Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

SpaceX Falcon 9 FT - Formosat 5 - SLC-4E

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Hope Kengchang got some photos from Hawk's Nest. We got delayed heading down there and was watching the SpaceX feed on my phone while hubby was driving. If it had been delayed might have made it to the lot. Did see it from the road driving there though. If you expand you can see the red glowing engines above the contrail.

IMG_3441.JPG


Disaapointed we didn't make it closer but cool to know we did see it launched.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nikxice
A complete landing video from JRTI would be great! This latest approach and landing at sea was perhaps the most stable to date. Having pocket fuel for a 33 second landing burn probably helped. As SpaceX continues to fine tune their drone ship landings, last June's Pacific hoverslam will likely become a distant memory.
 
I knew there was one coming up today but didn't realize it was a west coast launch until we were already down here. Is this the last Falcon 9 launch from here for some time?

Kengchang nice. Is that a badge they gave out? If so did you get to keep or have to hand back? Any photos of the launch to show? Wondering what your perspective was from there.

Very quick mission. Stage 1 had landed and Formosat was deployed before we even made it back to Arroyo Grande area. Our B&B host said they heard it and could see the contrails from up here-- on hilly area looking in that direction.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Grendal
Yeah, this all happened very quickly, no break needed in the webcast. Probably has to do with the target orbit *hand waving*...
2nd stage was one long burn instead of the usual two.
The reason for two burns of the second stage is to get the payload into GTO (Geosynchronous Transfer Orbit). Basically the first burn gives it enough velocity to orbit down low, then the second burn makes the orbit very elliptical. The payload then uses its own thrust near the top of the ellipse to circularize the orbit again. For Low Earth Orbit (LEO) there is never a need for a second burn.
 
The reason for two burns of the second stage is to get the payload into GTO (Geosynchronous Transfer Orbit). Basically the first burn gives it enough velocity to orbit down low, then the second burn makes the orbit very elliptical. The payload then uses its own thrust near the top of the ellipse to circularize the orbit again. For Low Earth Orbit (LEO) there is never a need for a second burn.

Not exactly. The minimum energy orbital insertion is still similar to a Hohmann transfer orbit with a short secondary burn at altitude. The Space Shuttle did this routinely using the OMS to circularize. This had the added bonus that the external tank was still in the transfer orbit which was designed to target it for re-entry in a benign location in the South Pacific.

If you have some fuel to throw away, you can loft the trajectory above the optimum Hohmann angle, arriving at the desired orbital altitude quickly while still thrusting towards orbital velocity, then cancel the excess vertical velocity by vectoring slightly down for the last few seconds of orbital insertion.

Needless to say, they had plenty of extra delta-v to squander considering that their payload was a 1000 lb satellite.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: Mike1080i and e-FTW
SpaceX used the old school grid fins for this launch and the last one since both were easy LEO launches. We see the crispy aluminum fins on high energy returns from GTO or a hot LEO.. So we probably won't see the new titanium grid fins on the next launch but will likely see them on the Iridium and SES launches.
 
So the aluminum fins are throw away? And the Titanium ones are reusable?

No. The aluminum grid fins are also reusable but need refurbishment after every launch. The titanium fins don't even have paint on them. They are reusable immediately with no refurbishment needed at all. They are all part of Elon's 24 hour turnaround demand. He, and now the company, have said that their goal is to have a Falcon 9 recovered booster have the ability to be reflown in 24 hours after recovery. No refurbishment at all except a cursory examination. Just re-integrate it with a new second stage, refuel it, then launch.

Fundamentally, I don't see the 24 hour turnaround as something that SpaceX intends to do as an action but more as a design goal. I expect that SpaceX will have a good backlog of recovered Block 5 boosters pretty quick just like they have a significant number of block 3 and 4 recovered boosters now. Once they have a dozen of those and maybe two full Falcon Heavies in their "stable" will be when the company will need to lessen their manufacturing pace. However, by the time that happens then I can see those people working on the mini BFR. Past that point is too far to speculate with any amount of reasonability. Elon dreams big though...
 
  • Like
Reactions: landis and GoTslaGo
Not exactly. The minimum energy orbital insertion is still similar to a Hohmann transfer orbit with a short secondary burn at altitude. The Space Shuttle did this routinely using the OMS to circularize. This had the added bonus that the external tank was still in the transfer orbit which was designed to target it for re-entry in a benign location in the South Pacific.

If you have some fuel to throw away, you can loft the trajectory above the optimum Hohmann angle, arriving at the desired orbital altitude quickly while still thrusting towards orbital velocity, then cancel the excess vertical velocity by vectoring slightly down for the last few seconds of orbital insertion.

Needless to say, they had plenty of extra delta-v to squander considering that their payload was a 1000 lb satellite.
I noticed while I was watching the webcast that the second stage changed its azimuth (??) near the end of the burn. You could see the horizon changing on one of the camera angles. I assumed at the time that with the single burn that they were already near the altitude they needed but needed some more velocity. I did not check to see if the rate of altitude increase was reduced at that point because I was more interested in the landing.
 
Fundamentally, I don't see the 24 hour turnaround as something that SpaceX intends to do as an action but more as a design goal. I expect that SpaceX will have a good backlog of recovered Block 5 boosters pretty quick just like they have a significant number of block 3 and 4 recovered boosters now. Once they have a dozen of those and maybe two full Falcon Heavies in their "stable" will be when the company will need to lessen their manufacturing pace. However, by the time that happens then I can see those people working on the mini BFR.
Yes, I agree. By setting that very difficult to achieve goal, Elon accelerates the timeframe for making the F9 rapidly reusable. And what SpaceX learns in that process will be applied to future rockets like the BFR. Rapid reusability also lowers costs to orbit by reducing the time and resources necessary to relaunch a rocket.

It's all part of the plan...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Grendal