HISPASAT 30W-6 Mission

[Anonymous No.9564624]

>SpaceX is targeting a Falcon 9 launch of the Hispasat 30W-6 satellite to a Geostationary Transfer Orbit (GTO) on Tuesday, March 6 from Space Launch Complex 40 (SLC-40) at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida. The two-hour launch window opens at 12:33 a.m. EST, or 5:33 UTC. The Hispasat 30W-6 satellite will be deployed approximately 33 minutes after launch.
>A two-hour backup launch window opens on Wednesday, March 7 at 12:33 a.m. EST, or 5:33 UTC.
>SpaceX will not attempt to land Falcon 9’s first stage after launch due to unfavorable weather conditions in the recovery area off of Florida’s Atlantic Coast.

Stream live in about 4 hours.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kpfrp-GMKKM

[Anonymous No.9564637]

Orlando fag here, Waiting for launch with mosquitoes.

[Anonymous No.9564649]

>>SpaceX will not attempt to land Falcon 9’s first stage after launch due to unfavorable weather conditions in the recovery area off of Florida’s Atlantic Coast.
huh.

[Anonymous No.9564663]

>>9564624
>>9564649
wtf. They're using titanium grid fins, and just throwing that shit away in the ocean. Aren't they $xm per fin? Which is why Elon was so happy the two side boosters of heavy landed back successfully?

[Anonymous No.9564667]

>>9564649
It's an older Block 4 booster. They're still recovering the ones they can for data, but they're working on phasing out everything but the Block 5's.

[Anonymous No.9564669]

>>9564667
its got Ti grid fins for no fucking reason

[Anonymous No.9564671]

>>9564663
Making the customer happy is more important. Every extra day a geo bird isn’t operational is money lost by the company. TVM and such

[Anonymous No.9564675]

>>9564669
They were probably planning on recovering it but weather isn't going to allow it, and the value of recovering the hardware isn't worth delaying the launch.

[Anonymous No.9564676]

>>9564671
its almost like reusability is starting to look more and more like a meme

[Anonymous No.9564677]

>>9564671
>>9564663
To elaborate, it isn’t worth it to stand down and remove the fins at this point. This mission has already been delayed - often launch contracts reduce payment by x amount for every n days past the original launch date. For example, fomosat.

[Anonymous No.9564680]

>>9564677
refer to
>>9564676

[Anonymous No.9564684]

>>9564676
lolwhat? Successfully launching the payload is still the primary goal. They don’t even really need this b4 booster anyways. They are probably saving money by not bothering to recover it either way - and they already have plenty of stages lying around

[Anonymous No.9564687]

>>9564684
everything you just furthers my point. Thank you.

[Anonymous No.9564691]

>>9564687
everything you just said*

[Anonymous No.9564692]

>>9564676
A single case of bad weather forcing an ASDS landing to be cancelled, for a useless block iv booster, renders reusability a meme? Lmao. Are you actually retarded?

[Anonymous No.9564699]

>>9564687
yep, he’s retarded folks.

Is is just me or have space threads been extra stupid lately due to trolls/morons? It’s honestly annoying

[Anonymous No.9564704]

>>9564687
it costs thousands of dollars to pay for the recovery vessels, port fees, tugboats, crane crew, road transportation, security detail, safeing operations, and not to mention storage. They’re ALREADY purposefully throwing away stages that can be recovered to make room for block 5. For all we know they are testing a new profile for the ti fins anyways. Don’t be dumb.

[Anonymous No.9564718]

>>9564692
The grid fins are multiple million $ per fin, friend.

Also, landing legs are not free, and yet, the ocean gets three of them.

[Anonymous No.9564740]

>>9564718
it's still up in the air if they could recover it in the first place. it's a 6-ton GTO sat. heavier that anything else they've recovered.

I bet they didn't think they had a good chance of recovery in the first place, thus not bothering to stand down for a day or remove the gridfins. That way they can still do whatever crazy new reentry burn profile to test out landing a 6-ton sat mission. It's not like they're losing money on the launch.

[Anonymous No.9564744]

>>9564718
>>9564740
plus, Ti fins are quite different dimension wise than Al fins. Close-up pics of the hinge mechanism shows that they can't exactly be hot swapped iirc.


