Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Speculation

[Kansan52]

So, the reason for taking the Telsa out of the fairing?

[Lar]

Add brackets and gear to the Payload adapter? Earlier pics didn't have that stuff.

[Johnnyhinbos]

So, the reason for taking the Telsa out of the fairing?

Put Zuma in the frunk...

(Sorry Lar - it did make me smile)

[IanThePineapple]

Add brackets and gear to the Payload adapter? Earlier pics didn't have that stuff.

And adding in Starman and that truss, unless they weren't on before

[cscott]

Did the second stage get more batteries or solar panels to allow for the 6 hour coast?

From Elon's FH press conference today: the upper stage got increased battery, and additional pressurant gas for attitude control thrusters and settling.

[meekGee]

Add brackets and gear to the Payload adapter? Earlier pics didn't have that stuff.

Could have been done after the photoshoot, before encapsulation.

But still they undid the half fairing, got the adapter off, re-did the fairing, SF, undid the fairing again, put the car back in...

I don't see the reasoning.

[Joseph Peterson]

Did the second stage get more batteries or solar panels to allow for the 6 hour coast?

From Elon's FH press conference today: the upper stage got increased battery, and additional pressurant gas for attitude control thrusters and settling.

Thanks.  That shots down the idea of second stage solar panels keeping the Roadster going.

[cscott]

Add brackets and gear to the Payload adapter? Earlier pics didn't have that stuff.

Could have been done after the photoshoot, before encapsulation.

But still they undid the half fairing, got the adapter off, re-did the fairing, SF, undid the fairing again, put the car back in...

I don't see the reasoning.

Because like all Musk projects this one was done in extreme time pressure, and they didn't have the truss fabricated and cameras, etc designed a few weeks ago when the first photos were taken?  They knew they'd have a few more days with the payload while the bugs were worked out of the static fire, and took advantage of the opportunity to complete the "mass simulator"...and add a few more Easter eggs, like the star man and the matchbox Tesla.

[meekGee]

Add brackets and gear to the Payload adapter? Earlier pics didn't have that stuff.

Could have been done after the photoshoot, before encapsulation.

But still they undid the half fairing, got the adapter off, re-did the fairing, SF, undid the fairing again, put the car back in...

I don't see the reasoning.

Because like all Musk projects this one was done in extreme time pressure, and they didn't have the truss fabricated and cameras, etc designed a few weeks ago when the first photos were taken?  They knew they'd have a few more days with the payload while the bugs were worked out of the static fire, and took advantage of the opportunity to complete the "mass simulator"...and add a few more Easter eggs, like the star man and the matchbox Tesla.

And risk the payload disintegrating, possibly destroying the rocket, definitely losing the mission, losing all credibility forever, since they launched a spacecraft without testing it?

[cscott]

And risk the payload disintegrating, possibly destroying the rocket, definitely losing the mission, losing all credibility forever, since they launched a spacecraft without testing it?

"Time to complete the payload" includes "time to analyze and test it".  It's hard to vibration test the payload when it's mounted at the top of a rocket.

[tyrred]

Add brackets and gear to the Payload adapter? Earlier pics didn't have that stuff.

Could have been done after the photoshoot, before encapsulation.

But still they undid the half fairing, got the adapter off, re-did the fairing, SF, undid the fairing again, put the car back in...

I don't see the reasoning.

Because like all Musk projects this one was done in extreme time pressure, and they didn't have the truss fabricated and cameras, etc designed a few weeks ago when the first photos were taken?  They knew they'd have a few more days with the payload while the bugs were worked out of the static fire, and took advantage of the opportunity to complete the "mass simulator"...and add a few more Easter eggs, like the star man and the matchbox Tesla.

And risk the payload disintegrating, possibly destroying the rocket, definitely losing the mission, losing all credibility forever, since they launched a spacecraft without testing it?

How much more riskier than the rest of this demo mission?  The spacecraft is effectively a second stage plus a dummy payload.  If they pull it off, this will not even be a footnote.  If the demo flight suffers a spectacular demise, then it will be time to analyze what went wrong, and if it was caused by any facet of the re-packaging of the payload.

