Author Topic: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)  (Read 533271 times)

Offline gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10205
  • US
  • Liked: 13885
  • Likes Given: 5933
Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #240 on: 09/20/2017 05:39 pm »
Isn't it about time to move this discussion to the Missions section and create an updates thread.  I anticipate there being some updates in the next couple of weeks on the timing.

There is already a mission thread:
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=42705.0

Offline Negan

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 739
  • Southwest
  • Liked: 210
  • Likes Given: 533
Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #241 on: 09/24/2017 04:05 pm »
So what's the TLI payload capability of the FH up to now? Could it do 20 metric Ton payload expendable?

Offline jpo234

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2021
  • Liked: 2280
  • Likes Given: 2184
Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #242 on: 09/29/2017 09:44 am »
Does FH still have a future after the BFR announcement? Or will it just launch once?
You want to be inspired by things. You want to wake up in the morning and think the future is going to be great. That's what being a spacefaring civilization is all about. It's about believing in the future and believing the future will be better than the past. And I can't think of anything more exciting than being out there among the stars.

Offline RotoSequence

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2208
  • Liked: 2068
  • Likes Given: 1535
Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #243 on: 09/29/2017 09:46 am »
Does FH still have a future after the BFR announcement? Or will it just launch once?

Customers are going to be rather cross if they're kicked back another five years by their launch provider for a rocket that only exists on paper.

Offline jpo234

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2021
  • Liked: 2280
  • Likes Given: 2184
Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #244 on: 09/29/2017 09:50 am »
Does FH still have a future after the BFR announcement? Or will it just launch once?

Customers are going to be rather cross if they're kicked back another five years by their launch provider for a rocket that only exists on paper.

If I did not miscount, there are just 5 FH launches on the manifest, some of them far enough in the future that they could conceivable launch on BFR.
You want to be inspired by things. You want to wake up in the morning and think the future is going to be great. That's what being a spacefaring civilization is all about. It's about believing in the future and believing the future will be better than the past. And I can't think of anything more exciting than being out there among the stars.

Offline darkenfast

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1539
  • Liked: 1829
  • Likes Given: 8739
Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #245 on: 09/29/2017 10:06 am »
Musk stated that they will build enough Falcons to keep flying the rocket until the BFR is established as a reliable vehicle, as he understands some customers won't want to risk payloads on an unproven launcher.  That's another advantage of a reusable rocket.  It will remain flying while the factory is building BFRs.
Writer of Book and Lyrics for musicals "SCAR", "Cinderella!", and "Aladdin!". Retired Naval Security Group. "I think SCAR is a winner. Great score, [and] the writing is up there with the very best!"
-- Phil Henderson, Composer of the West End musical "The Far Pavilions".

Online Cheapchips

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1030
  • UK
  • Liked: 861
  • Likes Given: 1931
Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #246 on: 09/29/2017 10:41 am »
If you take an optimistic view on BFR's first flight (2019) and a pessimistic* view on on FH (2018), that gives FH a couple of years useful service doesn't it?


*Arguably realistic?
« Last Edit: 09/29/2017 10:42 am by Cheapchips »

Offline jpo234

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2021
  • Liked: 2280
  • Likes Given: 2184
Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #247 on: 09/29/2017 11:10 am »
If you take an optimistic view on BFR's first flight (2019) and a pessimistic* view on on FH (2018), that gives FH a couple of years useful service doesn't it?


*Arguably realistic?

5 launches on manifest, 2 of the demo missions. One of the customer missions so late that it could launch without delay on BFR (assuming the BFR time table holds [big assumption, I know]). So, FH development for just 2 or 3 revenue flights?
You want to be inspired by things. You want to wake up in the morning and think the future is going to be great. That's what being a spacefaring civilization is all about. It's about believing in the future and believing the future will be better than the past. And I can't think of anything more exciting than being out there among the stars.

Offline Proponent

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7277
  • Liked: 2782
  • Likes Given: 1462
Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #248 on: 09/29/2017 11:32 am »
If you take an optimistic view on BFR's first flight (2019) and a pessimistic* view on on FH (2018), that gives FH a couple of years useful service doesn't it?


*Arguably realistic?

5 launches on manifest, 2 of the demo missions. One of the customer missions so late that it could launch without delay on BFR (assuming the BFR time table holds [big assumption, I know]). So, FH development for just 2 or 3 revenue flights?

If the Air Force certifies FH, it will be able to carry the heavy payloads for which DoD/NRO currently uses Delta IV Heavy.  That's only about one a launch per year, but with Delta IV Heavy being more expensive than FH and becoming more so as Delta IV Medium is phased out, I'll bet DoD/NRO will be keen to keep FH around, even if that means giving SpaceX an upkeep contract along the lines of the much-criticized ELC.

