Author Topic: SpaceX F9 : Galaxy 33/Galaxy 34 : CCSFS SLC-40 : 8 October 2022 (23:05 UTC) (Read 60803 times)

Rondaz · « **Reply #200 on:** 10/09/2022 02:20 pm »

Update / Update

Another Booster that reaches 14 releases.

https://twitter.com/SpaceNosey/status/1579064465433034753

Rondaz · « **Reply #201 on:** 10/09/2022 02:25 pm »

In this photo from @mdcainjr, the booster of SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket is seen moments after separation from the launch vehicle's upper stage Saturday evening.

It was this booster's 14th flight to space, tying a record for SpaceX's reusable rocket fleet.

https://twitter.com/SpaceflightNow/status/1579090300177289217

FutureSpaceTourist · « **Reply #202 on:** 10/09/2022 02:31 pm »

https://twitter.com/launchphoto/status/1579107710796120064

Quote

More shots of the launch of Intelsat's Galaxy 33 & 34 satellites moments after sunset last night

https://www.launchphotography.com/Launch_Photos.html

The second image in this tweet has not been tweeted by SpaceX but is on their website (attached)

FutureSpaceTourist · « **Reply #203 on:** 10/09/2022 02:45 pm »

Remotes are in

https://twitter.com/johnkrausphotos/status/1579118993612623872

Quote

Last night’s stunning sunset blastoff of Falcon 9, delivering Intelsat G-33/G-34 to orbit

FutureSpaceTourist · « **Reply #204 on:** 10/09/2022 03:28 pm »

https://twitter.com/trevormahlmann/status/1579118736837316608

Quote

A sunset Falcon 9 lift off from my sound-activated remote camera placed at SLC-40 in Cape Canaveral, Florida🚀🌅

FutureSpaceTourist · « **Reply #205 on:** 10/09/2022 03:52 pm »

https://twitter.com/schilkescott/status/1579136448875622401

Quote

Remote cameras retrieved off SLC-40 for a beautiful blue hour #SpaceX #Intelsat #galaxy 33&34 #Satellites #sunset #Launch 10-8-22 14th flight for B-1051-14 & 46th @SpaceX launch YTD! @maximum_Q @StingerNSW @steveMmattison @Rebelincryo1 @kaka_meyer @correachris_ @christysotonews

FutureSpaceTourist · « **Reply #206 on:** 10/09/2022 03:58 pm »

https://twitter.com/spacecoast_stve/status/1579139092268257281

Quote

Falcon 9 wraps up a busy week with a beautiful twilight launch!

Overview: nasaspaceflight.com/2022/10/spacex…

FutureSpaceTourist · « **Reply #207 on:** 10/09/2022 04:45 pm »

https://twitter.com/tgmetsfan98/status/1579150351894122496

Quote

Nine Merlins pushing Falcon 9 skyward.

nasaspaceflight.com/2022/10/spacex…

Rondaz · « **Reply #208 on:** 10/09/2022 05:03 pm »

Took a risk on my remote camera setup for Galaxy 33 & 34, annnnnnnnnddddddd it didn’t quite work out 😬…All good though! Got some big plans cooking for upcoming missions..

https://twitter.com/BrandonMWynn/status/1579120140456955904

Oersted · « **Reply #209 on:** 10/09/2022 08:28 pm »

Quote from: Rondaz on 10/09/2022 02:20 pm

Update / Update

Another Booster that reaches 14 releases.

https://twitter.com/SpaceNosey/status/1579064465433034753

Lanzamientos = launches.

LouScheffer · « **Reply #210 on:** 10/10/2022 12:05 am »

Quote from: ZachS09 on 10/09/2022 05:35 am

Telstar 19V was 7,075 kilograms, but reached an initial apogee of 17,800 kilometers.

Here, the combined Galaxy 33/34 stack weighing 7,350 kilograms reached an initial apogee of 19,800 kilometers.

Could Stage 1 have provided a bit more delta-v prior to MECO, leaving a lower fuel reserve for the entry and landing burns?