[meekGee]

And risk the payload disintegrating, possibly destroying the rocket, definitely losing the mission, losing all credibility forever, since they launched a spacecraft without testing it?

"Time to complete the payload" includes "time to analyze and test it".  It's hard to vibration test the payload when it's mounted at the top of a rocket.

So you think during the time of the SF, they took it down, completed assembly, drove it to a shake table, tested it, and put it back?

That's a pretty tall tale.  Any evidence?

And all the delays with FH didn't give them time to finish the Roadster?  So two days less of delays, and it would have flown empty?

[meekGee]

Add brackets and gear to the Payload adapter? Earlier pics didn't have that stuff.

Could have been done after the photoshoot, before encapsulation.

But still they undid the half fairing, got the adapter off, re-did the fairing, SF, undid the fairing again, put the car back in...

I don't see the reasoning.

Because like all Musk projects this one was done in extreme time pressure, and they didn't have the truss fabricated and cameras, etc designed a few weeks ago when the first photos were taken?  They knew they'd have a few more days with the payload while the bugs were worked out of the static fire, and took advantage of the opportunity to complete the "mass simulator"...and add a few more Easter eggs, like the star man and the matchbox Tesla.

And risk the payload disintegrating, possibly destroying the rocket, definitely losing the mission, losing all credibility forever, since they launched a spacecraft without testing it?

How much more riskier than the rest of this demo mission?  The spacecraft is effectively a second stage plus a dummy payload.  If they pull it off, this will not even be a footnote.  If the demo flight suffers a spectacular demise, then it will be time to analyze what went wrong, and if it was caused by any facet of the re-packaging of the payload.

Putting an untested payload is definitely asking for it and will also ruin any chance of ever being taken seriously by anyone ever again.

There's a difference between being competent but cute with the payload, and being stupid.

Much likelier though mundane is that since AMOS-6 the rules say no payloads during SF period.

Why the fairing? Since first time firing, validate acoustics model.

Simple, doesn't require conspiracies, and doesn't require them to be fools.

[tyrred]

Add brackets and gear to the Payload adapter? Earlier pics didn't have that stuff.

Could have been done after the photoshoot, before encapsulation.

But still they undid the half fairing, got the adapter off, re-did the fairing, SF, undid the fairing again, put the car back in...

I don't see the reasoning.

Because like all Musk projects this one was done in extreme time pressure, and they didn't have the truss fabricated and cameras, etc designed a few weeks ago when the first photos were taken?  They knew they'd have a few more days with the payload while the bugs were worked out of the static fire, and took advantage of the opportunity to complete the "mass simulator"...and add a few more Easter eggs, like the star man and the matchbox Tesla.

And risk the payload disintegrating, possibly destroying the rocket, definitely losing the mission, losing all credibility forever, since they launched a spacecraft without testing it?

How much more riskier than the rest of this demo mission?  The spacecraft is effectively a second stage plus a dummy payload.  If they pull it off, this will not even be a footnote.  If the demo flight suffers a spectacular demise, then it will be time to analyze what went wrong, and if it was caused by any facet of the re-packaging of the payload.

Putting an untested payload is definitely asking for it and will also ruin any chance of ever being taken seriously by anyone ever again.

There's a difference between being competent but cute with the payload, and being stupid.

Much likelier though mundane is that since AMOS-6 the rules say no payloads during SF period.

Why the fairing? Since first time firing, validate acoustics model.

Simple, doesn't require conspiracies, and doesn't require them to be fools.

Unclear what your opinion is here.  Are they being foolish and stupid, or simple, competent but cute?

[meekGee]

Add brackets and gear to the Payload adapter? Earlier pics didn't have that stuff.

Could have been done after the photoshoot, before encapsulation.

But still they undid the half fairing, got the adapter off, re-did the fairing, SF, undid the fairing again, put the car back in...

I don't see the reasoning.

