Author Topic: SpaceX Falcon Heavy : STP-2 : LC-39A : November 2018  (Read 194118 times)

Offline ChefPat

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1051
  • Earth, for now
  • Liked: 123
  • Likes Given: 1020
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.
Playing Politics with Commercial Crew is Un-American!!!

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8482
  • Australia
  • Liked: 3399
  • Likes Given: 797
Jeff Bezos has billions to spend on rockets and can go at whatever pace he likes! Wow! What pace is he going at? Well... have you heard of Zeno's paradox?

Offline docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4731
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 1829
  • Likes Given: 1
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.
« Last Edit: 06/13/2014 02:39 AM by docmordrid »
DM

Offline Antares

  • ABO^2
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5201
  • Done arguing with amateurs
  • Liked: 368
  • Likes Given: 226
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.
If I like something on NSF, it's probably because I know it to be accurate.  Every once in a while, it's just something I agree with.  Facts generally receive the former.

Offline docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4731
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 1829
  • Likes Given: 1
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
« Last Edit: 06/13/2014 03:03 AM by docmordrid »
DM

Offline king1999

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 251
  • F-Niner Fan
  • Atlanta, GA
  • Liked: 144
  • Likes Given: 487
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.

Offline Antares

  • ABO^2
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5201
  • Done arguing with amateurs
  • Liked: 368
  • Likes Given: 226
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.
If I like something on NSF, it's probably because I know it to be accurate.  Every once in a while, it's just something I agree with.  Facts generally receive the former.

Online Steven Pietrobon

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15365
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 4677
  • Likes Given: 605
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.
« Last Edit: 06/13/2014 05:29 AM by Steven Pietrobon »
Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #1:  Engineering is done with numbers.  Analysis without numbers is only an opinion.

Offline Jcc

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 865
  • Liked: 199
  • Likes Given: 93
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.

Online woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8116
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 4215
  • Likes Given: 1289
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.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32196
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 10843
  • Likes Given: 321
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.

Offline MTom

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 378
  • EU / Hungary
  • Liked: 107
  • Likes Given: 435
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.   ;)

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32196
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 10843
  • Likes Given: 321

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

Offline Galactic Penguin SST


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)
Chinese spaceflight is a cosmic riddle wrapped in a galactic mystery inside an orbital enigma... - (not) Winston Churchill

Offline MTom

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 378
  • EU / Hungary
  • Liked: 107
  • Likes Given: 435

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?

Offline Dudely

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 312
  • Canada
  • Liked: 109
  • Likes Given: 92
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+).

Offline docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4731
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 1829
  • Likes Given: 1
Anyone know if Thin Red Line in Canada is still working with Bigelow?
DM

Offline sublimemarsupial

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 386
  • Liked: 258
  • Likes Given: 3

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?

Offline Chris Bergin

Right then.

Let's all get on topic with THIS mission.

From this point onwards. Don't make me get out my big stick.

Offline Llian Rhydderch

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 896
  • Terran Anglosphere
  • Liked: 603
  • Likes Given: 5903

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!
Re arguments from authority on NSF:  "no one is exempt from error, and errors of authority are usually the worst kind.  Taking your word for things without question is no different than a bracket design not being tested because the designer was an old hand."
"You would actually save yourself time and effort if you were to use evidence and logic to make your points instead of wrapping yourself in the royal mantle of authority.  The approach only works on sheep, not inquisitive, intelligent people."

Tags: