Register here

Author Topic: Space X Interplanetary Transport System  (Read 29402 times)

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 10936
Re: Space X Interplanetary Transport System
« Reply #150 on: October 13, 2017, 06:01:37 am »
what happen to program if a BFR is lost with passengers on board ?!

What happens to the 747 program if a plane is lost with passengers on board?

"On March 27, 1977, two Boeing 747 passenger jets, KLM Flight 4805 and Pan Am Flight 1736, collided on the runway at Los Rodeos Airport (now Tenerife North Airport), on the Spanish island of Tenerife, Canary Islands, killing 583 people in the deadliest accident in aviation history."


TWA 800 was a 747.

In fact, 28 747s have been lost over the years.

http://www.airsafe.com/events/models/rate_mod.htm

Not relevant.  BFR is not going to have the flight rate of 747. The accident rate of a BFR is going to be magnitudes more than an airliner

Which doesn't change the fact that one crash won't end public space travel.  It's somewhat mind-boggling that this is even in doubt. 
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 10936
Re: Space X Interplanetary Transport System
« Reply #151 on: October 13, 2017, 06:04:15 am »
Unsubstantiated, and neither common nor sense.  There were existing destinations for air travelers to go to, that were served by other conveyances.

Exactly.  People chose to fly in relatively dangerous aircraft when there were much cheaper, safer alternatives. As for destinations how many people were flying from Europe to the US in the days of Columbus?  Did it stay that way?
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline Hobbes

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 606
Re: Space X Interplanetary Transport System
« Reply #152 on: October 13, 2017, 08:54:30 am »
IIRC the Falcon contains ~20,000 sensors. The problem with their last failure was not all of them were on and being recorded.

Not true at all.  That is complete nonsense.  Do you know what the cost of that many sensors and the mass of the wiring would be?

I was off: SpaceX receive 3000 channels of telemetry from the rocket. I assume that translates to at least 3000 sensors.

20k sensors is not impossible, by the way: Rocketlab has 25,000 channels of telemetry on their (much smaller) Electron.

Offline Michel Van

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 4055
Re: Space X Interplanetary Transport System
« Reply #153 on: October 13, 2017, 09:20:47 am »
IIRC the Falcon contains ~20,000 sensors. The problem with their last failure was not all of them were on and being recorded.

Not true at all.  That is complete nonsense.  Do you know what the cost of that many sensors and the mass of the wiring would be?

I was off: SpaceX receive 3000 channels of telemetry from the rocket. I assume that translates to at least 3000 sensors.

20k sensors is not impossible, by the way: Rocketlab has 25,000 channels of telemetry on their (much smaller) Electron.

The Saturn V had in his time, only measured 200 parameters and send that data to ground control during Launch.
I love Strange Technology

Offline blackstar

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1667
Re: Space X Interplanetary Transport System
« Reply #154 on: October 13, 2017, 07:30:02 pm »
At $10Million/launch (ie, fully realized re-usability), this is where things really change.  Wealthy individuals splitting the cost will kick start a tourist industry whose revenues will eventually swamp all other markets and provide for R&D to further drive down costs. 

Can you provide evidence for your assertion? What data is this based upon?

Basic assumptions.  Use 100 flight amortization schedule so take booster cost and divide by 100.  Space capsule amortization might be more than 100 (heat shield can be replaced).  Assume upper stage is not re-used (but with steady production and reduced production cost) and will make up the bulk of the cost.  Labor/fuel/other recurring can be amortized over a full year of passenger revenue (bulk rate discounting).  You will eventually come up with something in this ballpark which is then divided by the 7 passengers in the capsule going to a Bigelow Space Hotel (separate billing).

Profit margin will be impacted by how many competitors enter the game.  I assume Blue Origin will be there so no monopoly.

Financial/legal/tax impacts are too hard to figure and can be counteracting.  I assume tax laws will be written to encourage this activity and will work towards lowering insurance/capital write-off burdens.

No, not the made up numbers, the other made up thing that you asserted: "this is where things really change.  Wealthy individuals splitting the cost will kick start a tourist industry"

What data do you have to support that "things really change" at $10 million instead of, say, $9 million? What data do you have to support your assertion that a tourist industry will "kick start" at that point, as opposed to some other point?

Do you have actual market survey data that supports that? Or is this just something you believe?

Offline blackstar

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1667
Re: Space X Interplanetary Transport System
« Reply #155 on: October 14, 2017, 07:22:24 am »
interesting some one made a cost estimation on BFR

Go read the article on The Space Review. It's not much better than numerology. The author lacked a lot of numbers, so if he did not have data he either ignored it or invented his own numbers. It took a little while for somebody to point out that while the author was calculating the amortization for the BFR, he never actually provided the development cost of the rocket--you know, the number that you divide the flight rate into in order to figure out the amortization. If you look up other articles the guy has written you will see that he does that kind of thing all the time, sprinkling some magic math over his argument, but leaving out a lot of key factors.

Offline fredymac

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1242
Re: Space X Interplanetary Transport System
« Reply #156 on: October 14, 2017, 05:12:48 pm »

No, not the made up numbers, the other made up thing that you asserted: "this is where things really change.  Wealthy individuals splitting the cost will kick start a tourist industry"

What data do you have to support that "things really change" at $10 million instead of, say, $9 million? What data do you have to support your assertion that a tourist industry will "kick start" at that point, as opposed to some other point?

Do you have actual market survey data that supports that? Or is this just something you believe?


The burden of proof is actually on you.

Tell us why the economics of re-usability do not apply to rockets.

Explain what limiting physics make whole companies of rocket scientists/engineers wrong and you right.

Tell us why you so vehemently oppose private efforts (I assume you have equal angst against Blue Origin/New Glenn) where you are not forced to contribute involuntary tax funding and any failure on their part does not cost you anything.

Explain why ULA/Ariane are not providing the technical backup to your arguments so people like you would have details to highlight.

What do you want?  A law forbidding them from trying?  Where are you going with all this?

Offline blackstar

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1667
Re: Space X Interplanetary Transport System
« Reply #157 on: October 14, 2017, 06:00:56 pm »
The burden of proof is actually on you.

Tell us why the economics of re-usability do not apply to rockets.

Explain what limiting physics make whole companies of rocket scientists/engineers wrong and you right.

Tell us why you so vehemently oppose private efforts (I assume you have equal angst against Blue Origin/New Glenn) where you are not forced to contribute involuntary tax funding and any failure on their part does not cost you anything.

Explain why ULA/Ariane are not providing the technical backup to your arguments so people like you would have details to highlight.

What do you want?  A law forbidding them from trying?  Where are you going with all this?

No, you made the assertions. You provided numbers. Where is your data supporting it? Go back and read what I actually wrote--I asked you to provide your data.

Look, if you don't have any actual data, if you're just making stuff up, then admit it. There's no shame in being honest.

Offline NeilChapman

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 857
  • Interested 3rd party
Re: Space X Interplanetary Transport System
« Reply #158 on: October 14, 2017, 06:18:48 pm »
Musk get Rockstar treatment. So long he is successful,
If one BFR with passages blow up or crash, that will change...

I disagree, but we'll have to wait to see who's correct.

+1

Today, airlines fly specified routes around the world - airline highways if you will.  They launch and return to specific locations where they are in close proximity to each other.  One can only reduce risk so far within these parameters.  Airliners are also piloted, which introduces human issues as we've seen with several purposeful airline disasters.

2014 Air travel deaths  990
2015 Air travel deaths  560

There is well over 1 million automobile related deaths per year.  No one seems to be ending travel across continents by car.

SpaceX is describing redundancy in their engines as well as planning for catastrophic engine failure.  Will other events occur?  Sure.  Those systems failures will result in engineering changes that will decrease risk.

