SpaceX F9 - Hispasat 30W-6 - SLC-40

[Grendal]

Launch Date: February 25, Sunday
Launch Window: 0535 GMT (12:35 a.m. EST)
Launch Site: SLC-40, Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida
Booster Recovery: Expendable - Payload is too heavy for recovery
Booster Type: B1044 - Block 4 - New
Orbit: GTO - 6092 kg

A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket will launch the Hispasat 30W-6 communications satellite, formerly known as Hispasat 1F, for Madrid-based Hispasat. Hispasat 30W-6 will provide television, broadband, corporate networks and other communications services over Europe, North Africa and the Americas. The Hispasat 30W-6 satellite was built by Space Systems/Loral.

In a rare expendable mission with a brand new first stage, will lift the Hispasat 30W-6 commercial communications satellite into Geostationary Transfer Orbit for Madrid-based satellite operator Hispasat. Weighing in at 6.1 metric tons, the satellite will require the entirety of Falcon’s performance and not permit the first stage booster to be recovered. Based on SS/L’s 1300 satellite platform, Hispasat 30W-6 hosts a powerful communications payload comprising 48 Ku-band, 6 Ka-band, 1 Ka-BSS and 1 C-band transponder for the provision of the full palette of telecommunications services to Europe, North Africa, and the Americas including television distribution, broadband Internet and corporate networking services.

Hispasat 30W-6
Hispasat 30W-6 (Hispasat 1F)

49th F9 launch

 

[ecarfan]

In a rare expendable mission with a brand new first stage

(I know @Grendal knows what I am posting here, this is for those who might miss that for this GEO mission the payload mass precludes stage recovery) It is my understanding this will be a Block 4 core so SpaceX doesn’t have an incentive to recover it anyway. At the FH post launch press conference Elon said that Block 5 will be flying in a few months, those are the cores that will be recovered and reflown multiple times.

 

[bxr140]

Space Systems/Loral.

<ahem>

SSL

 

[e-FTW]

(I know @Grendal knows what I am posting here, this is for those who might miss that for this GEO mission the payload mass precludes stage recovery) It is my understanding this will be a Block 4 core so SpaceX doesn’t have an incentive to recover it anyway. At the FH post launch press conference Elon said that Block 5 will be flying in a few months, those are the cores that will be recovered and reflown multiple times.

Is it fair to assume they'll try and pull off a soft water landing again?

 

[RDoc]

I wonder what the comparative cost is (or will be) between an expendable Block 5 F9 and a fully recoverable FH for a heavy GEO satellite like this. Presumably the FH could also offer a better orbit as well.

 

[NeverFollow]

Is it fair to assume they'll try and pull off a soft water landing again?

And fairing landing recuperation testing ?

Did the fairings from the Falcon Heavy test flight get recovered?

 

[Grendal]

Is it fair to assume they'll try and pull off a soft water landing again?

Probably not, in this case. Since SpaceX knows they are going to be losing the booster, unless they have a real good reason to do a test, the company can give the satellite a little extra push and get it to its orbit quicker. They've done that before and its probably good advertising for them. JMHO.

I wonder what the comparative cost is (or will be) between an expendable Block 5 F9 and a fully recoverable FH for a heavy GEO satellite like this. Presumably the FH could also offer a better orbit as well.

I'm sure Block 5 F9's are more expensive than either B3 or B4. Now SpaceX knows they can recover a booster almost every time they try. So SpaceX can be more specific in their demands to their customers. If someone like Hispasat with a 6000 kg satellite wants a launch, SpaceX can say they need to launch on a recoverable FH and pay the $90 million. SpaceX can force this by saying an expendable B5 F9 is $90 million. I really don't think we'll see SpaceX ever expend a B5 booster in either F9 or FH intentionally. The days of doing that are over. That just makes strategic sense to me, but I could be wrong.

 

[ecarfan]

If someone like Hispasat with a 6000 kg satellite wants a launch, SpaceX can say they need to launch on a recoverable FH and pay the $90 million. SpaceX can force this by saying an expendable B5 F9 is $90 million.

Makes sense to me. No one else in the launch business can loft a payload like that for less, right?

 

[Grendal]

Makes sense to me. No one else in the launch business can loft a payload like that for less, right?

Ariane 6 might be competitive at just the right weight between F9 and FH. It's not due out until 2020. Ariane 6 (and 5) pulls off better pricing by launching two satellites at once. I believe that Ariane 5 is booked up for all their remaining dozen or so launches. Who knows what SpaceX will be like in 2020 for pricing. So I can't think of anyone able to loft a heavy satellite for less.

The bonus for SpaceX is that they can probably offer a direct injection into GEO for something in the 6000+ kg range. That swings the value back to SpaceX. Time is money in the satellite industry.

 

[Brando]

I wonder what the comparative cost is (or will be) between an expendable Block 5 F9 and a fully recoverable FH for a heavy GEO satellite like this. Presumably the FH could also offer a better orbit as well.

Capabilities & Services

$62 million vs $90 million

(We would not expect - especially at retail prices - a noticeable price difference of F9 versions - Block 4 or 5)
As re-use increases, costs for SpaceX go down and they pass along the savings to the customers.
For proof, see F9 vs FH pricing and Elon's talk about BFR pricing.
Elon sells value and goes against the "usual corporate culture" of charging what the market will bare.

 

[Grendal]

SpaceX is moving right along. First post has been updated with current information.

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

SpaceX on Twitter

On a personal note, I will be leaving on vacation on the 24th and be gone for three weeks. I may or may not have access to the internet where I am going. So don't wait for me to post webcasts if you find them. SpaceX seems to be making them harder to find on YouTube by skipping the tags.

 

[Brass Guy]

SpaceX is moving right along. First post has been updated with current information.

SpaceX on Twitter

On a personal note, I will be leaving on vacation on the 24th and be gone for three weeks. I may or may not have access to the internet where I am going. So don't wait for me to post webcasts if you find them. SpaceX seems to be making them harder to find on YouTube by skipping the tags.

I'm not sure this "vacation" thing is acceptable. You'll first need to verify some sort of connection so you can keep us all informed!

 

[ggr]

SpaceX is moving right along. First post has been updated with current information.

SpaceX on Twitter

On a personal note, I will be leaving on vacation on the 24th and be gone for three weeks. I may or may not have access to the internet where I am going. So don't wait for me to post webcasts if you find them. SpaceX seems to be making them harder to find on YouTube by skipping the tags.

I usually just go to spacex.com.

 

[ICUDoc]

SpaceX is moving right along. First post has been updated with current information.

SpaceX on Twitter

On a personal note, I will be leaving on vacation on the 24th and be gone for three weeks. I may or may not have access to the internet where I am going. So don't wait for me to post webcasts if you find them. SpaceX seems to be making them harder to find on YouTube by skipping the tags.

'Haven't seen your leave request, Grendal?

 

[Grendal]

Getting pushed out. New fairing issues.

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.

SpaceX on Twitter

 

[e-FTW]

Getting pushed out. New fairing issues.



SpaceX on Twitter

That threw me for a loop: the fairing is pressurized?

 

[Grendal]

That threw me for a loop: the fairing is pressurized?

Yes. To an extent. You need your payload prepared for no pressure in space. So you lower the pressure ahead of launch. That allows for less dramatic pressure change on the payload.

 

[Electroman]

Yes. To an extent. You need your payload prepared for no pressure in space. So you lower the pressure ahead of launch. That allows for less dramatic pressure change on the payload.

Why don't you simply have some holes at some strategic places in the fairing, that will automatically reduce the pressure as the rocket gains altitude.

So at launch the payload is at atmospheric pressure, and at separation it is at near vacuum.

 

[mongo]

Why don't you simple have some holes at some strategic places in the fairing, that will automatically reduce the pressure as the rocket gains altitude.

So at launch the payload is at atmospheric pressure, and at separation it is at near vacuum.

You are still going from 14.7 psi to 0 in 3 minutes (fairing separation). Much more gentle to depressurize over time, ahead of time (spoken as a SCUBA diver).
Sealing keeps the environment out of the satellite.

Vacuum packing also seals faring halves together (for whatever good that does).

 

[Cosmacelf]

Why don't you simply have some holes at some strategic places in the fairing, that will automatically reduce the pressure as the rocket gains altitude.

So at launch the payload is at atmospheric pressure, and at separation it is at near vacuum.

Those fairings are huge, carrying a lot of air volume. I wonder how big the holes would have to be to evacuate enough air in the couple of minutes it has until it reaches vacuum? And probably the last thing you want is over pressure inside the fairing, which is what’d you’d have if you did it this way.