XPost: sci.physics, sci.space.policy   
   From: fjmccall@gmail.com   
      
   JF Mezei  wrote:   
      
   >On 2017-05-25 16:22, Greg (Strider) Moore wrote:   
   >>   
   >> Telemetry. Though I believe during shuttle launches the decision was also   
   >>   
   >   
   >So a launch company such as SpaceX has to give the military the   
   >acceptable flight envelope inside of which no range safety is needed,   
   >and outside of which, range safety is needed.   
   >   
      
   Yes and no.  Again, Range Safety is primarily concerned with where the   
   thing could conceivably come down and that's all physics.  They know   
   on a moment by moment basis what the velocity vector of the vehicle is   
   and where it's pointed.  If that vector is such that it is getting to   
   where it could carry the vehicle outside the bounds of the range they   
   will blow it up.   
      
   >   
   >Would this be what takes weeks to type onto the punched cards needed for   
   >their 1970s computer to make the real time decision of whether the   
   >rocket is within acceptable parameters?   
   >   
      
   Just doing the paperwork can take a very long day.  Frequencies have   
   to be registered and certified clear within 24 hours of launch (and   
   that's not a fast process, so you usually start it 24 hours prior and   
   put in 12-18 hours getting it done).  Specific codes need to be   
   programmed that match those programmed into the TTS/FTS on the   
   vehicle.   
      
   >   
   >Wouldn't it be simpler for the launch company to just send constant flow   
   >of "OK" mesages (they do the validation of the flight performance) and a   
   >"NOT OK" the micro second the rockets goes outside of flight envelope?   
   >   
      
   It would be simpler but it wouldn't be as safe AND you would   
   potentially blow up a lot of vehicles   
      
   >   
   >I find it odd that it would take so long to go from one launch to another.   
   >   
      
   I'm sure there is much in the real world that you find 'odd'.   
      
   >   
   >Legally speaking, could SpaceX build and operate its own range safety.   
   >for KSC launches and not have to deal with the ancient military systems   
   >?  Or does the military have legal right to demand that it be in charge   
   >of range safety?   
   >   
      
   Not allowed.  USAF has responsibility for range safety on that range.   
      
   Please read this:   
      
   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Range_safety\   
      
      
   --   
   "Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to   
       live in the real world."   
                         -- Mary Shafer, NASA Dryden   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)