Launch News SpaceX Falcon 9 with Formosat-5 (August 24, 11:51 a.m. PDT / 18:51 UTC)

[Nicholas Kang]

Mission Press Kit: http://www.spacex.com/sites/spacex/files/formosat5presskit.pdf

SpaceX is targeting launch of FORMOSAT-5 from Space Launch Complex 4 East (SLC-4E) at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California. The 42-minute launch window opens on Thursday, August 24 at 11:51 a.m. PDT, or 18:51 UTC. The satellite will be deployed approximately 11 minutes after launch.

Following stage separation, Falcon 9’s first stage will attempt to land on the “Just Read the Instructions” droneship that will be stationed in the Pacific Ocean.

Launch webcast:

Static fire was successfully conducted on August 19th 2017, 12:00 PDT / 19:00 UTC

Static fire video:

Bonus for orbinauts: Orbiter add-on for this mission is available here

Good luck! :thumbup:

 

[BrianJ]

Once again, looks like they're going direct to 720km orbit, so I guess it will be a steep ascent profile. Press kit doesn't mention any Boostback-burn, so it will be Entry and Landing burns only, but I see the ASDS location is more where I would expect it to be for a full Boostback profile (not as far downrange). So, either an even steeper ascent profile than I thought, or early 1st stage MECO.
I'll be watching carefully to see how they do it

 

[RisingFury]

This thread is full of ghosts :shifty:

Launch was a success, with the payload deployed into the correct orbit and landing was right on the center of the ship. This is the 40th launch of the Falcon 9 (if we include the one that blew up on the ground) and the 12th this year.

 

[Thunder Chicken]

Nice mission.

---------- Post added at 06:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:37 PM ----------

38 out of 40 launches of the Falcon 9 to date were complete mission successes (95%). One of the failures was CRS-7 with complete loss of vehicle; the other was a partial failure of CRS-1/Orbcomm (engine failure, got CRS-1 to ISS but not enough fuel to get secondary Orbcomm into proper orbit due to NASA flight rules).

If they can keep this up they'll have launch reliability similar to Ariane 5 with greater payload and partial reusability. I can't wait to see Falcon Heavy.

 

[MaverickSawyer]

Don't forget the Amos-6 mission in your reliability counts... It may not have left the pad, but the payload was lost.

 

[Thunder Chicken]

Don't forget the Amos-6 mission in your reliability counts... It may not have left the pad, but the payload was lost.

I'm really not sure what I think of that one. If it didn't have a payload integrated, how would that have counted? I consider it poor ground handling procedure. They put the payload at risk when the test really should have protected the payload from in-flight failure risk.

I think the idea of essentially proof-testing the launch system completely prior to launch is a good one, but having the payload integrated while doing it is ridiculously risky (as they have learned). I understand why they wanted to do the test integrated, to save time and money, but the whole idea of a proof-test is to out flaws under normal launch conditions. Crossing their fingers and hoping such flaws aren't catastrophic is gambling. They just blew up the payload on the ground instead of in the air if they didn't do the test.

 

[boogabooga]

This is the 40th launch of the Falcon 9 (if we include the one that blew up on the ground)

In other words, this was the 39th launch of the Falcon 9.

 

[Thunder Chicken]

In other words, this was the 39th launch of the Falcon 9.

No, AMOS-6 is not included in the 40 launches.

 

[Linguofreak]

"Just Read the Instructions".

New conspiracy theory: based in the names of SpaceX's droneships, I don't think that Elon Musk is really running things. He's just a false front for a cabal of Kerbals.

 

[PhantomCruiser]

I've been looking for a copy of the "Culture" series. Nothing I've found is in the price range I'm willing to pay. For me to pay $9.99 for a Kindle copy, it'd better be good. Still mulling it over...

 

[RisingFury]

"Just Read the Instructions".

New conspiracy theory: based in the names of SpaceX's droneships, I don't think that Elon Musk is really running things. He's just a false front for a cabal of Kerbals.

Nonsense: If Kerbals were in charge of SpaceX, they'd be landing on a flatbed truck, while moving

 

[Urwumpe]

Nonsense: If Kerbals were in charge of SpaceX, they'd be landing on a flatbed truck, while moving

At night!

 

[PhantomCruiser]

Put that on Elon Musk's twitter feed and it might go on his "to do" list.

 

[Thunder Chicken]

Nonsense: If Kerbals were in charge of SpaceX, they'd be landing on a flatbed truck, while moving

Nah, I want a Falcon 9 stack to re-assemble itself on the pad.