SpaceX Updates (Thread 6)

[Draggendrop Veteran]

Back on topic.....

rehash article....

SpaceX's 1st Falcon Heavy Rocket Launch Set for Spring 2016

 

 

PASADENA, Calif. — The long-delayed first flight of SpaceX's Falcon Heavy launch vehicle is now scheduled for April or May of 2016, a company official said Sept. 1.

Speaking at the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics' Space 2015 conference here, Lee Rosen, vice president of mission and launch operations for SpaceX, said the company was also wrapping up work on the renovated launch pad that rocket will use.

"It's going to be a great day when we launch that, some time in the late April-early May timeframe," he said of the Falcon Heavy.

 

 

That first launch will be a demonstration missionwithout a paying customer. That launch will be followed in September by the Space Test Program 2 mission for the Air Force, carrying 37 satellites. Rosen said the company was also planning Falcon Heavy launches of satellites for Inmarsat and ViaSat before the end of 2016, but did not give estimated dates for those missions.

Prior to the June 28 failure of a Falcon 9 carrying a Dragon cargo spacecraft, SpaceX has planned to carry out the inaugural Falcon Heavy launch by the end of this year. At a July 20 press conference, SpaceX Chief Executive Elon Musk said work on the Falcon Heavy would be "deprioritized" while the company devotes resources to return-to-flight activities, delaying the first flight into 2016.

 

http://www.space.com/30455-spacex-falcon-heavy-launch-spring-2016.html

Was the September launch, for the Airforce, implying a FH.......?........

[DocM]

STP-2 is an FH mission for the US Air Force, and counts towards qualifying it for national security payloads.

WRT DoD waste; it's not just military procurement and waste, it's government in general at almost all levels. I've been involved at the managerial and operational levels and the insanity was enough to make your head explode. Daily. DoD is at least constitutionally mandated, but most of the duplicious and wasteful money sucks are not. 

[Draggendrop Veteran]

Ahhh...Excellent news.....

Airforce seems to be working with SpaceX here......very smart..........it will pay dividends down the road, to help each other, just like the SpaceX/Nasa scenario....

[Draggendrop Veteran]

STP-2 is an FH mission for the US Air Force, and counts towards qualifying it for national security payloads.

WRT DoD waste; it's not just military procurement and waste, it's government in general at almost all levels. I've been involved at the managerial and operational levels and the insanity was enough to make your head explode. Daily. DoD is at least constitutionally mandated, but most of the duplicious and wasteful money sucks are not. 

 Actually, I was surprised to read, that the military continually finds ways to save money and increase efficiencies by consolidation and amalgamations of various services and products....but have been told that congresscritters, have mandated certain amounts in certain area's, and will not condone any closures, for any reason, in their prospective states. The military is "actually told" not to carry out efficiencies due to mandates and that they "will" be using "such and such"..........congress and the military "industrial complex" are the problem here.

In fact, the US military spent more, in 2011, than the next 13 largest country budgets, combined.....and it is worse for 2016...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2013/01/07/everything-chuck-hagel-needs-to-know-about-the-defense-budget-in-charts/

In my opinion, the numbers can be arranged anyway one wants, and I really don't care. What bothers me, is when  "commercial conglomerates" and their siamesed political stooges, determine the fate of a country, by drowning it in debt, for their "personal gains"........"skewed funding" is a problem a lot of countries seem to have which causes deserving programs to suffer.

When I use the term "military industrial complex", please treat as commercial industries....It may have been my fault for not expressing myself properly....Later....

Edit...In retrospec...here is the NASA budget requests...(pdf and itemized)

http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/files/NASA_FY_2016_Budget_Estimates.pdf

[DocM]

Loads of waste at NASA too, but like DoD the vast majority of it is congressionally mandated (SLS etc). Many very expensive programs congress wants but DoD doesn't.

OTOH, some DoD desired cuts don't pass the blink test either. One excellent example is the USAF wanting to discontinue the A-10 Warthog for close air support. Congress saved it after Army ground troops raised holy hell. The grunts on the ground love that bird like no other.

[Draggendrop Veteran]

I remember the A-10 landing on our strip years ago........she gets a lot of attention and demands respect.......quite the machine.

On another note.....not that it looks off keel....at Nasa...

Mike Suffredini is leaving NASA after 10 years at the helm of the International Space Station program, overseeing assembly of the largest spacecraft ever built and shepherding the program through numerous political and technical roadblocks.

He took over as space station program manager at NASA’s Johnson Space Center in Houston in August 2005, and his last day at NASA is Sept. 9. Kirk Shireman, deputy director of JSC, takes over as program manager after Suffredini’s exit.

 

  “My last official day at NASA is Sept. 9. That’s when I check out. This will be my last week (Aug. 17-21) of sitting at the head of the table. Next week, I’ll be there with Kirk (Shireman), and Kirk will be doing all the standard meetings. I’ll be there to answer questions and the like, then I go to represent the program at the Soyuz launch, and then I come home and my last day is Sept. 9.

“On the 14th (of September), I begin work as an employee of SGT working directly for Kam Ghaffarian as his Vice President for Commercial Space, which is a new division being created when I get there. It’s a new division to go look at private and public partnerships, and investigating the idea of building a commercial low Earth orbit platform.”

 http://spaceflightnow.com/2015/09/05/one-on-one-with-nasas-chief-space-station-builder/

Company Overview of Stinger Ghaffarian Technologies, Inc.

Stinger Ghaffarian Technologies, Inc. operates as an aerospace services company that provides support and technical services in the areas of engineering, science, project management, and information technology. Its products and services include aerospace systems engineering, microelectronic hardware development, software system implementation, and science modeling and analysis. The company serves Department of Transportation, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the United States Geological Survey, and various other government and commercial organizations. Stinger Ghaffarian Technologies, Inc. was founded in 1994 and is based in Greenbelt, Maryland. It also has offices in New York, New York; Sioux Falls, South Dakota; Colorado Springs, Colorado; Las Cruces, New Mexico; Cleveland, Ohio; Seabrook, Maryland; Wallops Island and Hampton, Virginia; Houston, Texas; Moffett Field and El Segundo, California; Kennedy Space Center, Florida; Cambridge, Massachusetts; and Stennis Space Center, Mississippi.

Key Executives For Stinger Ghaffarian Technologies, Inc.

Dr. Kam Ghaffarian

Co-Founder, Chief Executive Officer, President and Chief Operating Officer

 

Mr. Harold Stinger

Co-Founder and Chairman

 

Mr. Joe Morway

Chief Financial Officer

 

Mr. Gerald F. Mayefskie

Senior Vice President of DOD and National Security Programs

Age: 74

 

Mr. Dave Wolt

Senior Vice President of NASA Business Unit and Senior Vice President of Technical Operations Center

 

http://spaceflightnow.com/2015/09/05/one-on-one-with-nasas-chief-space-station-builder/

Major customers:

NASA (supporting nine centers), Defense Department (AF, NRL, NRO), DOT (FAA), Volpe

Major contracts/projects:

NASA Goddard: Mechanical Systems Engineering Services, contract. Scope: End-to-end mechanical, structural, thermal, & materials engineering for spaceflight systems development. DOT: V-Trips [Technical Services to the Research and Innovative Technology Administration] Scope: Provide Volpe Center with IT services supporting Aviation Safety Management Systems. NASA Langley Research Center Information Technology Enhanced Services contract. Scope: Broad scope of IT services, including new and emerging technologies, evolving over the life of the contract. Covers IT requirements in support of computers, ancillary equipment, software, firmware, services, and related resources.

 

http://washingtontechnology.com/toplists/top-100-lists/2012/sgt-inc.aspx

This type of employment transfer never "looks" good.......

