SpaceX (general discussion)

[Orionblamblam]

I know it's fashionable to go all giddy at anything Elton Musk says (Lord knows the BBC got very hot under the collar about this ), but surely there is room for a BFR full of scepticism here?

I have little doubt that SpaceX could build at least the first stage of the BFR by 2022. But having the whole system built, tested and put into practice does seem really... aggressive.

It is, however, *possible.* Whether it'll happen or not... we'll see. Let's see how Falcon 9 Heavy works out.

 

[FighterJock]

I know it's fashionable to go all giddy at anything Elton Musk says (Lord knows the BBC got very hot under the collar about this ), but surely there is room for a BFR full of scepticism here?

I have little doubt that SpaceX could build at least the first stage of the BFR by 2022. But having the whole system built, tested and put into practice does seem really... aggressive.

It is, however, *possible.* Whether it'll happen or not... we'll see. Let's see how Falcon 9 Heavy works out.

In regards to Falcon 9 Heavy, we will not have long to wait to find out. Two month's to go. I for one cannot wait.

 

[Michel Van]

I have little doubt that SpaceX could build at least the first stage of the BFR by 2022. But having the whole system built, tested and put into practice does seem really... aggressive.

It is, however, *possible.* Whether it'll happen or not... we'll see. Let's see how Falcon 9 Heavy works out.

Yes, there Timetable is over the top ambitious: in five years flight ready
compare that to the Saturn V:
January, 1962 NASA announce the Saturn C-5 concept.
in 1966 the Saturn V rollout, a Facilities Integration Vehicle for testing Launch Complex 39
on November 9, 1967, Saturn V first launch. (one of two Test launch)
Finally on December 21, 1968 Saturn V made it first flight with Crew under Apollo 8 mission

That's 6 years from announcement of Saturn V to first Operational Flight with Crew.
But there is little catch in that time table
see the Engines for Saturn V were longer in Development as the Rocket.
The F-1 engine program started in 1955 and it took 10 years until first operational Engine.
So actually the Saturn V Development took from 1955 to 1968 or 13 years !

Now SpaceX does the same, there testing already new Hardware for there BFR.
The Raptor engine program started in 2009, similar time the program for new composite Material for cryogenic Tanks started.
Now the Raptor engine making qualification tests and Lox Tank had his own "test flight".
Seems the BFR program is already running since 2009...

 

[mrmalaya]

The BFR for space exploration is fine from a feasibility standpoint. There seems to be an acceptability to big business conquering space where states cannot (although I don't accept that one is better than the other).

I think that if you add another 5 years onto the timescales, then why not.

Firing the Great and the Good, around the world in a steady stream of spacecraft? That must have decades to mature though right?

 

[Grey Havoc]

Elon Musk: Rockets will fly people from city to city in minutes (BBC News)

 

[TomS]

Doing away with the Falcon family seems like a poor choice. It's hard to imagine a BFR being economical for launching payloads that the Falcon 9 can currently handle. You could bundle multiples together, but are there enough payloads with similar orbital parameters to make that viable?

 

[NeilChapman]

I found the Intra-planet transport intriguing.

Oxygen and methane instead of jet fuel. What would be the cost-per-ton for cargo? Basically, they could go site-to-site anywhere in the world but realistically they would carry some version of an ISO container.

What's it worth to move cargo, door to door, anywhere in the world, on the same day?

Wow.

 

[Dragon029]

Doing away with the Falcon family seems like a poor choice. It's hard to imagine a BFR being economical for launching payloads that the Falcon 9 can currently handle. You could bundle multiples together, but are there enough payloads with similar orbital parameters to make that viable?

The idea though is that a BFR flight will be cheaper, even for the same singular payloads, than a Falcon 9 launch today (with new-build yet-to-be-reused Falcon 9s), because currently the Falcon 9 second stage + fairings cost around $20m and are expended every flight. BFR on the other hand is 100% reused.

The first BFR flights might require multiple payloads to make up for its cost and modifications required to make it more reusable, but once BFR is sufficiently mature it should be quite cost competitive / cheaper. Remember too that they'll still have a fleet of used Falcon 9s and Falcon 9 Heavy's that they can use for less daring customers. SpaceX might even charge those customers a surcharge or just just keep costs similar to where they are now (eg: decrease costs from ~$60m per launch to only ~$40m per launch), because once they cease Falcon 9 1st stage production their internal expenses per launch will drop by nearly $40 million; all that spare revenue would then go to fund BFR manufacturing, testing, etc.

