On Thursday, January 29, 2015 at 8:05:46 AM UTC-5, Rick Jones wrote:
Jeff Findley wrote:
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.

Heck, I doubt we'll see even one landing at the launch site. On the
barge at sea, sure. The luddite in me would even wonder if there
would be any first stage landing attempt on the first Falcon Heavy
launch in the first place. Particularly if the first launch intends
to demonstrate to the USAF/NRO/et al the maximum mass-to-orbit
capabilities.


Agreed.

If you build enough barges, err I mean "autonomous drone ships", ;-) I wonder if RTLS is that important. What's cheaper to trade off? RP-1/LOX vs payload to orbit or marine diesel-vs-time?

It's an interesting question. On the face of it, unless I've blown the gloss over math looks like prices are about a 2-to-1 ratio in favor of the rocket fuel! If Musk's figures for F9 are right. But then a tug isn't going to burn ALL 200K gallons on a single tow of only 500 miles round trip in light seas either. If it burns, let's say 40K gallons, that'd put it at $115K to tow in a F9 booster, we're already at 1/2 again the price of an F9 burn there. Hmmmm...

As I said, an interesting question....

Dave

http://www.astronautix.com/props/loxosene.htm
http://qz.com/153969/spacex-just-mad...wnright-cheap/
http://www.waterwayguide.com/fuel-pricing/fwcklo
http://www.crowley.com/ocean