Author Topic: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion  (Read 64235 times)

Offline geza

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 144
  • Budapest
    • Géza Meszéna's web page
  • Liked: 31
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #80 on: 12/02/2017 11:54 AM »
Well, it has been confirmed by multiple reputable members of the press and by another SpaceX manager. Tesla Roadster is it.
With, or without, a satellite bus, that is the question.

With cameras.  That's as much as we've gotten so far beyond Elon's original tweets.

Cameras only means, that we will not have picture from Mars, only from the vicinity of Earth. Still great, but the huge PR could be even more fantastic via seeing Mars through the windshield!

Offline JamesH65

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 676
  • Liked: 406
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #81 on: 12/02/2017 12:06 PM »
Well, it has been confirmed by multiple reputable members of the press and by another SpaceX manager. Tesla Roadster is it.
With, or without, a satellite bus, that is the question.

With cameras.  That's as much as we've gotten so far beyond Elon's original tweets.

Cameras only means, that we will not have picture from Mars, only from the vicinity of Earth. Still great, but the huge PR could be even more fantastic via seeing Mars through the windshield!

I doubt it will end up anywhere near Mars itself. And by the time its get to a Mars orbit batteries will be flatter than a flat thing that is really flat. Unless it has solar panels, which I doubt. This I reckon is going to be a bung it in the general direction and let it go shot.

Offline geza

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 144
  • Budapest
    • Géza Meszéna's web page
  • Liked: 31
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #82 on: 12/02/2017 12:50 PM »
Well, it has been confirmed by multiple reputable members of the press and by another SpaceX manager. Tesla Roadster is it.
With, or without, a satellite bus, that is the question.

With cameras.  That's as much as we've gotten so far beyond Elon's original tweets.

Cameras only means, that we will not have picture from Mars, only from the vicinity of Earth. Still great, but the huge PR could be even more fantastic via seeing Mars through the windshield!

I doubt it will end up anywhere near Mars itself. And by the time its get to a Mars orbit batteries will be flatter than a flat thing that is really flat. Unless it has solar panels, which I doubt. This I reckon is going to be a bung it in the general direction and let it go shot.
This is why we either have a complete satelite bus (which may allow course correction and orbit insertion), or must be satisfied with few minutes of video during ascent and separation. Even the second would make MUCH bigger PR, that launch itself. However, the first option whould communicate to EVERYBODY on Earth that electric cars are coming AND mankind is going to Mars.
« Last Edit: 12/02/2017 12:51 PM by geza »

Online AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5183
  • Liked: 3104
  • Likes Given: 4424
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #83 on: 12/02/2017 12:54 PM »
2018 and SpaceX is launching to Mars. 
Wish it was a Dragon, though.
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline Jcc

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 826
  • Liked: 181
  • Likes Given: 80
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #84 on: 12/02/2017 12:58 PM »
At what point will it separate from S2? That will at least be on an earth escape trajectory, won't it.


Offline Herb Schaltegger

Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #85 on: 12/02/2017 01:35 PM »
Couldn't Mars aerocapture lead to an eventual orbit?

If they experiment with (hitherto untried) Mars aerocapture it will be a highly useful test mission, despite the playful payload.

No. Trajectories in that time frame (Jan '18) would require on the order of several thousand km/s delta-v to be captured into Mars orbit. Mars' atmosphere is far too thin to provide anything close to that, especially for a dense/high ballistic coefficient payload like an electric car. It'd fly through the atmosphere then keep on going ... And then you'd have to worry about pissing off NASA's planetary protection people re contaminating Mars with Earth bacteria. That's bad press.
Ad astra per aspirin ...

Online matthewkantar

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 691
  • Liked: 440
  • Likes Given: 473
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #86 on: 12/02/2017 01:36 PM »
Elon said "Mars orbit", which is quite confusing. But he also said it's going to stay in the deep space for years, I think it leaves us with two options left. Actual orbit around Mars does not seem plausible, with transfer window a few months away and most probably no motor to perform braking maneuver.

The first option is that it may be something like a Hohmann transfer orbit with an apogee at the Mars orbit (they would go to the Mars orbit then, to some extent), but with the planet in the other place at the same time.

