Author Topic: SpaceX FH : Falcon Heavy Demo : Feb 6, 2018 : Discussion Thread 2  (Read 584554 times)

Offline Johnnyhinbos

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3863
  • Boston, MA
  • Liked: 8095
  • Likes Given: 943
For what it’s worth, according to AmericaSpace the Tesla isn’t even at KSC, it’s over at Cape Canaveral...

http://www.americaspace.com/2018/01/24/falcon-heavy-roars-to-life-as-successful-test-fire-paves-way-for-february-launch-debut/
John Hanzl. Author, action / adventure www.johnhanzl.com

Offline Norm38

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1696
  • Liked: 1272
  • Likes Given: 2316
How can the payload not be on board if the fairing is?  They used an empty fairing, instead of just leaving it off?

Offline docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6333
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 4204
  • Likes Given: 2
How can the payload not be on board if the fairing is?  They used an empty fairing, instead of just leaving it off?

Playing Devil's Advocate; if the Roadster were a red herring and something else SpaceX has come up with is going uphill. 
« Last Edit: 01/30/2018 04:21 pm by docmordrid »
DM

Offline Mapperuo

  • Assistant Webmaster
  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1684
  • Yorkshire
  • Liked: 533
  • Likes Given: 68
Would anyone happen to know if NASA TV will broadcast the Falcon Heavy launch? I can't seem to find an answer using google.

I'm hoping that, due to the use of a KSC pad, they will.

The reason I'm hoping for NASA TV is that at the currently scheduled launch time I'll have access to a TV that carries NASA TV, but I won't have internet access.

Probably not, NASA hasn't broadcasted any commercial SpaceX launches.

But since it's such an important launch, maybe(?)

They were going to broadcast EchoStar 23 from 39A until it was swapped so CRS-10 was first, So yeh, I'd put this under a small possibility they may.
- Aaron

Offline speedevil

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4406
  • Fife
  • Liked: 2762
  • Likes Given: 3369
How can the payload not be on board if the fairing is?  They used an empty fairing, instead of just leaving it off?

Playing Devi's Advocate; if the Roadster were a red herring and something else SpaceX has come up with is going uphill.
Speculation thread is -> http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=42801.220

Offline Kabloona

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4846
  • Velocitas Eradico
  • Fortress of Solitude
  • Liked: 3429
  • Likes Given: 741
How can the payload not be on board if the fairing is?  They used an empty fairing, instead of just leaving it off?

Leaving the fairing off for the first full-up static fire on the pad wouldn't be a good idea even if there's no payload on top. SpaceX would likely want to gather acoustic and vibration data inside the fairing during the static fire to verify their predictions about the acoustic and vibe loads that FH payloads will be subjected to.

They'll be gathering that data during the first flight too, but doing so on the pad with all engines firing would be the first step, and the first real-world look at what an FH payload will be subject to. That first static test should tell them a lot about how well their acoustic and vibe models agree with reality inside the fairing.
« Last Edit: 01/28/2018 01:56 pm by Kabloona »

Offline ChrisGebhardt

  • Assistant Managing Editor
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7842
  • ad astra scientia
  • ~1 AU
  • Liked: 7877
  • Likes Given: 853
Would anyone happen to know if NASA TV will broadcast the Falcon Heavy launch? I can't seem to find an answer using google.

I'm hoping that, due to the use of a KSC pad, they will.

The reason I'm hoping for NASA TV is that at the currently scheduled launch time I'll have access to a TV that carries NASA TV, but I won't have internet access.

Probably not, NASA hasn't broadcasted any commercial SpaceX launches.

But since it's such an important launch, maybe(?)

They were going to broadcast EchoStar 23 from 39A until it was swapped so CRS-10 was first, So yeh, I'd put this under a small possibility they may.

Given that they've shown no interest in broadcasting any mission that wasn't a flight for them off 39A -- and there are numerous major commercial milestones off 39A they could have justified broadcasting (Echostar [first full commercial mission from KSC], SES-10 [first re-flight], NROL-76 [first commercial national security mission], X-37B [first wing space plane since Shuttle]) -- it would be a shocking (but granted, nice) change of pace for KSC to embrace their multi-user sport philosophy and broadcast launches from their facilities.

But their lack of interest likely stems from money.

SpaceX has to pay for the press site for every non-NASA mission off 39A for the press and for the contract workers to broadcast news conferences for non-NASA missions.  So KSC would likely want them to pay to broadcast the launch.  And they have their own webcast for that.
« Last Edit: 01/28/2018 02:36 pm by ChrisGebhardt »

Offline the_other_Doug

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3010
  • Minneapolis, MN
  • Liked: 2191
  • Likes Given: 4620
How can the payload not be on board if the fairing is?  They used an empty fairing, instead of just leaving it off?

