What is the earliest FH could be certified for Air Force and NASA missions?
But to get back on topic, has anyone heard info about where the side boosters from the inaugural launch will be kept? My vote is for the US Space & Rocket Center in Huntsville.
NASA has not yet selected a launch vehicle for the mission, but the baseline remains the Space Launch System, which allows the spacecraft to travel from Earth directly to Jupiter. Pappalardo said the mission is continuing to study the use of Delta 4 Heavy and Falcon Heavy as alternatives, but those would require the use of gravity assists that increase the mission’s flight time. The use of the Atlas 5 has been “closed off,” he said.
To do otherwise seems suicidal to me, to pin the hopes of thousands of researchers, decades of work, and a multi-billion dollar project on a rocket that has not yet flown. Yet it may be true - sillier things have happened.
This 2016 article claimed that Europa Clipper was hedging its bets, and keeping the design compatible with DIVH, FH, and SLS. QuoteNASA has not yet selected a launch vehicle for the mission, but the baseline remains the Space Launch System, which allows the spacecraft to travel from Earth directly to Jupiter. Pappalardo said the mission is continuing to study the use of Delta 4 Heavy and Falcon Heavy as alternatives, but those would require the use of gravity assists that increase the mission’s flight time. The use of the Atlas 5 has been “closed off,” he said.To do otherwise seems suicidal to me, to pin the hopes of thousands of researchers, decades of work, and a multi-billion dollar project on a rocket that has not yet flown. Yet it may be true - sillier things have happened. So is the design really such that it cannot (physically, not paperwork-ly) be launched on any rocket that already exists and has been flown at least once?Note: since then, it looks like FH Block 5 improvements might be able to do direct, or with a Mars gravity assist, which would not require re-design for greater insolation. If I was Clipper management (which I'm surely not) I'd ask SpaceX for a more recent estimate.
It is not clear whether NASA specifically asked SpaceX about the Falcon Heavy and Europa, as Goldstein said figures for all the commercial rockets were provided by a competitor to SpaceX, United Launch Alliance.
This 2016 article claimed that Europa Clipper was hedging its bets, and keeping the design compatible with DIVH, FH, and SLS.
On that note, Eric Berger says that QuoteIt is not clear whether NASA specifically asked SpaceX about the Falcon Heavy and Europa, as Goldstein said figures for all the commercial rockets were provided by a competitor to SpaceX, United Launch Alliance.
Quote from: envy887 on 04/25/2018 05:01 pmOn that note, Eric Berger says that QuoteIt is not clear whether NASA specifically asked SpaceX about the Falcon Heavy and Europa, as Goldstein said figures for all the commercial rockets were provided by a competitor to SpaceX, United Launch Alliance. They are working with LSP
Quote from: Jim on 04/25/2018 05:02 pmQuote from: envy887 on 04/25/2018 05:01 pmOn that note, Eric Berger says that QuoteIt is not clear whether NASA specifically asked SpaceX about the Falcon Heavy and Europa, as Goldstein said figures for all the commercial rockets were provided by a competitor to SpaceX, United Launch Alliance. They are working with LSP"They" being SpaceX or the Clipper team?
Quote from: envy887 on 04/25/2018 05:06 pmQuote from: Jim on 04/25/2018 05:02 pmQuote from: envy887 on 04/25/2018 05:01 pmOn that note, Eric Berger says that QuoteIt is not clear whether NASA specifically asked SpaceX about the Falcon Heavy and Europa, as Goldstein said figures for all the commercial rockets were provided by a competitor to SpaceX, United Launch Alliance. They are working with LSP"They" being SpaceX or the Clipper team?EC
Hmm, is Falcon Heavy available through LSP yet? Thought it still needed certification.
