-
#100
by
ChefPat
on 13 Jun, 2014 01:29
-
I don't see why that would be the case. They need to demo FH if they want to attract customers for it.
Unless there's been a drastic change, the only customer for this behemoth is the US air force.
The commsat folks would demand a lot more than just the one demonstration flight.
Bigelow.
-
#101
by
QuantumG
on 13 Jun, 2014 01:30
-
-
#102
by
docmordrid
on 13 Jun, 2014 02:37
-
I don't see why that would be the case. They need to demo FH if they want to attract customers for it.
Unless there's been a drastic change, the only customer for this behemoth is the US air force.
The commsat folks would demand a lot more than just the one demonstration flight.
Bigelow, if the 5.2x19m fairing is any indication. Seems perfect, if not purpose built, for BA-330.
-
#103
by
Antares
on 13 Jun, 2014 02:54
-
There is a very good reason not to do demos out of the Cape, now that a Vandy launch site is available: the lack of beaches full of tourists and news crews, all filming the possible unscheduled fireworks display.
-
#104
by
docmordrid
on 13 Jun, 2014 03:02
-
Go check YouTube for videos of the CASSIOPE launch at Vandy. There are plenty of places where a launch accident there could be seen & filmed by the public and news mongers
-
#105
by
king1999
on 13 Jun, 2014 03:05
-
There is a very good reason not to do demos out of the Cape, now that a Vandy launch site is available: the lack of beaches full of tourists and news crews, all filming the possible unscheduled fireworks display.
I think the last few words were what you wanted to say, but tried to dress it unsuccessfully. An old Russian engine is more likely to make it a July 4 for the US then 27 newly built and tested ones.
-
#106
by
Antares
on 13 Jun, 2014 05:13
-
I think the last few words were what you wanted to say, but tried to dress it unsuccessfully. An old Russian engine is more likely to make it a July 4 for the US then 27 newly built and tested ones.
No, unlike what I'm typing right now, I said exactly what I wanted to say. I will assume you're just new and don't realize that my moniker preceded the renamed launch vehicle by more than 4 years.
Pros know the relative reliability of the two launch systems, and pros in any business seek to minimize PR fall out. SpaceX is in a high-stakes PR match with FAR 15 Old Space right now. The Cape is much more accessible than Vandenberg. Places to watch from are less important than opportunity to do so.
-
#107
by
Steven Pietrobon
on 13 Jun, 2014 05:26
-
I'm am curious about why they switched to KSC though, maybe they have a payload that needs to launch east.
I'm guessing that KSC was chosen so that a used Dragon could be sent around the Moon on FH's first flight. I'm sure the connection to LC-39A having launched Apollo will not be lost on some.
-
#108
by
Jcc
on 13 Jun, 2014 10:57
-
I'm am curious about why they switched to KSC though, maybe they have a payload that needs to launch east.
I'm guessing that KSC was chosen so that a used Dragon could be sent around the Moon on FH's first flight. I'm sure the connection to LC-39A having launched Apollo will not be lost on some.
Nice thought, but they won't want to get NASA angry by upstaging Orion/SLS.
Speaking of NASA, they are a potential customer for interplanetary missions, including Mars.
First flight out of 39A is likely to have pad issues, maybe they want to shake those out on a demo flight rather than a CRS mission.
-
#109
by
woods170
on 13 Jun, 2014 11:38
-
I'm am curious about why they switched to KSC though, maybe they have a payload that needs to launch east.
I'm guessing that KSC was chosen so that a used Dragon could be sent around the Moon on FH's first flight. I'm sure the connection to LC-39A having launched Apollo will not be lost on some.
Nice thought, but they won't want to get NASA angry by upstaging Orion/SLS.
Speaking of NASA, they are a potential customer for interplanetary missions, including Mars.
That would not actually upset NASA but mostly Congress critters.
-
#110
by
Jim
on 13 Jun, 2014 11:40
-
I'm am curious about why they switched to KSC though, maybe they have a payload that needs to launch east.
I'm guessing that KSC was chosen so that a used Dragon could be sent around the Moon on FH's first flight. I'm sure the connection to LC-39A having launched Apollo will not be lost on some.
Np, they chose it for this payload, STP-2.
-
#111
by
MTom
on 13 Jun, 2014 11:55
-
I'm am curious about why they switched to KSC though, maybe they have a payload that needs to launch east.
I'm guessing that KSC was chosen so that a used Dragon could be sent around the Moon on FH's first flight. I'm sure the connection to LC-39A having launched Apollo will not be lost on some.
Np, they chose it for this payload, STP-2.
Jim's post is a good point to come back on topic: STP-2 and not FH demo flight.
-
#112
by
Jim
on 13 Jun, 2014 13:20
-
Jim's post is a good point to come back on topic: STP-2 and not FH demo flight.
They will be one and the same
-
#113
by
Galactic Penguin SST
on 13 Jun, 2014 13:49
-
Jim's post is a good point to come back on topic: STP-2 and not FH demo flight.
They will be one and the same
Is there any written source that can confirm this? (although it is an obvious choice for the FH maiden flight)
-
#114
by
MTom
on 13 Jun, 2014 19:21
-
Jim's post is a good point to come back on topic: STP-2 and not FH demo flight.
They will be one and the same
Is there any written source that can confirm this? (although it is an obvious choice for the FH maiden flight)
SpaceX launch manifest (still) says there will be two launches: FH demo flight and STP-2 for USAF.
Something changed?
-
#115
by
Dudely
on 13 Jun, 2014 20:03
-
I don't see why that would be the case. They need to demo FH if they want to attract customers for it.
Unless there's been a drastic change, the only customer for this behemoth is the US air force.
The commsat folks would demand a lot more than just the one demonstration flight.
Bigelow, if the 5.2x19m fairing is any indication. Seems perfect, if not purpose built, for BA-330.
Yes, they have been building hardware to fly on FH specifically. They already have some completed and are waiting in storage to launch (remember FH has been delayed 2 years+).
-
#116
by
docmordrid
on 13 Jun, 2014 20:30
-
Anyone know if Thin Red Line in Canada is still working with Bigelow?
-
#117
by
sublimemarsupial
on 13 Jun, 2014 20:32
-
I don't see why that would be the case. They need to demo FH if they want to attract customers for it.
Unless there's been a drastic change, the only customer for this behemoth is the US air force.
The commsat folks would demand a lot more than just the one demonstration flight.
Bigelow, if the 5.2x19m fairing is any indication. Seems perfect, if not purpose built, for BA-330.
Yes, they have been building hardware to fly on FH specifically. They already have some completed and are waiting in storage to launch (remember FH has been delayed 2 years+).
Do you have a source for that?
-
#118
by
Chris Bergin
on 13 Jun, 2014 21:43
-
Right then.
Let's all get on topic with THIS mission.
From this point onwards. Don't make me get out my big stick.
-
#119
by
Llian Rhydderch
on 13 Jun, 2014 22:54
-
Jim's post is a good point to come back on topic: STP-2 and not FH demo flight.
They will be one and the same
Is there any written source that can confirm this? (although it is an obvious choice for the FH maiden flight)
So, do we have a source for the idea that the STP-2 payload will fly on the FH demo flight, the maiden flight of Falcon Heavy???
Jim claims it will be.
I realize that there are some insiders here, and that they may possibly have, and then choose to make public, such inside information. But we are all better off if we know if a claim is from someone who is claiming inside knowledge, or if the information has been publically stated.
Let's make the implicit, explicit!