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12095
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 18197
  • Likes Given: 12158
Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #249 on: 09/29/2017 12:37 pm »
If you take an optimistic view on BFR's first flight (2019) and a pessimistic* view on on FH (2018), that gives FH a couple of years useful service doesn't it?


*Arguably realistic?

5 launches on manifest, 2 of the demo missions. One of the customer missions so late that it could launch without delay on BFR (assuming the BFR time table holds [big assumption, I know]). So, FH development for just 2 or 3 revenue flights?

If the Air Force certifies FH, it will be able to carry the heavy payloads for which DoD/NRO currently uses Delta IV Heavy.  That's only about one a launch per year, but with Delta IV Heavy being more expensive than FH and becoming more so as Delta IV Medium is phased out, I'll bet DoD/NRO will be keen to keep FH around, even if that means giving SpaceX an upkeep contract along the lines of the much-criticized ELC.
I don't agree. Faced with the prospect of an NSS-certified FH going away SpaceX will simply have BFR certified for NSS launches. IMO FH won't be kept around, for NSS launches only, after the stockpile of F9's and FH's runs out. SpaceX is not ULA.

Online JamesH65

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1559
  • Liked: 1739
  • Likes Given: 10
Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #250 on: 09/29/2017 12:50 pm »
If you take an optimistic view on BFR's first flight (2019) and a pessimistic* view on on FH (2018), that gives FH a couple of years useful service doesn't it?


*Arguably realistic?

5 launches on manifest, 2 of the demo missions. One of the customer missions so late that it could launch without delay on BFR (assuming the BFR time table holds [big assumption, I know]). So, FH development for just 2 or 3 revenue flights?

If the Air Force certifies FH, it will be able to carry the heavy payloads for which DoD/NRO currently uses Delta IV Heavy.  That's only about one a launch per year, but with Delta IV Heavy being more expensive than FH and becoming more so as Delta IV Medium is phased out, I'll bet DoD/NRO will be keen to keep FH around, even if that means giving SpaceX an upkeep contract along the lines of the much-criticized ELC.
I don't agree. Faced with the prospect of an NSS-certified FH going away SpaceX will simply have BFR certified for NSS launches. IMO FH won't be kept around, for NSS launches only, after the stockpile of F9's and FH's runs out. SpaceX is not ULA.

Which is what Musk said - they want one booster/spaceship that covers all the bases. I suspect its going to take longer than 2022 to get to that point, so I expect F9 to be flying at least until 2025 if not longer. Once BFR works and is reliable, F9 can be retired since there is nothing it can do cheaper than BFR. According to the current Musk figures. That may change.

Online Semmel

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2178
  • Germany
  • Liked: 2433
  • Likes Given: 11916
Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #251 on: 09/29/2017 12:53 pm »

If the Air Force certifies FH, it will be able to carry the heavy payloads for which DoD/NRO currently uses Delta IV Heavy.  That's only about one a launch per year, but with Delta IV Heavy being more expensive than FH and becoming more so as Delta IV Medium is phased out, I'll bet DoD/NRO will be keen to keep FH around, even if that means giving SpaceX an upkeep contract along the lines of the much-criticized ELC.

For the heavy DOD payloads, they would need a new fairing design and a new payload adapter, or a new payload adapter and vertical integration. The current system is limited to 11 mT or so and horizontal integration. People forget that F9 is more limited by the integration method than by the rocket throwing capability. For things that are heavier than the 11mT they HAVE to redesign the fairing. For things that require VI, the HAVE to redo the integration process. Given the announcement of canceling F9 within the next years, sounds like a waste of money TBH.

FH is for high energy orbits with medium mass payloads. This is actually good for ULA because it gives them a leg to stand on.

Offline georgegassaway

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 226
    • George's Rockets
  • Liked: 286
  • Likes Given: 76
Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #252 on: 09/29/2017 06:43 pm »
If you take an optimistic view on BFR's first flight (2019) and a pessimistic* view on on FH (2018), that gives FH a couple of years useful service doesn't it?

History of FH announced first launch, and several years past that date, provides little confidence or logic that BFR won't end up with the same molasses scheduling.   (And yes, I really did type molasses, not an auto-correct).

It just amazes me how many people faithfully believe any long term schedule that Elon Musk says (than again some still clinging to FH launching in November 2017 because Elon said so 2 months ago). When many of those people have been around long enough to know the history that it almost never turns out to be correct (for whatever reasons they do this and definitely should know better).  Boy who cried Wolf syndrome, too many times.

SpaceX does a lot of great stuff. Predicting long term timeframes is definitely not one of them.
« Last Edit: 09/29/2017 06:48 pm by georgegassaway »
Info on my flying Lunar Module Quadcopter: https://tinyurl.com/LunarModuleQuadcopter

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8144
  • Liked: 6801
  • Likes Given: 2965
Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #253 on: 09/29/2017 06:50 pm »

If the Air Force certifies FH, it will be able to carry the heavy payloads for which DoD/NRO currently uses Delta IV Heavy.  That's only about one a launch per year, but with Delta IV Heavy being more expensive than FH and becoming more so as Delta IV Medium is phased out, I'll bet DoD/NRO will be keen to keep FH around, even if that means giving SpaceX an upkeep contract along the lines of the much-criticized ELC.

For the heavy DOD payloads, they would need a new fairing design and a new payload adapter, or a new payload adapter and vertical integration. The current system is limited to 11 mT or so and horizontal integration. People forget that F9 is more limited by the integration method than by the rocket throwing capability. For things that are heavier than the 11mT they HAVE to redesign the fairing. For things that require VI, the HAVE to redo the integration process. Given the announcement of canceling F9 within the next years, sounds like a waste of money TBH.

FH is for high energy orbits with medium mass payloads. This is actually good for ULA because it gives them a leg to stand on.

Source for claim that payloads over 11t require a new fairing? A new PAF is considerably simpler than a fairing.

Offline Proponent

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7277
  • Liked: 2782
  • Likes Given: 1462
Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #254 on: 09/29/2017 09:21 pm »
Yeah, but it's going to be a while before BFR is ready, isn't it?  Time enough for more thant 2 or 3 revenue flights, methinks.

Offline wannamoonbase

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5412
  • Denver, CO
    • U.S. Metric Association
  • Liked: 3112
  • Likes Given: 3861
Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #255 on: 09/29/2017 09:22 pm »
Yeah, but it's going to be a while before BFR is ready, isn't it?  Time enough for more thant 2 or 3 revenue flights, methinks.

8-10 years is a safe bet. 

At 2-3 FH flights a year it will pay off.
Wildly optimistic prediction, Superheavy recovery on IFT-4 or IFT-5

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6809
  • California
  • Liked: 8485
  • Likes Given: 5384
Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #256 on: 09/29/2017 09:24 pm »
Yeah, but it's going to be a while before BFR is ready, isn't it?  Time enough for more thant 2 or 3 revenue flights, methinks.

Right. FH will fly until BFR can be certified. Whenever that will be. They are not going to stop with FH before then, even if it might fly more rarely than originally planned. But that reduced flight rate is due to F9 performance increases, not the BFR.

Online rakaydos

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2825
  • Liked: 1869
  • Likes Given: 69
Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #257 on: 09/30/2017 05:41 am »
If you take an optimistic view on BFR's first flight (2019) and a pessimistic* view on on FH (2018), that gives FH a couple of years useful service doesn't it?

History of FH announced first launch, and several years past that date, provides little confidence or logic that BFR won't end up with the same molasses scheduling.   (And yes, I really did type molasses, not an auto-correct).

It just amazes me how many people faithfully believe any long term schedule that Elon Musk says (than again some still clinging to FH launching in November 2017 because Elon said so 2 months ago). When many of those people have been around long enough to know the history that it almost never turns out to be correct (for whatever reasons they do this and definitely should know better).  Boy who cried Wolf syndrome, too many times.

SpaceX does a lot of great stuff. Predicting long term timeframes is definitely not one of them.
We KNOW what's holding up falcon heavy now. It's not the rocket being hard, they already solved that one.
Falcon heavy needs:
1) get pad 40 fixed
2) refit pad 39a to handle Falcon heavy, as planned.

Once both of those are complete, Falcon heavy will be flying. And step 1 is almost finished, despite hurricane.

Offline macpacheco

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 891
  • Vitoria-ES-Brazil
  • Liked: 368
  • Likes Given: 3041
Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #258 on: 09/30/2017 06:37 pm »
EVERY expendable F9 launch becomes a triple RTLS FH launch, as soon as SpaceX can handle the FH launch cadence.
I know some question if the refurb will be cheaper than building a new F9 booster, but its seem clear it will be (F9 booster refurb likely is ALREADY cheaper than 1/3 of the cost of a new booster).
Combined with the CLEAR Hawthorne manufacturing bottleneck, this alone could massively help SpaceX substantially increase its launch cadence and more towards nearly all boosters being recovered and relaunched.

I know, right now SpaceX doesn't have enough booster relaunch customers. And I'll restate my prediction this will change massively as the 5th or 6th successful relaunch happens.
Looking for companies doing great things for much more than money

Offline eric.paillet

  • Member
  • Posts: 1
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #259 on: 09/30/2017 08:04 pm »
In the current situation FH will only be needed for heavy weight / medium weight, high energy missions. On the other hand when second stage reuse has been implemented, FH will maybe be needed for nearly all missions due to the second stage additional mass penalty. Since the whole system will be reusable in that case, the extra cost due to needing the FH will be much less. Additionally, being able to reuse the second stage on nearly every mission will give them a lot of orbital reentry data that is possibly relevant to BFR.

 

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