Because like all Musk projects this one was done in extreme time pressure, and they didn't have the truss fabricated and cameras, etc designed a few weeks ago when the first photos were taken?  They knew they'd have a few more days with the payload while the bugs were worked out of the static fire, and took advantage of the opportunity to complete the "mass simulator"...and add a few more Easter eggs, like the star man and the matchbox Tesla.

And risk the payload disintegrating, possibly destroying the rocket, definitely losing the mission, losing all credibility forever, since they launched a spacecraft without testing it?

How much more riskier than the rest of this demo mission?  The spacecraft is effectively a second stage plus a dummy payload.  If they pull it off, this will not even be a footnote.  If the demo flight suffers a spectacular demise, then it will be time to analyze what went wrong, and if it was caused by any facet of the re-packaging of the payload.

Putting an untested payload is definitely asking for it and will also ruin any chance of ever being taken seriously by anyone ever again.

There's a difference between being competent but cute with the payload, and being stupid.

Much likelier though mundane is that since AMOS-6 the rules say no payloads during SF period.

Why the fairing? Since first time firing, validate acoustics model.

Simple, doesn't require conspiracies, and doesn't require them to be fools.

Unclear what your opinion is here.  Are they being foolish and stupid, or simple, competent but cute?

With the Roadster, competent and cute.

And so they did not just throw some trusses on it in the last minute because they didn't finish welding them together in time.

[cscott]

Unclear what your opinion is here.  Are they being foolish and stupid, or simple, competent but cute?

With the Roadster, competent and cute.

And so they did not just throw some trusses on it in the last minute because they didn't finish welding them together in time.

I don't think I disagree with you, if I understand what you're saying.  Your theory is that the released photos of the payload were effectively released on time delay: the initial camera-less photos preceded the trussed-photos by some appropriate amount of time, and they both were taken a "longish" time before the first photos were released, enough time for the trussed-photos payload to be appropriately analyzed, vibrated, tested, and qualified.

The payload may or may not have been on the rocket when the first beauty shots at the pad were taken, but it was certainly not present during the static fire for the normal boring avoidance-of-risk, nominal-procedures, etc reasons.  It was then mated to the FH at the "usual" time in the flow, after the static fire.

I don't necessarily disagree.  That's an entirely reasonable sequence of events.

My only slight quibble is that the release of the first trussless photos seemed to indicate near-real-time.  A grainy version was leaked on Reddit, then hastily a more official release of those photos was made.  If the trussed photos existed at that time, why not release them instead?

That leads me mildly to imagine that the trussing could have happened (or was in progress) between the release of the first photos and the release of the second photos.  That's a month or so, which would qualify as "extreme time pressure" for most aerospace jobs, but not necessarily the sort of "within two days" rush you seem to be objecting to.

[meekGee]

Unclear what your opinion is here.  Are they being foolish and stupid, or simple, competent but cute?

With the Roadster, competent and cute.

And so they did not just throw some trusses on it in the last minute because they didn't finish welding them together in time.

I don't think I disagree with you, if I understand what you're saying.  Your theory is that the released photos of the payload were effectively released on time delay: the initial camera-less photos preceded the trussed-photos by some appropriate amount of time, and they both were taken a "longish" time before the first photos were released, enough time for the trussed-photos payload to be appropriately analyzed, vibrated, tested, and qualified.

The payload may or may not have been on the rocket when the first beauty shots at the pad were taken, but it was certainly not present during the static fire for the normal boring avoidance-of-risk, nominal-procedures, etc reasons.  It was then mated to the FH at the "usual" time in the flow, after the static fire.

I don't necessarily disagree.  That's an entirely reasonable sequence of events.

My only slight quibble is that the release of the first trussless photos seemed to indicate near-real-time.  A grainy version was leaked on Reddit, then hastily a more official release of those photos was made.  If the trussed photos existed at that time, why not release them instead?

That leads me mildly to imagine that the trussing could have happened (or was in progress) between the release of the first photos and the release of the second photos.  That's a month or so, which would qualify as "extreme time pressure" for most aerospace jobs, but not necessarily the sort of "within two days" rush you seem to be objecting to.

Never mind... I was responding to a flippant remark, and the counter-responses became a saga.  Moving on, I hear there's a launch of some sort today.