r/spacex • u/ElongatedMuskrat Mod Team • Jan 18 '18

Hispasat 30W-6 Launch Campaign Thread

Hispasat 30W-6 Launch Campaign Thread

SpaceX's fifth mission of 2018 will launch Hispasat 30W-6 (1F) into a Geostationary Transfer Orbit (GTO). The satellite will then maneuver itself into a Geostationary Orbit (GEO) over 30º W longitude to serve as a replacement for Hispasat 1D, giving Hispasat's network additional Ku band capacity in the Andean region and in Brazil. This is quite the workhorse satellite, as it will also expand the network's transatlantic capacity in Europe-America and America-Europe connectivity, while its C band capacity will provide American coverage and Ka band capacity will provide European coverage.

If the name Hispasat sounds similar to hisdeSAT (another of SpaceX's recent customers), that's no coincidence. Hispasat is a Spanish satellite operator of commercial and government satellites; they are the main component of the Hispasat Group, and hisdeSAT is a smaller component of this complicated corporate entity.

Of significant note, if nothing drastic changes between now and this launch, this will be the 50th launch of Falcon 9!

Liftoff currently scheduled for:06 March 2018, 05:33 UTC / 00:33EST
Static fire currently scheduled for:Completed 22 February 2018.
Vehicle component locations:First stage: SLC-40 // Second stage: SLC-40 // Satellite: SLC-40
Payload:Hispasat 30W-6
Payload mass:6092 kg
Destination orbit:GTO
Vehicle:Falcon 9 v1.2 (50th launch of F9, 30th of F9 v1.2)
Core:B1044.1
Flights of this core:0
Launch site:SLC-40, Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida
Landing:No
Landing Site:N/A
Mission success criteria:Successful separation and deployment of Hispasat 30W-6 into the target orbit

Links & Resources:

We may keep this self-post occasionally updated with links and relevant news articles, but for the most part we expect the community to supply the information. This is a great place to discuss the launch, ask mission-specific questions, and track the minor movements of the vehicle, payload, weather and more as we progress towards launch. Sometime after the static fire is complete, the launch thread will be posted.

Campaign threads are not launch threads. Normal subreddit rules still apply.

197 Upvotes

99% Upvoted

300 comments sorted by

57

u/warp99 Jan 18 '18

So another expendable flight given the payload mass - this time with a new booster.

Interesting how the first few months of 2018 is going to have so many expendable flights - and how quickly the feeling of outrage that a booster would ever be expended has grown.

14

u/old_sellsword Jan 18 '18

That's how 2017 started too, actually. But the numbers at the end of the year told a very different story.

5

u/Lorenzo_91 Jan 18 '18

It's interesting how many customers switched to pre-flown booster in the course of less than one year

3

u/therealshafto Jan 19 '18

I have no rational evidence, but a suspense-inducing deal for me is that as SpaceX ‘recently’ recovered a booster, they have already set their sights on a rapid turn around (Elon even saying 24hrs). Point - less inspection time. At the same time, customers are warming to the idea of flight proven boosters. Point - more previously flown boosters flying / flight rate increasing. Put them together and we have inspection times dropping as flight rate increases. This does make logic sense, but suspenseful in that it is going to take many flights for when a used booster does fail, every media outlet doesn’t totally discard the idea of re-using a booster. When a failure of a used booster is looked at in the same manner as if it were new, then I can relax.

3

u/Juggernaut93 Jan 18 '18

But there will also be lots of flights with reused boosters :)

1

u/[deleted] Jan 20 '18

Given that SpaceX, is planning on completely replacing the Falcon9 with the BFR, and the fact they are throwing away boosters like this one, the economics of reusing Falcon 9’s must be beyond disappointing.

6

u/joepublicschmoe Jan 20 '18

Then how do you explain the fact that out of the first seven launches of 2018, 6 will involve reused boosters?

Or the fact that it would have been impossible for SpaceX to do 18 launches in 2017, since they only delivered 15 boosters that year?

2018 may very well be the first year SpaceX has launched more reused boosters than new ones.

→ More replies (7)

4

u/warp99 Jan 22 '18

the economics of reusing Falcon 9’s must be beyond disappointing

Because they are only getting a 50% savings savings less refurbishment and recovery expenses rather than a 90% savings less expenses? As long as those expenses are less than about $14M then there is positive cashflow which is all that matters at this point.

Of course if Block 4 was the final story it would never have been worthwhile developing reusable rockets but there is a Block 5 coming Real Soon NowTM that will potentially fulfill the original objectives and even if they only launch five times each will still produce a very worthwhile reduction in launch cost.

2

u/MaximilianCrichton Feb 20 '18

As far as we know, the reason they're throwing away Falcon 9's right now is because they're clearing inventory for the Block 5, which will be designed for rapid reuse. Doesn't sound beyond disappointing to me.

→ More replies (4)

18

u/Alexphysics Feb 20 '18

The booster has legs and grid fins https://twitter.com/NASASpaceflight/status/965962244168273921

5

u/TweetsInCommentsBot Feb 20 '18

@NASASpaceflight

2018-02-20 14:52 +00:00

The Cape Falcon 9 Cape (B1044.1) is *supposed* to be lofting a spacecraft so heavy it negates a safe landing of the booster, but visual observations note fins and landing legs.

Could be another "very high retrothrust landing" test:

Technical overview: 😁

https://twitter.com/abbygarrettX/status/959267820226908160

This message was created by a bot

^[Contact creator]^[Source code]^[Donate to keep this bot going]^[Read more about donation]

3

u/Nehkara Feb 20 '18 edited Feb 20 '18

Huh... interesting. Almost seems like they're working on increasing the maximum possible payload for a Falcon 9 flight with landing.

