The Wayback Machine - https://web.archive.org/web/20110921051227/http://hobbyspace.com/nucleus/index.php?itemid=28442
Skip to main content.
Space colony art: Don Davis


AIAA SPACE 2011 Conf.
Long Beach, CA
September 27-29, 2011

Space Access Int. Conf.
Paris, France
Sept 21-23, 2011

62nd Int. Astronautical Congress
Cape Town, South Africa
Oct. 3-7 2011
+ Entrepreneurship & Investment Forum
Oct.5, 2011

Int. Symposium on Personal & Commercial Spaceflight
Las Cruces, NM
Oct 19-20, 2011

Space Vision 2011
Univ. of Colorado
Boulder Colorado
Oct 27-30, 2011

Tip Jar
Regular readers can support HobbySpace
with a contribution via credit card:
Support HobbySpace
with monthly donation
Credit Cards
More payment options
available here.
Int. Symposium for Personal and Commercial Spaceflight

SpaceX announces launch date for FH

Here's a press release from SpaceX:

SpaceX Announces Launch Date for the World's Most Powerful Rocket
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 Space Shuttle or 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 lbs)
Length: 69.2 meters (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.

Comments

Let the games begin! :) This is really exciting.

Posted by Rick Boozer at 04/05/11 11:06:09

Interesting last paragraph. Do you think they believe that they have a real shot at developing the HLV for NASA? Or is it that they just don't want to threaten NASA too much? lol

Posted by josh at 04/05/11 11:18:36

I feel like he really knocked-down some barriers and kicked-down some doors today.

I wonder how ULA is going to respond to this?

ETA: Robert Bigelow is a happy man today!

Posted by Mike Puckett at 04/05/11 11:20:15

Somebody said the single-stick Falcon 9 gets a boost to 16 tons from the Merlin 1D upgrade too!

So, I guess that means it can handle the Dream Chaser now too?

ULA must be sweating kittens right now.

Posted by Mike Puckett at 04/05/11 11:26:44

One little history error. I believe that the Russian Energia rocket that carried the Buran into space had a higher payload (some 80 tons or so).

Posted by Elmar_M at 04/05/11 11:30:26

Long awaited news. I feel we can rest at ease that the future of US manned space will be saved by commercial companies instead of the expensive, overburdened government-derived alternatives. Allow commercial to handle LEO to the Moon for now. Allow NASA to save and build more amazing vehicles for deep space!

Posted by Seth at 04/05/11 12:12:59

I would rather be a janitor at SpaceX just to watch this process unfold and soak in the ambiance than be a project manager at ULA.

Posted by Brian Swiderski at 04/05/11 12:32:39

Not a fan of SpaceX (Dragon specifically)or HLV . However if NASA is hell bent on HLV and they can not even get past the basic funding stage then SpaceX big Dragon seems like a no-brainer?
Looks like SpaceX big Dragon maybe flying before NASA even gets to a basic HLV for jobs configuration stage. Still I would bet that NASA will go with the HLV for jobs version, they have to its part of NASA's fundamental core being.

Posted by Doug at 04/05/11 12:43:10

Crossfeed is key. With that, the core stage is delivered to high altitude and high speed with full tanks, a huge win over parallel burn systems. Impressive, and with any luck a stake through the heart of the Senate Launch System.

Posted by Doug Jones at 04/05/11 13:09:07

"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."

SpaceX still plans on building their Falcon XX vehicle? That is the beast which can lift a fully fueled Falcon 9H rocket to orbit as payload (give or take some with the next gen "Merlin 2" engine. More to the point, Nautlus-X in just a couple of flights?

Posted by Robert Horning at 04/05/11 18:36:46

It is all but certain that with NASA saying that the SLS will costs more and take longer, along with the games that CONgress is doing, that a new tactic will be taken.
My guess is that NASA will propose to build TWO new SHLV via a COTS style program (COTS-SHLV). The fact is that far far less then the money that CONgress was pushing for their jobs bill, NASA could have 2 SHLV created and in less time.
In addition, it is in our best interest to have 2 of these. The reason is that if we are going to support a lunar or martian base, then we need to have constant support. WIth this approach, WHEN (not if) has a failure, then it can be taken offline, checked and modified, while the remote bases continue.
Otherwise, if we do not do this, then we will find ourselves in another skylab or ISS situation

Posted by grr at 04/07/11 10:48:02

"Somebody said the single-stick Falcon 9 gets a boost to 16 tons from the Merlin 1D upgrade too!
So, I guess that means it can handle the Dream Chaser now too?
ULA must be sweating kittens right now."

Not only can it handle the chaser, it can do it at less than one 3rd of the price.

To be fair, we should ALL be sweating kittens. America needs multiple launch companies. The reason why ULA is failing is because they were never competitive from the gitgo. Worse, a big part of the business case was based on the likes of Bill Gates verbally promising that he would develop a leo sat system (anybody that trust gates is a real idiot).

But I think that it is fair to say that ULA management is right now in a major hot seat. They KNOW that SLS is dead with FXX looking very real. Instead, they should be pushing for a COTS-SHLV with at least 2 SHLV. Even if we spend 3 billion on spaceX and say 5-8 billion on ULA, it is far far cheaper and better than SLS or any shuttle derivative, or even the EELVs.

Posted by grr at 04/07/11 10:57:49
Add Comment

Note: HTML code will not work except for bare URLs (i.e. http://www...). Also, for postings older than 1 week, comments are filtered manually to prevent spam and so may not appear for a few days.
Note: Trash talking and name calling, especially in anonymous comments, won't be tolerated.

 


wholesale
wow gear
Best Aviation Jobs
Business hours
cash for gold
Custom Printed Promotional Products
dresses
Ephedrine/Ephedra
Green Laser Pointers
home & garden
Laser Pointers
Lolita Dresses
online casino
Satellite Broadband
Satellite Dish TV
Source China Products

Blog Search

Google
Web
HobbySpace