-
#20
by
Chris Bergin
on 23 Apr, 2017 13:57
-
People keep asking for a wider shot (I thought the logo would be the thing people really wanted to see, so rushed that on the turnaround), so here's one from Gary Blair's L2 McGregor collection...well the one that's got as much of the core in it as trees and distance allow. Remember these shots are from a public area outside of the test center (obviously).
Article for this event (the static firing of the FH Center - we're not sure when it's due) and the Static Fire for NROL-76) will be early next week.
-
#21
by
matthewkantar
on 23 Apr, 2017 15:08
-
So I guess the fold up struts that stayed on the center core in the FH CGI video are no longer the plan? It never made sense to me to have the weight of those on the core, better to send em home with the boosters.
Matthew
-
#22
by
old_sellsword
on 23 Apr, 2017 15:15
-
So I guess the fold up struts that stayed on the center core in the FH CGI video are no longer the plan? It never made sense to me to have the weight of those on the core, better to send em home with the boosters.
Matthew
That's definitely still the plan. But like fins and legs, they won't be attached until everything is ready for integration at the launch site. No reason to put them on for a static fire.
-
#23
by
mme
on 23 Apr, 2017 18:49
-
So I guess the fold up struts that stayed on the center core in the FH CGI video are no longer the plan? It never made sense to me to have the weight of those on the core, better to send em home with the boosters.
Matthew
Nose cone vs. interstage: They cant't fold up on the boosters as there is no place to latch. I don't know if folding down is an option.
The interstage also has a lot more volume for whatever mechanical systems are involved and there may be tradeoffs related to sharing the mechanical systems in the center booster vs. duplicating them on the two side boosters.
-
#24
by
Lars-J
on 24 Apr, 2017 16:16
-
So I guess the fold up struts that stayed on the center core in the FH CGI video are no longer the plan? It never made sense to me to have the weight of those on the core, better to send em home with the boosters.
Matthew
Nose cone vs. interstage: They cant't fold up on the boosters as there is no place to latch. I don't know if folding down is an option.
The interstage also has a lot more volume for whatever mechanical systems are involved and there may be tradeoffs related to sharing the mechanical systems in the center booster vs. duplicating them on the two side boosters.
A good reason to have most of the mechanical booster attachment hardware on the center core is aerodynamic and mass balance... Yes, you add some mass to the center core (FH has margin), but it will at least make the side boosters "cleaner" from an aerodynamic point of view. Sure, the center core will have some extra hardware sticking out from the FH trunk, but it will be balanced there as well.
-
#25
by
JasonAW3
on 24 Apr, 2017 16:43
-
Ok, I'm a bit confused.
I thought the idea with the first demo flight was to try to recover all three cores.
Has that changed, or are they simply waiting until they have the cores at the Cape to mount the landing legs?
-
#26
by
tvg98
on 24 Apr, 2017 16:45
-
Ok, I'm a bit confused.
I thought the idea with the first demo flight was to try to recover all three cores.
Has that changed, or are they simply waiting until they have the cores at the Cape to mount the landing legs?
They always attach landing legs, fins, etc at the Cape IIRC. Also, Elon said that the two side boosters will land at LZ-1 and the centre core will land on OCISLY.
-
#27
by
Chris Bergin
on 25 Apr, 2017 10:27
-
-
#28
by
Sesquipedalian
on 26 Apr, 2017 02:04
-
People keep asking for a wider shot (I thought the logo would be the thing people really wanted to see, so rushed that on the turnaround)
I suspect that if you had rushed the wider shot, people would have been clamoring to see the logo.
-
#29
by
dcporter
on 26 Apr, 2017 04:51
-
People keep asking for a wider shot (I thought the logo would be the thing people really wanted to see, so rushed that on the turnaround)
I suspect that if you had rushed the wider shot, people would have been clamoring to see the logo.
Confirmed I got very excited for the logo closeup.
-
#30
by
qralt
on 09 May, 2017 19:53
-
-
#31
by
sanman
on 09 May, 2017 21:54
-
Somebody put it up on Youtube, so here it is embedded:
-
#32
by
Chris Bergin
on 25 May, 2017 02:52
-
-
#33
by
FutureSpaceTourist
on 25 May, 2017 06:28
-
-
#34
by
Silmfeanor
on 25 May, 2017 10:45
-
Tweet by Elon Musk, confirmation of combined static fire - or perhaps a few static fires:
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/867667009839931393 Felix Beuster @FBeuster
Will there be a static fire test of the combined boosters as well, or will Heavy static fires always be separated?
Elon Musk @elonmusk
Replying to @FBeuster
There will be a combined booster static fire. Maybe a few.
-
#35
by
abaddon
on 25 May, 2017 15:04
-
Presumably that's just the regular static fire that SpaceX conducts at the pad before all launches, with the "perhaps a few" reflective of this being the maiden launch of a new configuration and (center) core variant? Last I remember hearing, the McGregor core test capability wasn't sized for Heavy.
-
#36
by
wannamoonbase
on 25 May, 2017 15:59
-
Presumably that's just the regular static fire that SpaceX conducts at the pad before all launches, with the "perhaps a few" reflective of this being the maiden launch of a new configuration and (center) core variant? Last I remember hearing, the McGregor core test capability wasn't sized for Heavy.
Given it's a 3 body vehicle I could see them trying some simulated inputs to verify engine response. But maybe they can do that with out the engines firing.
-
#37
by
Navier–Stokes
on 08 Jun, 2017 19:03
-
Elon MuskVerified account
@elonmusk
Replying to @JohnnyZenith
All Falcon Heavy cores should be at the Cape in two to three months, so launch should happen a month after that
11:51 AM - 8 Jun 2017
-
#38
by
envy887
on 08 Jun, 2017 19:16
-
Elon MuskVerified account
@elonmusk
Replying to @JohnnyZenith
All Falcon Heavy cores should be at the Cape in two to three months, so launch should happen a month after that
11:51 AM - 8 Jun 2017
For those following along at home, that puts the launch NET Aug 8 to Sept 8, Standard Elon Time; which is roughly November, real world time.
-
#39
by
cwr
on 08 Jun, 2017 19:26
-
Elon MuskVerified account
@elonmusk
Replying to @JohnnyZenith
All Falcon Heavy cores should be at the Cape in two to three months, so launch should happen a month after that
11:51 AM - 8 Jun 2017
For those following along at home, that puts the launch NET Aug 8 to Sept 8, Standard Elon Time; which is roughly November, real world time.
Actually, that sounds like all cores at the Cape between Aug 8 and Sep 8 and the launch between Sep 8 and Oct 8 taking Elon's quote at face value.
Carl