Either way, spacex has determined that it is worth it to lose this core. Why, we might not ever know.

[Anonymous No.9564845]

I stand corrected, they are the same mounting structures

[Anonymous No.9564848]

Today’s stage

[Anonymous No.9564849]

>>9564624
Oh look, yet another launch from one of the most dishonest companies in the history of private space travel. Seriously each launch following the Falcon family as they “revolutionize the launch industry” has been indistinguishable from the rest. Aside from the meme landings, the company’s only party trick has been to overwork and underpay its employees to reduce launch costs, all to make the mythical “full and rapid reuse” seem effective.

Perhaps the die was cast when Musk vetoed the idea of ambitious yet realistic missions like Red and Grey Dragon; he made sure the company would never be mistaken for an innovative force to anything or anybody, just ridiculously questionable government contracts for his companies. SpaceX might be profitable (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-NASA in its refusal of wonder, science and excitement. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.

>a-at least the landings are cool though
"No!"
The camerawork is dreadful; the landings of the charred boosters are boring. As I watch, I noticed that every time a Falcon 9 lands, Musk said either “self-sustaining civilization on Mars” or “imagine if you had a 747 and you threw it away after one flight.”

I began marking on the back of an envelope every time one of those phrases was repeated. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Musk's mind is so governed by clichés that he has no other style of thinking. Later I read a poorly-written news story on SpaceX by some fat web blogger. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are watching these launches now, surely they will work for SpaceX in the future and they too can have paychecks based off of government handouts." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you are a SpaceX fan, you are, in fact, trained to be a mindless supporter of government-funded billionaires.

[Anonymous No.9564852]

>>9564849
LINGUINI

[Anonymous No.9564857]

>>9564849
thanks for the bump, ragu

[Anonymous No.9564870]

quick, post'em

[Anonymous No.9564976]

>>9564849
>dishonest
go back to shitting in /tv/ in blade runner 2049 threads

[Anonymous No.9565016]

SpaceX launch threads are my absolute favourite to shitpost in.

[Anonymous No.9565019]

>>9565016
> X

[Anonymous No.9565038]

>>9565016
agreed

[Anonymous No.9565078]

>>9564669
Note where it splashed down and go salvage them yourself.

[Anonymous No.9565095]

Just realized that it's been quite some time since we see an abort during countdown. >pic is getting less and less relevant. The new enemy seems to be upper level winds.

[Anonymous No.9565102]

>>9565095
All of the aborts are now pre launch delays. Like the last six launches have all been pushed back due to fairing/GSE/sensor issues. But the countdowns have been going quite well, yes

[Anonymous No.9565112]

Stream started

[Anonymous No.9565114]

MUSIC!

[Anonymous No.9565115]

50th launch for spacex !

[Anonymous No.9565117]

here we go!

[Anonymous No.9565118]

WE STREAM NAO

[Anonymous No.9565126]

[Anonymous No.9565129]

New first stage, whats the difference?

[Anonymous No.9565131]

>reusability isn't a mem-

[Anonymous No.9565132]

>>9565126
WTF IS TIHS

[Anonymous No.9565133]

>>9565132
Saturn's moon, Pan

[Anonymous No.9565134]

>>9564852
MARTINI

[Anonymous No.9565136]

>>9565129
Meaning is just hasn't been used yet. Not a new design.

[Anonymous No.9565137]

>>9565131
1/10 trolle attempt, desu. you literally aren't fooling anyone, it just shits up the thread.

>>9565129
the last of the block 4's interceptors

[Anonymous No.9565140]

>mfw SpaceX is taking Hisapasats money just before they run them out of satellite internet business

kek

[Anonymous No.9565141]

So, like if this is successful it means we will have an influx of more Africans and South Americans online?

[Anonymous No.9565142]

>>9565132
7 days

[Anonymous No.9565143]

PHOTONIC TECHNOLOGY

[Anonymous No.9565144]

>>9565137
>make reusable rocket
>don't reuse it

[Anonymous No.9565146]

2 MINUTES

[Anonymous No.9565147]

>>9565140
not exactly. As Desch says, starlink will simply be a different type of comm system. He doesn't see it as a threat to iridium - you won't be able to use a handheld unit to talk to starlink like iridium can

[Anonymous No.9565149]

[Anonymous No.9565150]

READY FOR LAUNCH

[Anonymous No.9565155]

>>9565144
They're phasing out the block 4's.

