Launch News SpaceX Falcon 9 Return to Flight - Iridium NEXT Mission 1 (January 14, 2017)

[Kyle]

Looks like SpaceX is actually going to try to RTF next month. Booster has been spotted on its way to McGregor, presumably for its test firing. Likely that it will be from LC39A as VAFB is still closed due to the damage from the fire and SLC40 is... yea.

 

[Thunder Chicken]

Any chance it is just instrumented to the Nth degree for fuel loading/unloading tests, to chase down what caused the 2nd stage AMOS-6 to explode?

 

[Kyle]

SpaceX hopes procedure fix can allow Falcon 9 launches to resume

 

[MaverickSawyer]

I'm not going to hold my breath and wait for a flight... With this having been the second failure of the second stage due to the helium pressurization system, I'm hoping they actually fix the problem(s) that exists, rather than creating a workaround to get back to flying faster.

 

[Kyle]

As I understand it CRS-7's failure wasn't with the actual COPV, just a strut that was attached to it.

 

[MaverickSawyer]

As I understand it CRS-7's failure wasn't with the actual COPV, just a strut that was attached to it.

IIRC, that's what SpaceX said it was. NASA never announced a culprit due to insufficient data.

I find it even more interesting that the ITS will NOT have a helium pressurization system... To me, that's an indicator that they KNOW there's problems with the system, but are either unable or unwilling to perform a complete redesign to fix the flaws.

 

[Thunder Chicken]

I find it even more interesting that the ITS will NOT have a helium pressurization system... To me, that's an indicator that they KNOW there's problems with the system, but are either unable or unwilling to perform a complete redesign to fix the flaws.

Helium pressurization is a good idea when you will be in orbit in 8 minutes, but it is a terrible solution if you are going into space for extended voyages, need to take fuel in orbit, and need to fire engines months from now. The lack of helium pressurization on ITS is because there are smarter ways to get that job done in that application, not because of any inherent flaws in that system.

 

[RGClark]

Any chance it is just instrumented to the Nth degree for fuel loading/unloading tests, to chase down what caused the 2nd stage AMOS-6 to explode?

Such as putting back in the video cameras.

There is also concern about the quick nature of the fueling procedure before launch:

Experts concerned by SpaceX plan to fuel rockets with people aboard.
By Irene Klotz | CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla., Nov. 1

Members of the eight-member group, which includes veterans of NASA's Gemini, Apollo and space shuttle programs noted that all previous rockets that have flown people into space were fueled before astronauts got to the launch pad.
"It was unanimous ... Everybody there, and particularly the people who had experience over the years, said nobody is ever near the pad when they fuel a booster," Stafford said, referring to an earlier briefing the group had about SpaceX's proposed fueling procedure.
http://www.reuters.com/article/space-spacex-idUSL8N1D25IX?type=companyNews

I don't understand why SpaceX can't just put extra insulation or an additional refrigeration system on the exterior of the rocket while on the pad to deal with the supercooled propellant, and just withdraw it before the launch.

Bob Clark

 

[MaverickSawyer]

Such as putting back in the video cameras.

There is also concern about the quick nature of the fueling procedure before launch:

Experts concerned by SpaceX plan to fuel rockets with people aboard.
By Irene Klotz | CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla., Nov. 1


I don't understand why SpaceX can't just put extra insulation or an additional refrigeration system on the exterior of the rocket while on the pad to deal with the supercooled propellant, and just withdraw it before the launch.

Bob Clark

Like the insulation shrouds that they use to drape around early launchers?

 

[Thunder Chicken]

I don't understand why SpaceX can't just put extra insulation or an additional refrigeration system on the exterior of the rocket while on the pad to deal with the supercooled propellant, and just withdraw it before the launch.

They can, but loading and launching quickly is much simpler if it can be done safely. Adding insulation or refrigeration systems adds costs and complexity to the ground handling systems, introducing more failure modes. SpaceX ultimately might have to resort to these sorts of modifications, but simpler options would be preferred.

As for loading with astronauts on board - I suppose that fueling up the rocket before putting people on the pad ensures that some failure during fueling would not cause any injury or loss of life, but that still means that a whole lot of unprotected people would be milling around a fully fueled rocket and nothing says that a catastrophic failure could not occur during that time.

