OT: Falcon heavy rocket launch

[Tim+]

Currently this is rescheduled for 20:45 tonight. Launch window closed at

21:00

Could be well worth a look.

Tim

[Chris Hogg]

Battery powered? How much CO2 will it emit? :-)

Seriously though, I'll not miss it.

[Brian Gaff]

I assume that is gmt. Is this the one with an old sports car on the top to make up the weight? Brian

[Davey]

I like this quote:

"All that remains is to fuel the three boosters and light 27 engines."

Memories of the problems getting several engines working together on Pulling Tractors come to mind.

There's always one that has a different agenda.

I wish it luck.

[Davey]

Yes, it's Elon Musk's version of Back to the Future.

[Harry Bloomfield]

50:50 chance of success - it may need it.

[newshound]

I well remember the first Vanguard launch (having also seen Sputnik 2 "live").

Whilst Musk has a bit of the showman about him, he is pretty well grounded in the technology. Unlike a certain bearded Brit that I could name.

[Chris Hogg]

Truly remarkable! Whatever you might think of Musk, his batteries and his cars, that deserves a huge amount of praise.

[Jeff Layman]

Just been watching ti. No problems at all - even the boosters seemed to land successfully.

[Martin Brown]

Impressive to have it all work OK first time and simultaneous landings.

Not as potent in sheer power and lift terms as the good old Saturn V but with the three boosters properly reusable a real step forwards.

Long way to go to collect your free used Tesla car though. "Don't Panic" screen was a nice touch as was "Life on Mars"...

You have to admire Elon Musk for his vision and making it happen.

[T i m]

A couple of things ... it looked to me like the camera feeds from what was supposed to be both boosters seemed to be just from the same one twice, especially as their actions were identical (re-entry burns and sub positioning) and they both appeared to land on the same pad?

Do we know if the core landed successfully?

Cheers, T i m

[Tim+]

Nope, definitely two landed, only about half a second apart admittedly but there were definitely two.

I fear it may have perished. If it was intact I think we would have been told by now. Can?t believe that it wasn?t under some sort of remote surveillance. Still, I feel I?ve just witnessed what was probably the greatest bit of TV and technological achievement since the first moon landing. Simply stunning.

Tim

[T i m]

I didn't suggest otherwise (although it looked like an animation ), it was just that if you re-watch what is supposed to be the two camera feeds from the two different boosters, the footage is identical, including which pad 'they' land on?

I was just watching an streaming overview and on the other camera feed you hear mission control say 'we lost the centre core'. ;-(

I think it got close to the drone ship as we saw smoke before the feed stopped?

Quite.

It probably was ... and they have been pretty good about sharing the mistakes eh?

Agreed ... assuming it was real. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

[Jeff Layman]

I think this was mentioned in the live commentary - something about the two views of Cape Canaveral from space looking identical, but confirming that they were in fact from separate cameras on each booster. There was a short picture of only a second or two from the vessel on which the boosters landed showing both boosters touching down almost simultaneously on the two separate "X"s in circles. Then the signal was lost.

[T i m]

Yes, that's what they *said* but the images were nearly identical,

*including* landing on the exact same pad! OK, they would be doing similar things but I doubt they would be doing the exact same course corrections at the exact same time considering when they separated from the core they would be a fair distance apart and were falling autonomously?

I think you might be confused here Jeff. The two side boosters re-landed at Cape Canaveral, on the ground and the central core was due to land on the drone ship?

Yes, it seemed to freeze, as if it had been hit by a rocket module doing high speed! ;-(

Cheers, T i m

[dennis]

There is nothing special about his batteries. he has identified a niche market for his cars.

[Jeff Layman]

Sorry. I did get it mixed up. I have just looked again at the video (it's being replayed on the Arstechnica webpage), and you can definitely see there are subtle differences in the cam pictures from the boosters. Then at 37.55 the boosters landing is clearly shown, with a slight gap between them. Can't find any concrete info about what happened to the core.

[T i m]

No probs. ;-)

Including them landing on different pads?

If it's the external camera on the pads then I agree, and so I'm not saying there weren't two boosters ... I'm just saying that it was very clear to me that the supposedly 1 / 2 boosters feeds showed both boosters heading for the same pad, suggesting they were both the view from the same camera (on just one booster)?

Nor me yet and I think it strange they sorta fluffed over live on the main feed and haven't mentioned it anywhere else either (but it was mentioned on the tech feed)?

Cheers, T i m

[Bob Eager]

That side core landing was just showing off!

[F]

It took me back to the old Saturn V launches: sat in front of the TV and willing it to keep going (with a few shouted encouragements).

Absolutely brilliant!!!