SpaceX F9 : Cygnus NG-20 : CCSFS SLC-40 : 30 January 2024 (17:07 UTC)

[PM3]

Ben Cooper (Updated December 29th)
Launch at ~17:20 UTC

A Falcon 9 will launch Northrop Grumman's Cygnus NG-20 resupply mission to the ISS from pad 40 on January 29 around 12:20 p.m. EST.

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

Now "around 12:30 p.m. EST" (~ 17:30 UTC).

[zubenelgenubi]

Cross-post:

Ben Cooper's Launch Photography Viewing Guide, updated January 11:

A Falcon 9 will launch Northrop Grumman's Cygnus NG-20 resupply mission to the ISS from pad 40 on January 29 at 12:29 p.m. EST.

= 17:29 UTC

[ddspaceman]

Northrop Grumman
@northropgrumman
Our team is getting our #Cygnus cargo module ready to launch at the end of this month from @NASAKennedy.

Go S.S. Patricia “Patty” Hilliard Robertson! 🚀

Learn more: http://ms.spr.ly/6011iWlub

https://twitter.com/northropgrumman/status/1745777651732594898

[Steven Pietrobon]

PDF of online press kit and biography.

[FutureSpaceTourist]

[Skyrocket]

Any information on CubeSats on this mission?

[zubenelgenubi]

Cygnus NG-20 launch time to the second:
Cross-post:

Update from NASA (January 15th, 2024):

COMMENT |       EVENT        |       TIG        | ORB |   DV    |   HA    |   HP    |
COMMENT |                    |       GMT        |     |   M/S   |   KM    |   KM    |
COMMENT |                    |                  |     |  (F/S)  |  (NM)   |  (NM)   |
COMMENT =============================================================================
COMMENT  Ax-3 Launch           017:22:11:44.000             0.0     426.7     408.8
COMMENT                                                    (0.0)   (230.4)   (220.7)
COMMENT 
COMMENT  NG-20 Launch          029:17:29:52.000             0.0     424.3     408.2
COMMENT                                                    (0.0)   (229.1)   (220.4)
COMMENT 
COMMENT =============================================================================

Also, this is the next SLC-40 launch and the next Florida orbital launch, after Axiom-3.  Future Florida Starlink launches are now NET mid February.  My bolds.

Ben Cooper's Launch Photography Viewing Guide, updated January 17:

The next SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket will launch the Axiom-3 crew to the International Space Station from pad 39A on January 18 at 4:49 p.m. EST. The first stage will land back at the Cape about eight minutes after launch. A Falcon 9 will launch Northrop Grumman's Cygnus NG-20 resupply mission to the ISS from pad 40 on January 29 at 12:29 p.m. EST. The first stage will land back at the Cape about eight minutes after launch. A Falcon 9 will launch NASA's Plankton, Aerosol, Cloud, ocean Ecosystem (PACE) satellite from pad 40 on February 6 around 1:30 a.m. EST. The first stage will land back at the Cape about eight minutes after launch. A Falcon 9 will launch the Intuitive Machines IM-1 Nova-C lunar lander from pad 39A on February 10. The first stage will land back at the Cape about eight minutes after launch. Upcoming launches include more Starlink batches from pad 40. A Falcon 9 will launch the Telkomsat communications satellite for Indonesia from pad 40 on mid-February TBD. A Falcon 9 will launch the next crew of four astronauts to the International Space Station, Crew-8, from pad 39A on late February, likely around midnight EST. The first stage will land back at the Cape about eight minutes after launch.

[zubenelgenubi]

Cross-post:

JRTI still in Charleston. Journey Port Canaveral to Charleston took less than 2 days.

ASOG at Port Canaveral. Seems like there could be time for a Starlink launch 23rd-~25th Jan and still have pad ready for NG20 on 29th Jan but Launch Photography appears to be indicating no Starlink launches until after Feb 10th. So is ASOG also going for maintenance?