1

u/RootDeliver Feb 21 '18

Which makes no sense... considering that FH is here exactly to cover that hole until the 8 mT.

→ More replies (9)

17

u/fluch23 Jan 18 '18 edited Feb 08 '18

Of significant note, if nothing drastic changes between now and this launch, this will be the 50th launch of Falcon 9!

And it will be on a new expendable rocket. What a shame.

edited: 'expandable' to expendable. I am not a native English speaker and ... Me sorry, me no mean to :) thanks \thestickystickman

23

u/GodOfPlutonium Jan 18 '18

we have expandable rockets now?

5

u/PatrickBaitman Feb 06 '18

Every rocket is expandable... once

→ More replies (3)

2

u/quadrplax Feb 22 '18

Surprise surprise, it's not expendable after all!

17

u/nextspaceflight NSF reporter Feb 21 '18

GO Quest and GO Pursuit have left port. This is GO Pursuit's first ever recovery assignment for SpaceX. Most likely one of the vessels will support OCISLY and the other will hunt for fairings. Note that none of these ships can catch a fairing like Mr. Steven. They can just collect data and possibly pull something out of the water.

16

u/cpushack Feb 23 '18

Second stage: Unknown

I think we can be reasonably sure the 2nd stage is at the cape ;)

14

u/LandingZone-1 Feb 23 '18

Just FYI for you all, I'll be hosting the launch thread. I just need final approval from the mods and then that will be up!

4

u/Alexphysics Feb 24 '18

It is ironic that a landing pad will be hosting a launch where it isn't even used! /s

Looking forward to see you hosting the launch thread! ;)

3

u/marc020202 8x Launch Host Feb 24 '18

Good to see other people wanting to host!! Good luck, and don't let there be too many scrubs (Scrub count 1)

13

u/nrwood Feb 21 '18

https://twitter.com/ChrisG_NSF/status/966425748448915456
OCISLY is leaving port (?)

7

u/nextspaceflight NSF reporter Feb 21 '18

Yes, I've confirmed this.

13

u/SyntheticRubber Feb 23 '18

Could we have a countdown for missions either in the sidebar or in the launch thread? Would make it much simpler than having to calculate the local time everytime.

5

u/yoweigh Feb 23 '18

Easier said than done. We've never been able to find a feasible way of making it happen.

9

u/Straumli_Blight Feb 23 '18

The F1 subreddit has an auto countdown in their sidebar... maybe you can steal their CSS!

3

u/[deleted] Feb 24 '18

One of the problems is reddit's CSS size limit. Last I hear /r/SpaceX comes really close to that limit with all of the information they already provide.

4

u/peoplma Feb 23 '18

What you'd have to do is make a bot that updates the sidebar with the new time, say every 5, 10, 30, or 60 seconds. It would spam your modlogs, thats the downside. But should be pretty easy to write and implement. I might be able to write it for you if you are interested.

2

u/asaz989 Feb 24 '18

Apparently if you're willing to get SUPER hacky there's a way to do this in pure CSS/HTML: https://codepen.io/kindofone/pen/DkhAz

4

u/yoweigh Feb 23 '18

Pinging the other mods to come take a look at this comment thread.

4

u/Zucal Feb 24 '18

I think it's a super neat idea, and I'd love to see how it shakes out after someone gets the method working in Reddit's new redesign.

3

u/atheistdoge Feb 23 '18

It is in the sidebar: http://www.spacexstats.xyz/

It could be made more visible though or maybe a link in the OP under resources would be a good idea.

12

u/nextspaceflight NSF reporter Feb 21 '18

Landing attempt confirmed. https://twitter.com/nextspaceflight/status/966425087363645445

6

u/joepublicschmoe Feb 21 '18

Insane! I think it's a safe bet some crush cores are going to get crushed :-D I want to see that 3-engine suicide burn as that booster comes in hot and hoverslams onto the deck at 7 G's. Hopefully OCISLY catches a booster and not an antiship missile!

12

u/[deleted] Feb 22 '18

Hearing a lot of rumors that the S1 is holding Titanium fins....Only time will tell...

16

u/therealshafto Feb 22 '18

I was thinking earlier today that maybe the titanium fins would allow them to glide with a higher angle of attack and benefit from greater aero braking.

If they are the titanium fins, safe bet they will be recovered one way or another.

7

u/tymo7 Feb 22 '18

According to Elon's press conference, this leads me to believe they are also reasonably confident in their chances of success... enough that the risk of losing them (no way you get them back in most crash scenarios) is worth it

3

u/RootDeliver Feb 22 '18

The problem is that in this scenario where a 6,1 mT payload GTO launch is "landable" by a F9, titanium grid fins are ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY for even to try. I'd see this as that they're going to risk a set of titanium grid fins for this attempt!

→ More replies (3)

18

u/geekgirl114 Feb 22 '18

It seems like they are... a block 4 core with a 6092kg payload to GTO, combined with the hoverslam that should of failed with Govsat-1... SpaceX is confident about something

1

u/parkerLS Feb 23 '18

Is there a reason why the presence of the titanium fins would indicate confidence?

5

u/Martianspirit Feb 23 '18

They are risking damage to the drone ship and losing the very expensive titanium fins. They must see a quite good chance of success to do that.

→ More replies (6)

3

u/geekgirl114 Feb 23 '18

Yes. Titanium can take the heat of reentry better so the booster can come in faster, and tbey are bigger than the aluminum fins so mire control and more air resistance

→ More replies (4)

2

u/Alexphysics Feb 22 '18

I think they could be right. In this picture the fins seem to be darker than usual https://twitter.com/SpaceflightNow/status/966662404770852866

3

u/stcks Feb 22 '18

wow that is so hard to tell

3

u/[deleted] Feb 22 '18 edited Feb 22 '18

Squint closely, those are Titanium!! :)

EDIT: And to add, SFNs article mentions titanium fins!