Quote from: LouScheffer on 04/25/2018 04:46 pmTo do otherwise seems suicidal to me, to pin the hopes of thousands of researchers, decades of work, and a multi-billion dollar project on a rocket that has not yet flown. Yet it may be true - sillier things have happened. See Viking and Titan IIIE
Quote from: clongton on 04/25/2018 11:57 amQuote from: JamesH65 on 04/25/2018 11:47 amI do wonder whether craft like the BFS will change this decision making process. Once you have 'huge' lifters with a massive chomper door like the proposed BFS, will it be necessary any longer to make the choice of LV so early? Flagship mission hardware is designed very early in the process to take maximum advantage of a specific Launch Vehicle. Change the LV and you have to go back to the beginning and start again. That's not going to happen with Europa Clipper. SLS has already been designated as the LV and that is extremely unlikely to change. The only real decision yet to be made is whether the SLS LV will be Block 1 or 1B.The fact that SLS Block 1 and Block 1B have very different capabilities belies your point...
Quote from: JamesH65 on 04/25/2018 11:47 amI do wonder whether craft like the BFS will change this decision making process. Once you have 'huge' lifters with a massive chomper door like the proposed BFS, will it be necessary any longer to make the choice of LV so early? Flagship mission hardware is designed very early in the process to take maximum advantage of a specific Launch Vehicle. Change the LV and you have to go back to the beginning and start again. That's not going to happen with Europa Clipper. SLS has already been designated as the LV and that is extremely unlikely to change. The only real decision yet to be made is whether the SLS LV will be Block 1 or 1B.
I do wonder whether craft like the BFS will change this decision making process. Once you have 'huge' lifters with a massive chomper door like the proposed BFS, will it be necessary any longer to make the choice of LV so early?
Quote from: envy887 on 04/25/2018 12:40 pmQuote from: clongton on 04/25/2018 11:57 amQuote from: JamesH65 on 04/25/2018 11:47 amI do wonder whether craft like the BFS will change this decision making process. Once you have 'huge' lifters with a massive chomper door like the proposed BFS, will it be necessary any longer to make the choice of LV so early? Flagship mission hardware is designed very early in the process to take maximum advantage of a specific Launch Vehicle. Change the LV and you have to go back to the beginning and start again. That's not going to happen with Europa Clipper. SLS has already been designated as the LV and that is extremely unlikely to change. The only real decision yet to be made is whether the SLS LV will be Block 1 or 1B.The fact that SLS Block 1 and Block 1B have very different capabilities belies your point...In this specific case, not really. The difference is in the upper stage and the decision of Block 1 or 1B is driven by whether or not the NET date of 2022 can or should be pushed out until after the Mobile Launcher, designed for the EUS, is operational. If it flies with the iCPS it can stay on the Block 1 and use the NET of 2022. If it flies on the Block 1B it has to wait until the new Mobile launcher is ready. Congress has already mandated in law that SLS will be the LV for Europa Clipper, so the only decision left is 1 or 1B and the resulting NET launch date.But the core of my statement was (because this is a SpaceX Falcon Heavy thread) between SLS and Falcon Heavy. If SLS is used in either Block it is a direct shot at Jupiter and Clipper can carry its full complement of science instrumentation and can spend the necessary time at Europa surveying landing spots for the expected follow-on mission of a Europa lander. If the Falcon Heavy is used then Clipper will need to swing through the solar system grabbing gravity assists before it can head to Jupiter. That dramatically increases the cruise time and the need for thermal protection, which reduces the mass available for science instruments. It also decreases the amount of time that clipper will be able to spend surveying the moon looking for likely landing places for the expected follow-on mission of a Europa lander. These are the kinds of trade-offs that need to be considered when choosing a LV and why it is good management to select a LV as soon as possible and not a good idea to switch horses in the middle of the race without a really good reason. Changing LV after the design is set causes all kinds of problems.
Well, that's the difference. You presume FH cannot match SLS Block 1 capabilities. I posit that with Block 5 FH probably can, and Lou Scheffer's and Dr. Pietrobon's calculations agree. As far as I can tell neither LSP nor JPL have the numbers from SpaceX for Block 5 FH to do this comparison themselves.