Leaving the fairing off for the first full-up static fire on the pad wouldn't be a good idea even if there's no payload on top. SpaceX would likely want to gather acoustic and vibration data inside the fairing during the static fire to verify their predictions about the acoustic and vibe loads that FH payloads will be subjected to.

They'll be gathering that data during the first flight too, but doing so on the pad with all engines firing would be the first step, and the first real-world look at what an FH payload will be subject to. That first static test should tell them a lot about how well their acoustic and vibe models agree with reality inside the fairing.

It's also interesting that the website reporting that the roadster has not been inside the fairing also sates that their specific questions about the location of the roadster, as well as the exact orbit design for the demo mission, are questions that SpaceX has not answered, despite their direct requests for it.

It really sounds like the website authors are saying "Since you won't confirm the roadster is in the fairing, we will just assume it's not until you tell us otherwise."  And they are going by the pictures taken of the roadster prior to encapsulation, with some odd concept that, if SpaceX hasn't gotten back to them about their questions, then it is frozen in time as of the time the pictures were taken, or something.

In other words -- when a reporter whines "No one answered my questions, so I'll just say whatever I want!" they are usually making stuff up... ;)
-Doug  (With my shield, not yet upon it)

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10586
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 4548
  • Likes Given: 13523
Interesting, quote is from a tweet by VP Pence’s chief of staff:

Quote
The White House seems interested in the Falcon Heavy launch
“Major (positive) ramifications for US space industry if this goes according to plan.”

by Eric Berger - Jan 27, 2018 7:15pm GMT

https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/01/the-white-house-seems-interested-in-the-falcon-heavy-launch/
Great! :)  Please send money....
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10183
  • US
  • Liked: 13845
  • Likes Given: 5915
Interesting, quote is from a tweet by VP Pence’s chief of staff:

Quote
The White House seems interested in the Falcon Heavy launch
“Major (positive) ramifications for US space industry if this goes according to plan.”

by Eric Berger - Jan 27, 2018 7:15pm GMT

https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/01/the-white-house-seems-interested-in-the-falcon-heavy-launch/
Great! :)  Please send money....

The Air Force has already bought a FH test flight, it's just not the first flight.

Offline ChrisGebhardt

  • Assistant Managing Editor
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7842
  • ad astra scientia
  • ~1 AU
  • Liked: 7877
  • Likes Given: 853
How can the payload not be on board if the fairing is?  They used an empty fairing, instead of just leaving it off?

Leaving the fairing off for the first full-up static fire on the pad wouldn't be a good idea even if there's no payload on top. SpaceX would likely want to gather acoustic and vibration data inside the fairing during the static fire to verify their predictions about the acoustic and vibe loads that FH payloads will be subjected to.

They'll be gathering that data during the first flight too, but doing so on the pad with all engines firing would be the first step, and the first real-world look at what an FH payload will be subject to. That first static test should tell them a lot about how well their acoustic and vibe models agree with reality inside the fairing.

It's also interesting that the website reporting that the roadster has not been inside the fairing also sates that their specific questions about the location of the roadster, as well as the exact orbit design for the demo mission, are questions that SpaceX has not answered, despite their direct requests for it.

It really sounds like the website authors are saying "Since you won't confirm the roadster is in the fairing, we will just assume it's not until you tell us otherwise."  And they are going by the pictures taken of the roadster prior to encapsulation, with some odd concept that, if SpaceX hasn't gotten back to them about their questions, then it is frozen in time as of the time the pictures were taken, or something.

In other words -- when a reporter whines "No one answered my questions, so I'll just say whatever I want!" they are usually making stuff up... ;)

I know Mike.  He does not make up stories, nor is he whining.  Let's refrain from make accusations against other outlets and calling other reporter's work and sources into question unless you have proof their reporting is incorrect.  Questioning a story is one thing; saying a reporter is whining and "making stuff up" is another.
« Last Edit: 01/28/2018 09:14 pm by ChrisGebhardt »

Offline mdeep

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 188
  • NSF Photographer
  • Tampa Bay
  • Liked: 1138
  • Likes Given: 6
++

Please remember that when you write about reporters in this industry, friends and colleagues may be reading.

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13463
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 11864
  • Likes Given: 11086
++

Please remember that when you write about reporters in this industry, friends and colleagues may be reading.