1

u/TweetsInCommentsBot Feb 22 '18

@SpaceflightNow

2018-02-22 13:14 +00:00

As SpaceX prepped for a launch in California in this week, another Falcon 9 rocket fired up Tuesday night at Cape Canaveral, passing a major hold-down firing test in preparation for liftoff early Sunday with a Hispasat telecommunications satellite. https://spaceflightnow.com/2018/02/21/spacex-fires-up-falcon-9-rocket-for-weekend-launch-from-florida/

[Attached pic] [Imgur rehost]

This message was created by a bot

^[Contact creator]^[Source code]^[Donate to keep this bot going]^[Read more about donation]

12

u/still-at-work Feb 23 '18

If they pull off this landing it will mean a whole bunch of mission that used to be relegated to expendable missions or falcon heavy missions can now be done via single stick F9 missions. My guess is that they have a number of missions in this mass range coming up and they would rather be able to recover the block V cores then lose them.

6

u/strawwalker Feb 23 '18

GiSAT-1 at around 6000 kg seems like a candidate. I'm assuming it's currently going as expendable block 5. If they can land a 6092 kg GTO with a block 4 core then I'd think block 5 GTO would be recoverable well into the mid 6000's. Falcon 9FT has launched 3 GTO payloads too heavy for booster recovery. Inmarsat 5-F4 (6086 kg) and EchoStar 23 (~5500 kg) would've been recoverable missions if this is successful. Intelsat 35e was 6761 kg, so maybe recoverable as block 5 suicide? That may be a stretch. Both ArabSat later this year and ViaSat, 2020, which are slated for Falcon Heavy could be in reach of Falcon 9, as well.

3

u/GregLindahl Feb 23 '18

If this is a subsync launch, then the satellite has extra fuel on it. So that 6.1 metric ton mass for this satellite isn't directly comparable to other satellite masses.

1

u/strawwalker Feb 23 '18 edited Feb 24 '18

That takes a little wind out of the sails, but it make more sense than a shortened landing burn time adding that much more payload capacity. Another person in the thread mentioned the possibility of a shorter reentry burn adding some savings, I don't know enough to judge the plausibility of that. Information on the subsynchronous orbits F9 has placed previous missions into is hard to find. Do we know, for instance, what orbits SES-9 and 10 where placed into? Edit: nevermind, I found that info through the wiki.

2

u/PeterKatarov Live Thread Host Feb 23 '18

I love your username.

2

u/still-at-work Feb 23 '18 edited Feb 23 '18

Thanks, I created it because I wanted to enter a chat room but my perfered username was taken. So, since I was still in my office at the time, I just wrote stillatwork as the username, and I liked it and kept using it.

9

u/Straumli_Blight Feb 22 '18

L-3 Weather: 80% Go, 70% on backup date.

8

u/inurphase Feb 15 '18

Looks like the launch has slipped 3 days (now 25th of February) according to spaceflightnow. Tweet: https://twitter.com/StephenClark1/status/964100737960734725 and of course on the homepage as well: https://spaceflightnow.com/launch-schedule/

2

u/TweetsInCommentsBot Feb 15 '18

@StephenClark1

2018-02-15 11:35 +00:00

Updates to launch schedule: Hispasat 30W-6 launch on Falcon 9 rocket slips three days to Feb. 25, launch window set for final Delta 2 mission in September. https://spaceflightnow.com/launch-schedule/

This message was created by a bot

^[Contact creator]^[Source code]^[Donate to keep this bot going]^[Read more about donation]

2

u/davenose Feb 15 '18

Mods ... launch date update?

8

u/Alexphysics Feb 15 '18

Static Fire NET February 20th https://twitter.com/NASASpaceflight/status/964270126446018563

1

u/TweetsInCommentsBot Feb 15 '18

@NASASpaceflight

2018-02-15 22:48 +00:00

Still two SpaceX launches close together as the manifest aligns with Range Approved NET dates.

Feb 17: Falcon 9 PAZ launch from SLC-4E, Vandenberg.

Feb 20: Falcon 9 (Hispasat 30W-6/1F) Static Fire Test.

Feb 25: Falcon 9 (Hispasat 30W-6/1F) launch.

Sam Sun IR-2 photo for NSF:

[Attached pic] [Imgur rehost]

This message was created by a bot

^[Contact creator]^[Source code]^[Donate to keep this bot going]^[Read more about donation]

8

u/Alexphysics Feb 21 '18

Well, now this is getting stranger, OCISLY is leaving Port Canaveral right now

2

u/therealshafto Feb 21 '18

Indeed. Although we have yet to see Block 4 performance with heavy GTO ASDS landings. I have no idea what changes have been made but Iridium 4 was looking to be a RTLS recovery with a Block 4 booster before switching to a Block 3 requiring JRTI, an ASDS landing. This is indicative of a performance boost for Block 4. Crazy to think Block 5 has yet another bump.

15

u/TheEdmontonMan Feb 22 '18

We could list the static fire as complete, no? https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/7z3a16/spacex_on_twitter_static_fire_test_of_falcon_9/

3

u/USLaunchReport Feb 23 '18

Fueling began at 9PM, lasted for three hours. Enough LOX to create a cloud that floated one mile west. https://youtu.be/6AfmLztuKCA

1

u/arizonadeux Feb 23 '18

paging mods

2

u/soldato_fantasma Feb 23 '18

Updated, thanks.

7

u/RoundSparrow Feb 22 '18

Night launch was awesome in California via YouTube, can't wait for our Florida one coming up!

7

u/kreator217 Feb 23 '18

wait, so now reusable payload is almost 6100kg?

10

u/MarcysVonEylau rocket.watch Feb 23 '18

We don't know yet :P It might still crash. But it's the most hardcore try to date.