But that won't stop 30-40 minute priority cargo travel around the world.





Offline Orionblamblam

  • Secret Projects Guru
  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 7076
    • Aerospace Projects Review
Re: Space X Interplanetary Transport System
« Reply #159 on: October 14, 2017, 07:22:21 pm »

But that won't stop 30-40 minute priority cargo travel around the world.

The problem is that even if BFR-Transport works as well as hoped, there'll still be no such thing as 30-minutes to the other side of the planet. I can see how there might be a market for such a thing... an organ transplant, or a massively injured person or some such. But think about it: You are in charge of a transplant of a squeedlyspooch from a donor in New York City to a recipient in Dubai. So, you carve it out of the donor and dump it into the cooler precisely at noon. Since the recipient is a bazillionaire, there is a helicopter on the roof. You get the cooler to the chopper at 12:05. The chopper takes off and heads to the offshore launch site, landing at 12:20. Since the recipient is a bazillionaire, you are able to bypass the pesky waiting in line nonsense and cut ahead of everybody. You get the squeedlyspooch loaded on board at 12:30. You're ready to go! Pity the scheduled launch time is 3:30. So, three hours later the time comes... and there's a sandstorm at the Dubai launch site. Launch is delayed until 6:30. You arrive half an hour after that, a full seven hours after putting the squeedlyspooch on board the rocket. Sadly, the shelf life of a squeedlyspooch is only four hours and it has gone bad, has crawled out of the cooler, eaten half the passengers and has arranged their skulls in a mind-bending non-Euclidian geometry that opened a doorway that allowed Nyarlathotep to extrude through. The crawling chaos has now reduced half of Dubai to ashes, half to an alien structure of cyclopian dimenson that defies the laws of physics. Prepare for the incoming lawsuits from the few survivors who haven;t been driven mad by the results of your too-slow squeedlyspooch transplant scheme.
Aerospace Projects Review


And so the endless circle of life comes to an end, meaningless and grim. Why did they live, and why did they die? No reason. Two hundred million years of evolution snuffed out, for in the end Nature is horrific and teaches us nothing

Offline NeilChapman

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 857
  • Interested 3rd party
Re: Space X Interplanetary Transport System
« Reply #160 on: October 14, 2017, 09:05:23 pm »

But that won't stop 30-40 minute priority cargo travel around the world.

The problem is that even if BFR-Transport works as well as hoped, there'll still be no such thing as 30-minutes to the other side of the planet. I can see how there might be a market for such a thing... an organ transplant, or a massively injured person or some such. But think about it: You are in charge of a transplant of a squeedlyspooch from a donor in New York City to a recipient in Dubai. So, you carve it out of the donor and dump it into the cooler precisely at noon. Since the recipient is a bazillionaire, there is a helicopter on the roof. You get the cooler to the chopper at 12:05. The chopper takes off and heads to the offshore launch site, landing at 12:20. Since the recipient is a bazillionaire, you are able to bypass the pesky waiting in line nonsense and cut ahead of everybody. You get the squeedlyspooch loaded on board at 12:30. You're ready to go! Pity the scheduled launch time is 3:30. So, three hours later the time comes... and there's a sandstorm at the Dubai launch site. Launch is delayed until 6:30. You arrive half an hour after that, a full seven hours after putting the squeedlyspooch on board the rocket. Sadly, the shelf life of a squeedlyspooch is only four hours and it has gone bad, has crawled out of the cooler, eaten half the passengers and has arranged their skulls in a mind-bending non-Euclidian geometry that opened a doorway that allowed Nyarlathotep to extrude through. The crawling chaos has now reduced half of Dubai to ashes, half to an alien structure of cyclopian dimenson that defies the laws of physics. Prepare for the incoming lawsuits from the few survivors who haven;t been driven mad by the results of your too-slow squeedlyspooch transplant scheme.

An interesting dilemma.  Fortunately, decontamination teams can be sent quickly to Dubai.

