Author Topic: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion  (Read 64704 times)

Offline AJW

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 591
  • Liked: 489
  • Likes Given: 62
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #320 on: 12/05/2017 01:03 AM »
I think that sending his old Tesla is absolutely brilliant.   Musk is already getting publicity about a risky test flight, and he is also ahead of the curve if there is a launch failure.  He is spreading the word by discussing risks publicly, as well as by sending his old car, he may already be preparing an 'Oh Well!' statement if both the car and the FH are lost.

If you are a news commentator, pick your headline:   'SpaceX Rocket Blows Up!', or 'SpaceX Rocket Blows Up Destroying Used Tesla Roadster!'  Adding the side story of the Roadster significantly diminishes what could be a far more negative public impression.  By discussing this early, the public now has a month to process that this flight is risky, so if they will be long prepared for this eventuality.

Yes, a RUD would be a significant setback, but by sending a used car as the payload, it would be much easier to mitigate the public's and even the internal SpaceX employee's perception of a LOM than if a commercial, scientific, or even a mass simulator were on board.

As an aside, I do hope they at least connect the odometer and place a driver's view dashcam out the front for a first-person view of the fairing opening.   The concept images posted so far have the roadster horizontal, but you really want the car mounted in the direction of travel.

Offline TripD

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 576
  • E. Clampus Launchus
  • Liked: 450
  • Likes Given: 308
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #321 on: 12/05/2017 01:30 AM »
And many, many years from now.....

Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #322 on: 12/05/2017 01:32 AM »
Quote
The concept images posted so far have the roadster horizontal, but you really want the car mounted in the direction of travel.

@johnkrausphotos has said that the Roadster will be mounted at a roughly 45 degree angle. So how would one go about attaching it to the PAF?

Offline rakaydos

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 290
  • Liked: 125
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #323 on: 12/05/2017 01:42 AM »
Quote
The concept images posted so far have the roadster horizontal, but you really want the car mounted in the direction of travel.

@johnkrausphotos has said that the Roadster will be mounted at a roughly 45 degree angle. So how would one go about attaching it to the PAF?

Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #324 on: 12/05/2017 01:53 AM »
Quote
The concept images posted so far have the roadster horizontal, but you really want the car mounted in the direction of travel.

@johnkrausphotos has said that the Roadster will be mounted at a roughly 45 degree angle. So how would one go about attaching it to the PAF?

You could probably attach it to both axles
Proud creator of Ian's Paper Model Rocket Collection:
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=42383.0

Online meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7894
  • N. California
  • Liked: 4141
  • Likes Given: 843
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #325 on: 12/05/2017 02:33 AM »
Is there any chance that there's something attached to the car?

A beacon with a small solar panel maybe, so it can be found later?

Or if it's for show, any elements of the now defunct Red Dragon?

Or a red toy dragon?
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline dorkmo

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 664
  • Liked: 298
  • Likes Given: 792
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #326 on: 12/05/2017 02:49 AM »
Is there any chance that there's something attached to the car?

A beacon with a small solar panel maybe, so it can be found later?

Or if it's for show, any elements of the now defunct Red Dragon?

Or a red toy dragon?

how about a wheel of this?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y_Fenni_cheese

Offline TripD

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 576
  • E. Clampus Launchus
  • Liked: 450
  • Likes Given: 308
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #327 on: 12/05/2017 03:01 AM »
Is there any chance that there's something attached to the car?

A beacon with a small solar panel maybe, so it can be found later?

Or if it's for show, any elements of the now defunct Red Dragon?

Or a red toy dragon?

There's no reason that solar panels couldn't  be placed on the underside of the carriage.   

Offline ModZero

  • Member
  • Posts: 4
  • Nederland
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 18
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #328 on: 12/05/2017 09:00 AM »
The cheese wheel barely trended briefly. Likewise this will as well. Estimate that the amount of "influence" is worth a few million as an advertising campaign. Whoopee.

For comparison, the "landing circus" had a few hundred million, which when it landed successfully went to a half billion. Not bad.

