-
#20
by
Brovane
on 22 Jun, 2018 03:20
-
So the question is, what kind of Falcon Heavy flight does $130 million buy? All 3 cores recovered, or exended core?
The requirements seem to suggest that this was borderline doable on a Falcon 9 expendable. Therefore, I am guessing that this will be a fully recoverable Falcon Heavy launch. However, all three of the cores will be brand new plus the other AF requirements (thus the higher price).
Can we assume that all three cores will be not be flight proven? SpaceX could have done multiple bids offering different mixes of flight proven versus non flight proven boosters.
-
#21
by
gongora
on 22 Jun, 2018 03:25
-
The EELV program doesn't have a process for certifying flight-proven rockets yet. SpaceX would have needed to bid a new launch vehicle. That will probably remain the case for the rest of Phase 1A.
-
#22
by
Therodon
on 22 Jun, 2018 07:01
-
So the USAF certified the FH for EELV payloads after only one flight? 
SpaceX hasn't even flown the launch the USAF procured as a FH demo yet.
The Mission is 2020, so its not really high risk
-
#23
by
woods170
on 22 Jun, 2018 07:46
-
So the USAF certified the FH for EELV payloads after only one flight? SpaceX hasn't even flown the launch the USAF procured as a FH demo yet.
By the time AFSPC-52 is scheduled to launch FH will have flown at least three times.
Also, at least two recent missions (FH maiden launch and a F9 mission) had test objectives to satisfy USAF certification requirements.
-
#24
by
Brovane
on 22 Jun, 2018 12:07
-
So the USAF certified the FH for EELV payloads after only one flight? SpaceX hasn't even flown the launch the USAF procured as a FH demo yet.
By the time AFSPC-52 is scheduled to launch FH will have flown at least three times.
Also, at least two recent missions (FH maiden launch and a F9 mission) had test objectives to satisfy USAF certification requirements.
The statement from Shotwell indicated that FH was
already certified, not that certification was pending. So that would mean the USAF certified the FH after only one flight if we take Shotwell's statement at face value.
"On behalf of all of our employees, I want to thank the Air Force for
certifying Falcon Heavy"
-
#25
by
MaxTeranous
on 22 Jun, 2018 12:15
-
So the USAF certified the FH for EELV payloads after only one flight? SpaceX hasn't even flown the launch the USAF procured as a FH demo yet.
By the time AFSPC-52 is scheduled to launch FH will have flown at least three times.
Also, at least two recent missions (FH maiden launch and a F9 mission) had test objectives to satisfy USAF certification requirements.
The statement from Shotwell indicated that FH was already certified, not that certification was pending. So that would mean the USAF certified the FH after only one flight if we take Shotwell's statement at face value.
"On behalf of all of our employees, I want to thank the Air Force for certifying Falcon Heavy"
It can be read both ways, but it really doesn't matter, they've got the contract and by launch time the paperwork will be in order. That's what's important.
-
#26
by
Brovane
on 22 Jun, 2018 13:08
-
The statement from Shotwell indicated that FH was already certified, not that certification was pending. So that would mean the USAF certified the FH after only one flight if we take Shotwell's statement at face value.
"On behalf of all of our employees, I want to thank the Air Force for certifying Falcon Heavy"
It can be read both ways, but it really doesn't matter, they've got the contract and by launch time the paperwork will be in order. That's what's important.
I don't see how it can be read both ways. Shotwell is clearly stating the FH has been certified by the USAF. Even the USAF statement makes no mention that the contract is awarded on the basis that the FH will be certified in the future.
If Shotwell's statement is correct, that the USAF felt comfortable enough with the Feb 6th launch data to award EELV certification to the FH after only one launch and 5-months of data review, that is note worthy.
-
#27
by
woods170
on 22 Jun, 2018 13:26
-
So the USAF certified the FH for EELV payloads after only one flight? SpaceX hasn't even flown the launch the USAF procured as a FH demo yet.
By the time AFSPC-52 is scheduled to launch FH will have flown at least three times.
Also, at least two recent missions (FH maiden launch and a F9 mission) had test objectives to satisfy USAF certification requirements.
The statement from Shotwell indicated that FH was already certified, not that certification was pending. So that would mean the USAF certified the FH after only one flight if we take Shotwell's statement at face value.
"On behalf of all of our employees, I want to thank the Air Force for certifying Falcon Heavy"
It can be read as "being in the process of being certified" as well.
Yes, I know, semantics. But concluding that FH is already certified, based on the ambiguous statement from Gwynne alone, is far-fetched.
-
#28
by
abaddon
on 22 Jun, 2018 13:33
-
From SpaceNews:
The Falcon Heavy beat United Launch Alliance’s Delta 4 in a competition under the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle program. The launch will take place at Kennedy Space Center, Florida.
This seems to answer the question as to which LV ULA bid. I would have to think that further implies that the requirements were out of spec for an Atlas V launch, so a direct injection seems likely.