Yes. This is a special place in part because we don't do that sort of thing. Just not done.
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline CameronD

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2372
  • Melbourne, Australia
    • Norton Consultants
  • Liked: 866
  • Likes Given: 548
How can the payload not be on board if the fairing is?  They used an empty fairing, instead of just leaving it off?

Leaving the fairing off for the first full-up static fire on the pad wouldn't be a good idea even if there's no payload on top. SpaceX would likely want to gather acoustic and vibration data inside the fairing during the static fire to verify their predictions about the acoustic and vibe loads that FH payloads will be subjected to.

They'll be gathering that data during the first flight too, but doing so on the pad with all engines firing would be the first step, and the first real-world look at what an FH payload will be subject to. That first static test should tell them a lot about how well their acoustic and vibe models agree with reality inside the fairing.

It's also interesting that the website reporting that the roadster has not been inside the fairing also sates that their specific questions about the location of the roadster, as well as the exact orbit design for the demo mission, are questions that SpaceX has not answered, despite their direct requests for it.

Perhaps Elon had the roadster removed for static fire??   Given this is the first launch of this brute, that seems a reasonable possibility in case of a repeat of AMOS-6.
 
With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine - however, this is not necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are
going to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly overhead.

Offline pb2000

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 671
  • Calgary, AB
  • Liked: 759
  • Likes Given: 237
Perhaps Elon had the roadster removed for static fire??   Given this is the first launch of this brute, that seems a reasonable possibility in case of a repeat of AMOS-6.
If the static went bad, the loss of the roadster would have been an insignificant blip compared to the rocket and pad.
Launches attended: Worldview-4 (Atlas V 401), Iridium NEXT Flight 1 (Falcon 9 FT), PAZ+Starlink (Falcon 9 FT), Arabsat-6A (Falcon Heavy)
Pilgrimaged to: Boca Chica (09/19 & 01/22)

Offline CameronD

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2372
  • Melbourne, Australia
    • Norton Consultants
  • Liked: 866
  • Likes Given: 548
Perhaps Elon had the roadster removed for static fire??   Given this is the first launch of this brute, that seems a reasonable possibility in case of a repeat of AMOS-6.
If the static went bad, the loss of the roadster would have been an insignificant blip compared to the rocket and pad.

As may be, but.. but.. it's still a Tesla Roadster!  :o
With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine - however, this is not necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are
going to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly overhead.

Offline Inoeth

This is me entirely speculating, but perhaps because even tho it's "Just a Tesla Roadster", it is nonetheless one of Elon's personal roadsters (not 001, but one of the first original cars nonetheless) and because the FH is now horizontal, perhaps it'll go back into the HIF to integrate with the Roadster after all... beyond the FH being horizontal, I  haven't heard if it's gone into the HIF or is just chilling on the pad.... Otherwise, I'd guess that the story is slightly incorrect.... tho in the end, we'll all get our answer come February 6th (should it launch on schedule)...

Weather wise, things look okay from this far out, but i'm just looking at generic weather websites and things can certainly change in the next couple of days... Let's just hope GovSat launches on Tuesday or Wednesday or else that'll start pushing into FH's schedule..
. I agree that they do seem to have worked out the kinks given the successful static fire that only took place half an hour after the originally stated start of the window...

Offline Nomadd

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8835
  • Waikiki
  • Liked: 60418
  • Likes Given: 1301
++

Please remember that when you write about reporters in this industry, friends and colleagues may be reading.

Yes. This is a special place in part because we don't do that sort of thing. Just not done.
Except for Andy Pasztor?
« Last Edit: 01/29/2018 03:37 am by Nomadd »
Those who danced were thought to be quite insane by those who couldn't hear the music.

Offline Jdeshetler

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 814
  • Silicon Valley, CA
  • Liked: 3661
  • Likes Given: 3546
What is the hypothetical trajectories for a Falcon Heavy Demo Mission which will launch at 1:30 EST on February 6th 2018?

Offline speedevil

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4406
  • Fife
  • Liked: 2762
  • Likes Given: 3369
Perhaps Elon had the roadster removed for static fire??   Given this is the first launch of this brute, that seems a reasonable possibility in case of a repeat of AMOS-6.
Neglecting reasonable questions about the value of the roadster, this would have involved some delay as the roadster would have to be re-fitted at some point.
There is a reasonable likelyhood that this delay would - with also the unclarity about schedules on Govsat and now shutdowns, delay FH launch.
Something they really want to get over, without any more delays so they can get on to other stuff.
That, and if FH explodes at static fire, does anyone think that the roadster not being on top would make Elon feel better, especially as such is likely to lead to a stand-down for the whole fleet for some months.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1