Launch News SpaceX Falcon Heavy Demo Mission (1330-1630 EST 6th Feb. 2018)

[RisingFury]

I noticed this as well during the livestream. I had thought they switched the camera shortly after that point, but watching through to landing it becomes clear that it's the same feed.

They did switch. I noticed differences during descent. In the last 10 seconds of descent, they became apparent, including the thrusters firing at different times and at edges of the screen, you could see orientation and direction of the two cameras were different.

The feed was that similar because the path of both boosters was this similar.

 

[Hielor]

They did switch. I noticed differences during descent. In the last 10 seconds of descent, they became apparent, including the thrusters firing at different times and at edges of the screen, you could see orientation and direction of the two cameras were different.

The feed was that similar because the path of both boosters was this similar.

They may have switched the cameras, but it was definitely the same booster. Yes, there are slight differences in framing, but here's the last few seconds of descent:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbSwFU6tY1c&feature=youtu.be&t=37m37s

At the top of both of the cameras you can see the second booster burning, and both cameras show a descent to the same pad.

I concur with the "same booster, two cameras" theory.

EDIT: Not anymore! See my subsequent reply!

 

[Nicholas Kang]

The last image before her voyage to Mars orbit and the asteroid belt.

Farewell Spaceman!

https://www.instagram.com/p/Be6VZEzgAEk/

This is impressive!

[ame="https://twitter.com/timelapsejunkie/status/961335283215159296"]Ryan Chylinski on Twitter: "Game changer. Falcon Heavy is the most powerful operational rocket in the world by a factor of two. Congrats @elonmusk and @SpaceX #SpaceX #FalconHeavyLaunch #FalconHeavy… https://t.co/HnChY4FRrF"[/ame]

 

[Hielor]

They may have switched the cameras, but it was definitely the same booster. Yes, there are slight differences in framing, but here's the last few seconds of descent:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbSwFU6tY1c&feature=youtu.be&t=37m37s

At the top of both of the cameras you can see the second booster burning, and both cameras show a descent to the same pad.

I concur with the "same booster, two cameras" theory.

EDIT: Not anymore! See my subsequent reply!

As I discovered when I watched this with my wife:

Apparently they have edited (and shortened) this video: the timestamp above is no longer valid, and it does in fact now show cameras from two different boosters.

 

[Unstung]

Yeah, I don't remember SpaceX showing the Roadster during fairing jettison. SpaceX seems to recut the launch footage later on.

 

[PhantomCruiser]

They showed it right before fairing sep, then cut back to the S2 "engine view". Then the music started playing and they cut back to the roadster.
Then I saw "Don't Panic" and started giggling.

 

[Graham2001]

Thought it would be appropriate to mark this by linking to a page covering the Heavy Metal comic strip by Dan O'Bannon that probably inspired all this...

Heavy Metal: Soft Landing (1979)

http://thebristolboard.tumblr.com/post/43268765756/soft-landing-by-dan-obannon-and-thomas

 

[BrianJ]

At the top of both of the cameras you can see the second booster burning, and both cameras show a descent to the same pad.

I wasn't impressed by the TV presenters either not noticing or handing out BS - but they might have been watching a different feed. Now corrected on updated video, as noted.

Final 3rd burn of the second stage was visible from Nevada.

Do we know if the Roadster made one or two orbits between 2nd and 3rd burns? If one orbit, ApA would have been ~18700km, two orbits ApA would be ~6900km. Looked more like the lower ApA to me.

EDIT: SpaceflightNow.com report 6900km, I'll go with that.

 

[Messierhunter]

So uhhhh.... I found it. In space. Heading away from earth.
http://h.dropcanvas.com/c7yeg/roadster2.jpg
Astrometry and the calculated orbit will follow later tonight.

 

[boogabooga]

Does the Roadster remain attached to the upper stage or will they separate?

 

[Urwumpe]

Does the Roadster remain attached to the upper stage or will they separate?

I think it will stay attached, it would make no sense to separate the two now. But who am I to talk about sense and logic while talking about this mission?

 

[boogabooga]

it would make no sense to separate the two now. But who am I to talk about sense and logic while talking about this mission?

We're talking about a sports car headed for the asteroid belt.

 

[Messierhunter]

I think it will stay attached, it would make no sense to separate the two now.

I can confirm I only detected a single object, but I can't rule out it was just the upper stage with the roadster detached but too dim to detect. I doubt that to be the case though.

 

[Urwumpe]

We're talking about a sports car headed for the asteroid belt.

Exactly. Something is wrong, the universe is out of balance.

We should launch a Dodge Monaco labelled "Space Police" into the same orbit with slightly different true anomaly to fix it at the next opportunity.

"It's got a cop motor, a four hundred and forty cubic inch plant. It's got cop tires, cop suspensions, cop shocks. It's a model made before catalytic converters, so it'll run good on regular gas."

 

[statickid]

The only reason I can think of to separate it is for additional communication and operation testing/training.

 

[Ripley]

I was thinking:
how can it be possible, in a super technological area (space launches) where everything is maniacally pre-calculated, to have such a surplus in dV that instead of intercepting Mars' orbit, you go for the asteroid's belt instead?

 

[Urwumpe]

I was thinking:
how can it be possible, in a super technological area (space launches) where everything is maniacally pre-calculated, to have such a surplus in dV that instead of intercepting Mars' orbit, you go for the asteroid's belt instead?

Conservative estimates.

Not everything can be simulated and something could cut into the performance easily.

 

[boogabooga]

I was thinking:
how can it be possible, in a super technological area (space launches) where everything is maniacally pre-calculated, to have such a surplus in dV that instead of intercepting Mars' orbit, you go for the asteroid's belt instead?

I'm sure they knew it would be burn to depletion all along, but wanted to throw out the word "MARS" as much as possible for PR impact.

 

[Notebook]

Exactly. Something is wrong, the universe is out of balance.

We should launch a Dodge Monaco labelled "Space Police" into the same orbit with slightly different true anomaly to fix it at the next opportunity.

"It's got a cop motor, a four hundred and forty cubic inch plant. It's got cop tires, cop suspensions, cop shocks. It's a model made before catalytic converters, so it'll run good on regular gas."

Go for "Space Patrol", its been done before...

N.

 

[PhantomCruiser]

Exactly. Something is wrong, the universe is out of balance.

We should launch a Dodge Monaco labelled "Space Police" into the same orbit with slightly different true anomaly to fix it at the next opportunity.

"It's got a cop motor, a four hundred and forty cubic inch plant. It's got cop tires, cop suspensions, cop shocks. It's a model made before catalytic converters, so it'll run good on regular gas."

Fix the lighter.