Author Topic: SpaceX Manifest Discussion Thread (Read 466963 times)

gongora · « **Reply #340 on:** 04/29/2021 04:28 pm »

I think they'd have to request another modification to put up spares that took them beyond the approved numbers. I also think that won't be a problem for a while if ever. If they have problems with a set of the sats probably best just to replace them in a timely fashion.

I'm curious to see if deployments slow down for a while after the initial shell is filled. They're still iterating on everything, ISLs are still a work in progress. If they don't care about ISL for the 70 degree shell it would be a good one to start filling. Also curious to see if the number of sats on a rocket goes down as they launch to different inclinations and use Vandy for some.

oldAtlas_Eguy · « **Reply #341 on:** 04/29/2021 06:54 pm »

Soon we are going to need to add the following like entry on the manifest. But first a little more critical evaluation of the status of the element:
SN20 build status
BN3 Build status
Orbital Launch Facility build status.
Experimental FAA Launch license status
Experimental FCC com licences for an Orbital Starship launch and on orbit operations status

Here is the proposed line:

2021-07-1 (NET) SS BN3-1 L Starship Orbital Demo LEO . SN20-1

For now I think existing format can handle the Starship orbital launches since they will be in the counts of likely 5 or less over a period of the first year. But after that first launch a format extension to enable the inclusion of the fact that Starship has 2 significant reusable parts. That could be a lively discussion. As always such a discussion has its own thread. So those that want to discuss a format change should discuss it there.SpaceX Manifest Table Format Discussion

AC in NC · « **Reply #342 on:** 04/29/2021 08:47 pm »

Quote from: oldAtlas_Eguy on 04/29/2021 06:54 pm

Soon we are going to need to add the following like entry on the manifest.

Here is the proposed line:

2021-07-1 (NET) SS BN3-1 L Starship Orbital Demo LEO . SN20-1

For now I think existing format can handle the Starship orbital launches since they will be in the counts of likely 5 or less over a period of the first year.

I think the situation begs for independent Manifest Threads right from the start. Knowing how much work such tables are to maintain, there's probably enough difference to warrant it and it would eliminate having to look through noise if you're looking for a particular Family.

oldAtlas_Eguy · « **Reply #343 on:** 04/29/2021 09:11 pm »

Quote from: AC in NC on 04/29/2021 08:47 pm

Quote from: oldAtlas_Eguy on 04/29/2021 06:54 pm
Soon we are going to need to add the following like entry on the manifest.

Here is the proposed line:

2021-07-1 (NET) SS BN3-1 L Starship Orbital Demo LEO . SN20-1

For now I think existing format can handle the Starship orbital launches since they will be in the counts of likely 5 or less over a period of the first year.

I think the situation begs for independent Manifest Threads right from the start. Knowing how much work such tables are to maintain, there's probably enough difference to warrant it and it would eliminate having to look through noise if you're looking for a particular Family.

To keep them all in one basket may still be better. Since for a while Starlink will be launching on both SS and F9 at the same time. And in order to keep up with that constellation's launches, having to go to 2 threads would be a problem especially on the determination on order of launch for what batch went to what inclination and when in relation to when others did which launched on a different LV. Later when most launches have been taken over by Starship. And the number of Starship launches to the remaining launches still on F9 may be a significant item in the swamping out of trying to find and manage the few remaining F9 launches. For now I think the existing manifest can handle Starship at least for next couple of years (until 2023).

AC in NC · « **Reply #344 on:** 04/29/2021 09:27 pm »

That's a good point.

I can see value in both approaches but it wouldn't be worth doing if you weren't going to do it right. And I could see doing it right taking more than two Manifests. Tables are too much pain enough to maintain to go down that route.

oldAtlas_Eguy · « **Reply #345 on:** 04/29/2021 10:21 pm »

Quote from: AC in NC on 04/29/2021 09:27 pm

That's a good point.

I can see value in both approaches but it wouldn't be worth doing if you weren't going to do it right. And I could see doing it right taking more than two Manifests. Tables are too much pain enough to maintain to go down that route.

Would really need an online portal that is database backed that your own queries can be made to find any data you are looking for fast.

SMS · « **Reply #346 on:** 04/30/2021 05:23 pm »

https://twitter.com/SpaceNosey/status/1388153699353169921

wannamoonbase · « **Reply #347 on:** 04/30/2021 05:53 pm »

Love that graphic.

I'm still confused on what the plan is for 1052 and 1053. Those FH side boosters could be earning their keep and new Side boosters are on the way.

yokem55 · « **Reply #348 on:** 04/30/2021 09:30 pm »

Quote from: wannamoonbase on 04/30/2021 05:53 pm

Love that graphic.

I'm still confused on what the plan is for 1052 and 1053. Those FH side boosters could be earning their keep and new Side boosters are on the way.

My theory is that they've been canabalized to the point that they aren't worth bringing back to flight status.

ZachS09 · « **Reply #349 on:** 04/30/2021 09:51 pm »

Quote from: yokem55 on 04/30/2021 09:30 pm

Quote from: wannamoonbase on 04/30/2021 05:53 pm
Love that graphic.

I'm still confused on what the plan is for 1052 and 1053. Those FH side boosters could be earning their keep and new Side boosters are on the way.
My theory is that they've been cannibalized to the point that they aren't worth bringing back to flight status.