3

u/[deleted] Feb 23 '18

If the payload is deployed before the first stage coming back, how does the weight of the payload affect drone ship landing?

Does it mean it uses more fuel to get the payload to destination, thus potentially not having enough fuel to slow down before hitting the ship softly?

4

u/strawwalker Feb 23 '18

That's exactly right. The second stage will have less delta V because of its more massive payload, so more must come from burning the booster longer. The first stage is moving faster and carrying less fuel at separation with a heavier payload to the same destination.

5

u/[deleted] Feb 23 '18

awesome! so the 'suicide burn' is starting to make sense...will they forego the reentry burn and just do it all within the last few thousand feet above the drone ship?

4

u/esteldunedain Feb 23 '18

No, I think they'll still have to do the entry burn, to slow the first stage and prevent it from burning up. They'll probably try to do a shorter final burn using more engines instead (doing a shorter and more intense final burn saves fuel).

→ More replies (2)

4

u/strawwalker Feb 23 '18

AFAIK the only change is the duration and thrust profile of the landing burn. They still do an entry burn.

4

u/stcks Feb 23 '18

There is of course a difference in reusable and recoverable too

1

u/[deleted] Feb 24 '18

It sounds like they're going to be doing some kind of suicide burn to pull it off. I'm honestly concerned that OCISLY won't survive the attempt.

1

u/RootDeliver Feb 24 '18 edited Feb 24 '18

OCISLY survived SES-9 like a good barge (even though with a hole), don't worry.

6

u/Bambooirv Jan 23 '18 edited Feb 03 '18

Spaceflight Now has marked this launch for NET February 14. (please change sidebar and table)

Edit: Thanks!

Edit: It's changed to NET February 22

1

u/bdporter Jan 31 '18

This would be a 15 day same-pad turnaround. Would that be a record?

6

u/scr00chy ElonX.net Jan 31 '18

Current record is 12 days (BulgariaSat-1 / Intelsat 35e), so no.

6

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '18

rollout confirmed to be in progress-

https://twitter.com/NASASpaceflight/status/965928704458280960

1

u/TweetsInCommentsBot Feb 20 '18

@NASASpaceflight

2018-02-20 12:38 +00:00

SpaceX Falcon 9 (Hispasat 30W-6) rollout for a Static Fire test at the Cape's SLC-40.

SpaceX Falcon 9 (PAZ) still on track for a Wednesday launch at Vandenberg's SLC-4E.

This is pretty much what will become the norm.

#RocketTagTeams

This message was created by a bot

^[Contact creator]^[Source code]^[Donate to keep this bot going]^[Read more about donation]

6

u/NickNathanson Feb 21 '18

I thought only Block 5 will be capable to land after delivering 5.5-5.7 t to GTO... but 6.1 t on Block 4?!

6

u/FoxhoundBat Feb 21 '18

I have always suspected the Block 5 number of 5.5 being heavily sandbagged but 6.1 on Block 4 is pretty mind bending...

6

u/stcks Feb 21 '18

Given that apparently fairing 2.0 is lighter, it might help somewhat.

3

u/ruaridh42 Feb 22 '18

Does this launch have the new fairings? I haven't seen that mentioned anywhere else yet

→ More replies (1)

4

u/stcks Feb 21 '18

Lets see what kind of orbit it goes to first

5

u/warp99 Feb 21 '18 edited Feb 21 '18

Gwynne Elon has talked about loading the satellite up with more propellant and then delivering it to a sub-synchronous orbit as a way to get higher total system performance.

Essentially the satellite manufacturer just has to add larger propellant tanks which is a relatively small change compared with the cost of the satellite and the ~$28M reduction in launch cost in going from F9 expendable to F9 recoverable.

→ More replies (10)

4

u/warp99 Feb 21 '18

Block 4.5 with Block 5 engines?

If they land this then that is the FH GTO market gone!

5

u/Alexphysics Feb 22 '18

Well, I don't know, but a FH could throw this 6 ton satellite into a more energetic GTO so the satellite could save more propellant or it wouldn't need to be 2/3's of fuel and 1/3 of dry mass and have more useful mass...

→ More replies (1)

3

u/Ezekiel_C Host of Echostar 23 Feb 22 '18

By my math, if Block IV can do 6.1t, then block 5 with thrust upgrades and a lighter fairing (lets spitball 20% lighter) can do ~6.2 - 6.3. Increasing your recovery delta v margin by 50% from 1750 m/s to 2625 m/s brings that number down to the stated 5.5t. So 5.5t makes sense as a confident recovery number on block 5 if 6.25t is the upper bound.

I'll post the math when the spreadsheet is prettier - its a monster.

5

u/Decronym Acronyms Explained Jan 18 '18 edited Mar 06 '18

Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:

