-
#360
by
LouScheffer
on 19 Dec, 2017 17:22
-
Using the closest engine to core would tend to push tail into core engines... want the opposite effect. Use the center engine and when the nose is rotating away from center core at good rate, use TVC to kick tail away from center core. You'd be neutralizing some of the rotation, but physically pushing the tail away from contact.
If they can vector the closest engine enough to point through the center of gravity, then they can push away from the core without imparting any rotation. In combination with the gas jets at the top, this should allow pure translation away from the core, then use thrust vectoring to keep it away.
-
#361
by
GWH
on 19 Dec, 2017 17:43
-
-
#362
by
mdeep
on 19 Dec, 2017 19:00
-
-
#363
by
russianhalo117
on 19 Dec, 2017 19:16
-
I want to pull this in from the update thread:
FAA thinks launch is close:
Second day of the Next-Generation Suborbital Researchers Conference starts with keynotes by FAA’s George Nield and NASA’s Steve Jurczyk. #NSRC2017
https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/943132943383453697
Nield: 2017 has been pretty exciting for commercial spaceflight, but 2018 will be even more exciting, starting with Falcon Heavy first launch in the next month. #NSRC2017
https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/943135747477065728
FH before Zuma?
In the same month around the same time as Zuma is now on SLC-40, but FH launch date is dependent solely on FH pad testing and static fires before a date is set. It depends if FH has teething issues or not.
-
#364
by
gongora
on 19 Dec, 2017 20:08
-
FH before Zuma?
Not a chance (unless Zuma gets another big delay).
-
#365
by
deruch
on 20 Dec, 2017 00:10
-
Nield: 2017 has been pretty exciting for commercial spaceflight, but 2018 will be even more exciting, starting with Falcon Heavy first launch in the next month. #NSRC2017
https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/943135747477065728
FH before Zuma?
I think you're misreading the (somewhat ambiguous) tweet. Nield was saying that the
debut launch of the Falcon Heavy is currently planned to happen next month (January). Not that the FH launch will be the first launch of that month. So, no. Zuma will very likely be first.
-
#366
by
MATTBLAK
on 20 Dec, 2017 09:06
-
There's something in my eye...
-
#367
by
0x32
on 20 Dec, 2017 09:10
-
Well, there it is, in all its glory. From Elon's Twitter.
-
#368
by
jimbowman
on 20 Dec, 2017 09:10
-
What is the ice from inside the nozzles? Or is that just soot from when they tested the stages?
-
#369
by
ugordan
on 20 Dec, 2017 09:11
-
Larger versions
Note that the overhead view was photoshopped, a composite of at least two frames, possibly 3. The interstage is too short and it's missing the obvious stage separation pusher that's visible above the FH logo in the other shot.
I guess they couldn't capture the entire vehicle from overhead in a single frame without gross fisheye distortion so they had to mosaic separate frames with significantly different perspective.
Anyway, nice to finally see the mated hardware, the cores are actually a bit closer together than I imagined them to be due to the leg spacing, etc.
-
#370
by
ugordan
on 20 Dec, 2017 09:12
-
What is the ice from inside the nozzles?
The consensus seems to be that it might be TEA/TEB residue from previous firings.
-
#371
by
jimbowman
on 20 Dec, 2017 09:14
-
The consensus seems to be that it might be TEA/TEB residue from previous firings.
Gotcha. Looked like icicles as first before I opened the higher res pictures. They would have had the hanger A/C on pretty low for that. Haha.
-
#372
by
FutureSpaceTourist
on 20 Dec, 2017 09:17
-
Can I just say how beautiful FH is?
Looks like titanium grid fins on the side boosters but aluminium on the central core.
-
#373
by
octavo
on 20 Dec, 2017 09:18
-
Can I just say how beautiful FH is?
Looks like titanium grid fins on the side boosters but aluminium on the central core.
Lol, ninja'd. Yes and lots of pusher hardware on display.
It seems odd to be using such old hardware on a maiden flight. It's so incongruous to how space flight normally works, that my mind struggles with it.
-
#374
by
nacnud
on 20 Dec, 2017 09:19
-
Interesting the side boosters have Ti grid fins while the centre core has Al fins. I would have assumed the other way round as the centre core has the hotter reentry.
-
#375
by
jebbo
on 20 Dec, 2017 09:28
-
Interesting that the two side boosters seem to be different ways up ...
--- Tony
-
#376
by
vanoord
on 20 Dec, 2017 09:37
-
Interesting that the two side boosters seem to be different ways up ...
--- Tony
The two side cores are identical, ie the attachment points are at the same point on the radius of the octaweb - hence when attached to the centre core, they will be "different ways up".
From a point of view of ease of manufacture they only need to build one type of side core and presumably the only difference is to upload software that tells the core whether it's port or starboard (which they'd have to do if they built different 'handed' cores anyway).
-
#377
by
jebbo
on 20 Dec, 2017 09:43
-
The two side cores are identical, ie the attachment points are at the same point on the radius of the octaweb - hence when attached to the centre core, they will be "different ways up".
Thanks. Makes sense ... i just hadn't thought about it before
--- Tony
-
#378
by
vanoord
on 20 Dec, 2017 09:44
-
That, incidentally, puts to bed the debate as to whether the FH stack is assembled on the floor / whether the cranes are insufficient to lift an assembled stack onto the TEL / whether the stack is assembled on the TEL.
It's an impressive-looking beast, particularly at the business end.
-
#379
by
Req
on 20 Dec, 2017 09:48
-