[Anonymous No.9565156]

who's crinkling a crisps bag?

[Anonymous No.9565157]

How nominal are things?

[Anonymous No.9565158]

N O M I N A L
O
M
I
N
A
L

[Anonymous No.9565159]

>>9565157
norminal

[Anonymous No.9565160]

Will the first stage be recovered this time?

[Anonymous No.9565161]

>>9565160
negative

[Anonymous No.9565162]

>>9565160
No. Rough seas.

[Anonymous No.9565163]

>>9565160
Nope

[Anonymous No.9565164]

>>9565160
nope, seas are too high. Plus it was a very slim chance they recovered it in the first place - it's the heaviest payload they've (would have) attempted to recover the first stage of

[Anonymous No.9565165]

https://www.flightradar24.com/GLF6/109fcbb4 might get footage of stage 1 landing

[Anonymous No.9565168]

>>9565160
No, but it's still going through the motions. Nobody told the booster they didn't send out the drone ship.

[Anonymous No.9565169]

>>9565168
So it still physically has enough fuel left for the reentry and landing burns?

[Anonymous No.9565172]

spacex sure is launching a lot. 30 for 2018 is their goal

[Anonymous No.9565173]

>>9565157

[Anonymous No.9565174]

>>9565169
yeah. Meco velocity was 8232 km/h, so it's quite a heavy bird - landing might have not succeeded

[Anonymous No.9565175]

>>9565169
Maybe. It was going to be close anyway, since this is the heaviest satellite they were going to attempt recovery from for a GTO launch.

[Anonymous No.9565176]

Damn it feels good to be a spacer

[Anonymous No.9565178]

>>9565172
Is there a similar graph that includes foreign launch providers?

[Anonymous No.9565180]

>>9565172
>shuttle

thanks obama

[Anonymous No.9565182]

>>9565172
>all those other lines going down on the graph

[Anonymous No.9565183]

Press F to pay respect to titanium gridfins

[Anonymous No.9565184]

>>9565178
no, but it would be easy to make

[Anonymous No.9565185]

>>9565172
What is the current record of launches for any company per year so far?

[Anonymous No.9565187]

>>9565182
I'm going to mars and no SLS shill is going to stop me buying that fucking ticket. I get that it may end up being a con, but I'm fucked if it's not a ridiculously long, risky and expensive con.

[Anonymous No.9565188]

>>9565183
FFFF

[Anonymous No.9565189]

>>9565183
F

[Anonymous No.9565190]

>>9565183
What exactly makes them so expensive?
It seems like it's just a cast/machined block of titanium. Not cheap but not millions of dollars either.

[Anonymous No.9565192]

>>9565185
SpaceX, they surpassed ULA's record last year.

This year's standings are currently
7 China
5 SpaceX
3 Japan
3 ULA
2 Russia
1 New Zealand

[Anonymous No.9565193]

>>9565172

>tfw ULA

[Anonymous No.9565194]

pack it up boys

[Anonymous No.9565195]

>>9565190
it's the world's largest titanium casting by a large margin. Ti is super expensive and a bitch to work with. https://www.mmsonline.com/articles/getting-the-time-out-of-titanium

[Anonymous No.9565196]

>>9565194
w-what is that?

[Anonymous No.9565197]

>>9565194
Gonna go salvaging for dem rare fins yo

[Anonymous No.9565198]

[Anonymous No.9565199]

>>9565190

[Anonymous No.9565200]

>>9565196
chase plane to get sweet footage of the landing

[Anonymous No.9565203]

Was this booster the one used in the Falcon Heavy launch? I know the side boosters had titanium grid fins.

[Anonymous No.9565204]

>>9565198
I never get tired of seeing the exhaust plume expand as it climbs.

