Author Topic: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)  (Read 622022 times)

Online DanClemmensen

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8072
  • Earth (currently)
  • Liked: 6537
  • Likes Given: 2781
Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #1160 on: 07/08/2022 08:11 pm »
FH flight schedule suffers from a common problem that is related to heavy single sat payloads. And that is the complexity and size of those payloads creates a significant amount of schedule un-reliability for the sat readiness to fly. FH is ready to do multiple flights this year but will likely be a small part of the originally scheduled flights for which SpaceX has built hardware needed to support those flights.

As to availability to Super Heavy lifters +50t max payload capability. There will eventually be BO's NG hopefully. This should be in use prior to the last flight of DIVH. The NG flying at the 30t Heavy amount would fulfill the second launcher capability if the DOD really needs one at the 2024 timeframe.
There are a total of three remaining DIVH and they are all committed, so DIVH does not constitute a backup for  FH: that is, if FH were to be grounded today, none of its payloads could fly on DIVH.

NSSL usually requires at least two successful non-DoD flights before new launcher is accepted, so I do not think NG can serve as the backup in                            2024. At the current rate Starship is a more likely candidate from a schedule perspective, except that we don't know how SpaceX intends to support launching a heavy payload that requires vertical integration in a traditional fairing on Starship.

Offline Zed_Noir

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5490
  • Canada
  • Liked: 1814
  • Likes Given: 1302
Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #1161 on: 07/08/2022 11:08 pm »
<snip>
As to availability to Super Heavy lifters +50t max payload capability. There will eventually be BO's NG hopefully. This should be in use prior to the last flight of DIVH. The NG flying at the 30t Heavy amount would fulfill the second launcher capability if the DOD really needs one at the 2024 timeframe.
<snip>
NSSL usually requires at least two successful non-DoD flights before new launcher is accepted, so I do not think NG can serve as the backup in 2024. At the current rate Starship is a more likely candidate from a schedule perspective, except that we don't know how SpaceX intends to support launching a heavy payload that requires vertical integration in a traditional fairing on Starship.
My guess is that SpaceX will build a vertical integration bay with adjacent payload processing bay to load the payload onto a Starship with an overhead crane. Then the Starship gets placed on a SPMT unit with the overhead crane before rolling to the launch pad. Since the chopsticks on the Mechanizilla can lift an empty super heavy, it should have no problems lifting the Starship with a payload onto the Super Heavy.

The question is whether will SpaceX uses a chomper hatch or piano bay doors with probably a slide out deployment tilt table with the NRO/DoD special delivery Starship.

Very unlikely that SpaceX will employed the traditional 2 PLF halves with an expendable Starship variant. Unless the payload is extremely tall. In which case the vertical integration bay need to  have a way to encapsulated the payload in the traditional manner.



Offline AmigaClone

Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #1162 on: 07/10/2022 11:27 am »
Quote
Vulcan
Dude, where's your engines?

That is getting really stale. Yes, the BE-4 is very late, but they are clearly finally on their way. As evidenced by the images released by Tory on some bird site recently.
Posters will stop using that meme when a pair of flight capable engines is installed on the Vulcan.  :-*

Some posters might continue to use that meme until Vulcan reaches a certain launch cadence.

Offline AmigaClone

Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #1163 on: 07/10/2022 11:34 am »
None of the US providers (exclusive of Taurus) in the last 40 years.  ADTA doesn’t count nor does PSLV or Naro

Astra had an issue with fairing separation less than four months after your post. Granted, that is a startup company that has seen several failed launch attempts for different reasons, including the first time a tower was cleared horizontally in a launch attempt.

Online meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16250
  • N. California
  • Liked: 16561
  • Likes Given: 1467
Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #1164 on: 07/10/2022 04:25 pm »
Quote
Vulcan
Dude, where's your engines?

That is getting really stale. Yes, the BE-4 is very late, but they are clearly finally on their way. As evidenced by the images released by Tory on some bird site recently.
Posters will stop using that meme when a pair of flight capable engines is installed on the Vulcan.  :-*

Some posters might continue to use that meme until Vulcan reaches a certain launch cadence.
It has already reached a certain cadence.

You realize it might never launch more times than SpaceX launches in a single year with F9?

