Can Falcon Heavy handle a larger fairing?

[robert_d]

The ability to recover the fairings may inform the decision to try to build a larger one. If they only have to build two or three to handle the rare larger volume payloads, they might be able to amortize the cost over multiple flights.

But I wonder about the current second stage. Mr. Musk just emphasized the immense effort to upgrade the central core. Wouldn't that imply that the second stage would need re-enforcing also?

And I still re-iterate that a dual core F9 medium could support a 8 x 5.5 fairing with less internal modification to the stages. Maybe not as good as a full cylinder, but given the rising power requirements of spacecraft and the increasing efficiency of solar cells, an elliptical cross section might be a reasonable solution to adding volume.

[RoboGoofers]

If the Bigalow 330 is the only near term payload that would need a larger fairing, maybe it's Bigalow that needs to modify their module. It's not like the module is built yet, waiting for a suitable rocket.

They designed 330 for Atlas V. They can design one for FH, or ITS.

[deruch]

If the Bigalow 330 is the only near term payload that would need a larger fairing, maybe it's Bigalow that needs to modify their module. It's not like the module is built yet, waiting for a suitable rocket.

They designed 330 for Atlas V. They can design one for FH, or ITS.

A bigger, recoverable fairing for SpaceX would be a huge asset for their commsat constellation.  They are going to want to launch as many satellites as they can at a time.  Given the stated lifting performance of either the F9 or FH, it seems likely that they will be volume limited when it comes to deploying those satellites.

[spacenut]

All this gets back to "Can Falcon Heavy handle a larger fairing?"  It seems to be needed for the heavier LEO payloads it could launch.  Or, would it be needed to launch fuel for a fuel depot?  Especially lox.  I know F9 is fine with the existing fairing.  FH would seem to need a larger upper stage and fairing, especially for larger payloads.  F9/FH is a small rocket in comparison to other rockets with lesser capabilities.  I just wonder with the idea of fairing retrieval, why not go with a larger one if a redesign is in the works. 

[punder]

If the Bigalow 330 is the only near term payload that would need a larger fairing, maybe it's Bigalow that needs to modify their module. It's not like the module is built yet, waiting for a suitable rocket.

They designed 330 for Atlas V. They can design one for FH, or ITS.

This. Why the heck did Bigelow design his product right out of the launch market, except for the most expensive and restrictive option? Seems arbitrary and dumb. There, I said it: dumb. Must be the alcohol typing.   

[docmordrid]

If the Bigalow 330 is the only near term payload that would need a larger fairing, maybe it's Bigalow that needs to modify their module. It's not like the module is built yet, waiting for a suitable rocket.

They designed 330 for Atlas V. They can design one for FH, or ITS.

This. Why the heck did Bigelow design his product right out of the launch market, except for the most expensive and restrictive option? Seems arbitrary and dumb. There, I said it: dumb. Must be the alcohol typing.   

The length of their module has changed. Their latest B330 concept images show an elongated extension not on previous BA-330 concepts.

[Lars-J]

All this gets back to "Can Falcon Heavy handle a larger fairing?"  It seems to be needed for the heavier LEO payloads it could launch.  Or, would it be needed to launch fuel for a fuel depot?  Especially lox.  I know F9 is fine with the existing fairing.  FH would seem to need a larger upper stage and fairing, especially for larger payloads.  F9/FH is a small rocket in comparison to other rockets with lesser capabilities.  I just wonder with the idea of fairing retrieval, why not go with a larger one if a redesign is in the works.

Propellant is so dense that a full load of propellant would take up only a small part of the fairing. A larger fairing is NOT needed for propellant.

[DOCinCT]

If the Bigalow 330 is the only near term payload that would need a larger fairing, maybe it's Bigalow that needs to modify their module. It's not like the module is built yet, waiting for a suitable rocket.

They designed 330 for Atlas V. They can design one for FH, or ITS.

This. Why the heck did Bigelow design his product right out of the launch market, except for the most expensive and restrictive option? Seems arbitrary and dumb. There, I said it: dumb. Must be the alcohol typing.   

The length of their module has changed. Their latest B330 concept images show an elongated extension not on previous BA-330 concepts.

I believe the "latest concept image" is from a reddit user based off of the animated 3-D wireframe currently on the Bigelow website (which is apparently under re-construction).
Update:  I just came across a few images from @RobertTBigelow twitter account which does show the elongated tunnel.  I noticed several images on the Bigelow account dating back to mid-2016 also showing the tunnel.
So things have evolved.

[Steve G]

Being in the heavy haul trucking business, anything above 12'6" diameter creates some grief but not much. I've seen loads 18' in diameter and 90' long. Just that it requires a route survey, pole car, additional escorts, routes away from underpasses, taking down power lines, etc. I've done this sort of thing. If a 12' diameter load run would cost, for example, $15,000, an 18' diameter load might cost $150000. Each state is different, and often each county has its own permitting rules, but if is an established, regular route, costs could be mitigated. Other words, in relationship to the total cost of the rocket, the percentage of cost increase is in the low single digits.

However, I've also seen loads too wide to move based on where they are being built and where they are going to. I've literally seen large oilfield vessels disassembled by cutting torches to transport because the engineers never checked with the transport people. Not knowing the route, and alternative roads a larger rocket can take to pass through overpasses and choke points, I can't say if SpaceX can build wider diameter rockets at their current location. That's assuming they'd have the business case to invest $2 billion or so in a new clean sheet design, which I find unlikely. The amount of business they won't get because of current diameter restrictions wouldn't be worth cost cost of building a new rocket, unless it becomes an ego issue with Blue Origin's New Glenn wide bodied rocket.