I think that some "extra" launch campaign time has been determined to be necessary to prepare for the first Cygnus launch aboard a Falcon 9, and the first launch of same from SLC-40.

See also the next post, this thread.

[zubenelgenubi]

Cross-post:

As we move to a higher launch rate, we are adopting more of a factory model where the equipment is always running except for planned and unplanned maintenance. In this case,  JRTI is going through a planned dry dock while pad 40 also undergoes a planned maintenance period. The bonus is sneaking in some work on Bob/Doug given the gap in east coast launches!

https://twitter.com/TurkeyBeaver/status/1748063270169382944

SpaceX support ship Doug is en-route to Charleston, where it will seemingly join twin ship Bob and JRTI at a shipyard.

Looks like there is quite a sizeable gap in offshore recovery requirements for a few weeks now that might allow some heavy work to be done across SpaceX's fleet.

So, the "gap" of SLC-40 Falcon 9 launches is purposeful. (January 18 to 29)

[raptorx2]

If 6-38 and Cygnus are both RTLS, then the gap is even greater.

My money is on 6-38 RTLS from L/C  39A

Has anyone heard anything more about the extended fairing for F9.  We saw a photo of it being tested @ NASA Sandusky in the September time frame, but it was quickly removed from the source.  I guess they would need to "flight qualify" that on a "non-commercial launch" at some point? Maybe stick a couple Full Size V3's under the hood to perform some development testing before loading 100 of them on a Starship the first time. Could either LC 39A or SLC-40 Payload Processing enclose a F9 with an Extended Fairing?

Meanwhile 6-38 through 6-43 are all @FCC licensed/applied as RTLS/ASDS option, which seems to signal RTLS may become more common in the future.

More notably, 6-40 through 6-43 No longer request licensing for BOAT.

Just thinking outload here.

[crandles57]

So, the "gap" of SLC-40 Falcon 9 launches is purposeful. (January 18 to 29)

I make that 15th to 29th. Ax-3 on 18th was from 39A.

My money is on 6-38 RTLS from L/C  39A

Why? Isn't ASOG available?

[raptorx2]

Both Bob and Doug are in South Carolina.

Remember, JRTI was involved with the 1058 fiasco.  Octagrabber (not so good after)

[raptorx2]

But I think RTLS is not a "Fall Back" plan.  It is part of the future.

For instance, Mission 1920 Group 6-36's initial FCC filing on Nov. 7  2270-EX-ST-2023 was RTLS only.
A second application 2300-EX-ST-2023 was submitted later to add ASDS/Boat as an option to the original Nov. 7 application.

Personally, I think they were looking to put 6-36 RTLS LC-39A between  USSF-52 and AX-3.  But, the Falcon Heavy delay scuttled it. 6-36 was NET December in early December.

6-38 - 6-43 are all ASDS/RTLS

.

[Alexphysics]

Both Bob and Doug are in South Carolina.

Remember, JRTI was involved with the 1058 fiasco.  Octagrabber (not so good after)

Who says JRTI was moved into maintenance because of B1058? SpaceX already had before that the big tug that can move a droneship to the landing site within 48 hours meaning a droneship could in theory do 5 days between landings vs 7-8 with the previous tugs. It was clear SpaceX was planning to do maintenance on JRTI and keep ASOG around doing those 5 day turnarounds using that big tug well before the incident with B1058 happened.

Also Bob and Doug being in SC doesn't really mean much in terms of the difference between RTLS vs droneship recovery.

[raptorx2]

Both Bob and Doug are in South Carolina.

Remember, JRTI was involved with the 1058 fiasco.  Octagrabber (not so good after)

Who says JRTI was moved into maintenance because of B1058? SpaceX already had before that the big tug that can move a droneship to the landing site within 48 hours meaning a droneship could in theory do 5 days between landings vs 7-8 with the previous tugs. It was clear SpaceX was planning to do maintenance on JRTI and keep ASOG around doing those 5 day turnarounds using that big tug well before the incident with B1058 happened.

