Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Falcon Heavy - 7&8 Reuse - Elon's Roadster Demo - LC-39A

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
So here in SF Bay area, and just went out to pick up my husband. News on car radio (KCBS) was reporting people calling in to say they saw a bright white light in the sky and didn't think it was a meteor, said looked different. From Santa Rosa and south I think I heard. I was thinking this was possibly around the time that the boosters might have fired up (live feed just ended). Was the Roadster over this area?
 
Last edited:
The webcast host Michael said those two video feeds were different boosters.
And the host was incorrect. You can clearly see both feeds heading to the same pad (they're painted differently, so it's easy to tell). He made that comment earlier in the flight when it was not so obvious that someone had screwed up the feeds, and at that point it was reasonable that they'd look very similar.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: SMAlset
Is this bad or
better than expected?
Better. Quite a bit better.
If I understood correctly, the apogee of the orbit was twice as much as a TMI.
Keep in mind, this was a Block III/IV FH, and they limited thrust to reduce Max Q pressure.
The next heavies, which will be all Block V, which using full performance likely would be able to throw another Roadster to Jupiter or Saturn. Or two roadsters to Mars (with the same type of recovery).
But this was a burn to depletion. Zero fuel reserve. Typical missions require a fuel reserve as a safety margin in case of under performance.
Musk stated FH can throw payloads directly to Pluto, without gravity assists. Probably a much smaller payload (say under 500kg), but the farther away the payload destination, the total delta V required climbs a lot, which is amazing that a 100% RP1 rocket can do that. At some point the payload is too far out (say outside the solar system) you might end up with zero or negative payload (can't do the mission at all).
Plus there's the possibility of landing all 3 cores in 3xASDS on a purely parabolic trajectory which would add a bit more performance (no boostback, just a longer re-entry for the core to avoid getting too hot, ASDS catches the side boosters closer, the center core way out).
This launch also allocated some fuel for the core to do a boostback, otherwise ASDS would be much further out.

In rocketry, even a few more seconds of burn can make a significant difference. 30 seconds more a huge difference.
 
Last edited:
So here in SF Bay area, and just went out to pick up my husband. News on car radio (KCBS) was reporting people calling in to say they saw a bright white light in the sky and didn't think it was a meteor, said looked different. From Santa Rosa and south I think I heard. I was thinking this was possibly around the time that the boosters might have fired up (live feed just ended). Was the Roadster over this area?


Dang, It was Elon's Roadster going over. Saw this tweet where someone got a photo of it over AZ. Alex Ebertz (@AlexEbtz) | Twitter and then found this SF Gate news article Strange light over Northern California was SpaceX rocket
 
Last edited:
I listened to the press conference afterwards (
on a continuous loop). Some fun facts:

The Roadster was not space hardened at all. They didn't even test it for vacuum. Just a regular car. The spacesuit has a mannequin inside for rigidity. No sensors or anything on or in the suit. The roadster will continue broadcasting for about 12 hours and then it goes dark. No plans to track it or anything.

Going forward, they are only going to reuse block 5 cores. They aren't even going to reuse the two cores they recovered today since they aren't block 5, but they are glad they recovered them since they had the new titanium grid fins and they will re-use those grid fins. Elon said that manufacturing those grid fins is a production bottleneck (and probably expensive too).

Once they start recovering the central core of the FH (today's crashed as they couldn't relight two of the three engines due to some issue (garbled in the recording)), the cost of a FH launch isn't much more than the cost of a F9 launch. Although they will price it to market ($62M for F9 and $90M for FH). Elon also said that the development cost of FH, which he emphasized wasn't subsidized by anyone, was north of $500M.

Going forward, they have some minor tidying up for block 5 of F9 and FH, but then its all hands on deck for dragon crew and BFR. No significant new development for F9 and FH. All new design work will be for BFR. Aspirational goal is astronauts orbiting by end of this year in F9 and dragon crew.

The spaceship portion of BFR is the harder part, they think the booster part they have a firm handle on. So they will tackle the spaceship part first, with the hardest part being the heat shielding since trans planetary orbits come in much hotter than orbital trips.Expect to have little grasshopper like flights of the spaceship end of 2019! Maybe full BFR in 3-4 years.
 
The webcast host Michael said those two video feeds were different boosters.

Yes he did, and he was wrong. You can tell near the end when it is obvious that the "two" boosters are landing in the exact same landing pad.No doubt they planned on showing the two different boosters, but some glitch occurred. Either a mistake or a camera died or something.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mongo
Are they maneuvering the roadster to get those amazing shots? I can't believe it's just luck to get the earth in the background just right.
Its called the barbeque roll. Keep your payload/upper stage rotating so they don't get too much sun heat on one side and too cold on the other side, which can damage both pieces.
Everything else is just a normal result of the BBQ roll.
 
Yes he did, and he was wrong. You can tell near the end when it is obvious that the "two" boosters are landing in the exact same landing pad.No doubt they planned on showing the two different boosters, but some glitch occurred. Either a mistake or a camera died or something.
Sorry, everyone keeps saying it’s the same feed, but you can clearly see a second booster appear in the frame , just before they land. They are only a couple of hundred meters apart, so everything far away looks like it’s seen from the same vantage point.
Maybe it’s the same and changes partway through, but I think they are different the whole time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: e-FTW
Sorry, everyone keeps saying it’s the same feed, but you can clearly see a second booster appear in the frame , just before they land. They are only a couple of hundred meters apart, so everything far away looks like it’s seen from the same vantage point.
Maybe it’s the same and changes partway through, but I think they are different the whole time.
The latest video (
) has been corrected to show the correct feed in the lower rigt frame. You can by the date/time-stamp (missong on the original). It's also obvoius during landing that the landing pods are different. The original (live) was incorrect. Access the video from Falcon Heavy Test Flight | SpaceX.
 
Elon mentioned at the post launch conference that none of this rocket will be reused. Of the cores that flew, SpaceX wanted to recover the side boosters most because they had the reusable titanium grid fins. The next FH will be a Block 5.


Internal monolog "It worked? $@&%, that means we have to build more."


Regarding the same feed for both boosters. They may have been trolling all the people who were worried about both boosters being given the same landing point (sheepishly raises hand). If so, well played /golf clap.