But to customers of the FH, no, not an effective use.

I mostly agree with you, but I think there's one more audience, and it might be a quite important one: SpaceX current and potential employees. You know, those highly qualified people sometimes paid in stock options of a company that doesn't want to go public, who must be kept really excited or they'll find their somewhat precarious situation no longer acceptable.

Offline Bob Shaw

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 995
  • Liked: 376
  • Likes Given: 348
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #329 on: 12/05/2017 10:24 AM »
Quote
The concept images posted so far have the roadster horizontal, but you really want the car mounted in the direction of travel.

@johnkrausphotos has said that the Roadster will be mounted at a roughly 45 degree angle. So how would one go about attaching it to the PAF?


Volunteers will hold it in place.

Offline Striker-tech

  • Member
  • Posts: 9
  • Eastern Shore, Maryland, USA
  • Liked: 7
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #330 on: 12/05/2017 11:56 AM »
All the raging about the mass simulator aside, I'm curious how you'd prepare a vehicle for a trip like this, with expectations that it will be where you predict its orbit in three years.  The vanity of having it appear as it did at launch should be addressed, but also watch for unintended consequences. 

Tires. Even at zero inflation at sea level, that's a problem once in orbit, UV radiation degrades the compounds, and now you have a gas jet of unknown impulse / duration changing your trajectory.  Simple solution is remove the Schrader valve core, and et voila, they vent on ascent.   Headlights, LED screens, seat foam, that massive battery, all sources, however small, can be unintended of gas emissions and course deflection.   Getting it in orbit will be the easy part.  Predicting its orbit in a couple years?  We'll find out.

Offline sghill

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1319
  • United States
  • Liked: 1445
  • Likes Given: 2056
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #331 on: 12/05/2017 12:08 PM »
All the raging about the mass simulator aside, I'm curious how you'd prepare a vehicle for a trip like this, with expectations that it will be where you predict its orbit in three years.  The vanity of having it appear as it did at launch should be addressed, but also watch for unintended consequences. 

Tires. Even at zero inflation at sea level, that's a problem once in orbit, UV radiation degrades the compounds, and now you have a gas jet of unknown impulse / duration changing your trajectory.  Simple solution is remove the Schrader valve core, and et voila, they vent on ascent.   Headlights, LED screens, seat foam, that massive battery, all sources, however small, can be unintended of gas emissions and course deflection.   Getting it in orbit will be the easy part.  Predicting its orbit in a couple years?  We'll find out.

It's going to Mars orbit, not orbit around Mars.  Once it's launched, course corrections are pointless from outgassing of seats, and electronics, and other items. Even if it IS intended to go into orbit around Mars (which I seeeeeeeeeeeriously doubt), it'll be bolted and welded to the top of the far more massive second stage.
Bring the thunder Elon!

Online kdhilliard

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 192
  • Kirk
  • Tanstaa, FL
  • Liked: 195
  • Likes Given: 560
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #332 on: 12/05/2017 12:25 PM »
Even if it IS intended to go into orbit around Mars (which I seeeeeeeeeeeriously doubt), it'll be bolted and welded to the top of the far more massive second stage.

That's just one of many suggestions that it might remain attached to the upper stage.  It's been stated upthread that a payload fairing was required for this flight to count toward DOD certification (arguing against a normally mounted Dragon capsule).  Would successful release of the payload from the payload attach fitting (PAF) also be a certification requirement?

Offline MaxTeranous

  • Member
  • Posts: 11
  • Liked: 9
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #333 on: 12/05/2017 12:42 PM »
Even if it IS intended to go into orbit around Mars (which I seeeeeeeeeeeriously doubt), it'll be bolted and welded to the top of the far more massive second stage.

That's just one of many suggestions that it might remain attached to the upper stage.  It's been stated upthread that a payload fairing was required for this flight to count toward DOD certification (arguing against a normally mounted Dragon capsule).  Would successful release of the payload from the payload attach fitting (PAF) also be a certification requirement?

Probably not. Fairing qualification is needed as the aerodynamics of the FH is completely different to the F9. However the S2 PAF is identical on both vehicles, and the F9 to FH change would have no bearing on it.

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8176
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 2330
  • Likes Given: 5482
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #334 on: 12/05/2017 01:14 PM »
Even if it IS intended to go into orbit around Mars (which I seeeeeeeeeeeriously doubt), it'll be bolted and welded to the top of the far more massive second stage.

That's just one of many suggestions that it might remain attached to the upper stage.  It's been stated upthread that a payload fairing was required for this flight to count toward DOD certification (arguing against a normally mounted Dragon capsule).  Would successful release of the payload from the payload attach fitting (PAF) also be a certification requirement?

Probably not. Fairing qualification is needed as the aerodynamics of the FH is completely different to the F9. However the S2 PAF is identical on both vehicles, and the F9 to FH change would have no bearing on it.
Welcome to the forum! :)
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob, Physics instructor, aviator, vintage auto racer

Offline tdperk

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 247
  • Liked: 73
  • Likes Given: 25
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #335 on: 12/05/2017 01:54 PM »
Quote
The concept images posted so far have the roadster horizontal, but you really want the car mounted in the direction of travel.

@johnkrausphotos has said that the Roadster will be mounted at a roughly 45 degree angle. So how would one go about attaching it to the PAF?

Really very simple trusswork.

Offline MaxTeranous

  • Member
  • Posts: 11
  • Liked: 9
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #336 on: 12/05/2017 02:22 PM »
Even if it IS intended to go into orbit around Mars (which I seeeeeeeeeeeriously doubt), it'll be bolted and welded to the top of the far more massive second stage.

That's just one of many suggestions that it might remain attached to the upper stage.  It's been stated upthread that a payload fairing was required for this flight to count toward DOD certification (arguing against a normally mounted Dragon capsule).  Would successful release of the payload from the payload attach fitting (PAF) also be a certification requirement?

Probably not. Fairing qualification is needed as the aerodynamics of the FH is completely different to the F9. However the S2 PAF is identical on both vehicles, and the F9 to FH change would have no bearing on it.
Welcome to the forum! :)

Thanks!

Offline SpacedX

  • Member
  • Posts: 25
  • Gatineau
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 582
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #337 on: 12/06/2017 01:48 PM »
Hello,

Could the car be equipped with 2 telescopes continuously transmitting (within BW) images of Earth and Mars?

Otherwise, I think sending a car out there will have only short term and minimal PR value. Many will interpret it as nonsense. IMO, a missed opportunity for SpaceX to grab more mindshare and for longer.


Online ugordan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7420
    • My mainly Cassini image gallery
  • Liked: 1582
  • Likes Given: 339
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #338 on: 12/06/2017 02:00 PM »
Could the car be equipped with 2 telescopes continuously transmitting (within BW) images of Earth and Mars?

Almost anything can be done if you throw enough money at it. In this case you have to ask yourself at least two questions:
1) where does three-axis pointing control come from to be able to point at those objects?
2) where does deep space downlink capability come from? You're going to ask NASA to allocate DSN time for a PR stunt?

Otherwise, I think sending a car out there will have only short term and minimal PR value. Many will interpret it as nonsense.

I tend to agree.
« Last Edit: 12/06/2017 02:01 PM by ugordan »

Online JamesH65

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 676
  • Liked: 406
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #339 on: 12/06/2017 02:22 PM »
Hello,

Could the car be equipped with 2 telescopes continuously transmitting (within BW) images of Earth and Mars?

Otherwise, I think sending a car out there will have only short term and minimal PR value. Many will interpret it as nonsense. IMO, a missed opportunity for SpaceX to grab more mindshare and for longer.

For the first part, huge cost to develop as a one off that may not make it to space.

First the second part, short term minimal PR, probably*, but still better than a tank of water ballast which has no PR value at all. Any other cargo fits in to point one.

* I suggest looking at the social media/news media impact of this already, and it hasn't launched yet...

Tags: