Airbus developing reusable space rocket launcher

Status
Not open for further replies.
Nice find John.
 
Flyback engine section? With turboprops? Just had to be "different" from ULA and SpaceX, but I get that. I'd really like to see some good 'trade' papers on the various engine recovery methods.


Randy
 
Ongoing discussion here on the NASASpaceflight site

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?PHPSESSID=e0c953541a7dae52a114d17eb7e95a75&topic=35849.0
 
It will be interesting to see how it will work. Since SpaceX are having all sorts of problems with their reusable rocket.
 
FighterJock said:
It will be interesting to see how it will work. Since SpaceX are having all sorts of problems with their reusable rocket.
Click to expand...

They are? Like what?
 
Found this video in Youtube.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GeIHJ-i7yVk
 
while a spectacular boom, that was a test that mostly went right. And with each landing attempt, SpaceX has been improving without running into anything that appears to be a "showstopper" that would require a fundamental reassessment. Barring the unforseen they will have successfully landed an entire first stage by the end of the year, a long time before the Airbus vehicle exists.
 
The rocket landing isnt the final goal... but just a step. Dont forget it.
 
The world is on the cusp of a change in how we access space, and the cost of doing so. I am SO PUMPED about what SpaceX is doing here. This will be to access to space what steam was to the expansion of the American West.

ULS, Arian, Boeing, NASA and the other players better stop with their re usability half-measures, and get on board. Or, Musk will take their lunch money and stuff their sorry asses into hall lockers.

The only other players worth watching out there is Blue Origin and Virgin Galactic -- with Sierra Nevada bringing up the rear.

How are the Russian's doing with their parallel-burn fly-back boosters?

Robert Heinlein had it right from the start!

David
 
merriman said:
The world is on the cusp of a change in how we access space, and the cost of doing so. I am SO PUMPED about what SpaceX is doing here. This will be to access to space what steam was to the expansion of the American West.

ULS, Arian, Boeing, NASA and the other players better stop with their re usability half-measures, and get on board. Or, Musk will take their lunch money and stuff their sorry asses into hall lockers.

The only other players worth watching out there is Blue Origin and Virgin Galactic -- with Sierra Nevada bringing up the rear.

How are the Russian's doing with their parallel-burn fly-back boosters?

Robert Heinlein had it right from the start!

David
Click to expand...


Well said. There is indeed a strategic shift perfectly planned since day one. None of the legacy players - US, European, Chinese, Russian - could even understand what really would happened - and what is happening now. And in this game, the "winner takes all". So. Let's see to which extent, and how fast the survival instinct will shake the nuts, and the coconuts.
A.
 
antigravite said:
Well said. There is indeed a strategic shift perfectly planned since day one. None of the legacy players - US, European, Chinese, Russian - could even understand what really would happened - and what is happening now. And in this game, the "winner takes all". So. Let's see to which extent, and how fast the survival instinct will shake the nuts, and the coconuts.
A.
Click to expand...

It is not "winner takes all." Space launch is a protected market. It has always been like that because the U.S. government--and every government--considers space access to be vital to national security, so they don't simply leave it to chance, they subsidize the industry. That's why EELV consisted of two rockets, Atlas and Delta. It is why NASA funded both SpaceX and Orbital Sciences. And the same thing will continue.
 
antigravite said:
merriman said:
The world is on the cusp of a change in how we access space, and the cost of doing so. I am SO PUMPED about what SpaceX is doing here. This will be to access to space what steam was to the expansion of the American West.

ULS, Arian, Boeing, NASA and the other players better stop with their re usability half-measures, and get on board. Or, Musk will take their lunch money and stuff their sorry asses into hall lockers.

The only other players worth watching out there is Blue Origin and Virgin Galactic -- with Sierra Nevada bringing up the rear.

How are the Russian's doing with their parallel-burn fly-back boosters?

Robert Heinlein had it right from the start!

David
Click to expand...


Well said. There is indeed a strategic shift perfectly planned since day one. None of the legacy players - US, European, Chinese, Russian - could even understand what really would happened - and what is happening now. And in this game, the "winner takes all". So. Let's see to which extent, and how fast the survival instinct will shake the nuts, and the coconuts.
A.
Click to expand...


Not really. Both posts have over the top nonsense. Recoverability does not equate to reusability and could end up being just wasted effort
 
Hard to reuse a stage when it and its payload is scattered over the ocean
 
Byeman said:
Not really. Both posts have over the top nonsense. Recoverability does not equate to reusability and could end up being just wasted effort
Click to expand...

Or could end up making space launch affordable for the masses.
 
hmm, the big question in my opinion, in a few year's time would be comparing the costs and time needed for the refurbishment of the first stage versus 3D printing the new one. Parts of engines were printed (and tested), so the prospect of printing the whole first stage (and the whole rocket) is in the realm of possible.
 
bigvlada said:
hmm, the big question in my opinion, in a few year's time would be comparing the costs and time needed for the refurbishment of the first stage versus 3D printing the new one. Parts of engines were printed (and tested), so the prospect of printing the whole first stage (and the whole rocket) is in the realm of possible.
Click to expand...


There is less than 1% of printed material. And printed material has yet to used on pressure vessels. Anyways, it is easier to roll a sheet of metal into a tube vs printing a tank.
 
Enough with the personal attacks - be civil or be banned. Removed offending messages.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom