SpaceX Tuesday...
Discussion
MartG said:
loudlashadjuster said:
Presumably the USAF money aimed at the use of the VAB?
SpaceX couldn't use Pad 39A for a vehicle erected in the VAB as their horizontal integration building blocks the old crawlerway between the pad and the VAB. LC40 is not accessible from the VAB.If they were to follow the NASA model of VAB and mobile launcher carrying a vertical launcher, all three current facilities ( 2 in Florida, one at Vandenberg ) would require a new VAB to be built, and a new mobile launcher to be developed and built - the one for 39A would need to be able to keep the payload vertical while ascending the slope to the pad.
Much simpler & cheaper to continue moving the launcher to the pad horizontally, then fitting the payload once the vehicle is vertical.
At Pad 37 at the Cape, they have a 300 ft tall building (The MST - Mobile Service Tower) that envelopes the rockets and allows them to install the payload section safely inside. Once they've done that, the entire building jacks up and slowly retreats 345 ft on rails, leaving the completed rocket stack connected to the umbilicals from the nearby launch tower.
For the Atlas V, the integration of payload and any solid boosters is done in a fixed Vertical Integration Facility. Then they move the upright rocket stack on its launch platform to the pad on rails. This is at SLC-41 at the Cape.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yz-U-icgPE
They have equivalent facilities at Vandenberg in California.
The Delta IV buildings there were built for the Shuttle (for $4 billion), but never used for that.
I'm not sure how SpaceX can do the same thing without spending a bucket load of cash too. I wonder how many of these sensitive satellites are built by Lockheed or Boeing.
Beati Dogu said:
I wonder how many of these sensitive satellites are built by Lockheed or Boeing.
They are all (the KH-11s, that is) Lockheed.They've built *at least* 16 of them. 1 failed to make orbit, and 15 went to LEO.
Boeing failed to deliver on the followup contract to build similar but smaller platforms, so the NRO tore it up and gave more work to Lockheed in the form of a pair of new KH-11s.
Lockheed were subsequently given the contract for the followup generation of NRO sats that Boeing didn't deliver. It's a pair of these that were donated to NASA.
Tintin A & B will attempt to beam “hello world” in about 22 hours when they pass near LA
https://mobile.twitter.com/elonmusk/status/9667061...
Edited by Kccv23highliftcam on Thursday 22 February 20:48
Seriously though, it wouldn't take that much to add a removeable protective shed to the top end of the transporter/erector would it ?
Transport the launcher out horizontally, raise erect, do the static test fire, lay it down, assemble the shed and raise it erect again - maybe add some guy wires for stability. Open one side of the shed, lift the payload up by crane and place atop the launcher, close shed door. Once payload is integrated to the booster disassemble the shed, lowering the parts by crane, then launch as normal
Transport the launcher out horizontally, raise erect, do the static test fire, lay it down, assemble the shed and raise it erect again - maybe add some guy wires for stability. Open one side of the shed, lift the payload up by crane and place atop the launcher, close shed door. Once payload is integrated to the booster disassemble the shed, lowering the parts by crane, then launch as normal
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff