They said that, yes, but I can smell the PR when I see it.
What's worrying me is that the stage looks like it missed the spot. If that's the case, that's a guidance issue.
It's all just data input to refine the solution. You continue to work through unexpected events until you solve it. (Same as my auto-land algorithm problems on Glideslope 2 LOL!!!)
Like these guys say:
“I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work.”
― Thomas A. Edison
“There is only one thing that makes a dream impossible to achieve: the fear of failure.”
― Paulo Coelho, The Alchemist
“There is something good in all seeming failures. You are not to see that now. Time will reveal it. Be patient.”
― Sivananda Saraswati
Oh and the little Merlin that can... got that SES-9 up to a 40,610.6km apogee ... overachieving the stretch target for the customer. Awesome job.
---------- Post added at 04:38 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:02 PM ----------
I was thinking about the super-sync orbit and why that's a good thing. Right now, SES-9 is in a 40,610.6 x 340.7 km orbit, inc 27.9 degrees, headed to a 35,786 x 35,786 x 0.00 Inc. So it needs to kick the plane by 27.9 degrees (i.e. pretty significant), and then drop the ApA a bit and raise the PeA. As we Orbinauts know, plane changes are heavy dV relative to PeA changes. For a min dV, you want to make the plane change at the Apogee where your velocity is at the lowest (as opposed to at a node where you would normally do it).
Question for the quidance experts on the forum: what's the optimal GTO apogee to minimize the mission dV to a circularized GSO? I.e. at some point, the savings from plane change at t a higher altitude are offset by the higher dV to get to that high a GTO. Where's the optimal point?
(For real life, the limit is also driven by the capabilities of the second stage, and the reduced separation mass once the SES-9 is on its own.)