Also Bob and Doug being in SC doesn't really mean much in terms of the difference between RTLS vs droneship recovery.

Sorry if you interpreted this statement in that format.  Just pointing out that it was mentioned that  JRTI's Octagrabber was damaged in the incident with 1058. So might need some TLC while in dry dock.  Interesting to see if they install the In-motion Community Gateway while in dry dock.  Still no approval though.

[Chinakpradhan]

As per https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2024/01/launch-roundup-012224/ will the Cygnus launch fairing be modified to do late loads? If yes will the SLC-40 crew access arm be used?

[Chinakpradhan]

Why couldn't it launch from SLC-40 without any upgrades?

Does Cygnus on Falcon have late load capability?

I don't think Cygnus even has late load capability due to it being enclosed in a fairing.

It has : https://news.northropgrumman.com/news/features/northrop-grummans-antares-team-demonstrates-new-capability-to-load-cargo-just-before-launch

Operators maneuver the mobile payload processing facility over the front of the Antares fairing and seal the opening to provide a clean-room environment. The Antares fairing pop-top is then removed, providing access to Cygnus for loading cargo just 24 hours before launch.

can the fairing modification be towards side like soyuz fairing so that crew access arm of SLC-40 can reach and falcon 9 doesnt need to be horizontal?

[Chinakpradhan]

Why couldn't it launch from SLC-40 without any upgrades?

Does Cygnus on Falcon have late load capability?

I don't think Cygnus even has late load capability due to it being enclosed in a fairing.

It has : https://news.northropgrumman.com/news/features/northrop-grummans-antares-team-demonstrates-new-capability-to-load-cargo-just-before-launch

Operators maneuver the mobile payload processing facility over the front of the Antares fairing and seal the opening to provide a clean-room environment. The Antares fairing pop-top is then removed, providing access to Cygnus for loading cargo just 24 hours before launch.

Ah then it depends on whether SpaceX can develop a fairing with a door in time

or will SpaceX try fast movement as in case of starlink 6-35 that creates Falcon record for total time from hangar rollout to launch at 6 hours, 33 minutes. It's well within 24hr margin

[Chinakpradhan]

I don't think it was ever an option with Cygnus on Antares or Atlas?

The only hatch is at the top when on the pad, so you'd need a big hole right near the top of the fairing, at the point of maximum pressure and too high to line up with the access arm.

The chance of NG and SpaceX bothering for these three launches seems about zero to me. Is there any reason to think they might?

Cygnus is not consuming whole fairing volume so have a crew access arm door and then finda way to docking port inside the fairing. But now on seeing starlink 6-35 I am convinced fast rollout and launch in 10 hours is best thing. However it needs rollback on scrubs.

[Chinakpradhan]

If 6-38 and Cygnus are both RTLS, then the gap is even greater.

My money is on 6-38 RTLS from L/C  39A

Has anyone heard anything more about the extended fairing for F9.  We saw a photo of it being tested @ NASA Sandusky in the September time frame, but it was quickly removed from the source.  I guess they would need to "flight qualify" that on a "non-commercial launch" at some point? Maybe stick a couple Full Size V3's under the hood to perform some development testing before loading 100 of them on a Starship the first time. Could either LC 39A or SLC-40 Payload Processing enclose a F9 with an Extended Fairing?

Meanwhile 6-38 through 6-43 are all @FCC licensed/applied as RTLS/ASDS option, which seems to signal RTLS may become more common in the future.

More notably, 6-40 through 6-43 No longer request licensing for BOAT.

Just thinking outload here.

no increased gap, east coast has 2 landing pads and a Falcon 9 has landed on LZ-2 (I am not saying in Falcon Heavy). Also see Ovzon-3 they quickly removed the LZ-1 USSF-52 booster and landed Ovzon-3 booster.