[DocM]

Makes sense given NASA wanting to use commercial space stations, Lagrange point Exploration Gateways and such. Besides working with Bigelow, Thin Red Line Aerospace (Canada) is working with NASA and Orbital is looking at leveraging Cygnus tech for smaller mission modules. Others are also getting into the commercial station & habitat game. ISS won't be alone up there.

[Draggendrop Veteran]

At the last symposium, in the ISS thread, many commercial enquiries have been for a firm commitment date for the ISS, which will allow recuperation of investments, prior to establishing another station and more definitely, a moon base. It has been said, in round about ways, the ISS is definite for 2024 and can be extended another 10 years with a proper "parts replacements" schedule. With Russia/ESA interest in a moon base, China as well, my guess is the lunar base will go commercial, where the money is. I am sure Bigelow is intent on this as well.....Next decade will be interesting.....

[DocM]

Bigelow has already patented a way to join 3 modules in low lunar orbit and land them together, then cover them in Kevlar tubes filled with regolith for radiation & impact protection. Takes 3 large and 1 small propulsion modules designed for the task, and each module having a rigid core makes it a solid structure. Apparently it can later be taken back to square one then "hopped" to another location.

[Draggendrop Veteran]

One would figure , those with a lunar interest, will have some hard decisions to make.......maybe NOT.......Here we have Bigelow as a "Space Camping Center"....basically choose your "tent", choose from available options.....then design what else you need yourself, or buy from others....It is going to be a hell of a lot easier setting up a lunar base now.....this will really take off within the decade....  In fact, I wouldn't be surprised, if some billionaire bought a unit in the near future for a lunar vacation.

[DocM]

Return to Flight

NSF is reporting SES-9 on an F9 "1.2" is expected to be first to fly. Unconfirmed, but it would have to be early November or before because Dragon CRS-8 is up for NET November 16. CRS 8 is nearing shipment and CRS-9 and CRS-10 are being prepped,

And finally,

CRS-11 is to be the first re-flown Dragon airframe.

[DocM]

Exit "v1.2", enter Falcon 9 Full Thrust, as in 33% more thrust.

 

[Draggendrop Veteran]

Wonder what designation for the higher lift....v1.2X.......?.......v1.33.......?.........v1.31415926............

questionable ....reddit SpaceX schedule...

Important note: These dates are changing rapidly as SpaceX progresses to Return To Flight.

NET Date	Payload	Vehicle
1 November	SES-9	Falcon 9 v1.2
16 November	SpX CRS-8	Falcon 9 v1.2 + Dragon 1
2 December	Orbcomm OG2 Launch 2	Falcon 9v1.2
2015	Jason 3	Falcon 9 (last v1.1)
Early 2016	SHERPA	Falcon 9
2016	Eutelsat 117W B & ABS 2A	Falcon 9
2016	SpX CRS-9	Falcon 9 + Dragon 1
April/May 2016	Demo Flight	Falcon Heavy
December 2016	Demo Mission 1 (DM-1)	Falcon 9 + Dragon 2
2017	Inflight Abort	F9R-Dev2 + Dragon 2

As of 1 September 2015.

 

...........

[DocM]

The name is Falcon 9 v1.1 Full Thrust, which makes for a logical contraction of F9 FT.

It's been mentioned that too large a version increment would give ULA & Boeing owned congresscritters an opening to demand F9's DoD & NASA NLS II certifications be pulled and redone.

Pure politics.

[Draggendrop Veteran]

Pretty sad state of affairs, dinosaurs protecting fossil rockets......and people wonder why only satellites and probes have been to the moon since the 70's...... I figure 10 years....and they won't be controlling "anything of meaning" in space....that will be done by new space companies with vision.

SpaceX has shown an extreme level of patience for political games......they will soon hit the hump, when Dragon2 is flying and FH is hauling payloads...this will be when they begin to gain control and influence....

