SpaceX Falcon Heavy Demo - Discussion and Speculation

[Req]

Actually, IF your balls are big enough you can land both boosters on the single pad and the center core on the ship.

Why, do range and launch licensing officials and agencies have an affinity to big balls? 

I had the same thought though - the existing center pad at the cape is way oversized.

[CJ]

Actually, IF your balls are big enough you can land both boosters on the single pad and the center core on the ship.

That's my guess as to what they'll do if the second LZ isn't ready. With the accuracy they've demonstrated, it should be possible.

My other guess is they'll tow JRTI, via Panama (It'll fit now) to Florida, to have two ASDS offshore.

My prime guess, though, is they'll just pour some concrete for the second side booster. 

[jpo234]

Actually, IF your balls are big enough you can land both boosters on the single pad and the center core on the ship.

That's my guess as to what they'll do if the second LZ isn't ready. With the accuracy they've demonstrated, it should be possible.

My other guess is they'll tow JRTI, via Panama (It'll fit now) to Florida, to have two ASDS offshore.

My prime guess, though, is they'll just pour some concrete for the second side booster.

How about the gator tanning facility?

[Lar]

Let's dial down the "always 6 months away"/"no it isn't" stuff a bit shall we?

[Jim]

Actually, IF your balls are big enough you can land both boosters on the single pad and the center core on the ship.

Why, do range and launch licensing officials and agencies have an affinity to big balls? 

Because  big balls and public safety first are mutually exclusive.

[LouScheffer]

So, can we finally dispense with the paper rocket nonsense?

It is paper rocket until second when it successfully completes maiden mission.

To resolve this,  we need an extension to ISO standard 10795:2011 - Vocabulary used in space systems.  (That's a real ISO document, by the way.)

I would suggest the following (though of course any such revision would need to go through the ISO standard process for amending ISO processes):

"Powerpoint rocket" : Idea interesting enough to share, no detailed design.  Example - nuclear thermal mission to outer planets
"Paper rocket":  In the detailed design phase.  Example might be New Glenn or Vulcan.
"Bending metal":  Pieces being assembled into a rocket intended for flight.  Where Falcon Heavy is now.
"Prototype rocket":  Can fly but not trusted with valuable payloads.  New Shepard or Space Ship Two.
"Rocket":  Flying and in production with real payloads.  Soyez, Ariane, Atlas 5, Falcon, etc.

On this scale, Falcon Heavy is definitely past "paper" and well into "bending metal".

[Herb Schaltegger]

So with the new truncated cone cap on the Falcon currently on LC-39A, how certain are we that it was a Heavy side core seen in the recent photo?

[marksmit]

Exactly what I thought (unfortunately..)

[Jet Black]

They don't ship them with the cap on.

[old_sellsword]

So with the new truncated cone cap on the Falcon currently on LC-39A, how certain are we that it was a Heavy side core seen in the recent photo?

The static fire cap goes on the second stage, so I'd say as certain as we possibly can be that it was a FH side booster.

[pstephens]

So with the new truncated cone cap on the Falcon currently on LC-39A, how certain are we that it was a Heavy side core seen in the recent photo?

It wasn't long enough to have an interstage. An interstage + the cone cap would have been an even longer payload than normal. This one was noticeably shorter.

[Herb Schaltegger]

So with the new truncated cone cap on the Falcon currently on LC-39A, how certain are we that it was a Heavy side core seen in the recent photo?

The static fire cap goes on the second stage, so I'd say as certain as we possibly can be that it was a FH side booster.

That cap in your first photo isn't the same as the one in use at LC-39 today, which is much more conical.

[old_sellsword]

So with the new truncated cone cap on the Falcon currently on LC-39A, how certain are we that it was a Heavy side core seen in the recent photo?

The static fire cap goes on the second stage, so I'd say as certain as we possibly can be that it was a FH side booster.

That cap in your first photo isn't the same as the one in use at LC-39 today, which is much more conical.

They look very similar to me at least.

And my point still stands, there's no reason (I bet it's not even possible) for them to transport a static fire cap on the top of a first stage tank. First stages are always transported with an interstage or nose cone, and the cap goes on the second stage.

[jjyach]

To me the "cap" looks like the top of the LOX tank.    Theres a photo out there of a dragon being mated to the second stage and granted this is missing the collar, it looks the same to me just white so maybe like said a cover cap for static fires.

Dragon mate: http://www.spacex.com/sites/spacex/files/styles/media_gallery_large/public/crs-3_dragonmating_0.jpg?itok=Yn03e0Bd

Edit: I'm talking about the one at 39a now.  One that arrived at texas is totally a side booster

[old_sellsword]

To me the "cap" looks like the top of the LOX tank.    Theres a photo out there of a dragon being mated to the second stage and granted this is missing the collar, it looks the same to me just white so maybe like said a cover cap for static fires.

Dragon mate: http://www.spacex.com/sites/spacex/files/styles/media_gallery_large/public/crs-3_dragonmating_0.jpg?itok=Yn03e0Bd

They definitely put a cap on top of the rocket, but it would make sense for it to have the same contour as the top of the second stage.

[russianhalo117]

To me the "cap" looks like the top of the LOX tank.    Theres a photo out there of a dragon being mated to the second stage and granted this is missing the collar, it looks the same to me just white so maybe like said a cover cap for static fires.

Dragon mate: http://www.spacex.com/sites/spacex/files/styles/media_gallery_large/public/crs-3_dragonmating_0.jpg?itok=Yn03e0Bd

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=41454.msg1640618#msg1640618
it is indeed a side booster heading east. there are 4 in existence at this point and they ship with their ogive nosecones installed. Cant say anything else at this time, but you will be seeing an article from the NSF article team in the near future.

[russianhalo117]

To me the "cap" looks like the top of the LOX tank.    Theres a photo out there of a dragon being mated to the second stage and granted this is missing the collar, it looks the same to me just white so maybe like said a cover cap for static fires.

Dragon mate: http://www.spacex.com/sites/spacex/files/styles/media_gallery_large/public/crs-3_dragonmating_0.jpg?itok=Yn03e0Bd

They definitely put a cap on top of the rocket, but it would make sense for it to have the same contour as the top of the second stage.

The ogive nosecones are modified short interstage with the ogive nosecone installed on top. The side boosters are shorter in height, but not by much, than the central core booster

[gongora]

To me the "cap" looks like the top of the LOX tank.    Theres a photo out there of a dragon being mated to the second stage and granted this is missing the collar, it looks the same to me just white so maybe like said a cover cap for static fires.

Dragon mate: http://www.spacex.com/sites/spacex/files/styles/media_gallery_large/public/crs-3_dragonmating_0.jpg?itok=Yn03e0Bd

They definitely put a cap on top of the rocket, but it would make sense for it to have the same contour as the top of the second stage.

The ogive nosecones are modified short interstage with the ogive nosecone installed on top. The side boosters are shorter in height, but not by much, than the central core booster

Shorter including the interstages/nosecones?  Tank sizes are the same?

[russianhalo117]

To me the "cap" looks like the top of the LOX tank.    Theres a photo out there of a dragon being mated to the second stage and granted this is missing the collar, it looks the same to me just white so maybe like said a cover cap for static fires.

Dragon mate: http://www.spacex.com/sites/spacex/files/styles/media_gallery_large/public/crs-3_dragonmating_0.jpg?itok=Yn03e0Bd

They definitely put a cap on top of the rocket, but it would make sense for it to have the same contour as the top of the second stage.

The ogive nosecones are modified short interstage with the ogive nosecone installed on top. The side boosters are shorter in height, but not by much, than the central core booster

Shorter including the interstages/nosecones?  Tank sizes are the same?

Shorter including the interstages/nosecones?
AFAIK yes. The interstages with nosecones are slightly shorter above the grid fins than the central boosters interstage
Tank sizes are the same?
yes, for commonality, but engine sections and interstages have been updated to install the side booster attach points.

[meekGee]

So, can we finally dispense with the paper rocket nonsense?

It is paper rocket until second when it successfully completes maiden mission.

To resolve this,  we need an extension to ISO standard 10795:2011 - Vocabulary used in space systems.  (That's a real ISO document, by the way.)

I would suggest the following (though of course any such revision would need to go through the ISO standard process for amending ISO processes):

"Powerpoint rocket" : Idea interesting enough to share, no detailed design.  Example - nuclear thermal mission to outer planets
"Paper rocket":  In the detailed design phase.  Example might be New Glenn or Vulcan.
"Bending metal":  Pieces being assembled into a rocket intended for flight.  Where Falcon Heavy is now.
"Prototype rocket":  Can fly but not trusted with valuable payloads.  New Shepard or Space Ship Two.
"Rocket":  Flying and in production with real payloads.  Soyez, Ariane, Atlas 5, Falcon, etc.

On this scale, Falcon Heavy is definitely past "paper" and well into "bending metal".

There I was, reading your preamble, thinking that you were about to try to explain the balls joke.