[Anonymous No.9565205]

>>9565203
fresh booster

[Anonymous No.9565207]

>>9565192
damn the chinks are really stepping up on this,we gotta start dealing with this before they take over space and make the usa irrelevant

[Anonymous No.9565208]

these fins are bigger than people think

[Anonymous No.9565210]

>>9565208
In general the Falcon boosters are way bigger than people think.

[Anonymous No.9565212]

the whole rocket is just bigger than most people think desu

[Anonymous No.9565216]

>>9565200
Now THAT'S a bug zapper.

[Anonymous No.9565217]

>>9565212
>>9565210
>>9565208
it's a flying skyscraper. and the BFR will make it look puny

[Anonymous No.9565220]

>dat huge chunk of ice

Damn, they lost/switched feed just before it flew off as the engine fired up the second time.

[Anonymous No.9565224]

>>9565208
I'd love to get one of those. I'd turn it into a big wine rack.

[Anonymous No.9565226]

>>9565217
Von Braun would have been horrified by the fineness ratio of F9

[Anonymous No.9565232]

>>9565208
Those are the old aluminum ones. The new ones are even bigger.

[Anonymous No.9565233]

>>9565178

note the precipitous drop in Russia's launches (CIS)

[Anonymous No.9565234]

rip B1044


>>9565232
but thinner!

[Anonymous No.9565237]

>>9565226
von braun wouldn't give a fuck that he was wrong, he'd pop an allmighty boner from the sight of it landing

fun fact-the title of the leader of mars as named by him in a book about a martian society? the Elon. shit's weird yo

[Anonymous No.9565243]

Iridium NEXT 5 is up next on the 29th. Reused core, from a previous iridium launch no less!

[Anonymous No.9565244]

>>9565233
Roscosmos is absolutely screwed once dragon v2 and starliner start flying.

[Anonymous No.9565246]

>>9565233
The endless streams of failure/partial failures might have also contributed to the decline.

[Anonymous No.9565250]

>>9565244
>muh 372% increase in seat cost over 10 years
>muh 81 mil per seat
it's stupid


the big issue is if CC gets delayed again. We simply won't have the Soyuz's available - there hasn't been an order placed, and they take like 20 months to manufacture.

[Anonymous No.9565262]

wonder if elon was onboard. That is his jet, after all.

[Anonymous No.9565324]

>>9564744
Maybe those Ti grid fins were from an early batch and not as good as the latest ones.

[Anonymous No.9565334]

>>9564704
Case in point, recoverability is expensive.

[Anonymous No.9565343]

>>9565334
Not as expensive as building a new one.

[Anonymous No.9565371]

>>9565244
Which is no doubt why NASA will impose new delays

[Anonymous No.9565372]

>>9565244
Not really. They'll still send their own people up.
Also Russia is planning to build their own space station at some point, which'll keep Roscosmos busy.

[Anonymous No.9565383]

Watching a bit of the feed post deployment, the second stage looked to be doing some maneuvering. Think it was going to do a deorbit burn?

[Anonymous No.9565465]

>>9565383
It always has done, apart from the Falcon Heavy demo mission.

[Anonymous No.9565493]

>>9565250
I wonder if the delays are result of careful risk assessment
>soyuz - low risk - responsibility lies with the russians and the politicians who cancelled the shuttle, jobs at NASA are safe, loss of crew could bring benefits and even increase the budget for the SLS/Orion as replacement
>cc - high risk - responsibility lies mostly with nasa due to oversight, shifting blame to private sector could control some damage but ultimately careers will be ruined if someone dies
>no soyuz, no cc, no nothing - zero risk

[Anonymous No.9565503]

>>9565493
Sure if they never launch then they never "finish" any programs, maybe thats the lesson they "learnt" from apollo, never finish any program because your budget will get cut.

[Anonymous No.9565764]

>>9564624
Brainlet here, why is it titled falcon 9, and how similar is it to the falcon heavy launched earlier this year? Or was the falcon heavy technically a falcon 9 test?

Pls no bully thx

[Anonymous No.9565768]

>>9565764
Falcon 9 has 9 engines.
The heavy was basically an upgrade of the falcon 9.

[Anonymous No.9565788]

>>9565503
>The Last Manned Lunar Landing. Apollo 17 was the last Apollo mission to land men on the Moon. It carried the only trained geologist to walk on the lunar surface, lunar module pilot Harrison Schmitt.

>seding "geo"logists up to do a lunologist's job

No wonder they cut their funding.

[Anonymous No.9565798]

>>9565768
lolwhat?
>>9565764
F9 is a 2-stage rocket. FH is is a F9 with two F9 first stages as extra boosters

[Anonymous No.9565803]

>>9565768
>>9565798
THanks I was wondering about this, not exactly an easy answer to find

[Anonymous No.9565809]

>>9565803
Indeed, pretty obscure

[Anonymous No.9565812]

>getting excited by F9 launches
Wake me up for the FH launch for USAAF my dudes. Elon will be shitting bricks loading a real fucking payload onto his baby.

[Anonymous No.9565828]

>>9565200
>>9565216

>Pence examines new torture device for gays

[Anonymous No.9565837]

>>9565210

[Anonymous No.9565840]

>>9565809
>>9

[Anonymous No.9565876]

>>9565144
>company builds prototype reusable rocket to verify hardware and landing techniques, applies lessons learned to updated design making first flight in the next few weeks
>get buttblasted and declare reusability a meme because company doesn't make every attempt to reuse a prototype forever

[Anonymous No.9565885]

>>9565876
>replying to tongue-in-cheek bait

[Anonymous No.9565892]

>>9565334
>thousands of dollars
>expensive

thousands of dollars on a rocket launch is pennies on a HDTV.

[Anonymous No.9565898]

So how long until the Europeans, Russians, or Chinese espionage their way into having their own reusable rockets, or at the least get ahold of some of SpaceX's technical specs for the Falcon 9?

And don't say it's all a meme. There's a reason why Roscosmos and ULA are getting fucking JUSTed in terms of comparable rocket launches numbers.

[Anonymous No.9565900]

>>9565812
Nah. Now that it's flown they know the rocket can fly without tearing itself apart and the booster sep sequence works, plus the next Falcon 9 will use all Block 5 cores which are better in pretty much every way. Falcon Heavy launch 2 won't be a white-knuckle affair, just slightly more stressful than a Falcon 9 launch, but that itself is because Falcon 9's are so reliable now that they're pretty much guaranteed to make orbit without a hitch.

[Anonymous No.9565902]

>>9565898
SpaceX has pretty stringent internal firewalls/airgapping for technical information. It would have to be a literal inside job.

[Anonymous No.9565904]

>>9565885
I know it's bait but I can't ignore the catharsis of BTFOing an argument.

[Anonymous No.9565907]

>>9565898
They don't need to look at SpaceX's data beyond "use many engines to allow for lower TWR landings, use grid fins to stabilize and steer the core on reentry, start with an acceptably cheap expendable rocket and figure out reusability from there until you know enough to design a better fully reusable rocket from scratch".

There's no magic or breakthrough materials science going on with Falcon 9, it's just a robust design using well established technology in a new and effective way.

[Anonymous No.9565912]

>>9565907
The real secret sauce is a low MECO, ability to throttle down a substantial amount, relight capability, and a stage 2 with a fuckton of ISP. In other words, you have to copy the whole shebang

[Anonymous No.9565916]

>>9565180
Shuttle was a meme. Glad it flatlined

[Anonymous No.9565917]

>>9565907

The software they're using to calculate those landings is probably priceless.

[Anonymous No.9565919]

>>9565917
Jurvetson says that SpaceX’s main advantage is in software. I believe him; the decision to use C+ for EVERYTHING really opened it up for good talent to add quality software to the massive f9 stack

[Anonymous No.9565921]

>>9565917
Sure, but it can be built up by anyone with the resources and drive to build a reusable rocket.

[Anonymous No.9565928]

>>9565912
>and a stage 2 with a fuckton of ISP
Merlin 1D Vac is actually pretty low efficiency for an upper stage engine. It's the most efficient kerosene gas generator ever, but it gets completely thrashed by anything either staged combustion or hydrogen fueled. What Merlin 1D Vac does have is a pretty high thrust for an upper stage engine, which is part of the reason why the first stage can lob it relatively low and slow and still have a decent payload to LEO/GTO.

