Falcon Heavy set to launch on February 6th

[Waspie_Dwarf]

Second stage is in orbit. The burn that will put the Tesler on a route towards Mars will happen in about 6 hours.

[toast]

Well, that was an amazing piece of rocket ballet.

[Waspie_Dwarf]

5 minutes ago, Waspie_Dwarf said:

Second stage is in orbit. The burn that will put the Tesler on a route towards Mars will happen in about 6 hours.

Ignore this, I have no idea where I got that figure from. The second stage will reignite 28 minutes after launch.

[toast]

 

[Waspie_Dwarf]

1 hour ago, toast said:

Well, that was an amazing piece of rocket ballet.

Here are all the parts of that ballet in a SpaceX diagram:

 

[Waspie_Dwarf]

36 minutes ago, Waspie_Dwarf said:

Second stage is in orbit. The burn that will put the Tesler on a route towards Mars will happen in about 6 hours.

29 minutes ago, Waspie_Dwarf said:

Ignore this, I have no idea where I got that figure from. The second stage will reignite 28 minutes after launch.

Actually don't ignore it, I was right, There is a third burn about 6 hours after lift off that will put the Tesler in it;s heliocentric orbit. It's the second burn at 28 minutes, which raised the orbit, I didn't know about.

SpaceX has confirmed that the second burn was successful. Still no word on the landing of the core stage on board the barge.

 

[Waspie_Dwarf]

One hell of a view:

 

SpaceX is currently livestreaming views from the Tesla:

 

[Jon the frog]

Awesome launch, so cool to have a good live feed, we don't have enough like this from other manufacturer. It's at the same time a strong publicity stunt. I'm sure there will be money input for space venture after that to boost space-X further. 

 

Edited February 7, 2018 by Jon the frog

[Waspie_Dwarf]

Back on topic:

Elon Musk has confirmed that the centre core did not survive its landing on the barge, which is a shame.

[Jon the frog]

1 minute ago, Waspie_Dwarf said:

Back on topic:

Elon Musk has confirmed that the centre core did not survive its landing on the barge, which is a shame.

Sad, but it was different than the standard ones... it took them a couple of tries to get it right with the other models.

[Waspie_Dwarf]

1 minute ago, Jon the frog said:

Sad, but it was different than the standard ones... it took them a couple of tries to get it right with the other models.

Not on this flight, it was fairly standard. The only real difference is that whilst the side boosters were firing it was not at full throttle.

Future Falcon Heavy missions will have fuel from the side boosters pumped into the centre core, with the centre core at full throttle whilst the side boosters are still attached, This will mean that the Falcon Heavy will have even more lift off thrust than this mission. For this version the side boosters will also need to be modified. However none of these modifications should effect the ability of the cores to successfully land.

To loft the maximum payload into orbit the Falcon Heavy would need to deplete the fuel in all the cores during ascent, meaning that none of them would be recovered. SapceX already do this with the Falcon 9, sometimes the payload is either too heavy, or need too much speed at first stage separation, and it then operates like a conventional launcher with no attempt at first stage recovery.

[Astra.]

8 hours ago, internetperson said:

I often see these launches from my backyard and if that's the case today I'll snap a pic and upload it. 

Wow, lucky you. That would be pretty cool seeing this launch (or any for that matter) from your own backyard. I hope you were able to get some good snap shots. 

[Jon the frog]

2 hours ago, Waspie_Dwarf said:

Not on this flight, it was fairly standard. The only real difference is that whilst the side boosters were firing it was not at full throttle.

Future Falcon Heavy missions will have fuel from the side boosters pumped into the centre core, with the centre core at full throttle whilst the side boosters are still attached, This will mean that the Falcon Heavy will have even more lift off thrust than this mission. For this version the side boosters will also need to be modified. However none of these modifications should effect the ability of the cores to successfully land.

To loft the maximum payload into orbit the Falcon Heavy would need to deplete the fuel in all the cores during ascent, meaning that none of them would be recovered. SapceX already do this with the Falcon 9, sometimes the payload is either too heavy, or need too much speed at first stage separation, and it then operates like a conventional launcher with no attempt at first stage recovery.

Quite interesting, i was thinking the center one was a bit longer because of the attachment for the second stage and some structural tweak for the side booster. Whatever, the lost... the payload is in space, that's the big achievement !  The number of engine is quite impressive, it's starting to look like the Russian N1, lol

[Sundew]

"Won't you take a ride, on Heavy Metal! It's the only way you can travel down that road!"

 

[bison]

The third rocket burn was reportedly successful. The payload is in a solar orbit, independent of the Earth. It will apparently pass the orbit of  Mars, before reaching out into the asteroid belt, then circling around to near Earth's orbit, then that of Mars again, and so on. 

Point of the orbit nearest the Sun (perihelion) 0.96 Astronomicall Units.

Point of the orbit farthest from the Sun (aphelion) 2.61 Astronomical Units.  

Edited February 7, 2018 by bison
added information

[BorizBadinov]

2 hours ago, Sundew said:

"Won't you take a ride, on Heavy Metal! It's the only way you can travel down that road!"

 

 

First thing I thought of when I saw the view from the Tesla

[Mr Supertypo]

That was a fantastic sight and accomplishment. Wow speechles.  Now that tesla will be in space for a billion years, mindblown.

[Derek Willis]

A fantastic success for the Space-X team! Less than a decade ago Elon Musk and his colleagues launched their first rocket, the Falcon 1. After the usual delays that are features of the space industry - and the usual criticisms - they have now launched the mighty Falcon Heavy. Musk says he wants to send people to Mars in the not too distant future. I for one won't be betting against that. He may be a showman, but yet again he and the people at Space-X have shown the world what is possible with imagination and effort.

[Derek Willis]

5 hours ago, Jon the frog said:

Quite interesting, i was thinking the center one was a bit longer because of the attachment for the second stage and some structural tweak for the side booster. Whatever, the lost... the payload is in space, that's the big achievement !  The number of engine is quite impressive, it's starting to look like the Russian N1, lol

Except the N-1 didn't work ... However, it is good to see that after half-a-century, Sergi Korolev's multi-engine concept is actually practicable.   

[Waspie_Dwarf]

The latest on the centre core is that only one of the three engines needed for landing ignited. The booster hit the ocean at 300 mph. Shrapnel hit the drone ship and took out two of its engines.

[Waspie_Dwarf]

7 hours ago, bison said:

The third rocket burn was reportedly successful. The payload is in a solar orbit, independent of the Earth. It will apparently pass the orbit of  Mars, before reaching out into the asteroid belt, then circling around to near Earth's orbit, then that of Mars again, and so on. 

Point of the orbit nearest the Sun (perihelion) 0.96 Astronomicall Units.

Point of the orbit farthest from the Sun (aphelion) 2.61 Astronomical Units.  

This is actually an over performance.

As this was test flight using ballast (albeit a Tesla) this over performance isn't a problem. However had the Falcon Heavy been caring a useful payload it would be considered to have placed it into an incorrect orbit.

If this mission was actually trying to send a useful payload to Mars this over-shoot would either have rendered the mission a total write off or would have forced it to use extra fuel from its reserves to correct for the over-shoot, greatly shortening the mission.

 This is exactly why test flights don't carry useful payload. 

[Myles]

3 hours ago, Derek Willis said:

A fantastic success for the Space-X team! Less than a decade ago Elon Musk and his colleagues launched their first rocket, the Falcon 1. After the usual delays that are features of the space industry - and the usual criticisms - they have now launched the mighty Falcon Heavy. Musk says he wants to send people to Mars in the not too distant future. I for one won't be betting against that. He may be a showman, but yet again he and the people at Space-X have shown the world what is possible with imagination and effort.

Very impressive.   

I do wonder how the funds are.  This is extremely expensive even for a billionaire.   I hope he will stay committed.   It is nice to have more research being done.

[Jon the frog]

1 hour ago, Myles said:

Very impressive.   

I do wonder how the funds are.  This is extremely expensive even for a billionaire.   I hope he will stay committed.   It is nice to have more research being done.

With this launch and the publicity around it, i think funding will just poor in. The team he have found to build these rockets is impressive. The value of all this is astronomical and I hope will pave way to a manned space exploration.

[toast]

2 minutes ago, seanjo said:

.. and I'm pretty sure that the motors and the guidance computers are tried and tested from other smaller launchers, it seems to me the test was for the size of the launcher and the boosters return.

You underestimate the complexity of an advanced spacecraft. Its not LEGO, so any discussions on a LEGO fashion level are useless.

[Merc14]

1 hour ago, seanjo said:

I understand it was a test flight, I understand that they are using the car as ballast and that no first flight in the past has had anything valuable as a cargo. But EVERY launch is a lottery, and I'm pretty sure that the motors and the guidance computers are tried and tested from other smaller launchers, it seems to me the test was for the size of the launcher and the boosters return. They could easily have had a competition for a free payload with the proviso that it was very risky, and as this was a successful launch, the payload would now be doing something useful, instead of having a useless piece of plastic and metal falling through space.

One of the problems is that mating inert ballast to the second stage is far less complicated that mating a "living satellite"  there are electrical and communications connections, a tailor made mating ring, etc.  There has to be coordination between the launch team and the satellite team and the satellite requires a specific orbital altitude.  In other words it is expensive and requires time and manpower to d, especially when compared to an inert ballast load.  Lastly, no matter how willing to take a risk teh satellite's owner is there is still a value to the satellite or why launch the bloody thing in the first place?  Why go through all that when the launch itself is specifically designed to observe how your new rocket works and why bother to carry a satellite that the owner is willing to take a 50/50 chance on it being destroyed?  How worthwhile could the thing be if the owner doesn't care if it gets destroyed?

55 minutes ago, seanjo said:

You underestimate the interchangeability that a private company will demand. The Falcon Heavy uses 9 Merlin 1D main engines, a tried and tested engine, the controls and software are all proven tech. 

You must know far more than Elon Musk then because he said  that the heavy proved to be far more complex than they had originally thought and it took many more years to accomplish than he ever thought it would.  Also, teh Falcon has 9 engines, the heavy has 27.

Elon Musk speech to ISS R&D Conference

There is a lot of risk associated with the Falcon Heavy. There is a real good chance that the vehicle does not make it to orbit ... I hope it makes far enough away from the pad that it does not cause pad damage. I would consider even that a win, to be honest. ... I think Falcon Heavy is going to be a great vehicle. There is just so much that is really impossible to test on the ground. We'll do our best. ... It actually ended up being way harder to do Falcon Heavy than we thought. At first it sounds real easy; you just stick two first stages on as strap-on boosters. How hard can that be? But then everything changes. [the loads change, aerodynamics totally change, tripled vibration and acoustics, you break the qualification levels on all the hardware, redesign the center core airframe, separation systems] ... Really way, way more difficult than we originally thought. We were pretty naive about that. ... but optimized, it's 2 1/2 times the payload capability of Falcon 9.