Can SpaceX launch ppe/halo from SLC-6?¿‽¿?
Quote from: Chinakpradhan on 02/06/2024 07:50 amCan SpaceX launch ppe/halo from SLC-6?¿‽¿?The processing facilities can't handle it.
Quote from: Jim on 02/06/2024 02:54 pmQuote from: Chinakpradhan on 02/06/2024 07:50 amCan SpaceX launch ppe/halo from SLC-6?¿‽¿?The processing facilities can't handle it.Yep. It will take awhile to convert slc-6. From a ref in Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vandenberg_Space_Launch_Complex_6#SpaceX_(from_2023)"SpaceX expects to begin Falcon 9 launches from SLC-6 in 2025 and Falcon Heavy launches in 2026".
Quote from: DanClemmensen on 02/06/2024 03:01 pmQuote from: Jim on 02/06/2024 02:54 pmQuote from: Chinakpradhan on 02/06/2024 07:50 amCan SpaceX launch ppe/halo from SLC-6?¿‽¿?The processing facilities can't handle it.Yep. It will take awhile to convert slc-6. From a ref in Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vandenberg_Space_Launch_Complex_6#SpaceX_(from_2023)"SpaceX expects to begin Falcon 9 launches from SLC-6 in 2025 and Falcon Heavy launches in 2026".Was referring to Vandenberg spacecraft facilities
Quote from: DanClemmensen on 02/06/2024 03:01 pmQuote from: Jim on 02/06/2024 02:54 pmQuote from: Chinakpradhan on 02/06/2024 07:50 amCan SpaceX launch ppe/halo from SLC-6?¿‽¿?The processing facilities can't handle it.Yep. It will take awhile to convert slc-6. From a ref in Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vandenberg_Space_Launch_Complex_6#SpaceX_(from_2023)"SpaceX expects to begin Falcon 9 launches from SLC-6 in 2025 and Falcon Heavy launches in 2026". that doesn't seem an issue ppe/halo launch will slip to 2028-30 due to Artemis delays and no demo modules construction even.
<snip>According to the Gateway Update Thread, construction on PPE and HALO is fairly far along? https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=51452.msg2541132#msg2541132
Quote from: Vultur on 02/08/2024 12:25 am<snip>According to the Gateway Update Thread, construction on PPE and HALO is fairly far along? https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=51452.msg2541132#msg2541132True. But if the integrated vehicle stack is overweight. They will need to reduce the mass somehow. Likely with re-working the internal arrangements and offloading mass to the Dragon XL logistics vehicle and/or the SpaceX HLS lander.
Quote from: Zed_Noir on 02/08/2024 01:14 pmQuote from: Vultur on 02/08/2024 12:25 am<snip>According to the Gateway Update Thread, construction on PPE and HALO is fairly far along? https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=51452.msg2541132#msg2541132True. But if the integrated vehicle stack is overweight. They will need to reduce the mass somehow. Likely with re-working the internal arrangements and offloading mass to the Dragon XL logistics vehicle and/or the SpaceX HLS lander.I recall that the xenon fuel is refillable. So off loading propellant may also be an option. I believe it was a sizeable load.
Quote from: Zed_Noir on 02/08/2024 01:14 pmQuote from: Vultur on 02/08/2024 12:25 am<snip>According to the Gateway Update Thread, construction on PPE and HALO is fairly far along? https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=51452.msg2541132#msg2541132True. But if the integrated vehicle stack is overweight. They will need to reduce the mass somehow. Likely with re-working the internal arrangements and offloading mass to the Dragon XL logistics vehicle and/or the SpaceX HLS lander.Surely they have already done the simplest mass reductions? The most obvious reduction (as seen from the outside by this uneducated observer) is to replace the PPE-to-HALO docking systems on both spacecraft with a fixed connection. That particular docking connection is one of the most complicated on Gateway. True it has no crew tunnel, but it does support heavy electrical, Xenon, and propellant for the PPE chemical thrusters.
Quote from: DanClemmensen on 02/08/2024 03:18 pmQuote from: Zed_Noir on 02/08/2024 01:14 pmQuote from: Vultur on 02/08/2024 12:25 am<snip>According to the Gateway Update Thread, construction on PPE and HALO is fairly far along? https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=51452.msg2541132#msg2541132True. But if the integrated vehicle stack is overweight. They will need to reduce the mass somehow. Likely with re-working the internal arrangements and offloading mass to the Dragon XL logistics vehicle and/or the SpaceX HLS lander.Surely they have already done the simplest mass reductions? The most obvious reduction (as seen from the outside by this uneducated observer) is to replace the PPE-to-HALO docking systems on both spacecraft with a fixed connection. That particular docking connection is one of the most complicated on Gateway. True it has no crew tunnel, but it does support heavy electrical, Xenon, and propellant for the PPE chemical thrusters.Think they already done that.NASA should really consider using the HLS lander as a space tug to get the integrated vehicle stack to a Lunar orbit. Especially since a HLS lander is suppose to be available before the stack is launched.
Surely they have already done the simplest mass reductions? The most obvious reduction (as seen from the outside by this uneducated observer) is to replace the PPE-to-HALO docking systems on both spacecraft with a fixed connection.
Understood. But SpaceX apparently intends to fullfill its NSSL obligations when launching FH from VFSB by upgrading and using SLC-6, and that will include the pad and some kind of spacecraft facilities. Have they said whether they will modify the existing spacecraft facilities or just abandon them and build new ones?
Quote from: DanClemmensen on 02/06/2024 03:01 pmQuote from: Jim on 02/06/2024 02:54 pmQuote from: Chinakpradhan on 02/06/2024 07:50 amCan SpaceX launch ppe/halo from SLC-6?¿‽¿?The processing facilities can't handle it.Yep. It will take awhile to convert slc-6. From a ref in Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vandenberg_Space_Launch_Complex_6#SpaceX_(from_2023)"SpaceX expects to begin Falcon 9 launches from SLC-6 in 2025 and Falcon Heavy launches in 2026". that doesn't seem an issue ppe/halo launch will slip to 2028-30 due to Artemis delays and no demo modules construction even. Issue is why can't the vandy facilities handle? This saves SpaceX money for additional vif tower. Also tell the delta v needed to reach near equatorial earth orbit of Moon from a Polar or 52 inclination orbit from vandy. Alternatively, lay down pad 39a rails till nasa's vab near sls vab that is leased to SpaceX for Starship. And roll Transporter erector vertically that I doubt it can move vertically as it rolls horizontally
<snip>Yep. It would probably require a bunch more tanker flights, but this could be added to the HLS demo. One question: can HLS thrust be throttled down far enough? HLS would probably need to dock to HALO axial, so HALO would need to handle the force of itself plus the fully-fuelled PPE.<snip>.
The real irony would occur if they did use Artemis III for this. When Orion showed up they would find HLS already docked to Gateway, because HLS had dock to Gateway in LEO.