[DocM]

The largest contribution that'll come out of the Vulcan program will be that the ACES (Advanced Cryogenic Evolved Stage) upper stage will finally be built. Various versions will run from 1-4 engine, use Boeing's IVF fluids handling (autogenous pressurization, an internal combustion engine fueled by some of the autonomous gases, providing pumping and power),  almost unlimited restarts, and it'll provide a relatively simple conversion to a fuel depot.

[Draggendrop Veteran]

interesting tidbit while reading a generic recap article......

SpaceX conducts additional Falcon 9 improvements ahead of busy schedule

 

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/09/spacex-conducts-falcon-9-improvements-busy-schedule/

Visual sightings of the Dragons at Hawthorne last week (L2) noted the Dragons for CRS-8, 9, and 10 are currently located in the clean room in various states of completion. CRS-8 is currently scheduled to be shipped to Florida at the end of the month.

An interesting observation relating to the CRS-11 Dragon is currently being checked into, following claims this spacecraft may include the pressure hull from a previously flown Dragon – with one stripped down hull currently sporting a sign to denote it is destined for reuse (L2).

 

 
via L2’s SpaceX Section

Noticed during inspections of Falcon 9 hardware at SpaceX’s base in Hawthorne, California – engineers visually observed a small issue relating to weld points associated with a helium line – hardware classed as “inconel tubes” – via inspections (L2).

Although this issue was unlikely to have impacted on the vehicle during flight, a decision was taken to change them out on the F9-19, 21 and 22 vehicles. F9-21 and F9-22 were still without their engines at the time of the decision, expediting the changeout process.

 

 

Deeper into the placeholder is the Jason-3 mission, set to launch from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California on what is understood to be the last remaining Falcon 9 v1.1.

The placeholder cites a mid-December launch for this Ocean Surface Topography Mission, although NASA sources have understandably noted this is highly likely to slip into early 2016.

An official outline of the RTF plans will be revealed once the CRS-7 investigation report is complete and signed off by the relevant parties. SpaceX hasn’t revealed when this report is expected to be finalized at this time.

 

Later.... 

[DocM]

Inconel is a chromium-inickle-cobalt-iron based superalloy used not only for helium manifolds but engines. SuperDraco is printed using Inconel powder. Tough-as-hell and notorious for destroying tooling.

[DocM]

 

[Draggendrop Veteran]

Inconel is a chromium-inickle-cobalt-iron based superalloy used not only for helium manifolds but engines. SuperDraco is printed using Inconel powder. Tough-as-hell and notorious for destroying tooling.

Inconel is real tuff and doesn't tarnish too much. We have used it in Heavy transport aircraft for many decades, I have various sized (diameter) rolls of Inconel lock wire, always on hand for demanding applications. It must be a real advanced setup to 3D print this stuff...which is great for "non forgeable cavities" and quality control to ensure homogeneous grain structure.Now, if we could just get transparent aluminium./s......

Later....

[DocM]

>

Now, if we could just get transparent aluminium./s......

Later....

 

Already on the market. Aluminum oxynitride, an aluminum ceramic, can stop a .50 BMG cold. 

[Draggendrop Veteran]

That is way to cool.....the uses are phenomenal.......They actually did it........stunning......

[DocM]

A more refined optical quality example.

[Draggendrop Veteran]

Just a quick post, I apologize for being off topic, but it ties into the previous post nicely....

In the early 80's, for the annual airshow, we had a prank display, that we would put out for the children to see. On an aircraft parking spot, on the tarmac, we would put an APU (aircraft power unit) with mule, in position. The power cord was attached to a bent metal rod, and appeared to hook up to an "invisible" aircraft. On the same spot, wheel chocks were put at the main undercarriage "trucks", as well as the nose wheel, with a display sign for "Invisible Stealth Aircraft" A lot of airshows did this prank. This was before the common knowledge of stealth design prevalent today. We would sometimes put an old aircraft seat out, so the "little ones" could fly the plane....