My thought had more to do with 30-40 min priority travel supporting same day (or 10-12 hour) delivery. 

Cargo picked up w/in 3 hrs of Tokyo launch site on Monday by 1400 hrs. 
Cargo arrives to sorting site and ready for transport by 1900 hrs.
Cargo arrives in New York before 0700 Monday morning.
Cargo delivered w/in 3 hrs of NYC launch site by 11am Monday morning.

The capability will generate creative uses.




Offline fredymac

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1242
Re: Space X Interplanetary Transport System
« Reply #161 on: October 14, 2017, 10:08:58 pm »

No, you made the assertions. You provided numbers. Where is your data supporting it? Go back and read what I actually wrote--I asked you to provide your data.

Look, if you don't have any actual data, if you're just making stuff up, then admit it. There's no shame in being honest.


Incorrect.  I don't have to do anything.  I can sit back and just watch events unfold.

You on the other hand, must act to force these companies to stop.  You throw a smoke screen of obfuscation and will not respond to fundamental level questions on the basis for your antagonism.  Why?

Offline dan_inbox

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 459
  • Profanity: weaker mind trying to speak forcefully
Re: Space X Interplanetary Transport System
« Reply #162 on: October 15, 2017, 12:05:41 am »
Really, this kind of personal squabbling is no fun for onlookers.
Could you guys take it to PM, or to pistol at ten paces, or something?

Offline Orionblamblam

  • Secret Projects Guru
  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 7076
    • Aerospace Projects Review
Re: Space X Interplanetary Transport System
« Reply #163 on: October 15, 2017, 07:36:48 am »

The capability will generate creative uses.

Twenty years ago (yeeesh) I worked for Pioneer Rocketplane. For those who may not remember, it was a Shuttle orbiter-looking rocket & jet powered craft; it would lift off a runway under jet power, rendezvous with a tanker aircraft, receive a massive load of liquid oxygen, then fire up a rocket engine. The rocket engine would shoot the plane to high velocity and high altitude; once exoatmospheric it would open the cargo bay doors and eject an upper stage which would stuff a smallish payload into orbit.

This was during the early dot com boom, when lots of people were looking at lots of satellites; Bill Gates wanted *thousands* of small internet-broadcasting satellites, for instance. Lots of companies were therefore looking at lots of lower-cost ways to launch them.

But anything can be used for multiple things. The Rocketplane, it was found, could be used for long range, high speed travel. Nothing like the BFR... nowhere near as fast, nowhere near as far. But you could put several tons of payload in the bay and send it something like three or four thousand miles in under an hour. The question was... *what* payload? Several were suggested. Military payloads, of course, and passenger transports; high-speed FedEx-like package services. But the screwiest one was apparently one of the most potentially profitable: fish.

It seemed that the Japanese were bugnuts for fresh, *really* fresh, exotic sushi, fish typically harvested thousands of miles away, taking days to get back via boat or some hours via cargo plane. Pioneer Rocketplane had numbers suggesting that the high-end sushi market in Japan was ready to pay enough for just-caught freshness that rocketplane-provided fish was be a profitable and *steady* source of income.
Aerospace Projects Review


And so the endless circle of life comes to an end, meaningless and grim. Why did they live, and why did they die? No reason. Two hundred million years of evolution snuffed out, for in the end Nature is horrific and teaches us nothing

Offline RyanC

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 830
  • Crazy Researcher
    • Alternate Wars
Re: Space X Interplanetary Transport System
« Reply #164 on: October 15, 2017, 09:55:31 am »
Not relevant.  BFR is not going to have the flight rate of 747. The accident rate of a BFR is going to be magnitudes more than an airliner

Previous author pointed out that 1.8% of all 747s ever built (roughly) have been lost.

40% of all Space Shuttles ever built were lost.

A loss rate of 5% of all BFR ever built is going to be significantly more than a 747, but much, much safer than a Space Shuttle.