Using the usual assumptions, if the rocket was unchanged, increasing the mass from 7075 kg to 7350 kg would cost about 69 m/s - 3 m/s from the booster and 66 m/s from the upper stage. But instead it gained about 20 m/s (difference between apogee of 17800 and 19800 km). So the rocket as a whole did +89 m/s better than you would expect from the earlier launch.

The difference seems roughly evenly split between the stages. The 33/34 launch staged at 7350 km/hr, whereas 19V staged at 7075 km/hr. That's about +47 m/s for the first stage, as opposed to the -3 m/s if was unchanged. So that's +50 m/s compared to the earlier launch. It did appear the entry burn was about 3 seconds shorter, which would allow 1 more second of acceleration (since entry burn is 3 engine) which could account for most of the 50 m/s as you speculated.

The second stage must therefore be +39 m/s better than expected from the previous launch. I'm not sure where this might have come from. Maybe better understanding of residuals?

zubenelgenubi · « **Reply #211 on:** 10/10/2022 02:21 am »

Cross-post; launch time to the second:

Quote from: Salo on 10/08/2022 11:08 pm

https://twitter.com/cbs_spacenews/status/1578884217722720256
Quote
William Harwood @cbs_spacenews
F9/Galaxy 33/34: LIFTOFF! At 7:05:00pm EDT (2305 UTC)

jacqmans · « **Reply #212 on:** 10/10/2022 06:33 am »

Northrop Grumman-built Commercial Telecommunications Satellites Launched Successfully

Spacecraft are the first in a rapid series of civil, military and commercial Northrop Grumman payloads to be launched this fall
October 09, 2022 Space, Satellites

DULLES, Va. – Oct. 9, 2022 – The Galaxy 33 and Galaxy 34 C-band satellites built by Northrop Grumman Corporation (NYSE: NOC) were successfully launched yesterday aboard a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station in Florida. The satellites, based on Northrop Grumman’s flight proven GEOStar™ platform, were built for Intelsat and designed for 15 years of on-orbit life.

“Our GEOStar-3 satellite bus is a proven platform that commercial communications providers like Intelsat count on to deliver vital communications services to their customers,” said Steve Krein, vice president, civil and commercial space, Northrop Grumman. “We have a long history collaborating with Intelsat, not only on communications satellites, but also with our pioneering Mission Extension Vehicles.”

The Galaxy 33 and Galaxy 34 satellites will primarily provide television broadcast services in the upper portion of the C-band spectrum, a range of wireless radio frequencies that is used for critical telecommunications and data connectivity worldwide. They will support the U.S. Federal Communications Commission’s directive to make the lower portion of the C-band spectrum available for critical 5G services.

Northrop Grumman has delivered more than 40 geostationary telecommunications satellites for operators around the globe. Galaxy 33 and Galaxy 34 are the 12th and 13th such satellites the company has manufactured for Intelsat. These satellites are among the multiple Northrop Grumman payloads set to launch through the end of 2022, supporting customer missions that span human exploration, scientific discovery, communications and national security.

https://news.northropgrumman.com/news/releases/northrop-grumman-built-commercial-telecommunications-satellites-launched-successfully

FutureSpaceTourist · « **Reply #213 on:** 10/10/2022 10:56 am »

https://twitter.com/emerson_reese_/status/1579205260240777216

Quote

Liftoff! Falcon 9 engines blazing towards orbit carrying Intelsat satellites for Galaxy 33 & 34 mission.

📷 me/ @NewsSpaceflight

#SpaceX #Intelsat @SpaceX

ZachS09 · « **Reply #214 on:** 10/10/2022 11:57 am »

Quote from: LouScheffer on 10/10/2022 12:05 am

Quote from: ZachS09 on 10/09/2022 05:35 am
Telstar 19V was 7,075 kilograms, but reached an initial apogee of 17,800 kilometers.

Here, the combined Galaxy 33/34 stack weighing 7,350 kilograms reached an initial apogee of 19,800 kilometers.

Could Stage 1 have provided a bit more delta-v prior to MECO, leaving a lower fuel reserve for the entry and landing burns?
Using the usual assumptions, if the rocket was unchanged, increasing the mass from 7075 kg to 7350 kg would cost about 69 m/s - 3 m/s from the booster and 66 m/s from the upper stage. But instead it gained about 20 m/s (difference between apogee of 17800 and 19800 km). So the rocket as a whole did +89 m/s better than you would expect from the earlier launch.

