Pad 39A Goes Commercial
NASA Signs Agreement with SpaceX for Use of Historic Launch Pad
“NASA Kennedy Space Center’s historic Launch Complex 39A, the site from which numerous Apollo and space shuttle missions began, is beginning a new mission as a commercial launch site. NASA signed a property agreement with Space Exploration Technologies Corporation (SpaceX) of Hawthorne, Calif., on Monday for use and occupancy of the seaside complex along Florida’s central east coast. It will serve as a platform for SpaceX to support their commercial launch activities.”
This could be a sign that NASA is already expecting that SpaceX will be selected for Commercial Crew. Not proof of course but maybe an indicator. Not that Boeing and Sierra Nevada are being ruled out, but some have speculated that if down-select does occur that SpaceX might be one of the companies dropped, but I think this long term lease implies otherwise.
Of course ULA is already modifying CX-41 for Boeing and SN.
For those of us in Florida it’s fabulous news…to see the Heavy and recall Apollo flights as a much younger person. It’s terrific news.
Interesting. This is first time SpaceX has talked about vertical integration, ever. It tickles me they are so quick to innovate and change their operations, when it makes sense to do so. The Shuttle’s rotating service structure (RSS) is now a player in their operational scheme. They can still erect the rocket at the pad, like they already do. The payload is installed inside the Payload Changeout Room (PCR) before the rocket gets to the pad. The rocket moves the pad and is erected, then, rotate the RSS over the rocket and put the payload on the rocket. Just like Shuttle operations for the vertically integrated payloads. Outstanding!
That would be neat to see, but RSS is situated too low to service the payload section for F9 or FH. SpaceX will need to put a new crane on top of the tower.
You are right. SpaceX will have to modify the RSS to accommodate their rocket. I thought the Orbiter Access Arm would be pretty close… 195′ level vs Falcon 9 with Dragon capsule is 208 ft. Not that far. The height of the rocket can be factored in the re-design of the pad. They will have to build an erection mechanism at the base of the pad, for the F9 or FH. Stay tuned!
The orbiter access arm (including the white room) was removed by NASA last year. The gaseous oxygen vent arm (including the beanie cap) is still in place but as stated in the lease it is a historic item that must be preserved, so SpaceX plans to leave it in place when they extend the height of the FSS. As for RSS SpaceX has no current plans to use it and it may eventually be removed.
So what elevation will the crew use for access?
Seems like there would be several variables which would determine the height of the Dragon capsule in relation to FSS. Will the Falcon launch platform be on top of the 50 ft. concrete hardstand like Apollo/Shuttle, or will they build a platform in the flame trench?
If the launch pad will be on top of the hardstand, will they use the legacy MLP and crawler? That seems unlikely especially since there is no mention of leasing space in the VAB, and since they still seem to be planning for horizontal integration. So I guess in that case they will build a launch platform on top of the hardstand and then use a similar process as they do elsewhere with the only difference being they have to haul the rocket up a ramp.
Excavating the flame trench would seem more practical, since it would avoid the need for the rails the erector-transporter rides on to go up the steep slope to the top of the pad, but we’ll have to wait and see.
One possible issue with having the rocket in the flame trench is sound. The sound waves would be bouncing back and forth between the concrete walls, possible damaging the rocket.
Good point, maybe we could remove the hardstand completely except for the foundation of the FSS. Personally I am skeptical that any money can be saved by using the existing pad at all. If they want to go with vertical integration they should use a service tower with swingaway workstand/weather shields that surround the rocket, like the Chinese have at Jiuquan. And we also know more about how to dampen sound with metamaterial baffles instead of the ponds of water suspended under the SRBs.
Hopefully they will not use the MLP, crawler or VAB. Rollouts with the crawler were interminable and the Shuttle had only minimal weather protection and very limited access on the pad. What will they do if there is a scrub or weather delay after the payload is mounted? De-integrate the payload? Or will they have a new RSS to completely enclose the booster and allow access? One of the real assets of the SpaceX setup at CX-40 is the ability to have the entire rocket protected and accessible in the horizontal configuration within an hour or so after a scrub.
Right! No VAB, MLP or crawler needed. I believe that building launch tower access to Dragon (or a Spacecraft inside the Payload Fairing) is a good idea for SpaceX. Gives them more options. Often, there are “late access” payload requirements (or quick access after a scrub) that make having this capability very useful. They can still maintain their horizontal integration. In fact, Ms Shotwell did say they plan on building a new facility near 39A to process the vehicles (horizontally). Horizontal integration is a big part of their operations scheme. Using ground equipment, they rotate the rocket stages to gain easy access to work, anywhere in the vehicle.
I read it somewhere… to compete for EELV (Air Force & DoD) contracts. All EELV satellites are designed for vertical payload integration, and so are the Delta IV and Atlas V rockets. It is simpler to do. Falcon 9 or FH will have to adapt to the existing convention, I believe.
It looks like LC-39A has been selected to be Falcon Heavy’s standard launch pad. If they also launch crewed Falcon-9 from that pad, it will probably be as busy there as it ever was with the shuttle with 4-6 launches from LC-39A alone per year. Then the guys at KSC will be able to hold up their heads again in the six years or so before SLS begins its 1 launch per year tenure at LC-39B.