SpaceX Falcon 9 FT launch - CRS-10 - LC-39A

[Grendal]

Expect delays but there is a "placeholder" for this launch, so here you go:

Launch time: February 8th, 1855 GMT (1:55 p.m. EST)
Launch site: LC-39A, Kennedy Space Center, Florida
A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket will launch the 12th Dragon spacecraft on the 10th operational cargo delivery mission to the International Space Station. The flight is being conducted under the Commercial Resupply Services contract with NASA. Delayed from Feb. 13, June 10 and Aug. 1. Moved up from Nov. 21. Delayed from Nov. 11 and Jan. 22.

Commercial Resupply Services - Wikipedia

Commercial Resupply Services Overview

And specifically:
SpaceX CRS-10 - Wikipedia

 

[ecarfan]

So this is the first SpaceX launch from LC-39A? That in itself is pretty exciting!

For those who don't know, the LC-39 launch area was used for all the Apollo missions and then all the Space Shuttle launches. Detailed history of the site at Kennedy Space Center Launch Complex 39 - Wikipedia

 

[Grendal]

So this is the first SpaceX launch from LC-39A? That in itself is pretty exciting!

For those who don't know, the LC-39 launch area was used for all the Apollo missions and then all the Space Shuttle launches. Detailed history of the site at Kennedy Space Center Launch Complex 39 - Wikipedia

No. The first launch from LC-39A is EchoStar. Scheduled for NET January 30th at midnight. CRS-10 will be following that launch. EchoStar just got bumped 4 days so it is very possible that CRS-10 will get pushed back too.

I didn't mention but I fully expect that CRS-10 will be a RTL. I expect that all CRS missions will be RTL since LEO launches leave ample fuel for RTL.

 

[Matias]

Sorry for off topic, but why is Launch complex 39 39? What does the number mean?

 

[ecarfan]

Sorry for off topic, but why is Launch complex 39 39? What does the number mean?

Please read the Wikipedia page I linked to and it will explain. Kennedy Space Center Launch Complex 39 - Wikipedia

 

[Electroman]

RTLS - Return To Landing Site

 

[Grendal]

Sorry for off topic, but why is Launch complex 39 39? What does the number mean?

As far as I can tell, Cape Canaveral has had that many launch sites based on the history of the location. Here is a wiki that labels them all and gives the history:

List of Cape Canaveral and Merritt Island launch sites - Wikipedia

And here is the map the wiki has:

 

[Mike1080i]

For those who don't know, the LC-39 launch area was used for all the Apollo missions and then all the Space Shuttle launches. Detailed history of the site at Kennedy Space Center Launch Complex 39 - Wikipedia

Just to add a note, not all the Apollo missions flew from LC-39. LC-34 and LC-37 at CCAFS were also Apollo/Saturn 1 and Saturn 1B pads. LC-34 was the site of the Apollo 1 fire (50th anniversary is next week, Jan 27th) as well as the launch site of Apollo 7, the first crewed Apollo flight. LC-37 is now home to the Delta 4.

 

[Grendal]

The SpaceX Landing Complex is built on top of the old LC-13. Very recently SpaceX has received the okay from the EPA to expand the landing complex and build three more landing pads. Currently there is only one and it has been used twice. The very first landing which was Orbcomm and CRS-9. CRS-10 will also use the site unless SpaceX has other unknown reasons to avoid using it.

 

[ecarfan]

Very recently SpaceX has received the okay from the EPA to expand the landing complex and build three more landing pads.

Is that to be able to land the 3 FH 1st stages?

I wonder how closely synchronized those stage landings will be. Within a second or two?

 

[Grendal]

Is that to be able to land the 3 FH 1st stages?

I wonder how closely synchronized those stage landings will be. Within a second or two?

Yes. And it is only two additional pads, I'm not sure where I got it in my head there would be more. From what I read from others is that the three pads could accommodate all the FH boosters (even though it is very unlikely the center core will be RTLS) and includes the future use for a powered landing of Dragon 2 capsules as well.

I have a copy of the environmental assessment for the Landing Zone but it is over 200 pages long.

How they manage to synchronize the landing is for very smart SpaceX people to figure out. The big trick will be avoiding turbulence from one booster to another and during the landing. You only have to watch the cameras being buffeted during launch and landing to know there is a lot of turbulence to overcome.

 

[Grendal]

A number of people saw a wrapped booster arriving at LC-39A tonight. Since the EchoStar booster has been there for a month then this one is most likely for CRS-10. A very outside chance that this is the reuse flight booster for SES-10. I see no reason to clutter up the launch area with too many boosters, so CRS-10 makes the most sense.

 

[ecarfan]

Well, to make the CRS 10 launch date of Feb 8 I assume they need to get the booster for that mission into the Vehicle Integration Hangar building by now. If SpaceX can pull off two LC-39A pad launches within 9 days I will be impressed!

 

[Grendal]

Well, to make the CRS 10 launch date of Feb 8 I assume they need to get the booster for that mission into the Vehicle Integration Hangar building by now. If SpaceX can pull off two LC-39A pad launches within 9 days I will be impressed!

And sadly, they won't be able to pull it off. Probably due to delays to EchoStar 23, the new NET launch date for CRS-10 is now February 15th at 11:05 AM EST. So 9:05 AM on the West Coast. A twelve day turnaround if EchoStar lifts off on the 3rd as currently planned

 

[Grendal]

This just in. Unconfirmed, but very likely true, is that CRS-10 will jump ahead of EchoStar 23 in the launch cadence. I will post the change as it becomes official.

The reasoning is that EchoStar can be flexible while the resupply mission cannot. The LC-39A build out is not getting finalized and keeps forcing the current launch dates out. CRS-10 is currently set for February 15th. So SpaceX will stick with that date and push out EchoStar to a date after that instead of forcing the issue and readjusting both launches.

In the last few days the new Transporter Erector launch platform has been going through many test sessions and been vertical at LC-39A. At least once it was announced incorrectly that a F9 was on the TE.

 

[Mike1080i]

It's official according to this email SpaceX sent to the press.

Updated Guidance on SpaceX’s First Launch from Pad 39A

HAWTHORNE, Calif. – Jan. 29, 2017. SpaceX announced today that its first launch from Launch Complex 39A (LC-39A) at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida will be the CRS-10 mission to the International Space Station. The launch is currently targeted for no earlier than mid-February. Following the launch of CRS-10, first commercial mission from 39A is currently slated to be EchoStar XXIII. This schedule change allows time for additional testing of ground systems ahead of the CRS-10 mission. The launch vehicles, Dragon, and the EchoStar satellite are all healthy and prepared for launch.

 

[adiggs]

Note to self - don't blow up rockets on the landing pad. Landing pads might look indestructible, but with a big enough explosion, they become quite fragile and difficult to repair

 

[ggr]

Note to self - don't blow up rockets on the landing pad. Landing pads might look indestructible, but with a big enough explosion, they become quite fragile and difficult to repair

I'm not sure whether you know this or not, but the explosion was on a different pad (LC-40). Refurbishing LC-39A was already being done when the recent explosion happened. LC-40 is still not back in operation. So you're right, maybe even more right than you thought.

 

[adiggs]

Mostly I had a humorous (at least to me) thought go through my head, and I was unable to refrain from letting it out into the wild

 

[Discoducky]

So why the change to the TEL? I haven't seen an explanation.