[Anonymous No.9565929]

>>9565917
The software is probably useless unless you've got all the other things that make the whole thing work, like >>9565912 says.

It's almost like they designed F9 for all of this from the start... oh wait, they did.

[Anonymous No.9565931]

>>9565928
ah, yes - meant thrust, not isp.

It will be interesting to see if those Chinese colllege kids running LinkSpace can actually achieve orbit with their micro falcon. They’ve started teatherless hop testing now

[Anonymous No.9565938]

http://dataviz.love/2018/03/04/spacex-odd-moments-eternity/ neato

[Anonymous No.9565949]

>>9565931
https://twitter.com/Linkspace_China/status/961587794941419521/video/1

It sounds terrifying

[Anonymous No.9565958]

>>9565898

If ULA can scrape by for the next few years on remaining commercial launches and military launches, their partnership with Blue Origin should keep them competitive, especially if they can glean some VTVL reusability ideas from them (the engine-parachute midair helicopter recovery idea they have is pure AIDS.)

Roscosmos, other than surviving on a few military launches, is pretty much done for unless they do some corporate espionage. Pretty soon they'll have no market for commercial launches due to the lack of financial competitiveness and the current political climate.

Arianespace is doing okay for now, which gives them some wiggle room to develop reusability and/or lower costs. But SpaceX is eating Roscosmos' and ULA's lunches, and nibbling on Arianespace's french fries right now, so they have to get moving.

The Chinese will be okay. Their domestic market will be huge, and their government can just say that all domestic companies that wish to launch rockets must do it off of a Long March.

[Anonymous No.9565962]

>>9565949
Is it supposed to sound like an elk in heat?

Anyhow, it's a lot easier when your rocket can be throttled down enough to hover.

[Anonymous No.9565964]

>>9565962
down to 9%, according to linkspace

[Anonymous No.9565992]

>>9565904
It's not even bait. Anon is merely pretending to be retarded by imitating virtually all spacex competitors' PR. I mean, how are they going to come out and say "yes we suck and we sucked a lot until they showed us the way but we'll do our best from on"? Sour grapes and all. The question is how many of them believe that unironically or wait for spacex bankruptcy so things go back to normal. Burying your head in the sand is okay but it just might happen that the sand isn't sand at all, but reinforced concrete, as one russian expert said on the topic regarding roscosmos' competitiveness.

The real deal will be block V's which start flying next month or so. If those do indeed allow rapid reusability and multiple launches with minimal maintenance, then we really are in for a new space age.

[Anonymous No.9566036]

>>9565907
Well they did use a lot of new/newish tech that wasn't availible when these old rockets were being designed.

But part of that is being a company that can accept the risk of doing things new or improving existing processes.

[Anonymous No.9566152]

>>9566036
They use new TPS, new COPVs, lots of new tech

[Anonymous No.9566170]

>>9566152
True but you don't need those things to do do reusable rockets, they just help a little. If the COPVs on Falcon 9 and Heavy were replaced with regular metal ones the rockets would take a performance hit of no more than a couple percent, which would still let them cover the vast majority of the launch market. As for TPS, only Dragon actually uses their advanced PICA-X material, up until the Falcon 9 block 4 there were parts of the rocket covered in cork as thermal protection. Reentry from suborbital velocity is very mild compared to orbital reentry and doesn't require super advanced or special materials. The Block 5 version of Falcon will replace the cork surfaces with material that will be reusable almost indefinitely, but they didn't need to have that material developed and installed in the first place.

[Anonymous No.9566466]

>>9566170
It seems to me then that the biggest hindance to reusability are the right engines and corporate who can see long term.

[Anonymous No.9566514]

>>9566466
It's more about the right mindset & budgetary pressures. Also not having too many hands in the pot in regards to vehicle designing.

They don't have the flexibility to go "Hey lets just design our own engine because buying engines for 50 million apop is fucking nuts"

Oh well, it's not anything important, people want to pretend that space travel is a panacea for our problems on Earth..

[Anonymous No.9566763]

>>9566170
cork is still used it is a ghetto carbon carbon block 5 will use a different material on sections of the booster