SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket modified for Northrop Grumman Cygnus cargo launch on Jan. 30

News
By Brett Tingley
published

"It's taken a lot of modifications on our part to get this hardware ready to go fly."

a cylindrical, silver spacecraft upright in between two halves of a white egg-shaped payload fairing
A Northrop Grumman Cygnus freighter spacecraft in between two halves of a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket payload fairing. (Image credit: NASA/Kennedy Space Center)

SpaceX is preparing to launch a Northrop Grumman Cygnus spacecraft on its flagship Falcon 9 rocket for the first time next week.

The launch of the NG-20 resupply mission is targeted for no earlier than Tuesday, Jan. 30 at 12:07 p.m. EST (1707 GMT). As its name implies, this is the twentieth cargo flight that Northrop Grumman has sent to the International Space Station (ISS), but the first time that the company's Cygnus cargo craft has been sent to the orbital lab atop a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket. 

During a pre-flight teleconference on Friday (Jan. 26), William Gerstenmaier, vice president of Build and Flight Reliability at SpaceX, said that the Falcon 9's payload fairing, the shell that surrounds and protects a spacecraft during ascent while atop a rocket, had to be modified to add a hatch measuring 5 feet by 4 feet (1.5m by 1.2m). The hatch gives ground crews the ability to add extra "late-load" cargo before launch including special treats like ice cream for the astronauts aboard the space station, Gerstenmaier said.

Gerstenmaier added that the complication of addition of the hatch contributed to the decision to delay the launch one day to Jan. 30. That's because the area inside that hatch must be environmentally controlled, since any contamination on Cygnus's docking hardware could affect how well it berths at the ISS.

"So that's a pretty intense activity," Gerstenmaier said. "This will be the first time we've done that. It's taken a lot of modifications on our part to get this hardware ready to go fly." 

Related: A robot surgeon is headed to the ISS to dissect simulated astronaut tissue

Aboard the latest Cygnus freighter will be fresh foods and supplies for the astronauts currently aboard the space station and a slew of sophisticated science experiments, including the first robotic surgeon to make it up to the ISS.

MIRA, Virtual Incision's miniaturized robotic assisted surgery system, is pictured in position to reach rubber bands serving as simulated surgical tissue. (Image credit: NASA/Virtual Incision)

Cyrus Dhalla, vice president and general manager of tactical space systems at Northrop Grumman, explained that Cygnus will stay docked at the International Space Station for roughly six months, during which it might be called upon to boost the space station back up to its optimal altitude. That's because the station slowly falls towards Earth over time due to atmospheric drag. 

Northrop Grumman’s Cygnus cargo craft is pictured from the International Space Station as it approaches while orbiting 261 miles above the coast of the Garabogazköl Basin in Turkmenistan. (Image credit: NASA)
RELATED STORIES:

 —  Antares rocket makes its final launch, sending cargo to the International Space Station

 — SpaceX fishes Falcon 9 payload fairing out the sea at sunrise (photo)

 — Northrop Grumman's Cygnus cargo ship boosts International Space Station's orbit

When it's time at the ISS is complete, Cygnus will depart carrying trash and other waste to be disposed of in a fiery reentry in Earth's atmosphere, which is "another really important function of the platform," Dhalla added.

Previous Cygnus cargo missions flew atop Northrop Grumman's Antares rocket, but the current version of that vehicle is being phased out due to Russia's ongoing invasion of Ukraine. Supply chains for Antares, which relied on Ukrainian-built first stages and Russian rocket engines, have been disrupted by the invasion. Antares 230 made its last flight in August 2023.

Join our Space Forums to keep talking space on the latest missions, night sky and more! And if you have a news tip, correction or comment, let us know at: community@space.com.

Brett Tingley
Brett Tingley
Managing Editor, Space.com

Brett is curious about emerging aerospace technologies, alternative launch concepts, military space developments and uncrewed aircraft systems. Brett's work has appeared on Scientific American, The War Zone, Popular Science, the History Channel, Science Discovery and more. Brett has English degrees from Clemson University and the University of North Carolina at Charlotte. In his free time, Brett enjoys skywatching throughout the dark skies of the Appalachian mountains.