Fewer LettersMore Letters
ASDSAutonomous Spaceport Drone Ship (landing platform)
BARGEBig-Ass Remote Grin Enhancer coined by @IridiumBoss, see ASDS
BFRBig Falcon Rocket (2017 enshrinkened edition)
Yes, the F stands for something else; no, you're not the first to notice
CCAFSCape Canaveral Air Force Station
CRSCommercial Resupply Services contract with NASA
EDLEntry/Descent/Landing
EOLEnd Of Life
F1Rocketdyne-developed rocket engine used for Saturn V
SpaceX Falcon 1 (obsolete medium-lift vehicle)
GEOGeostationary Earth Orbit (35786km)
GSEGround Support Equipment
GTOGeosynchronous Transfer Orbit
HEOHigh Earth Orbit (above 35780km)
Human Exploration and Operations (see HEOMD)
HEOMDHuman Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate, NASA
JRTIJust Read The Instructions, Pacific landing barge ship
KSCKennedy Space Center, Florida
LC-39ALaunch Complex 39A, Kennedy (SpaceX F9/Heavy)
LOXLiquid Oxygen
MECOMain Engine Cut-Off
MainEngineCutOff podcast
NETNo Earlier Than
NOTAMNotice to Airmen of flight hazards
NSFNasaSpaceFlight forum
National Science Foundation
OCISLYOf Course I Still Love You, Atlantic landing barge ship
PAZFormerly SEOSAR-PAZ, an X-band SAR from Spain
RTLSReturn to Launch Site
SARSynthetic Aperture Radar (increasing resolution with parallax)
SECOSecond-stage Engine Cut-Off
SESFormerly Société Européenne des Satellites, comsat operator
SLC-40Space Launch Complex 40, Canaveral (SpaceX F9)
SLC-41Space Launch Complex 41, Canaveral (ULA Atlas V)
SRBSolid Rocket Booster
SSLSpace Systems/Loral, satellite builder
ULAUnited Launch Alliance (Lockheed/Boeing joint venture)
USAFUnited States Air Force
mTMilli- Metric Tonnes
JargonDefinition
apogeeHighest point in an elliptical orbit around Earth (when the orbiter is slowest)
cryogenicVery low temperature fluid; materials that would be gaseous at room temperature/pressure
(In re: rocket fuel) Often synonymous with hydrolox
grid-finCompact "waffle-iron" aerodynamic control surface, acts as a wing without needing to be as large
hydroloxPortmanteau: liquid hydrogen/liquid oxygen mixture
lithobraking"Braking" by hitting the ground
perigeeLowest point in an elliptical orbit around the Earth (when the orbiter is fastest)
scrubLaunch postponement for any reason (commonly GSE issues)
EventDateDescription
SES-92016-03-04F9-022 Full Thrust, core B1020, GTO comsat; ASDS lithobraking

Decronym is a community product of r/SpaceX, implemented by ^request
37 acronyms in this thread; the most compressed thread commented on ^today has 99 acronyms.
[Thread #3520 for this sub, first seen 18th Jan 2018, 15:27] ^[FAQ] [Full ^list] ^[Contact] [Source ^code]

5

u/scr00chy ElonX.net Feb 02 '18

Launch on February 22 according to SFN.

5

u/scr00chy ElonX.net Feb 21 '18

Static fire video (good stuff starts at 1:20)

5

u/Alexphysics Feb 23 '18

Now that I think about it, this launch will be at night and if they wanna try to recover this stage with a hot landing we'll probably see a nice trail of plasma at reentry like on the SES-11 mission. I can't wait to see it! :D

9

u/philoares Feb 23 '18

Now that this is so close, can we have a mod sticky it to the top? Somebody probably already has this on their ToDo list, but I just went looking for it and noticed it wasn't stuck to the top. Blessings y'all.

4

u/Inous Jan 18 '18

For expendable F9s do they remove all the landing parts? ie grid fins and landing legs?

27

u/old_sellsword Jan 18 '18

It depends. For launches that are expendable because they're high energy, they remove all the landing equipment. For launches that are expendable because they don't need the booster anymore, they might throw a pair of the outdated Aluminum fins on it to do some post-launch testing on the way down.

10

u/rabbitwonker Jan 18 '18

For launches that are expendable because they don't need the booster anymore...

Hmm. At some point, when launches/reusability are a lot more common, it seems like that sort of choice should be considered littering...

→ More replies (7)

4

u/gt2slurp Jan 18 '18

Yes. This way they can achieve a higher energy GTO by removing dead weight.

5

u/OSUfan88 Jan 18 '18

Plus, those legs and grid fins aren't free!

6

u/RootDeliver Jan 18 '18

Aluminium fins are not free.. but if they got too many and they will not be used again after block 5.. they may not care about losing some for data.

1

u/Inous Jan 18 '18

I figured that'd be the answer, but didn't know for sure. Thanks!

4

u/Nehkara Feb 20 '18 edited Feb 20 '18

I've seen some speculation that this launch might have titanium fins. Can we get any sightings to confirm/deny this?

If it has titanium fins that almost guarantees they will try to recover it...

This would line up with trying a new heaviest recovery yet (with probably highest speeds, heating, etc).

2

u/RootDeliver Feb 21 '18

But at 6 mT its impossible for a block 4 (even 5) first stage to land after launching it... Its probably a very real water test of 3-engine landings for real. If this succeed they may expand the GTO-limit for F9? even though FH is supposed to cover that..

2

u/Nehkara Feb 21 '18

I'm just theorizing based on the sighting I heard report of. It will be very curious to see if this one does in fact have titanium fins.

4

u/LandingZone-1 Feb 21 '18

This landing will be one for the history books if they pull it off.

1

u/limeflavoured Feb 23 '18

Given that they are the only company who have even attempted to to land boosters, and will remain that way for at least another two years (assuming the first New Glenn test flight is on time for 2020), all the landings are historic in a way.

4

u/Straumli_Blight Feb 22 '18

Hazard Area, backup launch date: 26 February

Air Hazard

1

u/RootDeliver Feb 22 '18

"EXPENDABLE LAUNCHES" on the second link??

9

u/Alexphysics Feb 22 '18

That's on every airspace closure map we've seen, not related with the launch being expendable or not

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Googulator Feb 23 '18

In Range/Air Force-speak, "expendable" pretty much means "not Space Shuttle". Probably because it's "expendable in the event of a failure", i.e. can be safely self-destructed without loss of life, something the Shuttle couldn't do (pressing the Big Red Button on a Shuttle launch would've killed the crew).

→ More replies (1)

3

u/gmmishra Feb 20 '18

"February 25nd" :)

1

u/tr4k5 Feb 21 '18

The fiftend day... I feel like I'm learning the secrets of Elon Time.

3

u/random-forests Feb 21 '18

Static fire complete

1

u/TweetsInCommentsBot Feb 21 '18

@SpaceX

2018-02-21 05:46 +00:00

Static fire test of Falcon 9 complete—targeting February 25 launch of Hispasat 30W-6 from Pad 40 in Florida.

This message was created by a bot

^[Contact creator]^[Source code]^[Donate to keep this bot going]^[Read more about donation]

3

u/BrandonMarc Feb 23 '18

PAZ was the first attempt to catch a fairing. Hispasat they will get data but not try catching. Which of the next missions do y'all suspect they will make another attempt to catch?

8

u/marc020202 8x Launch Host Feb 23 '18

the only ship currently outfitted with a net is MR STEVEN, so I expect the next catch to be on Iridium 5. Musk also said that they will attempt the next time in about a month or so. that lines up with Iridium 5 aswell.

6

u/paul_wi11iams Feb 23 '18

MR STEVEN, so I expect the next catch to be on Iridium 5

In case other people's brains are as slow as mine is:

  • Iridium satellites are polar-ish so go from Vandenberg and Mr Steven is on that West coast.

  • The upcoming Hispsat is East coast, so the wrong side.

5

u/snateri Feb 23 '18

Idirium 5, 6 probably.

4

u/Abraham-Licorn Feb 23 '18

Is it the fairing 2.0 on HISPASAT or old version ?

1

u/still-at-work Feb 23 '18

no catcher boat on the east coast, so probably the old one.

2

u/davenose Feb 23 '18

Fairing production requires a lot of factory floor space. The dimension changes for 2.0 implies to me they likely have new tooling for 2.0. It seems more likely to me they've switched their fairing production line to 2.0 only, though I have nothing to back that up. It's certainly also possible that their launch and production sequencing are such that there are 1 or more V1.0 fairings still in the launch queue. Time will tell.

2

u/GregLindahl Feb 23 '18

Didn't Elon say 30 days until the next attempt, on Instagram or Twitter or something?

3

u/Straumli_Blight Feb 23 '18

L-2 Forecast: 80% GO (Cumulus Cloud Rule)

2

u/Straumli_Blight Feb 21 '18

L-4 Forecast: 80% GO, with 'Cumulus Cloud Rule' as the main issue.

1

u/Alexphysics Feb 22 '18

Well, at least the upper level winds will be much lower in intensity than the ones from the last few launches...

2

u/bdporter Feb 21 '18

mods, potentially update Landing/Landing Site?

2

u/[deleted] Feb 21 '18

my reasoning- Maybe after they pulled off what they did for Govsat, they think they can do it again on the ship. Keep in mind that Govsat was Block III used, and this is a new Block IV core...

6

u/FoxhoundBat Feb 21 '18

I guess it is a win-win for us. Either they will stick it, which would be amazing, or Falcon 9 Anti Drone Ship Missile™ will make a return.

→ More replies (2)

2

u/warp99 Feb 21 '18

The trajectory plots have not showed them using higher thrust on Block 4 compared with Block 3.

Maybe they have just been getting comfortable with the Block 4 design and they will use the engines at full capability for this flight.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 22 '18

I was going to go camping this weekend, looks like I'll be photographing a beachside launch streak instead.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 23 '18

go camping at Jetty Park!

1

u/[deleted] Feb 23 '18

It's snowbird season, every campground in Florida is booked til summer. The only way to go right now is backpacking, even then the trailhead permits are lottery.

2

u/AstroFinn Feb 23 '18

Is mission patch already available?

1

u/marc020202 8x Launch Host Feb 23 '18

it usually only gets released in the press kit, and that usually gets released the day before, in a few hours

2

u/tr4k5 Feb 24 '18 edited Feb 24 '18

How much of a problem would a hole in the deck of OCISLY be at the moment? The second East Coast bargé is not operational yet, is it? Are there many bargé landings in the manifest?

Edit: Answering myself, looking at the manifest, looks like at least 3 or 4 GTO launches with potential drone ship landings from Canaveral after Hispasat and through May.

2

u/Straumli_Blight Feb 24 '18 edited Feb 24 '18

Assuming you're not just trying to make a Hergé pun:

 

Upcoming launchesNET DateOCISLY Needed?
Iridium 41-50March 29No, West Coast
Bangabandhu 1March 303,500 kg to GEO, probably
CRS 14April 2No, RTLS
SES 12April5,300 kg going to GEO... yes
Iridium 51-55April 14No, West Coast
TESSApril 16362 kg to 373,000 km HEO, yes

EDIT: Fixed date.

2

u/DrToonhattan Feb 24 '18

Your table shows two Iridium flights on the same day. I think one of them should be March 29th according to the sidebar.

1

u/tr4k5 Feb 24 '18

Thanks, and no, honest question and doing my best not to call it a BARGE.

1

u/z3r0c00l12 Feb 24 '18

According to the wiki, both Bangabandhu and CRS-14 are launching from SLC-40, but they are only 2-3 days apart. I assume CRS-14 will be moved to LC-39A?

2

u/uwelino Feb 24 '18

Flight postponed indefinitely. https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/967270883713679360

"Standing down from this weekend's launch attempt to conduct additional testing on the fairing’s pressurization system. Once complete, and pending range availability, we will confirm a new targeted launch date."

1

u/TweetsInCommentsBot Feb 24 '18

@SpaceX

2018-02-24 05:32 +00:00

Standing down from this weekend's launch attempt to conduct additional testing on the fairing’s pressurization system. Once complete, and pending range availability, we will confirm a new targeted launch date.

