Recommended Posts

I wonder what sort of procedure they have for removing the side booster nose cones from the interstage, they usually place that cap on it that locks itself to the stage after which they can lift it... but i suppose now they need some guys in a cherrypicker going up to unlock that nosecone first.

  • 2 weeks later...
2 minutes ago, DocM said:

That's not a booster, it's the new beefed up center core.

 

 It's rumored at least one FH booster will be a previouslycflown stage. 

I was going to say. Is it wider than a normal core?

  • Like 1

Thicker hull, massively beefed up Octaweb to take the loads, Octaweb mounts & longerons for the lower ends of the boosters, and a new beefed up "Sport" interstage with upper mounts for the boosters. 

  • Like 3

Nothing official, but gathered from tweets and recent articles...

 

1) Appears 39A was scheduled to be ready in November 2016, just not for FH, F9 could launch though.

 

2) FH requires new tracking systems for multicore landings, ordered from Orbital Systems, to be received on January 1, 2017 and will be installed then. This would conclude that FH would not have been able to launch in November 2016. Presently only have one tracking antenna at the cape, two more coming in so that all 3 stages can RTLS. (SpaceX payed for the gear)

 

3) Rumor of a "previously enjoyed" booster to be used on initial flight. No idea of the accuracy, but S1 has been proven to be the toughest stage ever built...unless someone has landed and tested one as much....(crickets)...

 

4) Have not heard anything on the construction at LZ-1 for the additional core landings.

 

5) Rumor has it that the damage at LC-40 is "moderate"...which I take as being a lot better than "nuked".

 

Anyone have anything else?

 

Thought this was a good article...will bring a reality smile

 

Why Exploding Rockets Are Not Always a Bad Thing

http://www.space.com/34051-exploding-rockets-arent-always-bad.html?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=Twitter&utm_campaign=socialtwitterspc&cmpid=social_spc_514648

 

:)

  • Like 2
  • 4 months later...

Going back to the cross feed system, or lack of it. I know it was talked about nearly a year ago. But I heard it mentioned somewhere fairly recently and was curious how they would manage the fuel in the centre booster. I presume they cant run all 3 at full power or all 3 will run out of propellant at the same time so will the centre booster be throttled back while the side boosters are in action then have it's power increased as those boosters prepare to and do detach?

With the cross feed system I think the idea was to run all three cores at full throttle but feed fuel from the outer cores to the inner core, so at the time the outer cores separate the inner core would still have lots of fuel.
With that plan dropped I'm not entirely sure how they will do it, I think it depends on the mission. They could drop the two boosters early with enough fuel to return and let the middle one burn for longer and land it on a barge. But like I said, that would probably depend on the mission, whenever it is possible to send the three boosters back that would probably be the cheapest solution.

I think they'll do it the "Delta-IV" way. Center Core will be in a partial-thrust mode until a bit after the two Side Cores separate, then it's a "Full Thrust" mode (see what I did there? :D) until it's spent and staging occurs. No reason to abandon what works. :p 

16 minutes ago, DocM said:

And we need to remember that 100% on that center core will be the Block 5 thrust of 1.9 million lbf.  Early FH's will likely use the Block 4 for a few launches for reuse testing.

Sweet, we'll get to see the performance of a Block-IV for a few launches. :yes: Even if it's on a FH, it'll fly. Works for me.

  • 2 weeks later...

HEADS UP!!

 

A Falcon Heavy side booster left Hawthorne last night!! Obvious because it had a nose cone in place of the interstage, and the front dolley wheels were repositioned.

 

 

I said a rude word as I was watching that video the first time haha

 

"Ok there's the engines....then the stage....still normal stage...NOSE CONE OMFG!"

Soon, Daniel-san ... soon.

 

Show me wash car. Hei. Show, wax-on, wax off ... hei. Show, paint the fence ... yosh'. Now show sand the floor ... hei. 

 

*Bow* You ready now. :D

  • Like 2
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • I think the car analogy is more this: Left hand drive, basic commands on the left side of the infotainment screen. Right hand drive, basic commands on the right side of the infotainment screen. Granted, you're not swapping between the two often so it's doesn't really work. But it's to do with the proximity of you (your mouse, or the driver) to the controls.
    • I mean, the old one was broken and so stupidly complex for many users, so I don't see that as a feasible option. A context menu needs to be simple to use, and for me the Windows 11 style actually worked really well for me, and many others. I used to have to scroll the damn context menu just to get to "file properties" in Windows 10. That was not a good experience, and I'm sure you'd agree. What they're trying to do is make it the best of both worlds, as clearly you'd prefer the Win10 style. I'm curious how they're going to do this.
    • The "Show more options" has its place, as does the simpler context menu, but it should perhaps be a separate fly-out rather than relaunching the entire, old context menu. The old context menu was getting absurd in Windows 10. Often I'd have to make the context menu scroll just to get to "File properties" on my old laptop. Even without much installed, the amount of items was just too much. It's a context menu, not a "do all" menu. Making it configurable is fraught with challenges too, so I'm interested to see how Microsoft tackles this one.
    • I don't hate the new menus, I am not a fan of the lack of features and how they went live when they clearly are not complete. The menu itself presents much better than the previous - but what's lacking (IMO) is: 1) Any kind of automated manipulation such as: "this goes on the new menu because you use this feature more often on this filetype" "this is rarely used and will fall back to the old menu" 2) Any kind of user manipulation such as: "a UI to add/remove/order items to the new menu"
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      I2D earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Dr Jared Dental Studio earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      RG INVESTMENT GROUP earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Very Popular
      The Norwegian Drone Pilot earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Very Popular
      s0nic69 earned a badge
      Very Popular
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      484
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      258
    3. 3
      Skyfrog
      84
    4. 4
      FloatingFatMan
      64
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      63
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!