On Thursday, January 29, 2015 at 12:10:04 AM UTC+13, Jeff Findley wrote:
SpaceX - Falcon Heavy - Flight Animation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Ca6x4QbpoM

From the video description:
Published on Jan 27, 2015
When Falcon Heavy lifts off later this year, it will be the
most powerful operational rocket in the world by a factor
of two. Thrust at liftoff is equal to approximately eighteen
747 aircraft operating simultaneously.

The one thing I doubt we'll see in the test launch is all three of the
first stage cores landing at the launch site. As far as I know, SpaceX
does not yet have permission to land a core at The Cape. I'd imagine
permission to land three (two almost simultaneously) in relatively close
proximity will take an additional level of permission beyond that.

This video is surely to show the future direction. In other words,
before ULA officially announces details of their "next generation"
launch vehicle, SpaceX is repeating what they plan to do with Falcon
Heavy. If Falcon Heavy can demonstrate fly-back and landing of three of
four Falcon Heavy first stages before ULA starts flying their "next
generation" system, the learner will truly be the new master.

Jeff
--
"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would
magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper
than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in
and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer

The large number of small engines is a great way to create thrust with low mass while maintaining good performance in a compact space at relatively low cost.

Not a lot of details how thermal protection is achieved during re-entry. Thermal loads for the booster rockets aren't as great as for the orbital booster but the attitude during re-entry, if accurate must use some sort of thermal protection on the engine - or the engine itself somehow, assuming the animation accurate.

Let's assume its accurate for a second. Thermal protection must use a gas generation cycle to create a stagnation zone well ahead of the exit plane. That would be technically sweet.

The only quibble I have is the massive landing gear. Its a point of failure and very massive as well. Unless you're planning to land on an unprepared surface, it really makes no sense to haul those things around. They're landing on the X - which is no larger than an elevator shaft - so they really should have an active transporter there that catches the falling rocket at that location. The technology to do this is well-advanced, and the savings are well worth the effort.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6pPwP3s7s4

I wonder what the mass break down is for the landing gear? I would wager it doubles the inert weight of the whole system. An oversized gripper that grasped the mounting brackets for the landing gear would allow dispensing with the rest of the landing gear. It would also improve aerodynamics at a critical time.

This could be tested with a sub-scale rocket system, and then tried on the larger system.