Connect with us

SpaceX

SpaceX test fires twice-flown Falcon 9 for world’s first commercial Moon mission

Published

on

Likely to be the third orbital-class launch for the booster in question, SpaceX’s next launch – led by primary customer Pasifik Satelit Nusantara (PSN) – has the potential to lay claim to multiple major spaceflight “firsts”, ranging from the first time a twice-flown Falcon 9 has launched on the East Coast to the world’s first attempt to land a commercial spacecraft on another planetary body – the Moon, in this case.

SpaceX has completed the final critical test milestone of the mission’s flight-proven Falcon 9, filling the rocket with propellant and successfully static firing the booster on the evening of February 18th. According to SpaceX, all remains on schedule for a February 21st launch attempt from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS) Launch Complex 40 (LC-40), with liftoff currently targeted for 8:45 pm EDT (01:45 UTC).

Advertisement

If all goes well, the launch of PSN satellite Nusantara Satu (formerly PSN-6; translation: “One Archipelago”) – carrying two copassenger spacecraft – could be an immensely significant moment for commercial spaceflight. Thanks to the support of rideshare provider Spaceflight Industries, those two passengers will be sent to high-energy geostationary orbits long relegated to dedicated launches of extremely large satellites, typically weighing multiple tons. While one could fairly argue that this is not the first time in history that a geostationary rideshare launch has occurred, it is almost certainly the first time that such a mission profile has been attempting for a commercial customer.

In this case, that commercial entity is the Israeli company SpaceIL in support of the world’s first commercially-developed Moon lander, a ~600 kg (1300 lb) spacecraft known as Beresheet (Hebrew for In the beginning”). Designed by SpaceIL and constructed by Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI), the craft has since been installed atop PSN-6 and encased in Falcon 9’s payload fairing along with one much smaller copassenger, an Air Force Research Laboratory-funded (AFRL) microsat known as “S5”. The latter spacecraft weighs roughly 60 kg (130 lb) and is an experiment designed to determine whether small satellites can be used in geostationary orbit (GEO), with S5 focusing on cataloging and tracking GEOsats.

Advertisement

Spaceflight Industries aims for new market creation

Shepherded by rideshare industry leader Spaceflight, the PSN-6 rideshare – known by the company as GTO-1 – has the potential to open up a new and highly useful realm of spaceflight previously all but closed off to customers lacking tens of millions of dollars for launch costs. While it’s unclear how exactly Spaceflight worked with SSL and/or PSN to make it happen, the mission profile and its potential are both fascinating and complex.

“What we’re doing with [GTO-1] is really cool, cause this is a type of mission that hasn’t really been available [commercially] in the past – taking a ride all the way to GEO and then separating in GEO as an independent spacecraft . . . We’re really excited about testing the market and proving – really, making – a new market here with the GEO [and GTO] rideshare.” – Ryan Olcott, Spaceflight (Jan. 2019)

In a late-January interview with Spaceflight’s Mission Director Ryan Olcott, the senior manager was audibly excited about the future potential of Spaceflight’s new GTO (and GEO) offerings and the many ways that they could change the game for a number of companies and startups with far smaller but no less capable spacecraft. Including startups Astranis and Terran Orbital and industry stalwart SSL, interest in small geostationary satellites has never been higher, and a number of pathfinder missions in 2020 and 2021 – if successful or at least promising – could mark a paradigm shift for the geostationary satellite communications industry as a whole. Often sized perfectly (100-500 kg) for a handful of in-development smallsat launch vehicles like Relativity’s Terran, Firefly’s Beta, and ABL Space’s RS-1, it will likely be several years before those new rockets are capable of reliably supporting these much smaller launches, leaving rideshare missions as the only real route for interested customers until the early to mid 2020s.

 

Advertisement

In the process of undertaking this milestone geostationary rideshare, Spaceflight had to design, build, and test custom hardware needed to protect the AFRL’s S5 spacecraft on its multi-week ridealong from geostationary transfer orbit to PSN-6’s geostationary orbit destination, as well as unique mounting hardware needed to load SpaceIL’s Beresheet spacecraft atop the main satellite host. In fact, GTO-1’s mission profile is impressively complex, requiring multiple mission-specific maneuvers and separation events to detach Beresheet shortly after the entourage separates from Falcon 9, carry S5 to a geostationary graveyard orbit (GEO + ~300 km) to separate Spaceflight’s custom hardware, return to a lower orbit to deploy the Air Force satellite, and finally insert PSN-6 into its final operational orbit.

“We actually have to open up our adapter system to allow the [AFRL S5] spacecraft to come out, so we have about a half-day time window that we’re aiming for where we will separate the top off of our cone adapter system and then drop [the orbit] back down a little bit [because we can’t drop that junk off in GEO – you have to use the GEO graveyard slot].” – Ryan Olcott, Spaceflight

Falcon 9 B1047 conducted its first and second launches in July and November 2018 (pictured here), respectively. (SpaceX)

“GTO is pretty cool because you can do all sorts of positive C3 missions [to] Lagrange points or just about [anywhere] in the solar system you want to go to … With SpaceIL, potentially in the future [Spaceflight will also] be able to partner with them to bring things to the Moon if they’ve got customers that want to bring payloads to the Moon.” – Ryan Olcott, Spaceflight

The fact that the first primary passenger (by weight) of GTO-1 is a mission as groundbreaking as the commercial Beresheet Moon lander is also by no means a coincidence according to Ostello, a feeling that was rapidly backed up by an agreement between IAI and European company OHB to potentially use Beresheet-derived landers to deliver European payloads to the Moon. Ostello expressed a similar interest and optimism a few weeks prior to that announcement. While not directly involving Spaceflight, the fact that IAI (Beresheet’s manufacturer) is interested in producing more landers for other customers essentially opens the door for Spaceflight or other commercial or governmental entities to purchase future landers for customer payloads or arrange their launch to the Moon.

Second time’s the third-time charm

Set to launch on an unspecified Falcon 9, process of elimination (i.e. which boosters are in Florida) implies that PSN-6/GTO-1 will feature either Falcon 9 booster B1047 or B1048, two flight-proven boosters with no know missions assigned that are also known to be in Cape Canaveral. B1047 last launched the Es’hail-2 satellite in mid-November, while B1048 completed its second launch (from California) in early October before shipping to Florida for unknown reasons. With B1048 situated in 39A’s hangar, the lack of any reports of a booster moving from 39A to 40 suggest that B1047 was the Falcon 9 that successfully conducted its third on-pad static fire last night.

Advertisement

Shortly after launch, the Falcon 9 booster will make its way to drone ship Of Course I Still Love You (OCISLY) – located ~650 km (400 mi) off the coast of Florida – for what will be the second time ever that SpaceX has successfully launched and landed the same Falcon 9 booster three times, following on the heels of B1046’s third launch last December. SpaceX fairing recovery vessel Mr. Steven also arrived at Port Canaveral last week after a nearly 8000 km (5000 mi) journey from Port of Los Angeles, raising the possibility of his first attempt at a fairing catch on the East Coast.

Fairing catcher Mr. Steven is now a part of SpaceX’s large Florida fleet, including GO Quest, GO Navigator, GO Searcher, OCISLY, and tugboats. (Tom Cross – 02/15/19)

Check out Teslarati’s newsletters for prompt updates, on-the-ground perspectives, and unique glimpses of SpaceX’s rocket launch and recovery processes!

Eric Ralph is Teslarati's senior spaceflight reporter and has been covering the industry in some capacity for almost half a decade, largely spurred in 2016 by a trip to Mexico to watch Elon Musk reveal SpaceX's plans for Mars in person. Aside from spreading interest and excitement about spaceflight far and wide, his primary goal is to cover humanity's ongoing efforts to expand beyond Earth to the Moon, Mars, and elsewhere.

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

Musk company boycott proposal at City Council meeting gets weird and ironic

The City of Davis in California held a weekly city council meeting on Tuesday, where it voted on a proposal to ban Musk-operated companies. It got weird and ironic.

Published

on

Credit: Grok

A city council meeting in California that proposed banning the entry of new contracts with companies controlled by Elon Musk got weird and ironic on Tuesday night after councilmembers were forced to admit some of the entities would benefit the community.

The City of Davis in California held a weekly city council meeting on Tuesday, where it voted on a proposal called “Resolution Ending Engagement With Elon Musk-Controlled Companies and To Encourage CalPERS To Divest Stock In These Companies.”

The proposal claimed that Musk ” has used his influence and corporate platforms to promote political ideologies and activities that threaten democratic norms and institutions, including campaign finance activities that raise ethical and legal concerns.”

We reported on it on Tuesday before the meeting:

Advertisement

California city weighs banning Elon Musk companies like Tesla and SpaceX

However, the meeting is now published online, and it truly got strange.

While it was supported by various members of the community, you could truly tell who was completely misinformed about the influence of Musk’s companies, their current status from an economic and competitive standpoint, and how much some of Musk’s companies’ projects benefit the community.

City Council Member Admits Starlink is Helpful

One City Council member was forced to admit that Starlink, the satellite internet project established by Musk’s SpaceX, was beneficial to the community because the emergency response system utilized it for EMS, Fire, and Police communications in the event of a power outage.

Advertisement

After public comments were heard, councilmembers amended some of the language in the proposal to not include Starlink because of its benefits to public safety.

One community member even said, “There should be exceptions to the rule.”

Advertisement

Community Members Report Out of Touch Mainstream Media Narratives

Many community members very obviously read big bold headlines about how horribly Tesla is performing in terms of electric vehicles. Many pointed to “labor intimidation” tactics being used at the company’s Fremont Factory, racial discrimination lawsuits, and Musk’s political involvement as clear-cut reasons why Davis should not consider his companies for future contracts.

However, it was interesting to hear some of them speak, very obviously out of touch with reality.

Musk has encouraged unions to propose organizing at the Fremont Factory, stating that many employees would not be on board because they are already treated very well. In 2022, he invited Union leaders to come to Fremont “at their convenience.”

The UAW never took the opportunity.

Advertisement

Some have argued that Tesla prevented pro-union clothing at Fremont, which it did for safety reasons. An appeals court sided with Tesla, stating that the company had a right to enforce work uniforms to ensure employee safety.

Another community member said that Tesla was losing market share in the U.S. due to growing competition from legacy automakers.

“Plus, these existing auto companies have learned a lot from what Tesla has done,” she said. Interestingly, Ford, General Motors, and Stellantis have all pulled back from their EV ambitions significantly. All three took billions in financial hits.

One Resident Crosses a Line

One resident’s time at the podium included this:

Advertisement

He was admonished by City Council member Bapu Vaitla, who said his actions were offensive. The two sparred verbally for a few seconds before their argument ended.

City Council Vote Result

Ultimately, the City of Davis chose to pass the motion, but they also amended it to exclude Starlink because of its emergency system benefits.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Elon Musk

California city weighs banning Elon Musk companies like Tesla and SpaceX

A resolution draft titled, “Resolution Ending Engagement With Elon Musk-Controlled Companies and To Encourage CalPERS To Divest Stock In These Companies,” alleges that Musk “has engaged in business practices that are alleged to include violations of labor laws, environmental regulations, workplace safety standards, and regulatory noncompliance.”

Published

on

tesla supercharger
Credit: Tesla

A California City Council is planning to weigh whether it would adopt a resolution that would place a ban on its engagement with Elon Musk companies, like Tesla and SpaceX.

The City of Davis, California, will have its City Council weigh a new proposal that would adopt a resolution “to divest from companies owned and/or controlled by Elon Musk.”

This would include a divestment proposal to encourage CalPERS, the California Public Employees Retirement System, to divest from stock in any Musk company.

A resolution draft titled, “Resolution Ending Engagement With Elon Musk-Controlled Companies and To Encourage CalPERS To Divest Stock In These Companies,” alleges that Musk “has engaged in business practices that are alleged to include violations of labor laws, environmental regulations, workplace safety standards, and regulatory noncompliance.”

Advertisement

It claims that Musk “has used his influence and corporate platforms to promote political ideologies and activities that threaten democratic norms and institutions, including campaign finance activities that raise ethical and legal concerns.”

If adopted, Davis would bar the city from entering into any new contracts or purchasing agreements with any company owned or controlled by Elon Musk. It also says it will not consider utilizing Tesla Robotaxis.

Hotel owner tears down Tesla chargers in frustration over Musk’s politics

A staff report on the proposal claims there is “no immediate budgetary impact.” However, a move like this would only impact its residents, especially with Tesla, as the Supercharger Network is open to all electric vehicle manufacturers. It is also extremely reliable and widespread.

Advertisement

Regarding the divestment request to CalPERS, it would not be surprising to see the firm make the move. Although it voted against Musk’s compensation package last year, the firm has no issue continuing to make money off of Tesla’s performance on Wall Street.

The decision to avoid Musk companies will be considered this evening at the City Council meeting.

The report comes from Davis Vanguard.

It is no secret that Musk’s political involvement, especially during the most recent Presidential Election, ruffled some feathers. Other cities considered similar options, like the City of Baltimore, which “decided to go in another direction” after awarding Tesla a $5 million contract for a fleet of EVs for city employees.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Starlink restrictions are hitting Russian battlefield comms: report

The restrictions have reportedly disrupted Moscow’s drone coordination and frontline communications.

Published

on

A truckload of Starlink dishes has arrived in Ukraine. (Credit: Mykhailo Fedorov/Twitter)

SpaceX’s decision to disable unauthorized Starlink terminals in Ukraine is now being felt on the battlefield, with Ukrainian commanders reporting that Russian troops have struggled to maintain assault operations without access to the satellite network. 

The restrictions have reportedly disrupted Moscow’s drone coordination and frontline communications.

Lt. Denis Yaroslavsky, who commands a special reconnaissance unit, stated that Russian assault activity noticeably declined for several days after the shutdown. “For three to four days after the shutdown, they really reduced the assault operations,” Yaroslavsky said.

Russian units had allegedly obtained Starlink terminals through black market channels and mounted them on drones and weapons systems, despite service terms prohibiting offensive military use. Once those terminals were blocked, commanders on the Ukrainian side reported improved battlefield ratios, as noted in a New York Post report.

Advertisement

A Ukrainian unit commander stated that casualty imbalances widened after the cutoff. “On any given day, depending on your scale of analysis, my sector was already achieving 20:1 (casuality rate) before the shutdown, and we are an elite unit. Regular units have no problem going 5:1 or 8:1. With Starlink down, 13:1 (casualty rate) for a regular unit is easy,” the unit commander said.

The restrictions come as Russia faces heavy challenges across multiple fronts. A late January report from the Center for Strategic and International Studies estimated that more than 1.2 million Russian troops have been killed, wounded, or gone missing since February 2022.

The Washington-based Institute for the Study of War also noted that activity from Russia’s Rubikon drone unit declined after Feb. 1, suggesting communications constraints from Starlink’s restrictions may be limiting operations. “I’m sure the Russians have (alternative options), but it takes time to maximize their implementation and this (would take) at least four to six months,” Yaroslavsky noted. 

Continue Reading