5 Comments Comment from the forums
  • edfran
    By my estimate, a pint of ice cream for the ISS astronauts is about $200,000. Is everyone OK with that....or might you join me in arguing that we should de-orbit the ISS and put our resources to fixing our planet Earth?
    Reply
  • Classical Motion
    You picked a new unit, a new configuration as an example. First timers and modified projects always cost more. Remember the first VCRs? First flat screens?

    Do you have any idea of the amount of money the wealthy people spend on entertainment? I'm sure it's much more than any report.

    And if allowed, a few more years of old fashion greedy competition will harvest some of that wealth. A rotating hotel with gravity would allow any to visit. Such structures can contain various degrees of g with none in the center. A playground. I bet we have hotels before we have mining.

    With a few minutes of acceleration and a few of weightlessness to get there....an exciting travel treat. With unseen views for those that must have the experience. Only the select will experience it. That will only last for awhile.......until the townhouses.

    Location, location, location.
    Reply
  • Cisventure Astronot
    edfran said:
    By my estimate, a pint of ice cream for the ISS astronauts is about $200,000. Is everyone OK with that....or might you join me in arguing that we should de-orbit the ISS and put our resources to fixing our planet Earth?
    I'd like to begin this reply by saying that I don't intend to "dogpile" on you or insult your character, but to convince you that money spent on space, and science in general, does help the Earth. So please don't read this in a condescending tone.

    If by "fixing our planet Earth" you mean "fighting climate change", then you should look at the climate-related science done in space and on the ISS, like this article by NASA.

    Otherwise: science has many, usually unforeseen, knock-on effects. NASA helped make many things that it rarely gets credit for, like modern cameras.

    NASA gets less than 1% of the federal budget, and it's not like the money is literally shot into space. It's put back into the economy. The money goes to highly-skilled individuals to hone their craft, manufacturers all over the country, inspiring and teaching the next generation of problem-solvers, and all sorts of places.
    Reply
  • edfran
    Cisventure Astronot said:
    I'd like to begin this reply by saying that I don't intend to "dogpile" on you or insult your character, but to convince you that money spent on space, and science in general, does help the Earth. So please don't read this in a condescending tone.

    If by "fixing our planet Earth" you mean "fighting climate change", then you should look at the climate-related science done in space and on the ISS, like this article by NASA.

    Otherwise: science has many, usually unforeseen, knock-on effects. NASA helped make many things that it rarely gets credit for, like modern cameras.

    NASA gets less than 1% of the federal budget, and it's not like the money is literally shot into space. It's put back into the economy. The money goes to highly-skilled individuals to hone their craft, manufacturers all over the country, inspiring and teaching the next generation of problem-solvers, and all sorts of places.
    With all due respect, I am quite close to what the ISS is doing. While there is some serious science, the majority are just beyond high school science fair projects. What we have proved at ISS is this: humans are terrible suited to long duration space flight...and unaffordable in the face of mankind's needs on the planet.
    I hope you would at least agreed that NASA has extraordinary capabities in robotic exploration. These are the highest value systems and sensors, and it is these that are making the greatest contribution to our better understanding of what is happening on our planet. NASA Manned Spaceflight is struggling to define missions for itself...like Artemis, a program that would ultimately consume beyond $100 billion to "land a woman and person of color on the Moon".
    We can do better.
    Reply
  • Cisventure Astronot
    edfran said:
    With all due respect, I am quite close to what the ISS is doing. While there is some serious science, the majority are just beyond high school science fair projects. What we have proved at ISS is this: humans are terrible suited to long duration space flight...and unaffordable in the face of mankind's needs on the planet.
    I hope you would at least agreed that NASA has extraordinary capabities in robotic exploration. These are the highest value systems and sensors, and it is these that are making the greatest contribution to our better understanding of what is happening on our planet. NASA Manned Spaceflight is struggling to define missions for itself...like Artemis, a program that would ultimately consume beyond $100 billion to "land a woman and person of color on the Moon".
    We can do better.
    For the record, I don't follow the ISS very closely. So I can't really argue your point with any confidence. But I will say that there is a niche for manned space stations, which might be the "high school science fair projects" you refer to. The presence of astronauts to carry out science makes it easier for third-parties to conduct research in space with NASA's help. I can't say whether it's worth it, though.

    I don't see any glaring flaw in your response. Thank you for the civil and thought-provoking conversation.
    Reply