The second option is just a Mars flyby, far enough from the planet to make sure the payload won't smash into the surface. I guess that Roadster is not going to have any trajectory correction thrusters, so I don't they they would risk going too close.

Considering the cost of something space-navigation-propulsion-worthy of braking over a ton to Mars orbit after many months, I'm pretty sure "Mars orbit" in this case means "an orbit around the Sun that touches Mars orbit at one end, Earth orbit at the other". Might target for a Mars flyby, might not. Launch date would imply probably not, at least not a very close one.

They have had a long time to work on this and have plenty of spare parts to play with. A Super Draco has the in space endurance and performance to brake into orbit. There are probably test articles aplenty. A weldment to attach to the car's chassis, some solar panels, precise location of the COG, etc. I think SpaceX could cobble something up in a month or so. No big deal if it does not work, right?

Still a completely inane idea.

Matthew

Online AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5183
  • Liked: 3104
  • Likes Given: 4424
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #87 on: 12/02/2017 01:56 PM »
Elon said "Mars orbit", which is quite confusing. But he also said it's going to stay in the deep space for years, I think it leaves us with two options left. Actual orbit around Mars does not seem plausible, with transfer window a few months away and most probably no motor to perform braking maneuver.

The first option is that it may be something like a Hohmann transfer orbit with an apogee at the Mars orbit (they would go to the Mars orbit then, to some extent), but with the planet in the other place at the same time.

The second option is just a Mars flyby, far enough from the planet to make sure the payload won't smash into the surface. I guess that Roadster is not going to have any trajectory correction thrusters, so I don't they they would risk going too close.

Considering the cost of something space-navigation-propulsion-worthy of braking over a ton to Mars orbit after many months, I'm pretty sure "Mars orbit" in this case means "an orbit around the Sun that touches Mars orbit at one end, Earth orbit at the other". Might target for a Mars flyby, might not. Launch date would imply probably not, at least not a very close one.

They have had a long time to work on this and have plenty of spare parts to play with. A Super Draco has the in space endurance and performance to brake into orbit. There are probably test articles aplenty. A weldment to attach to the car's chassis, some solar panels, precise location of the COG, etc. I think SpaceX could cobble something up in a month or so. No big deal if it does not work, right?

Still a completely insane idea.

Matthew

Fixed that for you.

Maybe not so crazy... GM spende almost $4B per year on advertising.  What have they purchased with that tidy sum that will get as much press?
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline nacnud

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2128
  • Liked: 299
  • Likes Given: 162
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #88 on: 12/02/2017 02:08 PM »
Maybe not so crazy... GM spende almost $4B per year on advertising.  What have they purchased with that tidy sum that will get as much press?

Good point, especially as Tesla has a marketing budget of essentially zero.
« Last Edit: 12/02/2017 02:09 PM by nacnud »

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8570
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1063
  • Likes Given: 238
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #89 on: 12/02/2017 02:10 PM »
Good point, especially as Tesla has a marketing budget of essentially zero.
I wouldn't exactly call the cost of a Falcon Heavy zero ;-)
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Offline ClayJar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 339
  • Baton Rouge, LA, USA
  • Liked: 702
  • Likes Given: 64
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #90 on: 12/02/2017 02:11 PM »
If, as they have said, they're not completely sure it'll go off without a hitch, would it be smarter *not* to include large amounts of toxic hyperbolic propellants? In an RUD, most of them would disappear in the big fireball, but could enough remain to be inconvenient?

Of course, even if there's absolutely no potential post-RUD issue, not having hypergols to deal with during the test and launch campaign would be convenient.

(Elon should have just used an apostrophe and made it perfectly clear: destination Mars' orbit.)

Offline Darkseraph

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 495
  • Liked: 198
  • Likes Given: 94
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #91 on: 12/02/2017 02:15 PM »
I presume a lot the car itself that isn't rated for space will be gutted and the vehicle will be permanently attached to the second stage. Perhaps the second stage could even be the 'service module' for the payload in that case. It would be kind of cool if they attempted something like the old Mars Greenhouse idea and tried to grow a plant in front of a camera at the distance of Mars, although expensive and hard to license. Does SpaceX even have a launch license yet for this flight?
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." R.P.Feynman

Offline Johnnyhinbos

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1028
  • Boston, MA
  • Liked: 1019
  • Likes Given: 160
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #92 on: 12/02/2017 02:18 PM »
If, as they have said, they're not completely sure it'll go off without a hitch, would it be smarter *not* to include large amounts of toxic hyperbolic propellants? In an RUD, most of them would disappear in the big fireball, but could enough remain to be inconvenient?

Of course, even if there's absolutely no potential post-RUD issue, not having hypergols to deal with during the test and launch campaign would be convenient.

(Elon should have just used an apostrophe and made it perfectly clear: destination Mars' orbit.)
What's a 'hyperbolic propellant'? :-)

Let me introduce the power of the word 'just':

Getting into Mars orbit is east. Just deploy the airbags for aerobreaking and then pump the breaks to slow it down the rest of the way. Of course you have to orient the firewall properly with the steering wheel...
John Hanzl. Author, action / adventure www.johnhanzl.com

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2301
  • US
  • Liked: 1648
  • Likes Given: 1159
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #93 on: 12/02/2017 02:18 PM »
I haven't noticed any FCC filings under the SpaceX name for this payload.  Unless they're registering a payload under some foreign subsidiary that only communicates with ground stations outside the U.S., it should have FCC filings if they intend to communicate with it.

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2937
  • Liked: 1368
  • Likes Given: 911
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #94 on: 12/02/2017 02:19 PM »
Silverbird's numbers for Falcon Heavy are way out of date.

Offline nacnud

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2128
  • Liked: 299
  • Likes Given: 162
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #95 on: 12/02/2017 02:20 PM »
Good point, especially as Tesla has a marketing budget of essentially zero.
I wouldn't exactly call the cost of a Falcon Heavy zero ;-)
Well it is if SpaceX are paying for it, and it's launching anyway so... I do feel sorry for the Roadster though, hopefully it won't get as lonely as Spirit out there.
« Last Edit: 12/02/2017 02:20 PM by nacnud »

Offline Dave G

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2002
  • Liked: 743
  • Likes Given: 1018
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #96 on: 12/02/2017 02:27 PM »
We need to be careful. I am 100% sure it will fly out to the orbit OF Mars around the sun, NOT enter orbit around Mars.
The press and twitterguys already getting it wrong per default.

Right.

Here's Elon's exact tweet (emphasis mine).
Quote
"Payload will be my midnight cherry Tesla Roadster playing Space Oddity. Destination is Mars orbit. Will be in deep space for a billion years or so if it doesn’t blow up on ascent."

If Elon meant that his Roadster will orbit the planet Mars, then wouldn't that be a decaying orbit?

If so, then wouldn't it crash onto the Mars surface way before "a billion years or so"?

With this in mind, I'm inclined to agree.  In this case, when Elon says "Mars orbit", I think he means an orbital path around the sun that's very similar to the path of Mars.

Online matthewkantar

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 691
  • Liked: 440
  • Likes Given: 473
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #97 on: 12/02/2017 02:38 PM »
the vehicle will be permanently attached to the second stage.

The money shot has to be the car drifting away from the PAF/bus/service module all on its own against the infinite black.

Matthew

Offline cscott

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2636
  • Liked: 1839
  • Likes Given: 658
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #98 on: 12/02/2017 02:49 PM »
I haven't noticed any FCC filings under the SpaceX name for this payload.  Unless they're registering a payload under some foreign subsidiary that only communicates with ground stations outside the U.S., it should have FCC filings if they intend to communicate with it.
What if they were using NASA resources for deep space communication? Would an FCC filing be necessary in that case?

Offline lamontagne

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1069
  • Liked: 1491
  • Likes Given: 240
Re: Falcon Heavy Demo Mission Payload Discussion
« Reply #99 on: 12/02/2017 02:55 PM »
Do the Tesla going past Mars!!
-With or without the hardtop?
-Any accessories? Cameras?  Thrusters?
-How close to Mars?
-Can anyone post a picture of the actual Musk Roadster for reference?
-Solar panel or would the battery be enough for a few years at low draw?  Probably run down fairly quickly if it needs to keep itself from freezing?
« Last Edit: 12/02/2017 02:56 PM by lamontagne »

Tags: