SpaceX Manifest Discussion Thread

[mandrewa]

The planned life is in the order of 100 missions with 10 missions between major overhauls / inspections.

Will SpaceX pull one at 10 flights and completely disassemble it for a very deep inspection, then let the others go beyond 10 flights based on the results on that destructive inspection?   

Yes.  But to put "100 missions with 10 missions between major overhauls/inspections" into what I think is the proper context, this was an aspirational goal.  It's not like the first boosters they make are actually expected to get to 100 uses.  But it was expected at the time that the statement was made that they were going to try to reach that goal with more development.

But this is all before Starship, aka BFR.  My interpretation of what Elon Musk said when he announced Starship as a very active goal was that they were going to stop putting development money into the Falcon 9.  Now as long as there is demand for the Falcon 9 they are going to keep making them, but that is the end of their commitment.

With Elon Musk you have to distinguish between statements about where are things now and what he is trying to reach.  He's always been very clear that Mars is the goal.  And to that end that was why he was pushing so hard to radically reduce the cost of the Falcon 9.  But once he realized that it just wasn't going to work, that even with the most optimistic assumptions the Falcon 9 was going to be too expensive -- for a Mars colony -- that was when he switched his energy to the Starship (called BFR back then) and when the aspirational statements about the Falcon 9 expired.

[Jansen]

https://spaceflightnow.com/2021/02/04/no-spacex-double-header-this-week-but-eastern-range-is-ready-for-two-launches-in-one-day/

Launch pads at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station and the Kennedy Space Center supported 31 rocket flights last year, and there are more than 50 missions scheduled in 2021, according to the 45th Space Wing, which oversees the unit commanded by Shoemaker and manages all Eastern Range launch operations on the Space Coast.

All those Starlink missions are adding up. Going to be a busy year!

[gongora]

https://ria.ru/20210212/spacex-1597241938.html
Google translate:

KIEV, February 12 - RIA Novosti. Ukraine is negotiating with SpaceX on the possibility of a joint launch in December of the Sich 2-30 remote sensing satellite, said Minister for Strategic Industries of the country Oleg Urusky.
Earlier, Urusky said that the President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky ordered to launch the Sich 2-30 remote sensing satellite into low-earth orbit.
“We are working intensively with a potential company that provides launch services because it’s not that easy. It’s a foreign company. We actually have a window to launch the spacecraft in December with the help of the foreign operator SpaceX we are working with. I think in the near future time will become clear, "Urusky said on the air of the First Business TV channel.
According to him, today the satellite is "practically ready", it needs final analysis and verification of its readiness for launch.

Looking through other articles there is a little doubt cast on the satellite readiness, and it doesn't appear to be a signed contract yet, so not putting it on the manifest until it's finalized.

[Jansen]

The loss of booster 1059 represents a significant setback to SpaceX’s goal of 48 launches and a rapid launch cadence in order to facilitate commercial Starlink operations in the first half of 2021.

The loss of 20% of their available booster capacity on the Eastern Range means that they will be booster constrained again, despite being able to turnaround some of their boosters in less than a month.

More troubling is that B1049 and B1051 are approaching their tenth flights, which could necessitate a substantial period of downtime for major refurbishment. This would likely be in the March/April timeframe, leaving only two boosters for Starlink launches.

I believe the company has contingencies to deal with this problem though, possibly put in place since the loss last year of B1048 and B1056.

These may include increased rate of F9 booster production, the use of B1063 on the east coast (if contractually possible), and conversion of Falcon Heavy side boosters.

[klod]

I wonder what booster will use SpaceX for CRS-22.

[Rebel44]

IMO, it would make sense for SpaceX to build up a slightly larger fleet of boosters if they want to launch 40+ times per year because some booster losses are likely to happen over time and some boosters might need a longer inspection/refurbishment after doing ~10 flights.

[Jansen]

Just had the new SMSR master schedule sent to me.

[gongora]

Just had the new SMSR master schedule sent to me.