And depending on how things shape up with Starship, possibly a lot less? (Not even counting NG here)
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 38471
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 23226
  • Likes Given: 434
Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #1165 on: 07/10/2022 07:08 pm »

Astra had an issue with fairing separation less than four months after your post. Granted, that is a startup company that has seen several failed launch attempts for different reasons, including the first time a tower was cleared horizontally in a launch attempt.

hence doesn't count

Online ZachS09

  • Space Savant
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8641
  • Argyle, TX
  • Liked: 2521
  • Likes Given: 2184
Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #1166 on: 07/10/2022 07:16 pm »
<snip>
As to availability to Super Heavy lifters +50t max payload capability. There will eventually be BO's NG hopefully. This should be in use prior to the last flight of DIVH. The NG flying at the 30t Heavy amount would fulfill the second launcher capability if the DOD really needs one at the 2024 timeframe.
<snip>
NSSL usually requires at least two successful non-DoD flights before new launcher is accepted, so I do not think NG can serve as the backup in 2024. At the current rate Starship is a more likely candidate from a schedule perspective, except that we don't know how SpaceX intends to support launching a heavy payload that requires vertical integration in a traditional fairing on Starship.
My guess is that SpaceX will build a vertical integration bay with adjacent payload processing bay to load the payload onto a Starship with an overhead crane. Then the Starship gets placed on a SPMT unit with the overhead crane before rolling to the launch pad. Since the chopsticks on the Mechanizilla can lift an empty super heavy, it should have no problems lifting the Starship with a payload onto the Super Heavy.

The question is whether will SpaceX uses a chomper hatch or piano bay doors with probably a slide out deployment tilt table with the NRO/DoD special delivery Starship.

Very unlikely that SpaceX will employed the traditional 2 PLF halves with an expendable Starship variant. Unless the payload is extremely tall. In which case the vertical integration bay need to  have a way to encapsulated the payload in the traditional manner.

Didn’t SpaceX plan on building a Vertical Integration Facility of their own? You know, the one stationed on Pad 39A that’ll retract backward before launch?
« Last Edit: 07/10/2022 07:17 pm by ZachS09 »
Liftoff for St. Jude's! Go Dragon, Go Falcon, Godspeed Inspiration4!

Offline Zed_Noir

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5490
  • Canada
  • Liked: 1814
  • Likes Given: 1302
Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #1167 on: 07/10/2022 08:18 pm »
<snip>
As to availability to Super Heavy lifters +50t max payload capability. There will eventually be BO's NG hopefully. This should be in use prior to the last flight of DIVH. The NG flying at the 30t Heavy amount would fulfill the second launcher capability if the DOD really needs one at the 2024 timeframe.
<snip>
NSSL usually requires at least two successful non-DoD flights before new launcher is accepted, so I do not think NG can serve as the backup in 2024. At the current rate Starship is a more likely candidate from a schedule perspective, except that we don't know how SpaceX intends to support launching a heavy payload that requires vertical integration in a traditional fairing on Starship.
My guess is that SpaceX will build a vertical integration bay with adjacent payload processing bay to load the payload onto a Starship with an overhead crane. Then the Starship gets placed on a SPMT unit with the overhead crane before rolling to the launch pad. Since the chopsticks on the Mechanizilla can lift an empty super heavy, it should have no problems lifting the Starship with a payload onto the Super Heavy.

The question is whether will SpaceX uses a chomper hatch or piano bay doors with probably a slide out deployment tilt table with the NRO/DoD special delivery Starship.

Very unlikely that SpaceX will employed the traditional 2 PLF halves with an expendable Starship variant. Unless the payload is extremely tall. In which case the vertical integration bay need to  have a way to encapsulated the payload in the traditional manner.

Didn’t SpaceX plan on building a Vertical Integration Facility of their own? You know, the one stationed on Pad 39A that’ll retract backward before launch?
You are probably referring to the vertical payload integration gantry tower at the old LC-39A pad for the Falcon Heavy and possibly the Falcon 9.

My previous post is a reply to @DanClemmensen on how SpaceX might vertically integrated payloads onto a Starship/Super Heavy stack for the new LC-39A pad.

It is confusing for some folks that there are now 2 launch pads at launch complex LC-39A. Hopefully there will be nomenclature clarifications for them. We might wind up with LC-39A1 and LC-39A2.  ::)

Online ZachS09

  • Space Savant
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8641
  • Argyle, TX
  • Liked: 2521
  • Likes Given: 2184
Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #1168 on: 07/10/2022 10:57 pm »
That’s what I meant, Zed_Noir. The Falcon rocket VIF.
Liftoff for St. Jude's! Go Dragon, Go Falcon, Godspeed Inspiration4!

Offline AmigaClone

Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #1169 on: 07/13/2022 09:52 pm »
Quote
Vulcan
Dude, where's your engines?

That is getting really stale. Yes, the BE-4 is very late, but they are clearly finally on their way. As evidenced by the images released by Tory on some bird site recently.
Posters will stop using that meme when a pair of flight capable engines is installed on the Vulcan.  :-*

Some posters might continue to use that meme until Vulcan reaches a certain launch cadence.
It has already reached a certain cadence.

You realize it might never launch more times than SpaceX launches in a single year with F9?

And depending on how things shape up with Starship, possibly a lot less? (Not even counting NG here)
As of July 2022, Vulcan has a historical launch cadence of 0/year. The popularity of that meme would diminish after ULA managed to launch 3 Vulcans in a year, and likely be gone if ULA could reach 10 Vulcan launches in a year.

Offline alugobi

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1725
  • Liked: 1750
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #1170 on: 07/13/2022 10:35 pm »
Memes are like clichés because of the element of truth in them. 

Online ZachS09

  • Space Savant
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8641
  • Argyle, TX
  • Liked: 2521
  • Likes Given: 2184
Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #1171 on: 07/13/2022 11:40 pm »
You know, there’s another cliché out there that says something along the lines of getting sidetracked. What was that again?
Liftoff for St. Jude's! Go Dragon, Go Falcon, Godspeed Inspiration4!

Offline Nomadd

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9022
  • Virginia
  • Liked: 61242
  • Likes Given: 1386
Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #1172 on: 07/13/2022 11:49 pm »
You know, there’s another cliché out there that says something along the lines of getting sidetracked. What was that again?
"Don't get sidetracked"
Those who danced were thought to be quite insane by those who couldn't hear the music.

Online ZachS09

  • Space Savant
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8641
  • Argyle, TX
  • Liked: 2521
  • Likes Given: 2184
Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #1173 on: 07/14/2022 12:02 am »
You know, there’s another cliché out there that says something along the lines of getting sidetracked. What was that again?
"Don't get sidetracked"


Close. It’s “This topic belongs in another thread.”

Where do memes go? The party thread. Not here.
« Last Edit: 07/14/2022 12:02 am by ZachS09 »
Liftoff for St. Jude's! Go Dragon, Go Falcon, Godspeed Inspiration4!

Offline MATTBLAK

  • Elite Veteran & 'J.A.F.A'
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5361
  • 'Space Cadets' Let us; UNITE!! (crickets chirping)
  • New Zealand
  • Liked: 2242
  • Likes Given: 3882
Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #1174 on: 07/14/2022 12:14 am »
It's getting a bit ridiculous...
"Those who can't, Blog".   'Space Cadets' of the World - Let us UNITE!! (crickets chirping)

Offline AmigaClone

Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #1175 on: 07/15/2022 02:36 pm »
It's getting a bit ridiculous...

The major issue with the lack of Falcon Heavy launches (after the first test one) seem to be related to payload issues.

Part of the issue with lack of payloads is the small detail that a Falcon 9 Block 5 can send about twice the payload into LEO as the original Falcon 9 V1.0, so some of the payloads initially planned for a Falcon Heavy have ended up being launched on a single stick Falcon 9.

Online DanClemmensen

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8072
  • Earth (currently)
  • Liked: 6537
  • Likes Given: 2781
Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #1176 on: 07/15/2022 02:56 pm »
It's getting a bit ridiculous...

The major issue with the lack of Falcon Heavy launches (after the first test one) seem to be related to payload issues.

Part of the issue with lack of payloads is the small detail that a Falcon 9 Block 5 can send about twice the payload into LEO as the original Falcon 9 V1.0, so some of the payloads initially planned for a Falcon Heavy have ended up being launched on a single stick Falcon 9.
Yep. as far as I know, there has never been a mission that was delayed due to the Falcon Heavy since the FH first became operational in 2018. Since then, there have been numerous FH launches that have been delayed due to payload delays. Only two operational payloads were ready, and both were launched successfully.

As you say, most commercial customers appear to have re-evaluated the economics after the F9 became cheap and reliable, and figured out how to take advantage of it by keeping their payload mass low enough for the F9.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 40455
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 26480
  • Likes Given: 12507
Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #1177 on: 07/15/2022 03:08 pm »
FH flight schedule suffers from a common problem that is related to heavy single sat payloads. And that is the complexity and size of those payloads creates a significant amount of schedule un-reliability for the sat readiness to fly. FH is ready to do multiple flights this year but will likely be a small part of the originally scheduled flights for which SpaceX has built hardware needed to support those flights.

As to availability to Super Heavy lifters +50t max payload capability. There will eventually be BO's NG hopefully. This should be in use prior to the last flight of DIVH. The NG flying at the 30t Heavy amount would fulfill the second launcher capability if the DOD really needs one at the 2024 timeframe.
There are a total of three remaining DIVH and they are all committed, so DIVH does not constitute a backup for  FH: that is, if FH were to be grounded today, none of its payloads could fly on DIVH.

NSSL usually requires at least two successful non-DoD flights before new launcher is accepted, so I do not think NG can serve as the backup in                            2024. At the current rate Starship is a more likely candidate from a schedule perspective, except that we don't know how SpaceX intends to support launching a heavy payload that requires vertical integration in a traditional fairing on Starship.
Delta IV Heavy didn’t have an immediate backup, either. They had Atlas V Heavy, which they claimed would be ready 30 months after ordering. Vulcan can essentially do the same trick.

So FH already has about as much of a backup as Delta IV Heavy did. More if you count there are like 3 or 4 new rockets (of at least Delta IV Heavy capability to LEO) ready to fly to orbit in the next 30 months, not just 1, and they’re being built or are built now already, not just a hypothetical configuration.
« Last Edit: 07/15/2022 03:09 pm by Robotbeat »
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Online DanClemmensen

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8072
  • Earth (currently)
  • Liked: 6537
  • Likes Given: 2781
Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #1178 on: 07/15/2022 03:53 pm »

So FH already has about as much of a backup as Delta IV Heavy did. More if you count there are like 3 or 4 new rockets (of at least Delta IV Heavy capability to LEO) ready to fly to orbit in the next 30 months, not just 1, and they’re being built or are built now already, not just a hypothetical configuration.
I will restrain my enthusiasm until one of the alternatives actually flies. The three I know of are Starship, Vulcan, and NG. Although I assume a design can be developed, It is unclear how Starship can accommodate NSSL payloads. Vulcan and NG both depend on the same new engine, and that engine's production rate is apparently limited.

Even if all three might fly in the next 30 months, or even get NSSL-qualified in that time, FH still constitutes a single point of failure without a backup for the next 30 months.

Offline dlapine

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 358
  • University of Illinois
  • Liked: 210
  • Likes Given: 353
Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Reply #1179 on: 07/15/2022 04:45 pm »

So FH already has about as much of a backup as Delta IV Heavy did. More if you count there are like 3 or 4 new rockets (of at least Delta IV Heavy capability to LEO) ready to fly to orbit in the next 30 months, not just 1, and they’re being built or are built now already, not just a hypothetical configuration.
I will restrain my enthusiasm until one of the alternatives actually flies. The three I know of are Starship, Vulcan, and NG. Although I assume a design can be developed, It is unclear how Starship can accommodate NSSL payloads. Vulcan and NG both depend on the same new engine, and that engine's production rate is apparently limited.

Even if all three might fly in the next 30 months, or even get NSSL-qualified in that time, FH still constitutes a single point of failure without a backup for the next 30 months.

Or our only proven, operational capability for SHLV at this time. What would be really bad would be having no operational capability at all now. That would be annoying. It's not as if the FH itself (SpaceX to be sure) is responsible for the lack of an alternative.

 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0
OSZAR »