SpaceX F9 - CRS-27 - LC-39A

Launch Date: March 14
Launch Window: 8:30pm EDT (5:30pm PDT, 0030 UTC on the 15th)
Launch site: LC-39A, Kennedy Space Center, Florida
Booster Recovery: ASDS - ASOG
Booster Type: B1073.7
Orbit: ISS in LEO
Mass: 9,525 kg (20,999 lb) for Dragon (C209.3)
Dragon Return: TBD
Yearly Launch Number: 17

A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket will launch a Dragon 2 spacecraft on a cargo resupply mission to the International Space Station. The flight is the 27th mission by SpaceX conducted under a Commercial Resupply Services contract with NASA. A boostback burn was used to lower the distance and time for recovery on A Shortfall of Gravitas.

SpaceX CRS-27 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

SpaceX Dragon 2 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

"SpaceX Dragon 16" by Astro_Alex is licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0.
Admin note: Image added for Blog Feed thumbnail

 

[Grendal]

 

[Grendal]

 

[ecarfan]

I liked these views!

 

[MyJoule]

Never gets old- nice centered landing.

The partial boost back burn was something I don't recall seeing before

Way to go SpaceX

 

[Electroman]

Just curious. Without boostback burn how far does it land and how long does it take for the booster to be towed back?. Same data with boostback burn?

They said they save a day and a half with the partial boostback.

 

[Tronguy]

Just curious. Without boostback burn how far does it land and how long does it take for the booster to be towed back?. Same data with boostback burn?

They said they save a day and a half with the partial boostback.

There’s been a pretty good Northeaster churning up the Atlantic for the past several days and the rocket’s path kind of followed up the eastern seaboard where it’s all been happening.

If nothing else one gets big waves out at sea when storms roll by. I suspect SpaceX wanted to keep the barge and the landing rocket out of all that.

My understanding is that a normal barge landing leaves more fuel in the booster than heading back to the launch site so they can provide more delta-V to the payload, while still leaving enough fuel for the reentry and landing burns.

Therefore, this launch may have split the difference a bit: doing a short boost-back burn to land the booster, which “wastes” more than doing a normal barge trajectory, but less than going back to the Cape.

Fun, though: I think this may have been the first time they’ve tried it, as you point out. Always something innovative with this bunch.

 

[JohnnyEnglish]

There’s been a pretty good Northeaster churning up the Atlantic for the past several days and the rocket’s path kind of followed up the eastern seaboard where it’s all been happening.

If nothing else one gets big waves out at sea when storms roll by. I suspect SpaceX wanted to keep the barge and the landing rocket out of all that.

My understanding is that a normal barge landing leaves more fuel in the booster than heading back to the launch site so they can provide more delta-V to the payload, while still leaving enough fuel for the reentry and landing burns.

Therefore, this launch may have split the difference a bit: doing a short boost-back burn to land the booster, which “wastes” more than doing a normal barge trajectory, but less than going back to the Cape.

Fun, though: I think this may have been the first time they’ve tried it, as you point out. Always something innovative with this bunch.

Perhaps barge transit time is becoming a constraint on launch cadence?

 

[Electroman]

If you have some fuel left after MECO why not use that to cut some time and costs on the barge on towing back to harbor. Norester or not, that is the right strategy.

 

[ggr]

Fun, though: I think this may have been the first time they’ve tried it, as you point out. Always something innovative with this bunch.

I think they've done it before, but a quick search doesn't find anything to back me up. Just my fallible memory.