Now...with transparent aluminium, light bending meta materials and stealth airframe composites......it is not much of a prank anymore, as it approaches reality.

[Draggendrop Veteran]

Recap on BE patent silliness....

Patent Decision May Not Spell End of Blue Origin-SpaceX Dispute

 

SpaceX has attempted to land the first stage of its Falcon 9 rocket on its “autonomous spaceport drone ship” twice, most recently in April. Credit: SpaceX

WASHINGTON — A decision by Blue Origin to withdraw most of the claims in a contested patent represents a near-term victory for SpaceX, but might not be the end of a dispute between the two companies regarding reusable launch vehicle technology.

In a “Final Judgment and Decision” issued by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Aug. 27, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board approved a request by Blue Origin to cancel 13 claims in a patent covering the landing of rocket stages on oceangoing vessels. The board had agreed in March to a SpaceX petition for an “inter partes” review of those claims by the board.

The request by Blue Origin to cancel the claims ended the review of what is known as the “’321 patent,” after the last three digits of the patent number. “Here, Blue Origin has requested cancellation of all the claims on which trial was instituted, hence, no claims will remain for trial,” the board noted in its decision. “In view of the cancellation of claims 1-13 of the ’321 patent, the entry of final judgment adverse to Blue Origin is appropriate.”

 

The patent, titled “Sea landing of space launch vehicles and associated systems and methods” and issued to Blue Origin in 2014, originally had 15 claims. The board ruled in March that two of the claims were not subject to inter partes review because they were too vague for the board to decide if SpaceX had a “reasonable likelihood” of winning a review on those claims.

SpaceX petitioned the patent board in August 2014 to review the ’321 patent, citing “prior art” — information that existed in the public realm before the patent — similar to claims in the Blue Origin patent. That included academic papers published in the 1990s that showed a similar approach to landing rocket stages on platforms at sea or other bodies of water. SpaceX has attempted to land the first stage of its Falcon 9 rocket on its “autonomous spaceport drone ship” twice, most recently in April.

 

 

 
he system Blue Origin received a patent for calls for launching a multistage rocket and, after first-stage separation, steering the detached core down to a floating platform for a tail-first powered landing. Credit: USPTO

The board’s decision makes the ’321 patent effectively unenforceable, one patent attorney noted. “This is the end of their ability to enforce that patent,” Andrew Rush, president of 3-D printing company Made in Space and an attorney who has closely followed the case, said in a Sept. 2 interview.

Rush noted, though, that while the board’s decision is a victory for SpaceX, Blue Origin is not giving up on the overall patent. Earlier this year, the company filed what’s known as a “reissue patent application” that seeks to amend the original patent. “This is a patent owner saying, ‘There’s a problem with my original patent. I want to rewrite my patent and turn in the old one,’” Rush explained.

Such a strategy, he said, is not uncommon among patent holders in similar disputes. In those cases, the patent holders choose to withdraw the claims of their original patent while simultaneously filing a reissue patent application with revised claims intended to avoid the prior art that triggered the dispute. “It looks like they’ve retreated, but they haven’t given up by any means,” he said.

Reissued patents, which are granted their own number, are relatively rare: while patent numbers recently crossed the 9 million threshold, the number of reissued patents is only in the tens of thousands. They can also take years to review: a May 2015 study by intellectual property law firm Wolf Greenfield found that the average waiting time for patents reissued in 2014 was three and a half years.

Rush expects one of two outcomes if and when the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issues a revised patent. If the revised claims are so narrowly defined as to exclude SpaceX’s approach, he said it’s unlikely the company would contest it. If, however, there is some overlap, “we’ll see the conflict start up again.”

That, however, could be years away, Rush noted, given the waiting time for reviewing reissue patent applications. “There’s a good chance this conflict will be on the back burner for the foreseeable future.”

http://spacenews.com/patent-decision-may-not-spell-end-of-blue-origin-spacex-dispute/

Pretty much done, unless Blue patents "water" next...............Later......