SpaceX Falcon Heavy Demo - Discussion and Speculation

[dglow]

... there are conceivably many ways to deconflict the incoming candles.

Sounds like something you'd pay a therapist for in anticipation of a significant birthday.

[Lars-J]

There's no crew for this mission, this is the thread for the FH demo mission. (which could have a Dragon, but it is IMO very unlikely)

[Welsh Dragon]

Except you wouldn't want to do that if you are going 1+ kilometer per second down range. 

There are plenty of ways to manage the return trajectories to keep separation.

Trajectory shaping could simply lead to an opposite MRSI, instead of starting at different times and impacting (landing) simultaneously, you would burn at the same time (to minimise downrange), and stagger landings.

[oiorionsbelt]

Where is the pad abort Dragon these days?

[old_sellsword]

Where is the pad abort Dragon these days?

It was most recently seen in Hawthorne as a display piece for the Hyperloop competition, but I'm not sure what that has to do with the Falcon Heavy Demo Mission.

[Ben the Space Brit]

Where is the pad abort Dragon these days?

It was most recently seen in Hawthorne as a display piece for the Hyperloop competition, but I'm not sure what that has to do with the Falcon Heavy Demo Mission.

Probably orionsbelt was wondering if it might be planned for use as the payload but if it has been reduced to 'display piece' status, that's unlikely.

[starhawk92]

I read back quite a while in this thread, so I don't think this has been asked:

If on of the side boosters is the refurbished core which launched Thaicom 8 last year, shouldn't the other side core be from "the same lot"?  Wouldn't it be odd/nightmare to put a new block 5 on one side and an old (temperature adjusted) core on the other side?

Along those lines, anyone know where the core which launched CRS-9 is hanging out these days?

[rsdavis9]

Along those lines, anyone know where the core which launched CRS-9 is hanging out these days?

according to this site it is at ksc.

https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/wiki/cores

[meberbs]

I read back quite a while in this thread, so I don't think this has been asked:

If on of the side boosters is the refurbished core which launched Thaicom 8 last year, shouldn't the other side core be from "the same lot"?  Wouldn't it be odd/nightmare to put a new block 5 on one side and an old (temperature adjusted) core on the other side?

Along those lines, anyone know where the core which launched CRS-9 is hanging out these days?

I don't think they will be on Block 5 yet when this mission launches, at most on Block 4. I agree that they'll want something from the same block, although it depends on what the differences are exactly. Just more evidence that both side cores will be reuse, and there are a couple used cores we haven't had status on in a while, the JCSat-16 core is another possibility.

[docmordrid]

Where is the pad abort Dragon these days?

It was most recently seen in Hawthorne as a display piece for the Hyperloop competition, but I'm not sure what that has to do with the Falcon Heavy Demo Mission.

If a test flight vehicle is needed for FH Demo, why not the Dragon 2 structural test article? Strip it down, add the minimum necessary parts & ballast and have at it. EFT-1X.

Not saying they did, but it seems a possible path without using the modded D1 pad abort vehicle.

https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/crew-dragon-pressure-vessel-put-to-the-test

[soltasto]

Where is the pad abort Dragon these days?

It was most recently seen in Hawthorne as a display piece for the Hyperloop competition, but I'm not sure what that has to do with the Falcon Heavy Demo Mission.

If a test flight vehicle is needed for FH Demo, why not the Dragon 2 structural test article? Strip it down, add the minimum necessary parts & ballast and have at it. EFT-1X.

Not saying they did, but it seems a possible path without using the modded D1 pad abort vehicle.

https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/crew-dragon-pressure-vessel-put-to-the-test

As far as I know, that pressure vessel was going to be used for Red Dragon 1.

[pikawaka]

Where is the pad abort Dragon these days?

It was most recently seen in Hawthorne as a display piece for the Hyperloop competition, but I'm not sure what that has to do with the Falcon Heavy Demo Mission.

If a test flight vehicle is needed for FH Demo, why not the Dragon 2 structural test article? Strip it down, add the minimum necessary parts & ballast and have at it. EFT-1X.

Not saying they did, but it seems a possible path without using the modded D1 pad abort vehicle.

https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/crew-dragon-pressure-vessel-put-to-the-test

As far as I know, that pressure vessel was going to be used for Red Dragon 1.

I thought that SpaceX were going to put the test articles through very stressful testing to find the limits of the system. Would they be allowed to reduce the difficulty of the tests in order to preserve the test articles for retrofitting as full Dragon V2's?

[Jim]

Where is the pad abort Dragon these days?

It was most recently seen in Hawthorne as a display piece for the Hyperloop competition, but I'm not sure what that has to do with the Falcon Heavy Demo Mission.

If a test flight vehicle is needed for FH Demo, why not the Dragon 2 structural test article? Strip it down, add the minimum necessary parts & ballast and have at it. EFT-1X.

Not saying they did, but it seems a possible path without using the modded D1 pad abort vehicle.

https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/crew-dragon-pressure-vessel-put-to-the-test

Because a fairing is required for the Demo.

[Bynaus]

Where is the pad abort Dragon these days?

It was most recently seen in Hawthorne as a display piece for the Hyperloop competition, but I'm not sure what that has to do with the Falcon Heavy Demo Mission.

If a test flight vehicle is needed for FH Demo, why not the Dragon 2 structural test article? Strip it down, add the minimum necessary parts & ballast and have at it. EFT-1X.

Not saying they did, but it seems a possible path without using the modded D1 pad abort vehicle.

https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/crew-dragon-pressure-vessel-put-to-the-test

Because a fairing is required for the Demo.

But Dragon could travel within the fairing, as long as a suitable adapter were developed. Such a Dragon+fairing combination (and thus, the adapter) might be necessary anyway to comply with planetary protection requirements for the Red Dragon.

In other words, I still haven't given up hope on a circumlunar Dragon (be it 1 or 2) stunt for the FH Demo.

[Semmel]

Because a fairing is required for the Demo.

How comes? Is the stress on the fairing stronger for a FH than for a regular F9?

[Herb Schaltegger]

Because a fairing is required for the Demo.

How comes? Is the stress on the fairing stronger for a FH than for a regular F9?

Apparently to satisfy DoD requirements before FH can be formally submitted in proposals for National Security payloads.

[NX-0]

Because a fairing is required for the Demo.

How comes? Is the stress on the fairing stronger for a FH than for a regular F9?

Because you test what you fly and fly what you test.

[EDIT: typo]

[rsdavis9]

So they have to put a fairing on it to demo capability to the gov. But what they put inside the fairing is up to them? So what guesses do people have as to what they might put in it? I would think they might also want to go to GEO to demonstrate that orbit to customers.

[Ben the Space Brit]

Whilst I understand the theoretical reason why the FH no. 1 has to fly with a fairing, I have to ask this:

1) Is it different in any substantive way from the F9 PLF?

2) Are the physical stresses on the fairing and the fairing mounting different in any way?

If the answer to both these questions are 'no', then I would question whether a fairing is really needed for the flight.

[JasonAW3]

Whilst I understand the theoretical reason why the FH no. 1 has to fly with a fairing, I have to ask this:

1) Is it different in any substantive way from the F9 PLF?

2) Are the physical stresses on the fairing and the fairing mounting different in any way?

If the answer to both these questions are 'no', then I would question whether a fairing is really needed for the flight.

Maybe they're also lofting a high bulk payload at the same time?