SpaceX Falcon 9 : SAOCOM 1B : Cape Canaveral : August 30, 2020 (23:19 UTC)

[RocketLover0119]

So a couple questions, have we heard anything about the NET date? (I’m going to be In Orlando for a week) What pad will this be from, considering ANASIS just launched from SLC-40 and Starlink is sitting delayed at 39a?

[whitelancer64]

I followed the story on the web: https://bit.ly/EquiposSAOCOM

The article has some good info

Five days before launch, the Argentine and SpaceX engineers will conduct a second procedural test, which this time will include the launcher and the satellite.

Are they saying they're going to do the static fire with payload attached?

As far as I know, yes, this is the case. We'll use this test as the last rehearsal before the launch.

PS: I was surprised, too. I thought they stopped doing static fires with the payload attached after AMOS-6.

They did, but it has technically always been up to the customer to have the payload on or not. NASA allowed the DM-1 Dragon to be on the booster for the static fire. Several (all? I haven't been keeping track) of the Starlink static fires have had the Starlinks on top.

[TJL]

I followed the story on the web: https://bit.ly/EquiposSAOCOM

The article has some good info

Five days before launch, the Argentine and SpaceX engineers will conduct a second procedural test, which this time will include the launcher and the satellite.

Are they saying they're going to do the static fire with payload attached?

As far as I know, yes, this is the case. We'll use this test as the last rehearsal before the launch.

PS: I was surprised, too. I thought they stopped doing static fires with the payload attached after AMOS-6.

They did, but it has technically always been up to the customer to have the payload on or not. NASA allowed the DM-1 Dragon to be on the booster for the static fire. Several (all? I haven't been keeping track) of the Starlink static fires have had the Starlinks on top.

DM 1 and 2 were left on the vehicle because it contained an escape system. Starlink is SpaceX owned...it was their choice to leave it intact for the static firing.

[TJL]

What was the reason for changing launch locations from VAFB to KSC?

[Tomness]

What was the reason for changing launch locations from VAFB to KSC?

1st off prove they can do it, since the Range approved Launching certain SSO & polar trajectories with a Dogleg again from the Eastern Range.
2nd keep the launch team & personal at same location because it's pretty much 1 team now.
3rd it's a little easier for foreign nationals to travel KSC VS VAFB & CCAFS/CCSFS

[KTigress]

What was the reason for changing launch locations from VAFB to KSC?

1st off prove they can do it, since the Range approved Launching certain SSO & polar trajectories with a Dogleg again from the Eastern Range.
2nd keep the launch team & personal at same location because it's pretty much 1 team now.
3rd it's a little easier for foreign nationals to travel KSC VS VAFB & CCAFS/CCSFS

Although your 2nd and 3rd points are true, they changed the launch site more than a year ago. So, I think it may have to do with the 1st point.

EDIT: I've just realised they're not launching regularly from California anymore. It makes more sense now. My bad!

[Elthiryel]

According to Next Spaceflight, booster 1059.4 is going to be used for this flight. It's going to be the first time the booster is used for the fourth time for an orbital flight for an external customer.

Previous missions:
December 2019 - CRS-19
March 2020 - CRS-20
June 2020 - Starlink-9 (V1.0 L8)

We don't know the exact launch date yet, but it should at least be very close to breaking the booster turnaround record set during ANASIS-II mission (51d 02h 08m).

Source: https://nextspaceflight.com/launches/details/90

[Aphelios]

SAOCOM 1B is pushed to late August
* the launch of the SAOCOM 1B had to be rescheduled towards the end of August , due to the additional time that the company SpaceX required for the launch vehicle's set-up .*
Also it says
*This additional time implies an approach to other launches planned from that Base , for which the United States Air Force , in charge of the authorizations for space mission launches from Cape Canaveral, ordered this reprogramming*

https://www.argentina.gob.ar/noticias/lanzamiento-del-satelite-saocom-1b

[kdhilliard]

SAOCOM 1B is pushed to late August
* the launch of the SAOCOM 1B had to be rescheduled towards the end of August , due to the additional time that the company SpaceX required for the launch vehicle's set-up .*
...

Is the Spanish "puesta a punto" (fine tuning?) consistent with saying they need more time to finish refurbishing B1059, which made its third flight back on 13 June (Starlink v1.0 L8)?

[zubenelgenubi]

Press release; Google translated

Launch of the SAOCOM 1B satellite, Saturday July 25, 2020

SpaceX , the launcher's supplier company, informed CONAE today that due to decisions by the United States Air Force, which coordinates that activity from Cape Canaveral Base, the launch into orbit of the second SAOCOM Mission satellite has been rescheduled for end of August.

The National Commission for Space Activities (CONAE), an agency of the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation, reports that the Argentine observation satellite SAOCOM 1B is in optimal conditions and ready to be launched, after successfully completing all the tests carried out by the team of 18 CONAE and INVAP professionals who traveled to the United States.

However, the launch of SAOCOM 1B had to be rescheduled towards the end of August, due to the additional time required by the SpaceX company for the launch vehicle to be tuned. This additional time implies an approach to other launches planned from that Base, for which the United States Air Force, in charge of the authorizations for space mission launches from Cape Canaveral, ordered this reprogramming.

Finally, it is worth noting the commitment and dedication of Argentine engineers to conclude the satellite launch campaign that will complete the SAOCOM constellation.

[russianhalo117]

SAOCOM 1B is pushed to late August
* the launch of the SAOCOM 1B had to be rescheduled towards the end of August , due to the additional time that the company SpaceX required for the launch vehicle's set-up .*
...

Is the Spanish "puesta a punto" (fine tuning?) consistent with saying they need more time to finish refurbishing B1059, which made its third flight back on 13 June (Starlink v1.0 L8)?

No. USAF (USSF Range) made the official request to reschedule for other vehicles on the ETR a very likely has nothing to do with refurbishing as the launcher is supposedly already integrated on its dollies. It is more likely to do with checks and/or replacements consistent with the Starlink and ANASIS-II F9 S2 issues (Starlink implied).ANASIS-II's second stage was swapped so a juggling of stages occurred. We have no clue if they are checking this rocket or swapped stages and so on.

[baldusi]

The press release actually can be summarized as follows:
SpaceX took a bit longer setting up the launcher. This pushed the launch date close to other missions. USAF thus requested this launch to be pushed towards the end on August.

This is the summary. I can only comment on the general tone. I don't have any internal information, just a native speaker (as in Argentinean used to read government press releases) I'm giving an accurately translated summary.

[gongora]

The FCC communications permits for launch and landing run through September 23.  SpaceX filed today for extensions of those permits.

[Elthiryel]

Previously Next Spaceflight stated that this mission is going to be launched using booster 1059.4, but now it shows "Unknown Vehicle" again, so there may be an assignment shift. I wonder if it's somehow related to the mission delays.

https://nextspaceflight.com/launches/details/90

[scr00chy]

I could imagine this flying on B1060.2 and B1059.4 being used for Starlink v1-11 instead.

[zubenelgenubi]

As "late August" approaches, is interest brewing to view this evening twilit launch spectacular down the length of the Florida Atlantic coast?
(See up-thread for previous discussion pre-pandemic quarantine.)

[Norm38]

I could imagine this flying on B1060.2 and B1059.4 being used for Starlink v1-11 instead.

I was thinking they'd save B1060.2 for the SiriusXM SXM-7 mission. Given the "pitching rotation" they have going with the boosters and an external customer, that makes the most sense.

[zubenelgenubi]

SAOCOM 1B, Argentine industry in space, dated August 13

Finally, [Gabriel Absi ,Manager of INVAP's Space Projects Area] explained the reason why they had to postpone the [SAOCOM 1B launch] date from the end of July to the end of August: "There is a North American [USA] satellite [NROL-44] that has priority over the rest because it is used for the security of the United States and that is why they postponed us a month, We don't have a specific date yet but we have a launch scheduled for the end of August."

[zubenelgenubi]

Cross-post:

https://spaceflightnow.com/launch-schedule/ (August 17 update)

Aug. 27 • Falcon 9 • SAOCOM 1B
Launch time: 2319 GMT (7:19 p.m. EDT)
Launch site: SLC-40, Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida

***

EDIT August 18: After this USA morning's successful Starlink launch, this is the next Falcon 9 orbital launch, nine days from today, from the same launch complex!
And less than two days after the previous launch from Cape Canaveral!

Scheduled:
Date - Satellite(s) - Rocket - Launch Site - Time (UTC)

2020
August 26 - NROL-44: Orion 10 (Mentor 8 ) (TBD) - Delta IV-H [D-385] - Canaveral SLC-37B - 06:16-10:25
  Late   August 27 - SAOCOM-1B, Capella 2 (Sequoia), GNOMES-1 - Falcon 9-092 (B1059.4 L) - Canaveral SLC-40 - 23:19

Changes on August 8th
Changes on August 17th

Also, a reminder from up-thread about the upcoming Static Fire--if the information is still correct, then Static Fire will be on August 22.

I followed the story on the web: https://bit.ly/EquiposSAOCOM

The article has some good info

Five days before launch, the Argentine and SpaceX engineers will conduct a second procedural test, which this time will include the launcher and the satellite.

Are they saying they're going to do the static fire with payload attached?

As far as I know, yes, this is the case. We'll use this test as the last rehearsal before the launch.

PS: I was surprised, too. I thought they stopped doing static fires with the payload attached after AMOS-6.

They did, but it has technically always been up to the customer to have the payload on or not. NASA allowed the DM-1 Dragon to be on the booster for the static fire. Several (all? I haven't been keeping track) of the Starlink static fires have had the Starlinks on top.

DM 1 and 2 were left on the vehicle because it contained an escape system. Starlink is SpaceX owned...it was their choice to leave it intact for the static firing.

[Aphelios]

*The SAOCOM 1B satellite is already in the cap of the Falcon 9 launcher! We proudly display our flag, our professionals and the launch badge, with the SAOCOM constellation.*   
https://twitter.com/CONAE_Oficial/status/1295867900134400008