SpaceX FH - Psyche - LC-39A

[Grendal]

Launch Date: October 13
Launch Window: 10:19AM EDT (7:19AM PDT, 14:19 UTC)
Launch site: LC-39A, Cape Canaveral, Florida
Side Booster Recovery: RTLS - LZ-1 and LZ-2
Core Booster Recovery: Expended
Boosters: Side Boosters: B1064.4 and B1065.4 Center Core: B1079.1
Mass: 2,608 kg (5,750 lb) (Psyche, Escapade, and Janus satellites)
Orbit: Heliocentric
Yearly Launch Number: 73

A SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket will launch NASA’s Psyche asteroid mission. The Maxar-built spacecraft will travel to the metallic asteroid Psyche, where it will enter orbit in 2029. This is the first spacecraft to explore a metal-rich asteroid, which may be the leftover core of a protoplanet that began forming in the early solar system more than 4 billion years ago. The Falcon Heavy’s two side boosters will return to Landing Zones 1 and 2 at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station for recovery. The center core will be expended.

This is the 8th Falcon Heavy launch.

Psyche (spacecraft) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Psyche Mission | A Mission to a Metal World

The Psyche mission will explore, for the first time ever, an asteroid made not of rock or ice, but of metal. The mission will investigate planet formation.

psyche.asu.edu

Psyche (Discovery 14)

The Psyche mission will explore one of the most intriguing targets in the main asteroid belt  a giant metal asteroid, known as 16 Psyche, about t...

space.skyrocket.de

 

[JB47394]

The center core will be expended.

Ugh. Starship can't get operational soon enough.

 

[scaesare]

I feel like there have been center core landing attempts (the Starman launch?),

Has one ever been successful?

 

[bmah]

I feel like there have been center core landing attempts (the Starman launch?),

Has one ever been successful?

I vaguely remember there was one that landed on its drone ship but didn’t make it back to shore for some reason.

Bruce.

 

[JB47394]

I vaguely remember there was one that landed on its drone ship but didn’t make it back to shore for some reason.

The Arabsat-6a mission successfully landed all three boosters, but rough seas toppled the center core and broke it in half. The bottom half stayed on the barge and was brought back to port for salvage.

 

[Electroman]

wow.. broke into half and one half fell into sea?. If they have a video, that would be quite a sight.

 

[scaesare]

Ah so now we have a successful center core landing... just not a recovery...

 

[scaesare]

I feel like there have been center core landing attempts (the Starman launch?),

Has one ever been successful?

(responding to myself)

Yes, there have been other landing attempts and the Starman launch was one of them:

Here's where it was supposed to happen (note the "Core Lands") milestone in the timeline.... it just didn't make it:

 

[Grendal]

Psyche getting encapsulated.

 

[Cosmacelf]

Ugh. Starship can't get operational soon enough.

Eh, SpaceX has been expending second stages for every single Falcon flight. Losing an occasional core is actually small potatoes.

 

[Grendal]

Delayed a week. First post updated.

NASA delays Psyche launch a week

NASA has postponed the launch of the asteroid mission Psyche a week to update the configuration of thrusters on the spacecraft.

spacenews.com

 

[Grendal]

Psyche satellite trajectory:

 

[JB47394]

Bennu is a small dark gravel pile with a low albedo and density, which is why OSIRIS-REx got an explosion of debris from hitting the surface with a burst of gas. In contrast, Psyche is bigger, brighter and denser, and ground observations suggest that it could be a pretty interesting object. It is not expected to be a pure iron-nickel asteroid (and certainly not made of precious metals), but rather some kind of stony-iron asteroid. Some are hoping that it was large enough and hot enough when formed to differentiate, with a rich metallic core and stonier exterior. Possibly even with some iron volcanism to push some iron out from the core. It's a cold object now, of course.

Here's a video that I ran across showing the metal richness of points across the surface of Psyche. It is part of the reason that scientists are hoping that there was differentiation and iron volcanism; the metal rich areas may represent outflows from a metallic core when the whole thing was molten.

We'll start to find out about all this in detail in 2029. sigh

 

[ICUDoc]

I reckon I have 20-30 years left in me.
I wonder if I will live to see commercial asteroid mining (like in that fab, OLD, video game, "Elite")?
I love the idea of concentrated precious metals spinning in space...
(Which is why I really like the current iPhone ad, with the titanium born in a supernova and eventually plummeting to Earth only to be mined and made into an iPhone. An astounding, enchanting everyday scientific miracle

 

[JB47394]

I wonder if I will live to see commercial asteroid mining (like in that fab, OLD, video game, "Elite")?

Forgive me for being the party pooper, but we have the unfortunate reality of the rocket equation. It essentially says that you may not have anything off planet until you figure out a new way of doing things because the rocket equation places severe limitations on how much mass you can move around. For example, disposable rockets are a way of doing things, but they barely let us operate off-planet. So we need to change something else. SpaceX has given us partially-reusable rockets - a new way of doing things - so we can do a whole lot more in low earth orbit. Make more changes and more of the universe opens up.

How about a fully reusable rocket that can loft 150 tons at a go? Great stuff. Now more of the universe is accessible. Probably the Moon. Probably not Mars (and there are other arguments against Mars colonies). Certainly we can send much larger probes into our solar system - and possibly try for interstellar destinations. Send 100 probes to the nearest 100 likely stars (a 20 light year radius) and wait 40 or 50 years. Well, 50 or 60 as we'd have to wait for the signals to come back.

How about AI and robotics? Well now we're starting to get serious. That means that the rocket equation will let us pack so much capability into our probes that they can actually do stuff out there. Geological surveys on Mars, or Titan, or Mercury. Throw in some additive manufacturing and in situ resource recovery and perhaps we're talking about asteroid mining. Psyche becomes an interesting target.

Then there is the potential for colonies. Send out a simple printer and a couple of our best humanoid robots (a volume of mass allowed by the rocket equation) that can power off solar (perhaps nuclear - also permitted by the rocket equation) that will collect resources, smelt and separate them, then build a bigger printer. Or many small ones. Then use your basic infrastructure to build everything you need (ad nauseum until you've duplicated our state of the art in infrastructure). For reference, see the game Space Engineers (which does not abide by the rocket equation). All it takes is patience.

I focused on the rocket equation, which is the physical reality. The social reality is just as harsh because we have to justify to society the use of so many resources for these projects. Like the rocket equation, if we can change the way we do things, then the social justification can come more easily. So how difficult is it to sell people on a $100 billion project to put a colony of 30 people on the Moon versus a $1 billion project to put 30 robots on the Moon?

Change the way things are done and new vistas open up.

I have about the same amount of time that you do, and I'm hoping that we get going with the robotic implementation. The more capable we are with automation, the more we can do there. I think that people in space makes little to no sense. I have neither interest nor faith in Elon's dreams of a Mars colony. When the robots are ready, the universe will be ours.

 

[ICUDoc]

I think that people in space makes little to no sense

Yeah, probably true but also not likely to stop it in the long term (if humans are here in the long term).
Mining sounds unlikely, given your text, but maybe I would be content to see the photographic results of a 30metre bore into a solid asteroid made of osmium

 

[JB47394]

Yeah, probably true but also not likely to stop it in the long term (if humans are here in the long term).

I have no idea what will happen long term because we have this thing called AI, which is the key to unlocking all the various "equations" that determine the possibilities available to us. It can change the rules of the game. Hopefully for the better.

maybe I would be content to see the photographic results of a 30metre bore into a solid asteroid made of osmium

Every man's gotta have a dream

 

[ecarfan]

The more capable we are with automation, the more we can do there. I think that people in space makes little to no sense. I have neither interest nor faith in Elon's dreams of a Mars colony. When the robots are ready, the universe will be ours.

I would respectfully point out that much of your post would be more on topic in this thread https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/mars-and-off-planet-colonization-pros-and-cons-discussion.308156/

Staying on the topic of asteroid mining is IMO appropriate for this thread. My personal opinion is that it is unrealistic to think it will happen in this century, and maybe not for several centuries or until whenever fusion drives become feasible.

 

[scaesare]

Forgive me for being the party pooper, but we have the unfortunate reality of the rocket equation. It essentially says that you may not have anything off planet until you figure out a new way of doing things because the rocket equation places severe limitations on how much mass you can move around. For example, disposable rockets are a way of doing things, but they barely let us operate off-planet. So we need to change something else. SpaceX has given us partially-reusable rockets - a new way of doing things - so we can do a whole lot more in low earth orbit. Make more changes and more of the universe opens up.


[snip]

I'm certainly not well-versed in rocketry engineering, the rocket equation, orbital dynamics.... etc... But my understanding of the rocket equation is that it governed the velocity change a rocket of a given mass was capable of given it's propellent mass and exhaust velocity along with parameters like specific impulse. It doesn't speak to what happens after you expend the propellant, whether you refuel the rocket or throw it away.

You say above in the same paragraph that:

... we have the unfortunate reality of the rocket equation. It essentially says that you may not have anything off planet until you figure out a new way of doing things...

and then

SpaceX has given us partially-reusable rockets - a new way of doing things...

How does reusability affect the limitations imposed by the rocket equation?

(unless you are saying that the fraction of usable mass the rocket equation allows you to get to space is so small, that in order to be practical, you need to go often and inexpensively... it's just that the "may not" didn't make it sound that way)

 

[JB47394]

(unless you are saying that the fraction of usable mass the rocket equation allows you to get to space is so small, that in order to be practical, you need to go often and inexpensively... it's just that the "may not" didn't make it sound that way)

With expendable chemical rockets, you may not explore the solar system. It's not a physical reality, but a practical one.

The lead-in was "It essentially says that you may not have". I was hoping that my phrasing would communicate the idea that we can't do much until we make it economical to loft propellant. The need for large amounts of propellant is the iron fist of the rocket equation, and until propellant becomes more easily available, we're not going anywhere. Propellant depots in various locations would make the solar system more accessible. But we always have to acknowledge the rocket equation.

Another big development is the ability to make propellant from the atmosphere on Mars - because it caters to the rocket equation. If successfully implemented, you don't have to take the fuel to return. The rocket equation is merciless on that score because return propellant is outgoing cargo, requiring that much more propellant to get to your destination.

@ecarfan mentioned fusion drives, which would be a real slap in the face to the rocket equation. Just don't point your fusion drive at anything that you want to keep.

To bring this back around to asteroid mining, if you want to mine asteroids, you're going to have to have propellant out in the asteroid belt. That means a low delta-v depot relative to the asteroid you're after. So perhaps Ceres, Vesta or Pallas would have enough ices in them to provide that propellant while being a low enough delta-v from a target like Psyche to make it accessible. Or perhaps there are other, smaller, icy bodies that would be usable.

There are various delta-v maps of the solar system, but I couldn't find one that included the asteroids so I don't know how practical it would be to fly to Ceres, refuel, fly to Psyche, mine, fly to Ceres, refuel, then fly the mined materials wherever they go.