Boarding and strapping in while the rocket is unfueled means crew and ground support personnel are safe from a major fuel-related failure. Fueling once the astronauts are on board means ground support personnel are out of harm's way and the astronauts have a means of pad abort during that time.

 

[Andy44]

Boarding and strapping in while the rocket is unfueled means crew and ground support personnel are safe from a major fuel-related failure. Fueling once the astronauts are on board means ground support personnel are out of harm's way and the astronauts have a means of pad abort during that time.

Right. And that's also what capsule abort systems are for.

 

[Kyle]

IIRC, that's what SpaceX said it was. NASA never announced a culprit due to insufficient data.

I find it even more interesting that the ITS will NOT have a helium pressurization system... To me, that's an indicator that they KNOW there's problems with the system, but are either unable or unwilling to perform a complete redesign to fix the flaws.

NASA never officially did, but they were confident enough that SpaceX's conclusion was sufficient that they let Dragon fly again on F9 twice in 2016.

 

[Donamy]

Has SpaceX ever reused any parts of a Dragon capsule ?

 

[mike-c]

Has SpaceX ever reused any parts of a Dragon capsule ?

Not yet:

http://www.space.com/33449-spacex-dragon-cargo-spacecraft-reflight.html

 

[Kyle]

RTF looking likely to be from VAFB with the Iridium satellites. The 2nd stage arrived at VAFB today.

 

[Kyle]

Looks like RTF is going to be from VAFB with the Iridium NEXT-1 satellites! The first stage arrived at VAFB today ahead of a probable December launch.

 

[Nicholas Kang]

SpaceX sets Dec. 16 for first flight since launch pad explosion

Spaceflightnow.com:http://spaceflightnow.com/2016/12/02/spacex-sets-dec-16-for-first-flight-since-launch-pad-explosion/

File photo of a Falcon 9 rocket rolling to the launch pad at Space Launch Complex 4-East at Vandenberg. Credit: SpaceX

Iridium said Thursday that the launch from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California is scheduled for Dec. 16 at 12:36 p.m. PST (3:36 p.m. EST; 2036 GMT), pending regulatory approval from the Federal Aviation Administration, the agency responsible for overseeing commercial space launches.

A view of the Iridium Next satellites and the SpaceX dispenser inside a clean room at Vandenberg in August. Credit: Iridium

More information:

The 10 satellites were delivered two-at-a-time to Vandenberg from their Orbital ATK factory in Gilbert, Arizona, in August for a planned launch in mid-September. Preparations were halted after the launch pad accident at Cape Canaveral.

Work has resumed inside SpaceX’s clean room at Vandenberg, with the final steps before launch including the attachment of all 10 spacecraft — designed by Thales Alenia Space and built in partnership with Orbital ATK — to a SpaceX-provided dispenser.

The deployment mechanism has two tiers, each holding five of the satellites. Once technicians connect the craft to the dispenser, they will load hydrazine fuel into each satellite. The spacecraft will each weigh nearly 1,900 pounds — about 860 kilograms — with a full tank of propellant.

The Falcon 9 rocket will place the first 10 next-generation communications satellites into a polar orbit around 388 miles (625 kilometers) above Earth. From there, the satellites will use on-board thrusters to maneuver into their final positions in the Iridium constellation.

Take note about this:

But first, SpaceX plans to run the Falcon 9 through a customary preflight static fire test, the same procedure that resulted in the explosion at Cape Canaveral in September. Iridium officials have said they will not put their satellites on the Falcon 9 rocket until the static fire test, which includes fueling of the booster and a brief on-pad engine firing, is successfully completed.

Hopefully everything goes well. Good luck, SpaceX!:thumbup:

 

[Nicholas Kang]

RTF postponed

Unfortunately, RTF was postponed to January 2017.

Official SpaceX Press Statement

http://www.spacex.com/news/2016/09/01/anomaly-updates

December 7, 10:30am EDT

We are finalizing the investigation into our September 1 anomaly and are working to complete the final steps necessary to safely and reliably return to flight, now in early January with the launch of Iridium-1. This allows for additional time to close-out vehicle preparations and complete extended testing to help ensure the highest possible level of mission assurance prior to launch.

p.s. Kyle, please change the thread title which states the date of RTF from December 2016 to January 2017 in light of this press statement.

Thank you. :thumbup:

 

[Kyle]

Done!

 

[Kyle]

Payload attached and encapsulated!