Author Topic: Bahamas Ministry to allow SpaceX dronships to land F9 at Exumas  (Read 25037 times)

Offline raptorx2

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 230
  • san diego, ca
  • Liked: 126
  • Likes Given: 5
.....However, it should be noted that the launch path and the need for the Bahamas are specific for a Group of Starlinks, and once completed SpaceX will go on a launch at a different inclination and may no longer need this area.
<snip>
Disagree. As that specific group of Starlink comsats will need constant replenishment to retain bandwidth capacity. Using the Bahamas launch path regularly at low flight rate makes regulatory issues easier to deal with if that particular orbital  inclination is needed for some future launches.



Yes, I agree, I was thinking initially, but replenishment is ongoing,  good point.  Best, Tony.

Nearly all of the V1.0's (~1500) launched to 53 degrees, Gen 1. with a five year expected life.  Some will be 5 years old late this year.

Pethpas we will see a near-term pause in Eastern Range Group 6 (43degree) launches, with emphasis on Group 7 Group 8 (53 degrees) from the Eastern Range?  Given that we have had ~41 launches of Group 6 (6-1, and 6-2 never raised) as of this moment with ~22.1 satellites per payload.  Brings them to ~860 V2.0 minis in the Gen. 2 43 degree shell.   In D2D documents, SpaceX has stated that the first complete D2D shell will encompass ~840 satellites.

SpaceX has not filed for an Experimental Launch Communications  license for Group 6 for over a month.  (Currently authorized for up to 6-46 with 6-47 pending).  All applications since the beginning of Feb.  have been for 53 degree inclinations (Group 7/ Group8).

With LC39A now in the loop. They will likely quickly expire the remaining Group 6 launch authorizations. Leaving only Group 7/ Group 8 authorizations.

Offline raptorx2

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 230
  • san diego, ca
  • Liked: 126
  • Likes Given: 5
A little recent data on "turnaround" of back to back ASDS (ASOG) missions.

Launch Feb. 25 (6-39) SLC-40
ASOG departs Feb. 20 2:40PM
ASOG  returns Feb 28 9:11AM

Launch (6-41) SLC-40
ASOG departs Feb. 29 6:28PM
ASOG returns  Mar. 7 12PM

Next scheduled mission for ASOG March 13 

So average turnaround for a back to back ASDS for Group 6 flights currently (~8 days) departure to return, not including ~1 1/2 days in port for offloading.  So ~10 day turnaround while pad turnaround for SLC-40 is around 4-5 days..  (39A?)

This is about the same turnaround for the Western Range with only 1 ASDS.   So in a scenario which is now approaching where they can launch back to back from both 39A and 40.  Pad turn around is not the limiting factor.  It's the time delta of the ASDS boats transiting to/from landing site.

So given this information. Launching Starlink flights Back to Back to Back at both 39A and 40 would yield only 6 Starlink flights per month from the Eastern Range due to the transit times.  (Obviously they could launch some RTLS missions (CRS) etc between these Back to Back Starlink Launches to increase pad utilization.

The Western Range would also be limited to these ASDS transit times, so at best, 3 Starlink launches per month.

All in, best case scenario, that would be 9 Starlink launches per month ( no delays) or ~ 205   V2.0minis (which would not include reconfiguring 39A for FalconHeavy (six weeks roundtrip) in the summer or commercial launches non RTLS launches from both the Western or Eastern Range. . 

Recently, Kiko Dontchev @TurkeyBeaver VP of Launch @ SpaceX stated on X, that they are working hard to get the D2D constellation on-orbit by the end of August.

According to FCC filings, this would require the launch of ~840 D2D payloads by the end of August.

Also we don't have an exact number of D2D payloads per launch.  But, given the data from the first six D2D satellites launched in January.  They appear heavier than the V2.0 Minis to some unknown degree.

A bit of a puzzle, but my money is that one ASDS will be "quasi-permanently" stationed in Bahamian Waters, and one of the support ships will be based in the Bahamas during this period for faring recovery.   There is just too much time lost in the ASDS transition back and forth to make this timetable. IMO
« Last Edit: 03/08/2024 12:36 am by raptorx2 »

Offline raptorx2

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 230
  • san diego, ca
  • Liked: 126
  • Likes Given: 5
Is SpaceX going "International"?
SpaceX Careers seeks:
 COUNSEL, LAUNCH AND RECOVERY OPERATIONS:

SpaceX is looking for an experienced attorney to take primary responsibility for solving the company’s legal challenges related to the launch and recovery of its Falcon, Dragon, and Starship vehicles, including obtaining relevant licensing and ensuring compliance with U.S., foreign, and international laws. Legal areas include but are not limited to export controls, marine operations and safety, hazardous materials, and international maritime law.

⚫️Provide expert advice, training, and guidance concerning U.S. federal requirements related to export controls, marine operations and safety, hazardous materials, and similar legal requirements in certain foreign jurisdictions.

⚫️Prepare and manage certain regulatory licenses and permits, including for exports and imports.

⚫️Provide expert advice and guidance concerning the requirements and obligations for handling export-controlled commodities, material, software, technical data, and defense services under the International Traffic and Arms Regulations (ITAR) and Export Administrations Regulations (EAR).

https://boards.greenhouse.io/spacex/jobs/7259806002?gh_jid=7259806002

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1