Which is publicly available on the NASA site: https://sma.nasa.gov/sma-disciplines/smsr

[Comga]

twitter.com/nextspaceflight/status/1361848375713296385

Commercial Crew tentative schedule, per latest NASA planning document. Note that these schedules are fairly fluid.

2021:
- OFT 2 - 3/25
- Crew 2 - 4/20
- Crew 1 Return - 5/1
- Crew 3 - 9/13
- Crew 2 Return - 9/27
- CFT - September

https://sma.nasa.gov/docs/default-source/sma-disciplines-and-programs/smsr/smsr-intergrated-master-schedule_24feb2020aab4a269d2a865b9a1a0ff0f003ca228.pdf?sfvrsn=8290faf8_18

https://twitter.com/nextspaceflight/status/1361848376568868868

2022:
- Crew 4 - 2/4
- Starliner 1 - 2/24 (Obviously, only Crew-4 or Starliner-1 will happen in this timeframe)
- Starliner-2 - 4/21
- Crew 5 - 8/15
- Starliner 3 - 12/14

2023:
- Crew 6 - 2/1

The schedule ends here, but more Starliner launches likely in 2023.

That answers a question from another thread a while ago.
It seemed like Boeing was going to be allied to “catch up” to SpaceX on the crew flights.
This says, to me, that Boeing can get into the regular rotation a year from now, if they are ready.
After that it will go back and forth between them.
I had worked out some convoluted logic about why Boeing would get to do several crew flights in a row, but it turns out that’s not the plan.
Seems fair enough.
It’s still got to be painful to their bottom line to be so far behind their plan.
But SpaceX, our subject here, will do quarterly flights until that time, then delay one flight and switch to semi-annual flights.
Also fair enough.

[marsbase]

It’s still got to be painful to their bottom line to be so far behind their plan.
But SpaceX, our subject here, will do quarterly flights until that time, then delay one flight and switch to semi-annual flights.
Also fair enough.

They contracted for an initial number of flights each. When SpaceX has fulfilled that contract, they will be able to re-negotiate for flights after that.  I suspect SpaceX will increase its per flight charges to match those of Boeing in the first round of contracts.  That's what SpaceX did when negotiating a renewal of the ISS CRS2 agreement.  It's hard for NASA to argue that their price is too expensive, since they were willing to pay that amount to Boeing.  And if NASA wants two competing flight services, they don't have a lot of choice.

[Comga]

It’s still got to be painful to their bottom line to be so far behind their plan.
But SpaceX, our subject here, will do quarterly flights until that time, then delay one flight and switch to semi-annual flights.
Also fair enough.

They contracted for an initial number of flights each. When SpaceX has fulfilled that contract, they will be able to re-negotiate for flights after that.  I suspect SpaceX will increase its per flight charges to match those of Boeing in the first round of contracts.  That's what SpaceX did when negotiating a renewal of the ISS CRS2 agreement.  It's hard for NASA to argue that their price is too expensive, since they were willing to pay that amount to Boeing.  And if NASA wants two competing flight services, they don't have a lot of choice.

Those points are neither in dispute nor relevant to a discussion of SpaceX’s manifest. 
The point was in the last line: quarterly SpaceX Crew flights until Boeing gets certified.
There will be no long pause between Crew missions.
Both parties will fly out their minimum contracts and get extended.

[mandrewa]

It’s still got to be painful to their bottom line to be so far behind their plan.
But SpaceX, our subject here, will do quarterly flights until that time, then delay one flight and switch to semi-annual flights.
Also fair enough.

They contracted for an initial number of flights each. When SpaceX has fulfilled that contract, they will be able to re-negotiate for flights after that.  I suspect SpaceX will increase its per flight charges to match those of Boeing in the first round of contracts.  That's what SpaceX did when negotiating a renewal of the ISS CRS2 agreement.  It's hard for NASA to argue that their price is too expensive, since they were willing to pay that amount to Boeing.  And if NASA wants two competing flight services, they don't have a lot of choice.

I don't believe that is what happened.  I suspect SpaceX offered basically the same price for CRS2 as it did for CRS1, and here is the important part, for the same number of missions.  But NASA reduced the number of missions, or the pace at which they occur, for CRS2 and SpaceX's price went up accordingly, because a significant part of the cost of doing CRS each year is going to stay the same regardless of the number of missions.

Those fixed costs, or the fixed cost per year, now have to be spread over fewer missions.

NASA is making this trade, and I agree with their priorities, in order to bring Dream Chaser into the mix.

[zubenelgenubi]

Cross-posts

Starlink v1.0 Flight 21:

There are 2 booster available for use for this flight: 1060.6 at 37 days L2L and 1051.9 at 52 days L2L.

Also even though the ambitious 9 day pad turnaround for 39A [March 4 to March 13] is possible in practice due to many obstacles it has been more like 11 to 14 days. Putting a more likely launch date as 15th to 18th.

Starlink v1.0 Flight 22:

For a flight in March there are 2 boosters available. But one of them them would be used by L21 leaving the other available to be used by L22.

The primary restriction is site resources. SpaceX Navy/ASDS availability and the pad turnaround of a nominal 11 to 14 days for a launch of ~24 March to the very end of March [from SLC-40]. Based on when L20 actually launches.

Starlink v1.0 Flight 23 and Crew 2; beyond:

There are sufficient boosters available for a launch of L21 ~18 Mar (39A), and of L22 on or just before 1 Apr (40).

But the next booster 1049.9 would not be available (assume L2L of 28 days) NET 2 Apr. But more likely 1049 would not be up and ready for another launch until 35-45 days or 7-17 Apr. Making it possible that it would likely launch on 10 Apr on (40) 10 days after launching L22 on (40) very late March.

But also by 6 Apr 1058.7 at 28 days L2L would possibly become available. So 2 boosters for L23 are likely to be available for a launch in first half of April.

[LC-39A may be unavailable,] because of the complication of launching early enough on 39A prior to the April 22 date for Crew 2. [With LC-39A being unavailable] and booster unavailability, [the L23 launch will] likely be [from SLC-40] on April 10 or even later.

[Beyond:]
It is likely only one launch from 39A (Crew 2) would occur in April.

But it is likely that a launch [of] L24 on 40 would happen 24 April or later [, again from SLC-40]. By then several boosters would be available.

[The] May launch schedule will not be as constrained and would likely have as many as 3 launches of Starlink (L25, L26 and L27) on both 39A and 40. With only [3] launches using the booster pool in April, there would be 2 boosters available at the beginning of May with a third by the middle to late May.

Edited by me, primarily for clarity, including [ ].
oldAtlas_Eguy, please contact me if I made errors.

[Jansen]

https://spaceflightnow.com/2021/03/03/launch-companies-range-officials-reassessing-weather-constraints-at-cape-canaveral/

Launch companies and U.S. Space Force range officials at Cape Canaveral are reassessing long-standing weather rules, looking at beefing up rocket defenses against lightning, and considering strategies to prepare for two different launch windows on a given day to guard against weather delays

The 45th Space Wing is eventually eyeing a switch to automated range scheduling to handle more requests from launch providers. Each range request currently takes “multiple hours of coordination” with security, safety, weather, and other teams, including the Federal Aviation Administration, which must help clear airspace over the launch site.

There have been a lot of changes recently to enable faster turnaround and recycling. Many more are being considered to prevent weather scrubs and mitigate the effects of weather.

For SpaceX Starlink launches, multiple launch windows on the same day might become standard.

This is a great article, suggest you give it a read.

[su27k]

https://spaceflightnow.com/2021/03/03/launch-companies-range-officials-reassessing-weather-constraints-at-cape-canaveral/

It's interesting that they're focusing a lot on lightning, I guess that's why they have a job opening for Lightning Direct and Indirect Effects Engineer, Senior.

[gongora]

Re: https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=52191.msg2191728#msg2191728

https://www.yuzhnoye.com/ua/press-center/news/copy_news_823.html
TECHNICAL MEETING ON URGENT ISSUES OF SICH-2-1 SPACECRAFT READINESS FOR LAUNCH IN 2021

March 11, 2021
On March 10, CB Pivdenne chaired by the Chairman of the State Tax Administration Volodymyr Taftay hosted a technical meeting of chief designers on urgent issues of readiness of the Sich-2-1 spacecraft for launch in 2021

The technical meeting was attended by representatives of co-contractors: SPE "Hartron-ARCOS LTD", SPE "Hartron-YUKOM", KP SPB "Arsenal", SPE SE "ZAO NDIRV", DNDP "CONNEX", as well as representatives of the National Center management and testing of spacecraft, the Ministry of Strategy and PGZ-DKAU.

After hearing and discussing the reports and speeches of the participants of the meeting on the current state of work, they noted that the work is being performed in full and in accordance with the approved General Schedule for the completion of the space system "Sich-2-1".

The issue of providing current funding for the Sich-2-1 project was also discussed. Given the necessary time to advance launch services, the technical meeting of chief designers appealed to the SCA and the Ministry of Strategy to make every effort to sign the Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers on some issues of creating a space system "Sich-2-1".

Regarding the readiness of the spacecraft "Sich-2-1", at this time SE "CB" South "together with the cooperation of co-performers have already performed the following works:

- developed design documentation;

- conducted autonomous testing of subsystems;

- made a dimensional and dynamic model and conducted static and dynamic tests of spacecraft structures;

- manufactured and purchased components of the spacecraft of domestic and foreign production;

- assembled the flight model;

- performed 75% of work on the program of electroradiotechnical tests .

[steveleach]

Have we seen any evidence of the impact of the loss of B1059 on the 2021 schedule yet?

Will there even be any impact, or are they not significantly constrained by booster numbers?

Just curious.

[Jansen]

Have we seen any evidence of the impact of the loss of B1059 on the 2021 schedule yet?

Will there even be any impact, or are they not significantly constrained by booster numbers?

We’re starting to see an impact in the end of March/early April timeframe. March would’ve likely been a five launch month if not for the loss of B1059.

A lot of boosters were held up due to the issues with B1049. Now that it has launched, those boosters are going up and SpaceX will be booster constrained again.

You can’t lose 20% of your Starlink launch capacity and not have an impact.

[Jansen]

Will there even be any impact, or are they not significantly constrained by booster numbers?

It appears that B1063 is being transported to Florida to support launch operations. Unconfirmed at this time, as the pictures aren’t conclusive.

With the delays to DART and other VAFB flights, it makes sense to use B1063 as a replacement and new build (B1070?) for west coast operations.

If it’s true, we could still see five launches in March.

Edit:  Confirmed by Michael Baylor

https://twitter.com/nextspaceflight/status/1370400469479161860

[oldAtlas_Eguy]

It is likely that 1063 would arrive just after L21 launches from 39A. ~Mar 16 -17. It could then be used for a on or before 1 April launch out of 39A of L23. But likely it would be more like sometime after 1 April but before 6 April. A 20 day process  launch after an arrival on 15 Apr to 39A would be 3 April. This should be plenty of time.

Next launch L24 out of LC40 a week later on the 10th is possible with 1058 (30 days) or even 1049 (39 days).

Then 3 days after Crew 2 another launch L25 on LC40 which would have 2 booster to pick from in the narrow window between the SpaceX Navy assets involvement in Crew 2 support and then for the Crew 1 landing 1st week of May.

As soon as SpaceX Navy assets are available another launch L26 out of 39A with at least 2 if not 3 boosters to pick from can be performed. May would likely sport 4 launches in total.

B1063's arrival in Florida will make possible for 1 additional launch in both April and May. 4 in each month. Possibly as many as 5 in May.