-
#29
by
wannamoonbase
on 22 Jun, 2018 13:36
-
There will be at least 2-3 more flights on the FH before then as well. The USAF will have eyes on all SpaceX launches no doubt.
Next up a vertical integration launch.
-
#30
by
Brovane
on 22 Jun, 2018 14:24
-
So the USAF certified the FH for EELV payloads after only one flight? SpaceX hasn't even flown the launch the USAF procured as a FH demo yet.
By the time AFSPC-52 is scheduled to launch FH will have flown at least three times.
Also, at least two recent missions (FH maiden launch and a F9 mission) had test objectives to satisfy USAF certification requirements.
The statement from Shotwell indicated that FH was already certified, not that certification was pending. So that would mean the USAF certified the FH after only one flight if we take Shotwell's statement at face value.
"On behalf of all of our employees, I want to thank the Air Force for certifying Falcon Heavy"
It can be read as "being in the process of being certified" as well.
Yes, I know, semantics. But concluding that FH is already certified, based on the ambiguous statement from Gwynne alone, is far-fetched.
I am sure the crack reporting team at NSF forum can get clarification from SpaceX on the status of FH EELV certification.
-
#31
by
envy887
on 22 Jun, 2018 14:41
-
From SpaceNews:
The Falcon Heavy beat United Launch Alliance’s Delta 4 in a competition under the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle program. The launch will take place at Kennedy Space Center, Florida.
This seems to answer the question as to which LV ULA bid. I would have to think that further implies that the requirements were out of spec for an Atlas V launch, so a direct injection seems likely.
Is it confirmed that ULA is not bidding the Delta IV Medium at all anymore? The 5,4 Medium could do the reference mission.
-
#32
by
envy887
on 22 Jun, 2018 14:47
-
Previous discussion here :
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=43266.msg1728038#msg1728038
Interesting choice, the requirements seemed borderline for F9. Good win for SpaceX.
originally i think it was to be a transfer orbit and could now be direct insertion
Could be, but I doubt it for $130 million.
Why? Would they have to give up the core? They advertise four times that payload to GTO.
They advertise 8,000 kg to GTO for $90M commercial. USAF assurance adds at least $30M on that. Direct GEO insertion is a special service that requires extra batteries and helium in the upper stage, so probably costs more. It doesn't add up to me.
I think this a good example of a greater 5.5 t but less than 8.0 t GTO flight with 3-core recovery on FH. The cost is almost exactly as expected, and it fits perfectly with the reference orbit.
-
#33
by
dante2308
on 22 Jun, 2018 15:57
-
So the USAF certified the FH for EELV payloads after only one flight? SpaceX hasn't even flown the launch the USAF procured as a FH demo yet.
Maybe this has to do with the Falcon Heavy being a derivative of the Falcon 9.
-
#34
by
oldAtlas_Eguy
on 22 Jun, 2018 19:58
-
The current stated contracting policy for the AF which has not changed is that prior to contract award the LV must be AF certified. This is only excepted by demo's and some experimental payload waivers: example STP-2.
The AF may have delayed the award to gain the time to complete certification of FH since that was the LV that the source selection favored.
-
#35
by
russianhalo117
on 22 Jun, 2018 23:18
-
The current stated contracting policy for the AF which has not changed is that prior to contract award the LV must be AF certified. This is only excepted by demo's and some experimental payload waivers: example STP-2.
The AF may have delayed the award to gain the time to complete certification of FH since that was the LV that the source selection favored.
It will have the required flights by September 2020.
-
#36
by
oldAtlas_Eguy
on 23 Jun, 2018 01:34
-
The current stated contracting policy for the AF which has not changed is that prior to contract award the LV must be AF certified. This is only excepted by demo's and some experimental payload waivers: example STP-2.
The AF may have delayed the award to gain the time to complete certification of FH since that was the LV that the source selection favored.
It will have the required flights by September 2020.
You are confusing AF contracting policy with NASA. If the LV has not been certified it cannot be awarded a contract (AF contracting policy). If AF did not follow this policy then ULA can sue and probably win and be awarded the contract by the courts.
-
#37
by
oldAtlas_Eguy
on 23 Jun, 2018 01:36
-
The FH is a configuration of the F9. It only requires a review of what is different from that of the F9. It does not really require 3 flights.
-
#38
by
gongora
on 23 Jun, 2018 02:07
-
The FH is a configuration of the F9. It only requires a review of what is different from that of the F9. It does not really require 3 flights.
FH is not just a configuration of F9. It is a different launch vehicle. AF tends to treat heavy vehicles different from medium vehicles since they don't fly as often.
-
#39
by
sanman
on 23 Jun, 2018 03:50
-
Wow,what kind of payload needs the lifting power of FalconHeavy?
That must be a very large satellite.
SpaceX hasn't even flown the launch the USAF procured as a FH demo yet. 
