Falcon Heavy will fly

Falcon Heavy will fly (763014)	Home · Maps · About

Home > OTChat

[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]

(763014)	view threaded
Falcon Heavy will fly
Posted by WillD on Sat Apr 9 18:22:05 2011 edf40wrjww2msgDetailOT:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d SpaceX has upped the ante in their battle to gain a foothold in the US launcher market. The Falcon 9 Heavy is being touted as the most powerful rocket since the Saturn V (it isn't, unless they mean US launchers), and that it will deliver twice the payload of its nearest rival, the Delta IV Heavy, with almost half the cost. From SpaceX's Press Release Falcon Heavy will lift more than twice as much as any other launch vehicle WASHINGTON – Today, Elon Musk, CEO and chief rocket designer of Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) unveiled the dramatic final specifications and launch date for the Falcon Heavy, the world's largest rocket. “Falcon Heavy will carry more payload to orbit or escape velocity than any vehicle in history, apart from the Saturn V moon rocket, which was decommissioned after the Apollo program. This opens a new world of capability for both government and commercial space missions,” Musk told a press conference at the National Press Club in Washington, DC. “Falcon Heavy will arrive at our Vandenberg, California, launch complex by the end of next year, with liftoff to follow soon thereafter. First launch from our Cape Canaveral launch complex is planned for late 2013 or 2014.” Musk added that with the ability to carry satellites or interplanetary spacecraft weighing over 53 metric tons or 117,000 pounds to orbit, Falcon Heavy will have more than twice the performance of the Delta IV Heavy, the next most powerful vehicle, which is operated by United Launch Alliance, a Boeing-Lockheed Martin joint venture. 53 metric tons is more than the maximum take-off weight of a fully-loaded Boeing 737-200 with 136 passengers. In other words, Falcon Heavy can deliver the equivalent of an entire commercial airplane full of passengers, crew, luggage and fuel all the way to orbit. View the launch simulation video at: www.spacex.com Falcon Heavy’s first stage will be made up of three nine-engine cores, which are used as the first stage of the SpaceX Falcon 9 launch vehicle. It will be powered by SpaceX’s upgraded Merlin engines currently being tested at the SpaceX rocket development facility in McGregor, Texas. Falcon Heavy will generate 3.8 million pounds of thrust at liftoff. This is the equivalent to the thrust of fifteen Boeing 747s taking off at the same time. Above all, Falcon Heavy has been designed for extreme reliability. Unique safety features of the Falcon 9 are preserved, such as the ability to complete its mission even if multiple engines fail. Like a commercial airliner, each engine is surrounded by a protective shell that contains a worst case situation like fire or a chamber rupture, preventing it from affecting other engines or the vehicle itself. Anticipating potential astronaut transport needs, Falcon Heavy is also designed to meet NASA human rating standards, unlike other satellite launch vehicles. For example, this means designing to higher structural safety margins of 40% above flight loads, rather than the 25% level of other rockets, and triple redundant avionics. Falcon Heavy will be the first rocket in history to do propellant cross-feed from the side boosters to the center core, thus leaving the center core with most of its propellant after the side boosters separate. The net effect is that Falcon Heavy achieves performance comparable to a three stage rocket, even though only the upper stage is airlit, further improving both payload performance and reliability. Crossfeed is not required for missions below 100,000 lbs, and can be turned off if desired. Despite being designed to higher structural margins than other rockets, the side booster stages will have a mass ratio (full of propellant vs empty) above 30, better than any vehicle of any kind in history. Falcon Heavy, with more than twice the payload, but less than one third the cost of a Delta IV Heavy, will provide much needed relief to government and commercial budgets. In fact, Falcon Heavy at approximately $1,000 per pound to orbit, sets a new world record in affordable spaceflight. This year, even as the Department of Defense budget was cut, the EELV launch program, which includes the Delta IV, still saw a thirty percent increase. The 2012 budget for four Air Force launches is $1.74B, which is an average of $435M per launch. Falcon 9 is offered on the commercial market for $50-60M and Falcon Heavy is offered for $80-$125M. Unlike our competitors, this price includes all non-recurring development costs and on-orbit delivery of an agreed upon mission. For government missions, NASA has added mission assurance and additional services to the Falcon 9 for less than $20M. Vehicle Overview Mass to Orbit (200 km, 28.5 deg): 53 metric tons (117,000 lb) Length: 69.2 m (227 ft) Max Stage Width: 5.2 m (17 ft) Total Width: 11.6 meters (38 ft) Weight at Liftoff: 1,400 metric tons or 3.1 million lbs Thrust on Liftoff: 1,700 metric tons or 3.8 million lbs Please note that Falcon Heavy should not be confused with the super heavy lift rocket program being debated by the U.S. Congress. That vehicle is authorized to carry between 70-130 metric tons to orbit. SpaceX agrees with the need to develop a vehicle of that class as the best way to conduct a large number of human missions to Mars. The Falcon Heavy Rocket will be the most capable rocket in the world. Credit: SpaceX About SpaceX SpaceX develops, manufactures and launches family of launch vehicles and spacecraft that are increasing the reliability and performance of space transportation, while ultimately reducing costs by a factor of ten. With the Falcon rockets, SpaceX has a diverse manifest of launches to deliver commercial and government satellites to orbit. After the Space Shuttle retires, the Falcon 9 and SpaceX’s Dragon spacecraft will start carrying cargo, including live plants and animals, to and from the International Space Station for NASA. Falcon 9 and Dragon were developed to one day carry astronauts. Founded in 2002 by Elon Musk, SpaceX is a private company owned by management and employees, with minority investments from Founders Fund, Draper Fisher Jurvetson, and Valor Equity Partners. The company has over 1,250 employees in California, Texas and Florida. For more information, and to watch the video of the Falcon 9 and Dragon launches, visit the SpaceX website at SpaceX.com. IMHO this is a fairly interesting development as most of the community speculated that SpaceX would do to better develop their Hydrogen/LOX Raptor engine in an effort to improve geosynchronous transfer orbit performance for the fairly lucrative communication satellite market. But with the first Falcon 9 Heavy flying with the conventional Merlin powered, Kerosene/LOX fueled upper stage, and flying into a polar orbit from Vandenberg AFB in California, it seems possible they're taking aim at United Launch Alliance's USAF contracts for low earth orbit spy satellites. IMHO it's also interesting they will use propellant crossfeeding as that potentially means the two strap-on Falcon 9s will be discarded at lower altitudes and lower speeds than the Falcon 9 first stages that have been utilized to this point. That means those two boosters may stand a better chance of being reused because they'll be less susceptible to damage. Adding the Raptor upper stage to the Falcon 9H could push performance toward the 70 ton lower limit of NASA's proposed Space Launch System, which is slated to replace the Shuttle and the now defunct Constellation program. A pair of Falcon 9H launches, one each for an Orion or Dragon capsule, another for a lander, and a third with a stretched upper stage with a Raptor engine could very well put the very same lander NASA proposed to put on the Moon for a fraction the cost. It is possible a few tanker flights would be required to fill the Earth Departure Stage, and with prepositioning of fuel using very fuel efficient solar electric stages we could even reach Mars' moons with a reasonable number of launches. SpaceX certainly makes a strong case for having NASA forgo rocket design and construction and contracting out their launch services as was originally proposed for the FY2011 budget.
Post a New Response

(763015)	view threaded
Re: Falcon Heavy will fly
Posted by RockParkMan* on Sat Apr 9 18:23:36 2011, in response to Falcon Heavy will fly, posted by WillD on Sat Apr 9 18:22:05 2011.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailOT:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d Good. we need a real rocket.
Post a New Response

(763018)	view threaded
Re: Falcon Heavy will fly
Posted by WillD* on Sat Apr 9 18:51:25 2011, in response to Re: Falcon Heavy will fly, posted by RockParkMan on Sat Apr 9 18:23:36 2011.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailOT:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d As Mr. Musk has repeatedly noted, it is more than a little hypocritical that most Republican congressmen favor NASA's outdated and unreasonably expensive arsenal-based Spaceflight Center arrangement and the massive funding they require, while claiming to be pro-Business and anti-government. I guess as with everything the Republicans do, there's a big asterisk next to their support for business. Some of the Utah and Alabama congressional delegations are downright hostile to SpaceX, despite SpaceX being the only real corporation attempting orbital spaceflight right now. Given just how badly NASA is dragging its feet on downsizing the unwieldy Ares into the more modest requirements of the Space Launch System I'm ready to say 'Screw it' and join the argument against NASA providing its own launch services. We could provide federal funding for ULA's Advanced Centaur and Atlas V Phase II modifications while also providing SpaceX with some funding for their Falcon X concept, and likely still save money relative to NASA's hideously overpriced figures for a 70 to 130 ton (or tonne, the law isn't very clear) Shuttle Derived Launch Vehicle. I really liked the Jupiter when it was a sensible alternative to the monster Marshall Spaceflight Center turned the Ares into, but it now seems that no matter what NASA's course they'll be unable to get over the Freudian obsession with unaffordable rockets. At the very least, SpaceX having flying Falcon 9s has made for better Youtube videos:
Post a New Response

[ Return to the Message Index ]