Someone needs to ask SpaceX about the actual story behind B1052 and B1053.

Mangala · « **Reply #350 on:** 05/01/2021 05:58 pm »

If SpaceX will have four starlink launches before June 1st XM-8 launch, so they will have to use their four available boosters, B-1049, B-1051, B-1058 and B-1060 (the order is about their number, not the launch order), so I'm very curious to see what booster they will use for the XM-8 launch.

gongora · « **Reply #351 on:** 05/02/2021 04:30 am »

Quote from: Mangala on 05/01/2021 05:58 pm

If SpaceX will have four starlink launches before June 1st XM-8 launch, so they will have to use their four available boosters, B-1049, B-1051, B-1058 and B-1060 (the order is about their number, not the launch order), so I'm very curious to see what booster they will use for the XM-8 launch.

We don't know how many Starlink launches will be before SXM-8. I just list the next few Starlink launches on the manifest and move them around as we find out the real dates. Sometimes that's a few weeks, sometimes it's a couple months.

Comga · « **Reply #352 on:** 05/02/2021 12:35 pm »

Quote from: ZachS09 on 04/30/2021 09:51 pm

Quote from: yokem55 on 04/30/2021 09:30 pm
Quote from: wannamoonbase on 04/30/2021 05:53 pm
Love that graphic.

I'm still confused on what the plan is for 1052 and 1053. Those FH side boosters could be earning their keep and new Side boosters are on the way.
My theory is that they've been cannibalized to the point that they aren't worth bringing back to flight status.

Someone needs to ask SpaceX about the actual story behind B1052 and B1053.

There’s an L2 thread for that.

Mangala · « **Reply #353 on:** 05/02/2021 08:08 pm »

Quote from: gongora on 05/02/2021 04:30 am

Quote from: Mangala on 05/01/2021 05:58 pm
If SpaceX will have four starlink launches before June 1st XM-8 launch, so they will have to use their four available boosters, B-1049, B-1051, B-1058 and B-1060 (the order is about their number, not the launch order), so I'm very curious to see what booster they will use for the XM-8 launch.

We don't know how many Starlink launches will be before SXM-8. I just list the next few Starlink launches on the manifest and move them around as we find out the real dates. Sometimes that's a few weeks, sometimes it's a couple months.

Understood, thanks. As your manifest was the same that the one of Nextspaceflight's site, I assumed that four starlink launches were effectively scheduled to launch before XM-8 launch, then my interrogation.

wannamoonbase · « **Reply #354 on:** 05/03/2021 06:44 pm »

We should be seeing a Starlink L26 date any minute now.

Edit: Also curious as to what booster is assigned to the SXM-8 flight.

Jansen · « **Reply #355 on:** 05/04/2021 09:10 pm »

Confirmed in bold, rest is estimated

B1049 - Starlink v1.0 L25
B1051 - Starlink v1.0 L27
B1058 - Available now Starlink L26?
B1060 - Reprocessing - June 1 (32 days)
B1063 - Available now Starlink L28?

B1061 - Reserved Inspiration4?
B1062 - Reserved GPS III SV05
B1067 - Reserved CRS-22 June 3

May 09 SLC-40
B1051.10 - Starlink v1.0 L27

May 14 LC-39A (10 days pad turnaround)
B1058 (37 days last launch) Starlink v1.0 L26

May 20 SLC-40 (11 days)
B1063.2 Starlink v1.0 L28

June 1 SLC-40 (12 days)
B1060.8? (32 days)- SXM-8

June 3 LC-39A (20 days)
B1067.1 - CRS-22

June 17 SLC-40 (16 days)
B1062.2 - GPS III SV05

Best estimation based on booster processing and availability.

Assumptions are that B1061 will be used for Inspiration4 and NASA workflow will again require long lead time for CRS-22. Also that B1063 will be put into rotation for Starlink, but that might not happen. If so, L28 gets bumped to June.

Jansen · « **Reply #356 on:** 05/05/2021 06:28 am »

https://spaceflightnow.com/2021/05/04/starlink-launch-marks-100-straight-missions-since-an-in-flight-falcon-rocket-failure/

Quote

The next Falcon 9 launch is scheduled for 2:42 a.m. EDT (0642 GMT) Sunday from pad 40 at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, carrying the next batch of Starlink internet satellites.

Another Starlink mission is planned in mid-May with a Falcon 9 launch from pad 39A.

SMS · « **Reply #357 on:** 05/05/2021 10:45 am »

https://twitter.com/SpaceNosey/status/1389889862044692481

Jansen · « **Reply #358 on:** 05/06/2021 08:17 pm »

OFT-2 is now targeting Friday 30 July for launch. Should end before CRS-23.

Jansen · « **Reply #359 on:** 05/06/2021 08:40 pm »

Quote from: Jansen on 05/04/2021 09:10 pm

May 14 LC-39A (10 days pad turnaround)
B1058 (37 days last launch) Starlink v1.0 L26

Launch targeting 15 May 2021 at 6:58pm EDT (2258 UTC) on Falcon 9 (booster 1058.8 ) from KSC LC-39A. ASDS landing is expected on OCISLY.

I was pretty close on the prediction, HIF turnaround taking slightly longer.