** 04/30/2023 04:06 pm »

Quote from: LouScheffer on 04/30/2023 03:54 pm

Quote from: ChrisC on 04/30/2023 04:30 am
What is the current thinking on whether the boosters on this mission will be RTLS, going to (dual) ASDS, or fully expended?
We can guess this is going direct to GEO. If it was just GTO, then Arabsat-6 shows they could easily do this with side RLTS and recovered core.

But even if it it's going direct to GEO, that does not narrow the options much. RTLS sides + expended core is *guessed* to be able to put about 6000kg to GEO. USSF-52 is though to be about 6350 kg, possibly within the margin of error. ASDS sides or fully expended can do this without trouble.

Given the military likes to have lots of margin, I'm guessing they paid for ASDS sides or fully expended. If two droneships are not available, SpaceX could chose to save one side booster and let the other fall into the ocean. Even wilder, given their recent landing accuracy, SpaceX could try to land both boosters on the same ASDS, but I doubt they will try this, cool as it would be.

So overall my guess is all expended, or ASDS of one or both side boosters. Likely not RTLS. However this is all speculation, none of this is known.

Expending one side booster, and landing the other one seems unlikely to me. Just like landing both side boosters on a single droneship seems unlikely to me. We will know for sure when SpaceX' files the STA Request. Recent STA Requests are for launches NET Late-May, so hopefully we won't have to wait much longer.

ZachS09 · « **Reply #112 on:** 04/30/2023 04:13 pm »

Quote from: GewoonLukas_ on 04/30/2023 04:06 pm

Quote from: LouScheffer on 04/30/2023 03:54 pm
Quote from: ChrisC on 04/30/2023 04:30 am
What is the current thinking on whether the boosters on this mission will be RTLS, going to (dual) ASDS, or fully expended?
We can guess this is going direct to GEO. If it was just GTO, then Arabsat-6 shows they could easily do this with side RLTS and recovered core.

But even if it it's going direct to GEO, that does not narrow the options much. RTLS sides + expended core is *guessed* to be able to put about 6000kg to GEO. USSF-52 is though to be about 6350 kg, possibly within the margin of error. ASDS sides or fully expended can do this without trouble.

Given the military likes to have lots of margin, I'm guessing they paid for ASDS sides or fully expended. If two droneships are not available, SpaceX could chose to save one side booster and let the other fall into the ocean. Even wilder, given their recent landing accuracy, SpaceX could try to land both boosters on the same ASDS, but I doubt they will try this, cool as it would be.

So overall my guess is all expended, or ASDS of one or both side boosters. Likely not RTLS. However this is all speculation, none of this is known.

Expending one side booster, and landing the other one seems unlikely to me. Just like landing both side boosters on a single drone ship seems unlikely to me. We will know for sure when SpaceX' files the STA Request. Recent STA Requests are for launches NET Late-May, so hopefully we won't have to wait much longer.

Arabsat 6A was put into a supersynchronous GTO with side booster RTLS and center core ASDS landing, and it was 6,465 kilograms.

The same FH triple booster recovery config can be used for USSF-52 since it's ~100 kilograms lighter than Arabsat 6A.

LouScheffer · « **Reply #113 on:** 04/30/2023 04:32 pm »

This site claims ASDS for side cores, on two separate droneships, core will be expended.

SpeakertoAnimals · « **Reply #114 on:** 04/30/2023 04:44 pm »

Quote from: LouScheffer on 04/30/2023 04:32 pm

This site claims ASDS for side cores, on two separate droneships, core will be expended.

The cores have no legs.
Oops, my bad.

Lars-J · « **Reply #115 on:** 04/30/2023 04:58 pm »

Quote from: SpeakertoAnimals on 04/30/2023 04:44 pm

Quote from: LouScheffer on 04/30/2023 04:32 pm
This site claims ASDS for side cores, on two separate droneships, core will be expended.
The cores have no legs.

This is not the thread for todays FH viasat launch, this is for a later FH launch.

Alexphysics · « **Reply #116 on:** 04/30/2023 05:37 pm »

Is there any source at all for this mission being to GEO?

LouScheffer · « **Reply #117 on:** 04/30/2023 05:55 pm »

Quote from: Alexphysics on 04/30/2023 05:37 pm

Is there any source at all for this mission being to GEO?

No, it's an inference. We know the core is to be expended, but the sides are not RTLS. FH with RTLS sides and ~~expended~~ recovered center already put a heavier satellite (Arabsat-6) into a quite super-synchronous orbit. This implies the target orbit for USSF-52 is higher energy than even a very aggressive GTO. The guess is GEO, but presumably it could be some other type of high-energy orbit.

EDIT: Correction, Arabsat-6 recovered the core. This makes the conclusion even stronger.

Alexphysics · « **Reply #118 on:** 04/30/2023 06:09 pm »

Quote from: LouScheffer on 04/30/2023 05:55 pm

Quote from: Alexphysics on 04/30/2023 05:37 pm
Is there any source at all for this mission being to GEO?
No, it's an inference. We know the core is to be expended, but the sides are not RTLS. FH with RTLS sides and expended center already put a heavier satellite (Arabsat-6) into a quite super-synchronous orbit. This implies the target orbit for USSF-52 is higher energy than even a very aggressive GTO. The guess is GEO, but presumably it could be some other type of high-energy orbit.

I must have missed the source for side boosters not being RTLS. There's not even an FCC permit for the mission yet. We got surprised by Viasat-3 being all expendable, I think it's wise to just wait for that to drop and then make assumptions cause otherwise we might get surprised again.

ZachS09 · « **Reply #119 on:** 04/30/2023 06:18 pm »

Quote from: LouScheffer on 04/30/2023 05:55 pm

Quote from: Alexphysics on 04/30/2023 05:37 pm
Is there any source at all for this mission being to GEO?
No, it's an inference. We know the core is to be expended, but the sides are not RTLS. FH with RTLS sides and expended center already put a heavier satellite (Arabsat 6A) into a quite super-synchronous orbit. This implies the target orbit for USSF-52 is higher energy than even a very aggressive GTO. The guess is GEO, but presumably it could be some other type of high-energy orbit.

The Arabsat 6A center core WAS NOT expended. It was fitted with recovery hardware and successfully landed on the drone ship, but it toppled over because of rough seas.

And the Octograbber was not modified to handle FH center cores in time for Arabsat 6A.