Falcon Heavy prepares for debut flight as Musk urges caution on expectations

[Chris Bergin]

Article one from the ISSRDC - by Chris Gebhardt, on Falcon Heavy, with some additional updates via L2 and Nathan renders and all manner of coolness:

https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/07/falcon-heavy-prepares-debut-musk-urges-caution-expectations/

[MATTBLAK]

It's a terrific article from Chris - as usual. It's been a long road to get to Falcon Heavy...

[ulm_atms]

I don't know if I am looking more forward to the launch or the tri-core landing attempt. 

Do we know yet if they will have the second landing pad finished for the heavy's test?  Last I heard was boosters on land, core on drone was the plan.  Just curious how that's going or if it is still the plan.

[Robotbeat]

I'm more interested in the upper stage recovery attempt.

[Paul Howard]

Musk is likely playing the expectations game with the fear of failure. He does it a lot during booster landings, which usually turn out well.

[abaddon]

If we're talking "I'm more interested", I'm most interested in seeing a successful primary mission.

On the subject of Elon, it is worth remembering that he said that the first F91.1 launch had a 50% chance of being successful.

Seems like we are still a ways away and there's still a pretty good chance it slips into 2018.  I think SpaceX would really like to avoid that though, because then it starts impinging on commercial crew.

[ChrisGebhardt]

If we're talking "I'm more interested", I'm most interested in seeing a successful primary mission.

On the subject of Elon, it is worth remembering that he said that the first F91.1 launch had a 50% chance of being successful.

Seems like we are still a ways away and there's still a pretty good chance it slips into 2018.  I think SpaceX would really like to avoid that though, because then it starts impinging on commercial crew.

It would have to slip pretty far into 2018 -- accompanied by SpaceX saying "we're prioritizing Falcon Heavy over a fixed price contract with specific date requirements and visiting vehicle schedules and ISS functionality" -- for it to impact commercial crew.  And that's not going to happen.

[abaddon]

Current schedule shows February for the uncrewed demo flight, so you must have pretty different ideas of "pretty far into 2018" than I do.

And of course CC will take priority over FH.  But that means FH would get pushed way further back for its first flight, which is not what SpaceX wants either.

[ChrisGebhardt]

Current schedule shows February for the uncrewed demo flight, so you must have pretty different ideas of "pretty far into 2018" than I do.

And of course CC will take priority over FH.  But that means FH would get pushed way further back for its first flight, which is not what SpaceX wants either.

Uncrewed demo is March 2018.  I've seen nothing public or L2 that's ever said February.  It was "end of 2017" before Gwen's official confirmation that it was moving to March 2018.  So that's November, December, January, and February for FH opportunities -- with current schedules for SLC-40.  So yes, a five month slip for FH to the point where it would begin to impinge on CC would be a pretty significant slip in 2018.

[gongora]

Uncrewed demo is March 2018.  I've seen nothing public or L2 that's ever said February...

NASA gave a February date today, although I'd still probably treat that as a NET.
https://blogs.nasa.gov/commercialcrew/2017/07/20/nasas-commercial-crew-program-target-flight-dates/

[ChrisGebhardt]

Uncrewed demo is March 2018.  I've seen nothing public or L2 that's ever said February...

NASA gave a February date today, although I'd still probably treat that as a NET.
https://blogs.nasa.gov/commercialcrew/2017/07/20/nasas-commercial-crew-program-target-flight-dates/

Good to know.  And interesting in the mis-match.  I wonder what the conversations between SpaceX and NASA must have been for this to be (a fairly low-key) announcement today when Gwynne had been giving a date of a few weeks to a month later than that?

Regardless... to the point of the question/post.  FH will not "impinge" on CC as was stated earlier.  And that, with known SLC-40 schedules, still leaves four months of opportunities for FH.

[Kansan52]

Could uncrewed launch from SLC-40 since it does need crew access?

[rpapo]

Could uncrewed launch from SLC-40 since it does need crew access?

I would think they would want to do a fit test with the crew access arm.  That could be put off for later, but the unmanned test would be a good time to do it nonetheless, providing the arm is ready.

[ChrisGebhardt]

Could uncrewed launch from SLC-40 since it does need crew access?

I would think they would want to do a fit test with the crew access arm.  That could be put off for later, but the unmanned test would be a good time to do it nonetheless, providing the arm is ready.

Good question.  I'll see what I can find out on that.  My gut is that while it's technically possible that they'll want to use 39A for the reasons rpapo states.