SpaceX F9 - Transporter 8 - SLC-4E

Launch Date: June 12
Launch Window: 2:35pm PDT
Launch site: SLC-4E, Vandenberg Space Force Base, California
Core Booster Recovery: RTLS - LZ-4
Booster: B1071.9
Fairings: Reused
Mass: Approx 5 metric tonnes
Orbit: SSO - Polar LEO
Yearly Launch Number: 40

A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket will launch the Transporter 8 mission, a rideshare flight to a sun-synchronous orbit with numerous small microsatellites and nanosatellites for commercial and government customers. The Falcon 9’s first stage booster will return to Landing Zone 4 at Vandenberg.

This launch will likely use the new MVac nozzle extension design aimed at increasing cadence and reducing costs. This new nozzle extension is shorter and, as a result, the engine has a lower specific impulse and therefore performance. Due to this, it will only fly on missions that don't need Falcon 9's full performance capability.

"SpaceX Falcon 9 1.1 Launch Sequence at Vandenberg AFB" by jurvetson is licensed under CC BY 2.0.

 

[808?]

 

[Cosmacelf]

Latest ETA is June 12, 2:10pm (presumably PDT).

 

[ecarfan]

This launch will likely use the new MVac nozzle extension design aimed at increasing cadence and reducing costs.

I understand the cost reduction aspect, but how does the shorter nozzle increase launch cadence? Thanks.

 

[Cosmacelf]

I understand the cost reduction aspect, but how does the shorter nozzle increase launch cadence? Thanks.

They need to make a new one for every launch, so if they can make them faster, they can launch faster.

 

[bxr140]

They need to make a new one for every launch, so if they can make them faster, they can launch faster.

That would necessarily mean the actual manufacturing of the second stage bell is the mission critical path. While IMO unlikely it’s certainly plausible as the second stage is almost certainly the vehicle long pole and the nozzle mfg is one of the more difficult recurring tasks on the second stage. That said, it’s hard to imagine that SX would let themselves be the recurring long pole in mission/launch cadence (vs the range or payload availability, including starlinks), and so it’s hard to imagine any improvement in best case or average launch cadence as a result of the smaller bell.


Lots of hopes and dreams on this one:

 

[Electroman]

Clear skies and Go for Launch !!!

And it is going to be RTLS !! Whooo Hooo

 

[Cosmacelf]

Decidedly weird moment when the landing legs didn’t deploy all at the same time. Ninth mission and they are getting sticky! It worked out in the end and landed OK.

 

[Electroman]

200th successful landing.

The legs retracted asymmetrically which caused to skip my heartbeat momentarily, but it all ended well.

 

[HVM]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1668373536660914176

 

[ecarfan]

The legs retracted asymmetrically which caused to skip my heartbeat momentarily

I had the same reaction!

Loved the moment the bow shock wave was briefly visible during ascent.

 

[HVM]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1668418954170347521

 

[Grendal]

Second Orbiter transfer vehicle malfunctions

An orbital transfer vehicle by Launcher that was part of a SpaceX rideshare mission in June malfunctioned shortly after deployment.

spacenews.com

 

[Electroman]

Cue the Musk haters blaming this on SpaceX. I do see that the Satellite manufacturer has admitted this has a software error in their systems, but still that may not stop some pressititues blaming SpaceX.

 

[bxr140]

Cue the Musk haters blaming this on SpaceX. I do see that the Satellite manufacturer has admitted this has a software error in their systems, but still that may not stop some pressititues blaming SpaceX.

Easy with the sensationalism. Nobody of any standing is saying that. Don't Fox News it into a story.
It's obviously a Launcher problem. It's not the first time they've had a problem.

 

[Electroman]

Easy with the sensationalism. Nobody of any standing is saying that. Don't Fox News it into a story.
It's obviously a Launcher problem. It's not the first time they've had a problem.

Oh no one has hinted any blame on SpaceX this time only because the satellite company was quick to identify the cause and communicate it.

If they had not, this would have been de ja vu of a different mission from 4 years ago when a secret military mission (from Lockheed ?) that was lost right after payload deployment.

 

[scaesare]

... pressititues ...

Oh, definitely stealing that...

 

[Grendal]

Oh no one has hinted any blame on SpaceX this time only because the satellite company was quick to identify the cause and communicate it.

If they had not, this would have been de ja vu of a different mission from 4 years ago when a secret military mission (from Lockheed ?) that was lost right after payload deployment.

It was Northrup Grumman, not Lockheed.