SpaceX Tuesday...

TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED
Author
Discussion

MartG

20,694 posts

205 months

Friday 10th February 2017
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
Is the old Shuttle rotating structure still going to be used and, if so, for what?
Time will tell - but I'd guess it may be used for Falcon Heavy ( or it may just have been left there to save money by not demolishing it )

Beati Dogu

8,896 posts

140 months

Friday 10th February 2017
quotequote all
They've been slowly removing bits of it. They're not allowed to drop it with explosives.

At the moment is just a bloody great lightning conductor. You can see the single lightning tower hovering over the Falcon 9 in the photo above.


Work to clear its' sister pad, 39B, was completed in 2011 after 2 years work. Again, no explosives were allowed.

Here's what that pad looks like now (with pad 39A in the background):



NASA intend to use it for SLS launches. These will roll out to the pad upright on a mobile launcher. It'll be like Saturn V all over again.

There's a video about the site clearance here, including a time lapse:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Pj8sjgYza4

hidetheelephants

24,472 posts

194 months

Saturday 11th February 2017
quotequote all
Beati Dogu said:
They've been slowly removing bits of it. They're not allowed to drop it with explosives.
Given the likely toasting it would get if a launch went wrong, how much of a benefit is that?

MartG

20,694 posts

205 months

Saturday 11th February 2017
quotequote all
More photos here http://projecthabu.com/post/157088764130/for-the-f...

Looks like the old service tower isn't being used at all, other than as a lightning rod

Beati Dogu

8,896 posts

140 months

Saturday 11th February 2017
quotequote all
hidetheelephants said:
Given the likely toasting it would get if a launch went wrong, how much of a benefit is that?
It's not the superstructure they're concerned about, but the damage dropping it would cause to the concrete & brick launchpad below. By taking it down a bit at a time they can help preserve the pad itself for later use.

Much of the concrete is quite old now and the epoxy glue & steel tie rods have been slowly weakened by the effects of the nearby ocean, Florida's climate and the acidic byproducts of rocket exhaust.

During one of the Shuttle launches (STS-124 - Discovery from Pad 39a in 2008), the blast from the rockets dislodged a 75 by 20 foot section of flame trench wall and threw fireproof bricks as far as the boundary fence.


Eric Mc

122,055 posts

266 months

Saturday 11th February 2017
quotequote all
Thanks for the details above. All interesting stuff. When the SLS is moved to Pad 39B, will its launch tower move with it on the crawler - as happened with the Saturn V - or will the tower be permanently set at the pad?


MartG

20,694 posts

205 months

Saturday 11th February 2017
quotequote all
The SLS will use the tower fitted to the mobile launcher https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016/02/ct-2-compl...

Beati Dogu

8,896 posts

140 months

Sunday 12th February 2017
quotequote all
Yes, the tower & rocket are transported to the launch pad together on a giant crawler, veteran of Apollo and the Shuttle programs. Once in situ, the crawler backs off out of the way, like before.

You can see the mobile launcher tower in the pad 39B photo I posted on the previous page. At the end of the long approach ramp, you can see the crawler itself.

Here's a couple of videos of them running it out to the pad for testing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZBWk6UJxu4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5s1pCS5coX4


Eric Mc

122,055 posts

266 months

Sunday 12th February 2017
quotequote all
Thanks again.

All they need to do now is paint it red.

Beati Dogu

8,896 posts

140 months

Sunday 12th February 2017
quotequote all
They've completed the Falcon 9 static fire test at pad 39A without it going bang, so that's good.


MartG

20,694 posts

205 months

Sunday 12th February 2017
quotequote all
Beati Dogu said:
They've completed the Falcon 9 static fire test at pad 39A without it going bang, so that's good.
thumbup

MartG

20,694 posts

205 months

Sunday 12th February 2017
quotequote all
Video embedded in this article http://spaceflightnow.com/2017/02/12/fire-returns-...

I note that, unlike previous practice, the payload isn't attached yet

Sylvaforever

2,212 posts

99 months

Monday 13th February 2017
quotequote all
real shame we cant do gifs anymore......

MartG

20,694 posts

205 months

Thursday 16th February 2017
quotequote all
Weather could delay Saturday's launch

http://spaceflightnow.com/2017/02/15/weather-could...

MartG

20,694 posts

205 months

Thursday 16th February 2017
quotequote all
Looks like the payload is now fitted




MartG

20,694 posts

205 months

Thursday 16th February 2017
quotequote all
Upright on the pad smile


MartG

20,694 posts

205 months

Friday 17th February 2017
quotequote all
SpaceX is targeting a late morning launch of its tenth Commercial Resupply Services mission (CRS-10) from Launch Complex 39A (LC-39A) at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida. The instantaneous launch window is on Saturday, February 18 at 15:01 GMT, with a backup launch opportunity at 14:38 GMT on Sunday, February 19.

Edited by MartG on Friday 17th February 17:37

SystemParanoia

14,343 posts

199 months

Friday 17th February 2017
quotequote all
MartG said:
SpaceX is targeting a late morning launch of its tenth Commercial Resupply Services mission (CRS-10) from Launch Complex 39A (LC-39A) at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida. The instantaneous launch window is on Saturday, February 18 at 15:01 a.m. GMT, with a backup launch opportunity at 14:38 a.m. GMT on Sunday, February 19.
... errm 15:01 am ? 14:38am ?

Einion Yrth

19,575 posts

245 months

Friday 17th February 2017
quotequote all
SystemParanoia said:
MartG said:
SpaceX is targeting a late morning launch of its tenth Commercial Resupply Services mission (CRS-10) from Launch Complex 39A (LC-39A) at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida. The instantaneous launch window is on Saturday, February 18 at 15:01 a.m. GMT, with a backup launch opportunity at 14:38 a.m. GMT on Sunday, February 19.
... errm 15:01 am ? 14:38am ?
I assume converted from Eastern Time without removing the a.m.
10:01 and 09:38

MartG

20,694 posts

205 months

Friday 17th February 2017
quotequote all
Einion Yrth said:
I assume converted from Eastern Time without removing the a.m.
10:01 and 09:38
Yes - fixed now
TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED