The LSP data hasn't been updated in a while. It doesn't match the data SpaceX has on their website, which is presumably for Block 5. They don't have any data at all on New Glenn or any other vehicle bigger than DIVH.
Which numbers are you referring to?
Quote from: envy887 on 06/07/2017 02:26 amWhich numbers are you referring to?Numbers quoted by LSP or the provider. Any other numbers are, AFAICT, estimates by forum members--which do not appear to be consistent with other "official" numbers.
For that matter, why not just launch a complete FH upper stage fully fueled or a stretched upper stage no payload. Dock Orion to it, then proceed to cis-lunar. No need for refueling. Just separate the booster upper stage, and redock with a new upper stage either sent on a F9 or another FH. Two FH launches are still cheaper than one SLS launch.
You cannot insert a fueled Falcon upper stage to Orbit. It weighs something like 120 tons (this regularly gets missed, for some reason) . And has a length of 12m+ thus making fairing encapsulation impossible.
Quote from: Dante80 on 06/07/2017 04:58 amYou cannot insert a fueled Falcon upper stage to Orbit. It weighs something like 120 tons (this regularly gets missed, for some reason) . And has a length of 12m+ thus making fairing encapsulation impossible. I'm just gunna leave the second part of this alone We don't know much about the Falcon Heavy second stage mass figures. Some reasonable estimates are: Length: 13.8 mDiameter: 3.7 mEmpty mass: 3,900 kgPropellant mass: 92,670 kgThrust: 934 kNISP: 348 s
SLS Blk 1 2019? 24,500 kg 19,500 kg N/A
Oh, and honestly that's the hard way. If you just replace the fairing with a third stage that is identical to the second stage, you'll get 39 tons through TLI. The second stage does 2,230 m/s of the burn to orbit, the third stage does the rest and is 73.4% full when you come to do your TLI burn. Of course, you have to throw away another Merlin, so it's not free, and who knows if the fineness ratio is getting too high here.
Quote from: QuantumG on 06/07/2017 06:27 amOh, and honestly that's the hard way. If you just replace the fairing with a third stage that is identical to the second stage, you'll get 39 tons through TLI. The second stage does 2,230 m/s of the burn to orbit, the third stage does the rest and is 73.4% full when you come to do your TLI burn. Of course, you have to throw away another Merlin, so it's not free, and who knows if the fineness ratio is getting too high here.I'd be surprised if the Falcon 9/heavy upper stage had the structural margins to carry another identical stage and a 39 ton payload.
Not to mention that ~6 mT comsats already are almost maxing out the fairing:
Quote from: ncb1397 on 06/07/2017 09:41 pmNot to mention that ~6 mT comsats already are almost maxing out the fairing:That doesn't look like a 5m fairing, and Falcon 9 fairing internal volume looks much bigger (see below with Jason 3 payload):
I was asking which ones specifically you find inconsistent.
Quote from: edkyle99 on 06/07/2017 07:26 pmSLS Blk 1 2019? 24,500 kg 19,500 kg N/AWhere are these SLS block 1 numbers from?They seem suspiciously low, I think the payload for these trajectories should be higher
Working backward from the Trans-Mars values published by SpaceX, I came up with 5.6 tonnes TLI for F9B5 and 20.9 tonnes TLI for FH. I'm honestly having trouble seeing how Falcon Heavy meets its claimed payload goals, let alone the numbers we've conjured in our guesstimates, unless it incorporates yet-to-be-revealed improvements. To be conservative, I'm putting these at 5.5 tonnes and 20.5 tonnes, respectfully.
I'm certain that New Glenn's TLI number would not be less than its TMI number, so I'm leaving my original guesses on that rocket unchanged for now. I'm adding a GTO column because that is an oft-listed number.