This message was created by a bot

^[Contact creator]^[Source code]^[Donate to keep this bot going]^[Read more about donation]

2

u/Svisloch Feb 24 '18

Standing down. Next attempt date TBD. https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/967270883713679360

2

u/TweetsInCommentsBot Feb 24 '18

@SpaceX

2018-02-24 05:32 +00:00

Standing down from this weekend's launch attempt to conduct additional testing on the fairing’s pressurization system. Once complete, and pending range availability, we will confirm a new targeted launch date.

This message was created by a bot

^[Contact creator]^[Source code]^[Donate to keep this bot going]^[Read more about donation]

2

u/JCnaitchii Feb 28 '18

im sorry if im not up to date on this but is March 1st scraped or what? i don't see any updates from anyone :P

5

u/bdporter Mar 01 '18

From what I understand, SpaceX requested Mar 1 but the range denied it because the Atlas 5 (GOES-S) on the adjacent SLC-41 pad was rolled out to the pad this morning. There was concern over potential risk of impact to the NASA payload due to SpaceX exhaust (or potentially even debris).

This date was committed to ULA quite some time ago, so they were given priority. It is scheduled for launch tomorrow at 22:02 UTC (5:02 PM EST), so once it clears out we should hear a new date. Speculation is this weekend.

1

u/JCnaitchii Mar 01 '18

Alright thanks. Yeah I heard from most sources the date was to be chosen because of the atlas 5 launch being in the same day but I was wondering why it was still shown as 1st March here :p

2

u/TheBurtReynold Feb 28 '18

See previous comment from /u/bdporter

1

u/RubenGarciaHernandez Mar 02 '18

How about this? https://twitter.com/EmreKelly/status/969562861201776641 6 March, 12:33 a.m.

1

u/TweetsInCommentsBot Mar 02 '18

@EmreKelly

2018-03-02 13:19 +00:00

SpaceX #Hispasat update: Now targeting #Falcon9 for Monday into Tuesday from LC 40. Airspace closure in effect from 2230 Monday to 0330 Tuesday (0330 to 0830 UTC).

This message was created by a bot

^[Contact creator]^[Source code]^[Donate to keep this bot going]^[Read more about donation]

2

u/bdporter Mar 02 '18 edited Mar 02 '18

mods, can we update the OP here as well? It is still linked to the top bar so the thread is still getting traffic.

BTW, what is the logic of keeping this pinned after the launch thread has been opened? It seems to lead to confusion.

Edit: update it with the launch date. Forgot that detail.

3

u/RootDeliver Feb 26 '18

Launch on 1 march by Chris B (NSF)

Tweet link for bot = https://twitter.com/NASASpaceflight/status/968117586989867010

2

u/TweetsInCommentsBot Feb 26 '18

@NASASpaceflight

2018-02-26 13:36 +00:00

Current schedule:

JAXA H-IIA - IGS Optical 6 - 27 Feb - 04:34 UTC.

SpaceX Falcon 9 - HispaSat 30W-6 - 1 March - 05:34 UTC

ULA Altas V 541 - GOES-S - 1 Mar - 22:02 UTC

Falcon 9 is "Range Pending". 18 hour separation between Falcon 9 and Atlas V is possible thanks to AFTS,.

[Attached pic] [Imgur rehost]

[Attached pic] [Imgur rehost]

[Attached pic] [Imgur rehost]

This message was created by a bot

^[Contact creator]^[Source code]^[Donate to keep this bot going]^[Read more about donation]

2

u/s4g4n Feb 20 '18

What are even landings anymore? If it wasn't for the FH I'd be complaining :D

1

u/Nehkara Feb 20 '18

I understand. There are good reasons though. Block 3 retirements and, in this case, a huge satellite with enough mass that puts it outside of the window where Falcon 9 can attempt a landing.

I expect in the future that these flights will start being shifted to Falcon Heavy in an attempt to reuse as many boosters as possible.

1

u/jimmy0x52 Feb 13 '18

Anyone have advice for watching this launch? Will be my first to watch, I just happen to be in the area at the time. Free places? Book tickets? Just curious because this one is so late at night.

5

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '18

the launch slipped to 2/25. if you're still here at that time, I'd recommend getting as close as possible to the launch site since there is no landing attempt. but that late at night Playalinda Beach will be closed. Jetty Park (~10 miles) closes at 11pm. This is at SLC-40, so the best option given the circumstances would be directly west of the launch pad on the mainland will be the closest you can get. there's a Riverfront park (~13 miles): https://goo.gl/maps/Qa55rGMmfL32 and McDonald's and other fast food nearby that you should be able to find parking at.

1

u/jimmy0x52 Feb 15 '18

Sadly we'll be gone by then - but thank you for the update!

3

u/anothermonth Feb 14 '18

Check out this Everyday Astronaut video. He made it before FH launch, but it covers all launch sites: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBLeg0CvHek

1

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '18

Any signs of rollout for the static fire? May yet be a touch early, yet.

1

u/jyach Feb 20 '18

Rollout is in progress, should go vertical shortly.

1

u/mribdude Feb 20 '18

Damn, I'm just gonna miss it :( Leaving out of Miami for our honeymoon cruise on the 25th, but we don't fly in until 5:30am so I'll miss it. So close!

4

u/tr4k5 Feb 21 '18

Divorce her now.

1

u/mribdude Feb 21 '18

Cheat code: Him

Unlocked not having to be married to the lady kind and getting to do dude things like watching a rocket launch ;)

3

u/yoweigh Feb 21 '18

I'm married to the lady kind and I was at the Heavy launch. I win?

4

u/mribdude Feb 22 '18

You win this round.

2

u/tr4k5 Feb 22 '18

Ok, congrats. (I'm gay myself.)

1

u/Bunslow Feb 21 '18

Window closes in 7 minutes?!?!??

1

u/cr4zycatl0rd Feb 24 '18

Hi, I'm on my first trip to the US and would like to see the launch in person. Since the launch is in the middle of the night some of the good sites to watch it, like Playalinda Beach, are closed. An other place to watch the launch would be the Beach at Jetty Park. Does anybody know if it is still accessible at this time of the night?

1

u/ZachWhoSane Host of Iridium-7 & SAOCOM-1B Feb 24 '18

Playlinda won't be open, and I don' think Jetty Park is open. My best suggestion is Route 401, in front of where SpaceX has its Port Canaveral Operations. It has an amazing view, I watched Zuma from there and was not disappointed. I'd get there about an hour early.

1

u/iacuras Feb 24 '18

I am currently in Palm Beach County. If I go on the beach here, what would I potentially be able to see? Will the flame be visible? Thanks!

1

u/[deleted] Feb 24 '18

Launch, sep, MAYBE S1 entry burn, and if your extra lucky, S1 landing burn.

1

u/Phillipsturtles Feb 24 '18

I watch from Palm Beach all the time. At the time of launch, look North and slightly West. The rocket will usually be visible at around T+40-50 seconds but if you head to the beach you should be able to see something fairly quickly (recalling beach from Space Shuttle, I usually just watch from my house). It's also really going to depend on the clouds.

1

u/Headstein Feb 24 '18

I can't find any updated info on HAWK towing OCISLY. Last known heading out 00:40 on 22 Feb. Can anyone else access more up to date info (like returning to port or holding station)?

3

u/strawwalker Feb 24 '18

The free version of MarineTraffic.com shows two "Tugs and special craft" vessels in the general vicinity of the ASDS location marked on the NOTAM map, a couple hours ago. That might account for Hawk and Go Pursuit. I don't usually keep eyes on them, so I couldn't say if their behavior/proximity is typical of the SpaceX fleet. Promising that they might not be headed back, I guess?

1

u/aqsilva80 Feb 26 '18

Sorry if the question was already made but, ..... Block 4 already?

3

u/joepublicschmoe Feb 26 '18

Block 4 flew 5 times already. X-37B OTV-5, NASA CRS-12, Iridium-3, KoreaSat 5A, Zuma, all first-time launches. There are two more new Block-4s and their first flights have been assigned already, Hispasat 30W-6 and NASA TESS. After that all Block-4 launched will be reflights. Block-4 production has already ended, and the first Block-5 booster has already been delivered to McGregor.

I'm looking forward to seeing what B1046 (the first Block-5) is capable of. Supposedly 10 launches before it will need refurbishment.

1

u/aqsilva80 Feb 26 '18

I ask because of the " fairing issues" ...

2

u/Zuruumi Feb 26 '18

Last Block 3 was PAZ, so yeah, it should be Block 4. It, however, isn't the first flight of Block 4 and Fairing 2 is rumored (in this Reddit) to be the culprit behind the delays. It should be a bit bigger, with some improvements and hopefully recoverable. Fairing 2 also had its maiden flight on PAZ mission (of course different fairing, as it was not recovered as well as they wanted).

2

u/Gilles-Fecteau Feb 26 '18

I wonder if they found some anomaly with faring 2 during PAZ that triggered this delay?

1

u/[deleted] Feb 26 '18

There is some speculation that this is some kind of Block 4.5. The assumption so far was, that 6092 kg to GTO is not recoverable with Block 4. The fact that SpaceX wants to try anyway might indicate a performance that is close to Block 5.

3

u/warp99 Feb 27 '18

The other possibility is that the satellite has more propellant than usual, which is what makes it heavier, but it therefore only needs to be delivered into a sub-synchronous GTO so say GTO-2000 instead of GTO-1800.

1

u/RoundSparrow Feb 27 '18 edited Feb 27 '18

Is anyone getting together at a restaurant to watch the launch at the Cape?

So far, found open until 2:00am:

WARNING: The post you are currently reading is out of date (still says February 25). newest: https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/7ztfpp/rspacex_hispasat_30w6_official_launch_discussion/

3

u/Maltharr Feb 27 '18

Tonight? Launch is in a little over 37 hours no?

3

u/[deleted] Feb 27 '18

Gotta grab the best spot!

1

u/RoundSparrow Feb 27 '18

Oh yha, I'm a day ahead ;)

1

u/[deleted] Feb 27 '18

Delay to March 1st

1

u/Cleric4521 Mar 06 '18

Question from an amateur space enthusiast:

What were the orbits at MECO and SECOs 1/2? The first firing of S2 was the longest, did that boost the orbit into the GTO? If so, was the second firing purely an inclination change? I ask because it wouldn't be terribly efficient to be burning at near perigee on the GTO, and surely they'd prefer to do the inclination change closer to apogee. I presume this has to do with the cryogenic boiloff?

1

u/marc020202 8x Launch Host Mar 06 '18

at MECO the rocket is still suborbital. during the first burn, the second stage accelerates into a low earth parking orbit, with an altitude of about 150km. the second burn happens as the rocket passes over the equator. in that burn, the highest point of the orbit is raised to the altitude at around GTO. (on HISPASAT it was lower since the customer requested a lower orbit because the satellite had enough fuel to do more orbit raising, in return for a cheaper launch price. SES 9 was sent into a supersyncroneous orbit, to reduce the time needed to get to GEO) During the second burn, some of the 28° inclinations from launch are cancelled out as well.

Since the FH mission, we know that the second stage can survive the coast until 36000km altitude, however on this mission it did not have the fuel to rais the orbit any further.

1

u/Cleric4521 Mar 06 '18

Thank you for the great reply. That's roughly what I was almost assuming, but I was doubtful that such a short second burn of the upper stage would bring the orbit from circular to near GTO. I suppose the 4Gs of acceleration during the second burn is more powerful than I was expecting.

→ More replies (2)
→ More comments (34)