
SpaceX launches first U.S. national security space mission - jonbaer
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-space-spacex-launch/spacex-launches-first-u-s-national-security-space-mission-idUSKCN1OM0D9
======
Agathos
I gather this was Falcon 9's first EELV-certified mission, but to call it its
first national security mission is quite the overstatement. Falcon 9s have
already launched an NRO spy satellite, the Air Force X-37B, and the mysterious
Zuma.

------
ChuckMcM
More importantly it is SpaceX's 21st launch of the year. Making 2018 the year
with the most launches ever. One of the things that contributes to this is a
stock of 'previously flown' boosters that allowed for more launches without
having to build more engines and boosters. As the cadence improves the
financial picture for SpaceX only gets better as far as I can tell.

------
dylan604
Do they mean first "successful" launch to orbit? I thought the launch where
the payload failed to separate was the first launch, even though the launch
was a success and the deployment failed. Why is this launch considered first?

~~~
gpm
They've successfully launched successful national security missions before
that successfully separated (e.g. NROL 76). The headline is just wrong.

I think it is the first satellite in this particular set of related launches.

------
fpoling
SpaceX had to use a fully expendable Falcon for this launch. What makes a GPS
satellite so heavy?

~~~
5436436347
Two things:

1\. A GPS satellite is in a very high orbit compared to LEO, and so all stages
were requested to burn to completion, to ensure the satellite has enough
margin to reach that orbit.

2\. The second stage ends at a ~800 km orbit, while the satellite itself needs
to increase this to ~12,000 km (I'm rounding these numbers). The sat has to
carry enough on-board propellant to raise it's orbit that much which
necessarily increases it's wet-weight due to the rocket equation.

~~~
fpoling
Still SpaceX routinely recovers the first stage after launching geostationary
communication satellites. I thought GPS should be lighter as they are closer
to Earth and needs to send much less information in their signal, so the power
requirements and size of Solar panels should be lower.

~~~
marvin
This sattelite was some 8000kgs, vs. 4000-ish kgs for the previous-generation
GPS satellites, if I remember correctly.

~~~
Roritharr
Any idea why their weight increased so much?

~~~
nradov
The latest generation of GPS satellites has more antennas and more powerful
transmitters. This improves signal reception and reduces the impact of
jamming.

------
trhway
no employee protests against DOD projects :)

~~~
DeonPenny
yeh cause doing DOD projects from an American Company to increase GPS is a
good thing

~~~
dingaling
Not for those on the receiving end of JDAMs

SpaceX is taking defense money to launch satellites that are primarily for
military use in guiding platforms that deliver things to lethal terminal
effect. That's just as martial as Raytheon building the Tomahawk guidance
module.

Thought experiment: would SpaceX take Russian money to launch GLONASS birds?
I'd wager not because it would be 'immoral'.

~~~
mikeash
Beneficial civilian use of GPS is orders of magnitude more common than
military uses. Military systems also never _require_ GPS, because you can’t
count on the enemy not to jam the signal or shoot down the satellites, so
there are always alternate navigation methods. For example, JDAMs also use
inertial navigation.

I would not want to work on a weapons system but I’d have no problem working
on something like GPS.

I see no evidence for the conclusion to your thought experiment. You can’t
just make up a conclusion to support your argument, it needs to actually be
based on something.

------
sneak
How is an upgraded GPS satellite a “national security” mission?

Yes, I understand that precise and reliable global navigation is essential to
fighting wars and guided weapons, but such uses pale in comparison to the
billions of people who rely on GPS every day to do non-war, non-USA stuff. It
is neither national nor security.

Or do they just mean “in the role of defense contractor”?

~~~
Phlarp
GPS is lofted and maintained by the DoD. It's primary purpose is military. It
would not exist as a free service without DoD's investment. Other satellite
constellations with far fewer sats cost considerable amounts of money to use,
and few of our modern applications for GPS would be very appealing at $xxx a
month. Civillian GPS is a generous charity from US taxpayers to the rest of
the world

~~~
sneak
No, its primary purpose is civilian. Its original and occasional purpose is
military, sure, but as I mentioned, it is used far more widely now, by several
orders of magnitude. Its military applications are so eclipsed now by non-war-
related uses that the military origins are practically irrelevant.

~~~
Phlarp
Civilian use is wide yes, but this is only because it is provided for free by
DoD. None of those uses would be economically viable if they had to bear the
costs of developing, launching and maintaining the system.

Keeping track of the boats and missiles pays the bills. Everything else is
just a happy accident of zero marginal use cost.

~~~
xvilka
Galileo GNSS proves you wrong, since initially was designed primarily for
civilian use.

~~~
meepmorp
Galileo’s being primarily civilian in focus has no bearing on GPS’ main
purpose. GPS is a US system, funded and directed by the military.

~~~
xvilka
You are right, but it proves that GNSS system can be civilian primarily and
would be still feasible.

~~~
enraged_camel
Nice goal post moving.

