SpaceX Falcon Heavy Flight Animation

The DSCOVR launch also provides another compelling reason for RTLS. Bad weather at the recovery site. If the weather is good enough at the launch site for a launch it is unlikely to go bad enough to prevent a landing in the time it takes for a booster to return.

Saving $$$ on fuel doesn't help if you are forced to put it down in the ocean.

Dave

In article ,
says...

The DSCOVR launch also provides another compelling reason for RTLS. Bad weather at the recovery site. If the weather is good enough at the launch site for a launch it is unlikely to go bad enough to prevent a landing in the time it takes for a booster to return.

Saving $$$ on fuel doesn't help if you are forced to put it down in the ocean.

"Forced" would seem to indicate that something has gone wrong. If
something goes wrong, like an engine out, the fuel which would have been
used for landing would be burned in order to successfully accomplish the
primary mission. That's the entire idea since the beginning of the
Falcon 9R program; use the "reserve" in your fuel budget for boost back
and landing. Other launchers use this to help better aim the stages for
destructive reentry or simply let it go "splat" on the ocean or on land.

In other words, losing a first stage now and then would not be the end
of the world. In fact, they're losing a first stage on *every* mission
today, and are still profitable. You handle that by having several
completed first stages ready to go. I'd want three spare stages
*minimum* to handle the loss of a Falcon Heavy. But that's me. Musk
may have other ideas on how to mitigate risk.

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