It is looking like SpaceX will have about a month of downtown between the upcoming Intelsat launch and CRS-12. Is it possible that some of the FH upgrades could be completed during that time?
Quote from: rpapo on 06/26/2017 02:29 pm..... back when they thought it would be easy to fasten three Falcon first stages side by side. Since then much has changed.Exactly why I came over here, after the grid fin discussion in the Iridium thread, and wondering how tightly the cores could be secured with those [and the legs] inbetween. So a look at http://www.spacex.com/falcon-heavy says and shows bars are connecting the cores only at the top of each first stage and at the bottom near the legs. The Falcon 9 has been flown without that extra stabilization at the top and bottom of the first stage, so the vibration loads have been much more evenly distributed. Now it appears the vibration loads will be much more concentrated somewhere near the middle. Would that be a routine engineering calculation, or something they may be risking?
..... back when they thought it would be easy to fasten three Falcon first stages side by side. Since then much has changed.
Quote from: CyndyC on 06/27/2017 03:46 amNow it appears the vibration loads will be much more concentrated somewhere near the middle. Would that be a routine engineering calculation, or something they may be risking? It's going to make me nervous there won't be a connecting rod across the middle. I'm guessing that might have been a subject of debate earlier in the development process.
Now it appears the vibration loads will be much more concentrated somewhere near the middle. Would that be a routine engineering calculation, or something they may be risking?
Quote from: CyndyC on 06/27/2017 11:48 pmQuote from: CyndyC on 06/27/2017 03:46 amNow it appears the vibration loads will be much more concentrated somewhere near the middle. Would that be a routine engineering calculation, or something they may be risking? It's going to make me nervous there won't be a connecting rod across the middle. I'm guessing that might have been a subject of debate earlier in the development process.Structural analysis is pretty routine by rocket science standards. Back in the 1960s, NASA saw a bunch of companies each developing their own analysis software, and supported the development of NASTRAN, which has been used and enhanced for more than a half century. Unlike combustion analysis or computational aerodynamics, analysis of modes of vibration is a pretty mature field. Of course you can still make mistakes, but of all the reasons the FH might fail, lack of connecting rods in the middle of stack is pretty low on the list.
Quote from: LouScheffer on 06/28/2017 12:03 amQuote from: CyndyC on 06/27/2017 11:48 pmQuote from: CyndyC on 06/27/2017 03:46 amNow it appears the vibration loads will be much more concentrated somewhere near the middle. Would that be a routine engineering calculation, or something they may be risking? It's going to make me nervous there won't be a connecting rod across the middle. I'm guessing that might have been a subject of debate earlier in the development process.Structural analysis is pretty routine by rocket science standards. Back in the 1960s, NASA saw a bunch of companies each developing their own analysis software, and supported the development of NASTRAN, which has been used and enhanced for more than a half century. Unlike combustion analysis or computational aerodynamics, analysis of modes of vibration is a pretty mature field. Of course you can still make mistakes, but of all the reasons the FH might fail, lack of connecting rods in the middle of stack is pretty low on the list.As far as I'm aware, pretty much no boosters for any operational launcher from any nation have ever had more than two connection points. Further, in each case, the load is generally carried by one of the two (either top or bottom), not both. In short, two connection points is fine. If you can't adequately secure the boosters to the core with two cross-members, then you don't have any business trying to design multi-core rockets.
Random question: Is it known what will happen to 1027 (the FH Core STA)? Will it be scrapped or be converted to a normal FH core?
Quote from: IanThePineapple on 07/05/2017 06:23 pmRandom question: Is it known what will happen to 1027 (the FH Core STA)? Will it be scrapped or be converted to a normal FH core?Excuse my ignorance, but what are you talking about. What is STA?
Quote from: Roy_H on 07/12/2017 12:05 amQuote from: IanThePineapple on 07/05/2017 06:23 pmRandom question: Is it known what will happen to 1027 (the FH Core STA)? Will it be scrapped or be converted to a normal FH core?Excuse my ignorance, but what are you talking about. What is STA?Structural Test Article.
Quote from: gongora on 07/12/2017 12:16 amQuote from: Roy_H on 07/12/2017 12:05 amQuote from: IanThePineapple on 07/05/2017 06:23 pmRandom question: Is it known what will happen to 1027 (the FH Core STA)? Will it be scrapped or be converted to a normal FH core?Excuse my ignorance, but what are you talking about. What is STA?Structural Test Article.This is why Elon hates acronyms.
I was really intrigued a few years back when SpaceX was describing what the FH would have in the way of "gee-wiz" technology, like for instance the "cross-core propellant feed". I gather that this will not be on the FH that flies later this year. Has this been dropped for good, or will it be a later upgrade?
Quote from: MoDyna on 07/11/2017 09:40 pmI was really intrigued a few years back when SpaceX was describing what the FH would have in the way of "gee-wiz" technology, like for instance the "cross-core propellant feed". I gather that this will not be on the FH that flies later this year. Has this been dropped for good, or will it be a later upgrade?I don't think there's a left and a right; aren't the boosters are the same part rotated around the long axis of the core (rotational symmetry rather than mirrored symmetry)?Either way, crossfeed is gone for good.
There have been references to an FH booster core STA being constructed as well - but there hasn't been a gap in the core serial numbers that it would fit into: does / did it exist?
Quote from: IanThePineapple on 07/05/2017 06:23 pmRandom question: Is it known what will happen to 1027 (the FH Core STA)? Will it be scrapped or be converted to a normal FH core?Apparently last seen at McGregor in October. Similarly random questions:There have been references to an FH booster core STA being constructed as well - but there hasn't been a gap in the core serial numbers that it would fit into: does / did it exist?
Unless it didn’t get a serial number, it doesn’t exist as a standalone STA. My theory is that they used 1023 as soon as they got its new FH side booster octaweb installed, then they shipped it back to Hawthorne for completion after testing.
It’s been 44 years since the mighty Saturn V last thundered skyward from a launch pad at Kennedy Space Center in Florida. The towering rocket, generating enough power to lift 269,000 pounds into orbit, had been the workhorse of the Apollo moon missions.Later this year, SpaceX plans to launch its most powerful rocket yet from the same pad. The long-awaited Falcon Heavy is key to the Hawthorne company’s plans to ramp up its defense business, send tourists around the moon and launch its first uncrewed mission to Mars.But unlike the Saturn V, the Falcon Heavy will have plenty of competition.