The difference seems roughly evenly split between the stages. The 33/34 launch staged at 7350 km/hr, whereas 19V staged at 7075 km/hr. That's about +47 m/s for the first stage, as opposed to the -3 m/s if was unchanged. So that's +50 m/s compared to the earlier launch. It did appear the entry burn was about 3 seconds shorter, which would allow 1 more second of acceleration (since entry burn is 3 engine) which could account for most of the 50 m/s as you speculated.

The second stage must therefore be +39 m/s better than expected from the previous launch. I'm not sure where this might have come from. Maybe better understanding of residuals?

Isn’t 7,075 km/h and/or 7,350 km/h at MECO too slow for a GTO launch? I think you were off by 1,000 km/h for both values.

LouScheffer · « **Reply #215 on:** 10/10/2022 05:06 pm »

Quote from: ZachS09 on 10/10/2022 11:57 am

Quote from: LouScheffer on 10/10/2022 12:05 am
Quote from: ZachS09 on 10/09/2022 05:35 am
Telstar 19V was 7,075 kilograms, but reached an initial apogee of 17,800 kilometers.

Here, the combined Galaxy 33/34 stack weighing 7,350 kilograms reached an initial apogee of 19,800 kilometers.

Could Stage 1 have provided a bit more delta-v prior to MECO, leaving a lower fuel reserve for the entry and landing burns?
Using the usual assumptions, if the rocket was unchanged, increasing the mass from 7075 kg to 7350 kg would cost about 69 m/s - 3 m/s from the booster and 66 m/s from the upper stage. But instead it gained about 20 m/s (difference between apogee of 17800 and 19800 km). So the rocket as a whole did +89 m/s better than you would expect from the earlier launch.

The difference seems roughly evenly split between the stages. The 33/34 launch staged at 7350 km/hr, whereas 19V staged at 7075 km/hr. That's about +47 m/s for the first stage, as opposed to the -3 m/s if was unchanged. So that's +50 m/s compared to the earlier launch. It did appear the entry burn was about 3 seconds shorter, which would allow 1 more second of acceleration (since entry burn is 3 engine) which could account for most of the 50 m/s as you speculated.

The second stage must therefore be +39 m/s better than expected from the previous launch. I'm not sure where this might have come from. Maybe better understanding of residuals?
Isn’t 7,075 km/h and/or 7,350 km/h at MECO too slow for a GTO launch? I think you were off by 1,000 km/h for both values.

I went back and checked the videos, and you are right. Both were off by 1000 k/hr. Thanks for the correction.

OneSpeed · « **Reply #216 on:** 10/11/2022 01:09 am »

Here is a comparison of the webcast telemetry from Galaxy 33-34 and last years SMX-8 missions. Like Telstar 18V, the SMX-8 payload was about 7,000kg. The first difference in the booster profiles is the larger SMX-8 throttle back for terminal guidance. SMX-8 MECO was at 2,265m/s, G33-34 at 2,315m/s, for a difference of 50m/s. The second difference is that G33-34 used more glide at re-entry, saving some propellant.
Conversely, despite the extra payload mass of G33-34 its second stage very nearly maintained its lead, finishing some 46m/s faster. Perhaps the propellant was a little colder?

gbl · « **Reply #217 on:** 10/12/2022 02:18 am »

Time lapse view from ASDS:
https://twitter.com/spacex/status/1580014747516211202

FutureSpaceTourist · « **Reply #218 on:** 10/12/2022 09:59 pm »

https://twitter.com/spaceoffshore/status/1580295863972134912

Quote

ASOG droneship is returning from Galaxy 33/34 with B1060.

Somewhat hard to estimate but the droneship is sailing slowly, which would align with approx. dawn on Thursday, however an overnight arrival is possible.

FutureSpaceTourist · « **Reply #219 on:** 10/13/2022 09:10 am »

https://twitter.com/spaceoffshore/status/1580477729287581696

Quote

ASOG droneship is approaching Port Canaveral this morning. Arrival time potentially 7:30am ET at current pace.