-
#1400
by
.Scott
on 24 Jan, 2018 18:16
-
They will launch when they launch - just relax and enjoy the show!
Relax?!? The best shows are the ones that keep you on the edge of your seat.
-
#1401
by
meekGee
on 24 Jan, 2018 18:28
-
"A week or so" does that mean we can put a NET date of around 2/2? 
As always.. Musk says that from his point of view, they can go in a week, ands "or so" since he knows things will get in the way.
Gov. Shutdown, remember?
How long "or so" is is not something I care deeply about. It'll go when it'll go.
-
#1402
by
oldAtlas_Eguy
on 24 Jan, 2018 18:55
-
2 weeks exact is the 7th.
-
#1403
by
ZachF
on 24 Jan, 2018 19:00
-
It's good to be sceptical. Not so good to be cynical 
I prefer to be on the first side. I don't believe that FH will launch after a week. But we've waited for so long - a week, two weeks or a month would make no difference.
At least it isn't six months™ anymore
-
#1404
by
saliva_sweet
on 24 Jan, 2018 19:02
-
At least it isn't six months™ anymore
Just one week...™
-
#1405
by
Rocket Science
on 24 Jan, 2018 19:08
-
Onward and upward!
-
#1406
by
cppetrie
on 24 Jan, 2018 19:09
-
Does someone have a comparison between Delta IV Heavy and FH first launch preparations? My search skills couldn'the locate anything yet.
Delta IV Heavy first went vertical Dec. 10th 2003 and launched Dec. 21st 2004. So Delta IV Heavy preparations took over a year. And the payload did not deploy to the correct orbit.
That's a fair comparison. Two cases of a three-barrel where the individual barrels are already known.
Clearly not a trivial issue.
Actually not. Delta IV Heavy used three unique cores than are not used on any other versions. Their early trade studies and design decisions, along with under performance really f'ed up the "common" core concept. Atlas V Heavy would have avoided many of these issues. The Boeing EELV scandal and Air Force wrongfully award of the majority of the missions to Boeing really messed up the EELV program and what it could have achieved.
Good to know, thx.
However, in the grand scheme of things, how far off are the individual DIV barrels from the single stick one?
It's the same engine, similar (at least) tanks, similar (at least) avionics, no?
Just sounds like as with SpaceX they found out that the heavy is more complex then they thought, and ended up not where they thought they would.
Atlas may have worked out better - I don't have the information to judge.
SpaceX ended up with dissimilar cores too, right? Plus the added interactions, (which I'm sure are more significant after release) and there it is, getting debugged on the pad.
At least they have two pads...
The side boosters are mirror images of each other and the core is heavily reinforced, since the basic core was lighten to meet performance goals for single stick missing
Are you talking about FH here? I was under the impression the side boosters were normal F9 boosters and one was rotated 180 degrees about its long axis to make it all line up and work properly. That would imply they are identical and not mirror images. Perhaps I’ve misunderstood something somewhere along the line. AIUI DIVH uses mirror image side boosters and so each of the cores is unique, which contributes to it’s expensiveness.
-
#1407
by
Machdiamond
on 24 Jan, 2018 19:15
-
-
#1408
by
TheFallen
on 24 Jan, 2018 19:23
-
Onward to launch!!!! 
A week or so = Just after GovSat 31 Jan but before the 10 Feb Paz at Vandenberg. Hopefully they schedule for the 4-5th so that they can get it launched before another Gov shutdown.
They should launch during half time of the Super Bowl. That'd be some good alternate entertainment.
Why you hatin' on Justin Timberlake?
In all serious, I'm so stoked (and relieved) that FH finally lit its engines. I probably shouldn't broadcast that I was in my car driving to work while my phone was on its dashboard mount with Chris G.'s Periscope airing on its screen.
Thank God my car was at a red light when smoke appeared from FH exactly at 9:30 AM, PST! (I live in L.A.)
-
#1409
by
envy887
on 24 Jan, 2018 19:24
-
The side boosters are mirror images of each other and the core is heavily reinforced, since the basic core was lighten to meet performance goals for single stick missing
Are you talking about FH here? I was under the impression the side boosters were normal F9 boosters and one was rotated 180 degrees about its long axis to make it all line up and work properly. That would imply they are identical and not mirror images. Perhaps I’ve misunderstood something somewhere along the line. AIUI DIVH uses mirror image side boosters and so each of the cores is unique, which contributes to it’s expensiveness.
No, he was talking about Delta IV Heavy. Falcon Heavy has rotated identical boosters, not mirror symmetric boosters.
-
#1410
by
Poole Amateur
on 24 Jan, 2018 19:34
-
Looking at the various videos, I think the burn after the engines had fully ramped up, was about 3 to 4 seconds. I won't be at all surprised if there is another test before launch. Though I could be seriously wrong as explained below.
Wasn't it epic though? Because I am thick, that looked a lot more energetic than I was expecting!
-
#1411
by
Rocket Science
on 24 Jan, 2018 19:40
-
First time I heard a roar close to that of the Saturn V!
-
#1412
by
Jim
on 24 Jan, 2018 19:43
-
First time I heard a roar close to that of the Saturn V!
Shuttle would be closer
-
#1413
by
RocketLover0119
on 24 Jan, 2018 19:46
-
Listening reeeeaaaaly closely, you can hear on the SpaceX video the staggered engine start, and man, the roar of those engines.......
-
#1414
by
Rocket Science
on 24 Jan, 2018 19:47
-
First time I heard a roar close to that of the Saturn V!
Shuttle would be closer
I'm thinking all liquid fueled... The SSMEs didn't sound as deep to me, but when the solids kicked in, oh boy...
-
#1415
by
LaunchedIn68
on 24 Jan, 2018 19:54
-
Just like February 1981! Except this time the steam cloud is on the other side and there is no 'twang'.
-
#1416
by
Mike_1179
on 24 Jan, 2018 19:55
-
First time I heard a roar close to that of the Saturn V!
Shuttle would be closer
Just out of curiosity, how was the sound compared to the Delta IVH with RS-68A's? If I remember, your comment about the sound of that launch was "daaaaaymn".
edit - found the post:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=28414.msg923635#msg923635 I added too many a's to it. Was just wondering how this sound compared to other heavy lifts you've seen
-
#1417
by
Jimmy_C
on 24 Jan, 2018 20:00
-
The static fire was awesome! Glad they are working out the bugs slowly. They ignite the engines 2 at a time on the Falcon Heavy. At the end of a static fire, do they also turn off all of the engines in a sequence 2 at a time, or are all of the engines turned off at once?
-
#1418
by
eeergo
on 24 Jan, 2018 20:03
-
Official vid - shorter than 12 secs but impressive
https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/956236301275054080
This one suggests a six second-ish burn, which is shorter than reality. They must have lost something in the edit. Other videos (L2, etc.) are showing a 10-ish second burn.
- Ed Kyle
Looks like it's sped up by a factor of ~2. If you play it at half speed in Youtube, the venting and water flow from the rainbirds looks much more natural.
-
#1419
by
PahTo
on 24 Jan, 2018 20:12
-
Official vid - shorter than 12 secs but impressive
https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/956236301275054080
This one suggests a six second-ish burn, which is shorter than reality. They must have lost something in the edit. Other videos (L2, etc.) are showing a 10-ish second burn.
- Ed Kyle
I watched a couple different angles and based on the velocity of the plume just above the end of the flame trench, I counted eight seconds at "maximum" throttle. Real ground-pounder, that...
EDIT: just saw the SpaceX video--looks more like six seconds.
