-
Pegasus XL – TacRL-2 – Vandenberg –13 June 2021 (08:11 UTC)
by
Star One
on 14 Aug, 2020 16:31
-
-
#1
by
arachnitect
on 14 Aug, 2020 19:07
-
Looks like a routine proficiency flight to me. Only difference is flying out of Edwards.
Why are they flying out of Edwards? Could be cool secret stuff but more likely it's boring ordinary stuff (hangar maintenance?)
-
#2
by
Star One
on 14 Aug, 2020 19:29
-
Looks like a routine proficiency flight to me. Only difference is flying out of Edwards.
Why are they flying out of Edwards? Could be cool secret stuff but more likely it's boring ordinary stuff (hangar maintenance?)
As you say this appears to be what they are basing it on as quoted below.
It is possible that this was just a routine training flight so that the Stargazer's crew could practice a launch operation without actually firing a rocket. However, it's not clear why Northrop Grumman would have staged such a flight out of Edwards, the U.S. Air Force's premier flight test facility, which is also home to NASA's Armstrong Flight Research Center, rather than the aircraft's home base at Mojave.
-
#3
by
zubenelgenubi
on 06 Mar, 2021 00:28
-
Is this what we were discussing last year?
(excerpt of the on-line State of Vandenberg Air Force Base address, morning of March 5, 2021--see attached screen capture)
2021 Launch Missions, Vandenberg AFB
TacRL-2Launching on Pegasus from L-1011 (
Stargazer)
-
#4
by
russianhalo117
on 06 Mar, 2021 00:57
-
Is this what we were discussing last year?
(excerpt of the on-line State of Vandenberg Air Force Base address, morning of March 5, 2021--see attached screen capture)
2021 Launch Missions, Vandenberg AFB
TacRL-2
Launching on Pegasus from L-1011 (Stargazer)
Maybe.
FA8818 is the base identifier for the TacRL Programme run out of Kirtland AFB.
-
#5
by
PM3
on 06 Mar, 2021 09:03
-
https://govtribe.com/award/federal-contract-award/delivery-order-fa881820d0003-fa881820f0020TACRL-2 MISSION TASK ORDER
Jul 30 2020
Award Date
Jul 30 2021
Current Completion Date
Jul 30 2021
Potential Completion Date
FA881820D0003FA881820F0020 is a delivery order under Orbital Services Program 4. It was awarded to Orbital Sciences LLC on Jul 30, 2020. The delivery order is funded by the Space and Missile Systems Center (DOD - USAF - AFSPC). The potential value of the award is $28,100,000. The NAICS Category for the award is 481212 - Nonscheduled Chartered Freight Air Transportation. The PSC Category is V126 - Space Transportation and Launch Services
-
#6
by
starchasercowboy
on 06 Mar, 2021 20:45
-
-
#7
by
gongora
on 06 Mar, 2021 23:26
-
-
#8
by
gongora
on 03 Apr, 2021 22:13
-
There is a Pegasus launch this year.
TacRL-2 mission out of VAFB mid-year. Tactically Responsive Launch Program. USAF calls NorGrum and says "go". NorGrum then has three weeks to integrate, test and launch the mission.
-
#9
by
Comga
on 04 Apr, 2021 03:59
-
Have I got this correct?
The USSF buys one of the last two vehicles of and old design at half price.
They contract to launch a satellite to demonstrate “rapid response”.
This should not be a challenge for an established, solid fueled vehicle...
unless you look at the last launch that took years to get into space
But even if they do succeed in launching it quickly, the feat can only be repeated once.
While relying on the lovely but aged and irreplaceable Stargazer.
Seems more like a consolation prize for NG bidding full price for the IXPE launch, simultaneous with demonstrating unreliability, all while it was obvious that they were no longer the only rocket capable of launching into an equatorial orbit.
Why SHOULD NG have offered NASA a discount of 20%, 30%, or even 40% on their second to last rocket when their friends will guarantee they can get 50%?
In fact, half price sounds like a TERRIBLE deal for the Space Force. What’s NG’s marginal cost? Forget the build. That’s a sunk cost. Either they got Paul Allen to pay for them or the made a poor investment in a business that made little sense. (Trade your old unique aircraft for a new, massively oversized unique aircraft.Plan for multiple launches of a rocket that launched barely once a year, while still touting the benefits of launching to exactly the orbit the customer wants, ridesharing by another name.)
Can someone point out a reason why this is a good idea?
-
#10
by
rayleighscatter
on 04 Apr, 2021 12:45
-
Because TRL isn't a launch vehicle program, it's a capabilities program. If they can do it with Pegasus they can do it with any available launch vehicle.
So they went with the cheapest option.
-
#11
by
edkyle99
on 04 Apr, 2021 14:07
-
Seems more like a consolation prize for NG bidding full price for the IXPE launch, simultaneous with demonstrating unreliability, all while it was obvious that they were no longer the only rocket capable of launching into an equatorial orbit.
I'm not sure I see the "simultaneous" here. The last Pegasus failure was in 1996. The ICON launch, in 2019 around the same time that IXPE was awarded, was successful, though delayed. The satellite mission itself also seems to be successful to date.
...
Can someone point out a reason why this is a good idea?
Celebrate the price reduction, thanks to competition and, possibly, to Orbital/Northrop Grumman merger synergies.
True, I think, that Pegasus is the only U.S launch vehicle currently flying that is also already in the Smithsonian.
- Ed Kyle
-
#12
by
ncb1397
on 04 Apr, 2021 14:24
-
While relying on the lovely but aged and irreplaceable Stargazer.
There are other aircraft that can carry Pegasus XL (it is in fact lighter fueled than Launcher One is). 747s are pretty cheap right now.
Why SHOULD NG have offered NASA a discount of 20%, 30%, or even 40% on their second to last rocket when their friends will guarantee they can get 50%?
I missed the announcement that Pegasus XL was cancelled, other than musings by the NSF cancel-everything-not-labeled-S****X brigade. Yes, the grim reaper comes for every rocket eventually...
-
#13
by
Comga
on 04 Apr, 2021 23:21
-
Of course, but it doesn't matter.
It's not a "capability" if it's a one-off that can't be replicated.
Pegasus is a solid fueled rocket mated to a specific aircraft, and there is only one Pegasus after this one.
Who remembers Maxwell Smart's response to being told his finger gun was out of bullets?
He fires the last one into the ceiling.
"NOW I'm out of bullets!"
There is no industry wide technology they are proving that means another launch provider could do the same.
It doesn't matter if rainbow flying unicorns could carry Pegasus. It has not been done.
The IXPE
BID was made simultaneous with NG was failing to get ICON off the ground.
Going out of business sales make for good opportunities for the buyer, but don't promote business.
Someone said "Do not think it is much of an advancement to do the unnessesary three times faster."
Here, we can say that it is not much of a bargain to buy something not needed at half price.
So no one can rise above picking nits and make a convincing case for this award?
-
#14
by
rayleighscatter
on 06 Apr, 2021 00:57
-
So no one can rise above picking nits and make a convincing case for this award?
The USAF has 600 spare launch vehicles that are almost identical to Pegasus.
-
#15
by
lrk
on 06 Apr, 2021 01:18
-
Have I got this correct?
The USSF buys one of the last two vehicles of and old design at half price.
My understanding is that NG is still capable of building Pegasus vehicles, but they are typically only built when ordered. The two currently in inventory were ordered by Stratolaunch and never flown.
-
#16
by
Tomness
on 06 Apr, 2021 03:30
-
So no one can rise above picking nits and make a convincing case for this award?
The USAF has 600 spare launch vehicles that are almost identical to Pegasus.
Got love decommissioned ICBM Motors Via Minotaurs and Pegasus's baby brother Minotaur-C
-
#17
by
lrk
on 06 Apr, 2021 04:08
-
Pegasus's baby brother Minotaur-C
IDK if I would call it a
baby brother, it's basically a Pegasus minus the wings, stuck on top of another "stage 0" motor.
-
#18
by
edkyle99
on 07 Apr, 2021 00:14
-
People have been "calling" the end of Pegasus for a dozen years or more now. One day, they'll be right, but for the time being it is alive as long as there are Minotaurs and GBIs and Antares and test missiles, since they more or less share avionics.
- Ed Kyle
-
#19
by
The Phantom
on 10 Apr, 2021 16:07
-
Have I got this correct?
The USSF buys one of the last two vehicles of and old design at half price.
They contract to launch a satellite to demonstrate “rapid response”.
This should not be a challenge for an established, solid fueled vehicle...
unless you look at the last launch that took years to get into space
But even if they do succeed in launching it quickly, the feat can only be repeated once.
While relying on the lovely but aged and irreplaceable Stargazer.
Seems more like a consolation prize for NG bidding full price for the IXPE launch, simultaneous with demonstrating unreliability, all while it was obvious that they were no longer the only rocket capable of launching into an equatorial orbit.
Why SHOULD NG have offered NASA a discount of 20%, 30%, or even 40% on their second to last rocket when their friends will guarantee they can get 50%?
In fact, half price sounds like a TERRIBLE deal for the Space Force. What’s NG’s marginal cost? Forget the build. That’s a sunk cost. Either they got Paul Allen to pay for them or the made a poor investment in a business that made little sense. (Trade your old unique aircraft for a new, massively oversized unique aircraft.Plan for multiple launches of a rocket that launched barely once a year, while still touting the benefits of launching to exactly the orbit the customer wants, ridesharing by another name.)
Can someone point out a reason why this is a good idea?
It's good to remember that NASA paid twice what this mission costs because NASA required mission assurance activities that the DoD is not demanding for this mission. Mission assurance is expensive because it requires plenty of man-hours from well-paid analysts and engineers.
It should be noted that, back in the 00's, OSC offered the USAF Pegasus missions priced at less than $15M for the Orbital/Suborbital Program. Those offerings were called "Raptor".