[DaveH62]

If FH could support an 8 meter fairing, would SpaceX be entitled to compete for any SLS payload? I thought the law was that any private service provider should be chosen over a government rocket, if an equivalent service can be provided. I understand there must be more details involved, but if SpaceX can meet SLS payload plans, aren't they entitled or even prioritized to compete?

[spacenut]

Why couldn't a fairing be four sections instead of two?  That way they can be trucked, then assembled on the rocket at the in the rocket assembly building around the payload.  They can be carried on a tractor-trailer at a slight angle to not be over 12' high.  That could make about a 5.5m fairing.  Six peddles would make a 6m diameter fairing.  However for a Bigelow module, a longer fairing may be needed, not really wider. 

Anyway, SpaceX is going to have to have a larger fairing eventually to carry larger objects. 

[tdperk]

If the Bigalow 330 is the only near term payload that would need a larger fairing, maybe it's Bigalow that needs to modify their module. It's not like the module is built yet, waiting for a suitable rocket.

They designed 330 for Atlas V. They can design one for FH, or ITS.

Pretty sure the ITS would do a BA1K5 to BA3K.

[mvpel]

If the Bigalow 330 is the only near term payload that would need a larger fairing, maybe it's Bigalow that needs to modify their module. It's not like the module is built yet, waiting for a suitable rocket.

They designed 330 for Atlas V. They can design one for FH, or ITS.

I had a chance to chat with Mr. Bigelow at the CRS-8 + BEAM launch a year ago today, and I can say with a high level of confidence that they most likely will not modify their module to accommodate the existing FH fairing. Since I work in DoD classified environments, I was able to recognize a few of the signs that there was something he wasn't able to disclose, and three days later I found out what it was:

Bigelow Aerospace and United Launch Alliance Join Forces to Foster a New Era of Sustainable Commercialization in Low Earth Orbit

While the Atlas V has been expensive, a cheaper ride years late is expensive too. And it looks like Bigelow made a reasonable decision in the long run, for an Atlas V launch three years from now:

United Launch Alliance cuts Atlas rocket price amid competition (April 4, 2017)

The elongated section which DocMordrid noted above is an airlock to allow for EVA and deployment of satellites - it will be the largest airlock ever flown.

[spacenut]

That means in order to compete with the longer Atlas V fairing, SpaceX would have to make a longer fairing if it plans to get a 330 module to LEO, or with FH to an orbit of the moon.  What does a 330 module weigh?  20 tons?  A F9 could launch it expendable to LEO with a stretched fairing.  FH could put it in moon orbit, also with a stretched fairing. 

[punder]

How much engineering is involved in stretching a fairing, then? It's basically a tube with a nosecone, stressed mainly for longitudinal loads. But it will make the vehicle longer and more "bendy" both before and after booster sep (both of them, in the case of FH). The F9 already has the highest aspect ratio on record, isn't  that right?

Even so, it's highly likely imho SpaceX has already done plenty of engineering and market analysis on stretched fairings. Lots of other irons in the fire right now...

[Jim]

That means in order to compete with the longer Atlas V fairing, SpaceX would have to make a longer fairing if it plans to get a 330 module to LEO, or with FH to an orbit of the moon.  What does a 330 module weigh?  20 tons?  A F9 could launch it expendable to LEO with a stretched fairing.  FH could put it in moon orbit, also with a stretched fairing. 

It was on another thread that Spacex has no plans for stretched fairing.

[guckyfan]

That means in order to compete with the longer Atlas V fairing, SpaceX would have to make a longer fairing if it plans to get a 330 module to LEO, or with FH to an orbit of the moon.  What does a 330 module weigh?  20 tons?  A F9 could launch it expendable to LEO with a stretched fairing.  FH could put it in moon orbit, also with a stretched fairing. 

It was on another thread that Spacex has no plans for stretched fairing.

Unless there is a customer willing to pay.

[Jet Black]

If the Bigalow 330 is the only near term payload that would need a larger fairing, maybe it's Bigalow that needs to modify their module. It's not like the module is built yet, waiting for a suitable rocket.

They designed 330 for Atlas V. They can design one for FH, or ITS.

Yep, I think this. Ultimately it will be a calculation for Bigelow - do they want to send up very large modules at significant cost, or more smaller ones at less cost.

[Jim]

That means in order to compete with the longer Atlas V fairing, SpaceX would have to make a longer fairing if it plans to get a 330 module to LEO, or with FH to an orbit of the moon.  What does a 330 module weigh?  20 tons?  A F9 could launch it expendable to LEO with a stretched fairing.  FH could put it in moon orbit, also with a stretched fairing. 

It was on another thread that Spacex has no plans for stretched fairing.

Unless there is a customer willing to pay.

There is no customer

[RoboGoofers]

yeah just to summarize the situation so far:

SpaceX has no plans for a larger fairing.
If there were a customer willing to pay to develop a larger fairing, they might do it.
The only customer with a near term payload that'd need a larger fairing is a B330.
Bigelow has some sort of agreement with ULA to launch B330 on an Atlas.
So there's no customer that'd need a larger fairing before ITS.

I can see why this might be pretty low on the priority list for Spacex.