What would be the cost-per-ton for cargo? Basically, they could go site-to-site anywhere in the world but realistically they would carry some version of an ISO container.

It'll depend ~90% on how much it costs to inspect, repair and ready BFRs. Elon's presentation stated that they think that with reuse, a BFR launch can cost less than a Falcon 1 launch (which was about $18 million including development costs). If we assume that it can do 150 tons at $18 million, that's $120,000 per metric ton; that would equate to $54.5 per pound. If SpaceX achieves its dream of <24 hour turnarounds on BFR, then those costs could be slashed even further.

Amazon Same-Day International Delivery?

 

[Flyaway]

Still seems like too many engines with too much they could go wrong. Why not develop larger more powerful engines so that you can have fewer. At the moment it’s looking like the N-1 Vs Saturn V and we all know who won that race.

 

[NeilChapman]

It'll depend ~90% on how much it costs to inspect, repair and ready BFRs. Elon's presentation stated that they think that with reuse, a BFR launch can cost less than a Falcon 1 launch (which was about $18 million including development costs). If we assume that it can do 150 tons at $18 million, that's $120,000 per metric ton; that would equate to $54.5 per pound. If SpaceX achieves its dream of <24 hour turnarounds on BFR, then those costs could be slashed even further.

Amazon Same-Day International Delivery?

I'll have my sashimi same-day from Japan. Fab!

I think he said cargo hold was 850m3, no? That's a substantial volume so there's opportunity for shipping a wide range of items.

The "space junk" pitch was smart. Could be strategic for US DoD to have this in their back pocket. Not a bad way to eliminate your enemy's satellites w/o the risk of additional "space junk". This "feature" alone could get them serious DARPA funding.

I'm sure I'm not the only one that's thinking there's probably an easy Space Station replacement with this rig. Some type of pod connector with 5 ships docked? The 6th location being an extension to other pods of 5 ships?

 

[sferrin]

Still seems like too many engines with too much they could go wrong. Why not develop larger more powerful engines so that you can have fewer. At the moment it’s looking like the N-1 Vs Saturn V and we all know who won that race.

*cough* Soyuz.

 

[Flyaway]

Still seems like too many engines with too much they could go wrong. Why not develop larger more powerful engines so that you can have fewer. At the moment it’s looking like the N-1 Vs Saturn V and we all know who won that race.

*cough* Soyuz.

But is Soyuz anywhere near the complexity of BFR?

 

[Flyaway]

Elon Musk’s idea for commercial rocket travel on Earth would be a logistical nightmare

“You can’t fly humans on that same kind of orbit,” Brian Weeden, director of program planning for Secure World Foundation, told The Verge. “For one, the acceleration and the G-forces for both the launch and the reentry would kill people. I don’t have it right in front of me, but it’s a lot more than the G-forces on an astronaut we see today going up into space and coming back down, and that’s not inconsiderable.”

Another problem with ballistic trajectory is radiation exposure in the vacuum of space, Weeden added. To be sure, astronauts on the International Space Station are largely shielded from this radiation, thanks to Earth’s magnetic field, which deflects most of the deep-space particles. But his indifference toward the impact that these interstellar concepts would have on human bodies is classic Musk.

One of the most striking conclusions to come out of the DOT paper is the effects this type of futuristic travel could have on pilots. “The pilot will have to deal with activities ranging from direct control of the vehicle to oversight and situational awareness to planning,” the paper’s author, Ruth A. MacFarlane Hunter, a national expert on logistics and emergency management and a registered professional aeronautical engineer, wrote. “The much larger array of instruments and situations may require the pilot to quickly shift to a different activity using different instruments.”

https://www.theverge.com/2017/9/29/16385026/elon-musk-spacex-rocket-transportation-point-to-point

 

[sferrin]

"“For one, the acceleration and the G-forces for both the launch and the reentry would kill people. I don’t have it right in front of me, but it’s a lot more than the G-forces on an astronaut we see today going up into space and coming back down, and that’s not inconsiderable.”"

:

 

[sferrin]

Still seems like too many engines with too much they could go wrong. Why not develop larger more powerful engines so that you can have fewer. At the moment it’s looking like the N-1 Vs Saturn V and we all know who won that race.

*cough* Soyuz.

But is Soyuz anywhere near the complexity of BFR?

It's got 32 rocket engines and has flown nearly 2000 times, with a very good success rate.

 

[Orionblamblam]

But is Soyuz anywhere near the complexity of BFR?

*Potentially* quite a bit more complex than BFR. Size is not a good way to judge complexity. A modern vehicle with roughly the same number of rocket chambers *should* be far less complex... and BFR only had the core, none of the strap-ons.

 

[Michel Van]

Great, once Elon Musk propose a visionary Idea
comes first one with negative bla bla bla
Like Brian Weeden a expert on space Policy, NOT on Space flight engineering.

You know in history there were always that kind of shit talk:
"You cannot reach India by west route, you would fall of the flat Earth" (about Columbus plans)
"You cannot drive faster then 18 mph or 30 km/h otherwise you die" (about first railway)
"There is no need for more then five big computer worldwide" (about informatics)
"Mass production of Automobiles ? ridiculously ! were you get big amount buyers for that ?" (about Henry Ford plans)

Elon Musk’s idea for commercial rocket travel on Earth would be a logistical nightmare

“You can’t fly humans on that same kind of orbit,” Brian Weeden, director of program planning for Secure World Foundation, told The Verge. “For one, the acceleration and the G-forces for both the launch and the reentry would kill people. I don’t have it right in front of me, but it’s a lot more than the G-forces on an astronaut we see today going up into space and coming back down, and that’s not inconsiderable.”

Another problem with ballistic trajectory is radiation exposure in the vacuum of space, Weeden added. To be sure, astronauts on the International Space Station are largely shielded from this radiation, thanks to Earth’s magnetic field, which deflects most of the deep-space particles. But his indifference toward the impact that these interstellar concepts would have on human bodies is classic Musk.

One of the most striking conclusions to come out of the DOT paper is the effects this type of futuristic travel could have on pilots. “The pilot will have to deal with activities ranging from direct control of the vehicle to oversight and situational awareness to planning,” the paper’s author, Ruth A. MacFarlane Hunter, a national expert on logistics and emergency management and a registered professional aeronautical engineer, wrote. “The much larger array of instruments and situations may require the pilot to quickly shift to a different activity using different instruments.”

https://www.theverge.com/2017/9/29/16385026/elon-musk-spacex-rocket-transportation-point-to-point

 

[sferrin]

here the Presentation, since SpaceX shutdown the Videostream.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-f19ynm5OM

ISS and DSG crews will get familiarize, that Dragon getting a hell bigger in 2022
I wonder will Blue Origin answer BFR with "New Armstrong" ?

He looked scared to death. ???

 

[NeilChapman]

Elon Musk’s idea for commercial rocket travel on Earth would be a logistical nightmare

One of the most striking conclusions to come out of the DOT paper is the effects this type of futuristic travel could have on pilots. “The pilot will have to deal with activities ranging from direct control of the vehicle to oversight and situational awareness to planning,” the paper’s author, Ruth A. MacFarlane Hunter, a national expert on logistics and emergency management and a registered professional aeronautical engineer, wrote. “The much larger array of instruments and situations may require the pilot to quickly shift to a different activity using different instruments.”

https://www.theverge.com/2017/9/29/16385026/elon-musk-spacex-rocket-transportation-point-to-point

Hahaha.... What pilot?

 

[NeilChapman]

here the Presentation, since SpaceX shutdown the Videostream.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-f19ynm5OM

ISS and DSG crews will get familiarize, that Dragon getting a hell bigger in 2022
I wonder will Blue Origin answer BFR with "New Armstrong" ?

He looked scared to death. ???

I've never seen him in front of groups "comfortable". He was on message, and he seemed to get through all his points e.g. he didn't double back for anything.

I thought he did a good job. Especially for someone whom this presentation style is not easy.

 

[Flyaway]

Still seems like too many engines with too much they could go wrong. Why not develop larger more powerful engines so that you can have fewer. At the moment it’s looking like the N-1 Vs Saturn V and we all know who won that race.

*cough* Soyuz.

But is Soyuz anywhere near the complexity of BFR?

It's got 32 rocket engines and has flown nearly 2000 times, with a very good success rate.

More nozzles than engines.

 

[Orionblamblam]

He looked scared to death. ???

He looked like a high functioning autistic/Aspie, which seems to be the general consensus.

You can see that here as well:

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

 

[sferrin]

I thought he did a good job. Especially for someone whom this presentation style is not easy.

Didn't mean it as criticism, just that most of the other times I've seen him speaking he seemed very comfortable with the situation.

 

[TomcatViP]

The number of engines allow for a much simpler technology. Ease in design brings reliability. The very same battle was lost with the NASA shuttle when they insisted of having high pressure pumps instead of the Rocketdyne's classical reliable design.

 

[jeffb]

The number of engines allow for a much simpler technology. Ease in design brings reliability. The very same battle was lost with the NASA shuttle when they insisted of having high pressure pumps instead of the Rocketdyne's classical reliable design.

If memory serves, they didn't have much of a choice with the SSMEs. I think they had to wring everything they could from them to get the shuttle + payload into orbit.

 

[TomcatViP]

When you read Rocketdyne's history they are quite firmly stating that they had a turbopump based engine available for the shuttle but NASA insisted on the technology.

 

[Mach42]

Elon Musk’s idea for commercial rocket travel on Earth would be a logistical nightmare

“You can’t fly humans on that same kind of orbit,” Brian Weeden, director of program planning for Secure World Foundation, told The Verge. “For one, the acceleration and the G-forces for both the launch and the reentry would kill people. I don’t have it right in front of me, but it’s a lot more than the G-forces on an astronaut we see today going up into space and coming back down, and that’s not inconsiderable.”

Another problem with ballistic trajectory is radiation exposure in the vacuum of space, Weeden added. To be sure, astronauts on the International Space Station are largely shielded from this radiation, thanks to Earth’s magnetic field, which deflects most of the deep-space particles. But his indifference toward the impact that these interstellar concepts would have on human bodies is classic Musk.

One of the most striking conclusions to come out of the DOT paper is the effects this type of futuristic travel could have on pilots. “The pilot will have to deal with activities ranging from direct control of the vehicle to oversight and situational awareness to planning,” the paper’s author, Ruth A. MacFarlane Hunter, a national expert on logistics and emergency management and a registered professional aeronautical engineer, wrote. “The much larger array of instruments and situations may require the pilot to quickly shift to a different activity using different instruments.”

https://www.theverge.com/2017/9/29/16385026/elon-musk-spacex-rocket-transportation-point-to-point

What the hell is he talking about? I'm guessing he assumed the BFR will fly on an ICBM trajectory for some inexplicable reason? The video (pinch of salt, artist's impression, ect aside) shows the BFR being boosted to a LEO and de-orbiting to land?

Even if he didn't pick up on that at first he could have come up with the fractional orbit idea on his own instead of taking things at face value and simply branding the Point-to-Point concept as impossible.

Also the whinging about piloting is hilarious as well. If one did an ounce of research he would discover that the NASA astronauts on Commercial Crew (SpaceX and Boeing) are basically passengers.

What a bunch of unimaginative, negative ninnies that clearly lack critical thinking and the attitude to innovate and overcome obstacles. NASA would have never made it to the moon with these types.

 

[NeilChapman]

I thought he did a good job. Especially for someone whom this presentation style is not easy.

Didn't mean it as criticism, just that most of the other times I've seen him speaking he seemed very comfortable with the situation.

Didn't take it that way. My gut reaction was the similar to yours. His presentation of the new Tesla was similar.

When you think at all this relatively young man has accomplished - extraordinary. I'm fascinated at the way his mind works. This, and his other character flaws, proves he's human.

 

[mrmalaya]

Whilst I would love a world where space travel was commonplace, when I see the way Tesla are trying to control the EV charging and infrastructure in the UK in order to push out the competition, you could say that creates a better world, but I see it as an attempt to dominate the market.

There is an almost cult like status behind Musk, and I love a visionary, but in this case the worlds media would be better served applying a bit of critical thinking rather than gushing over Elon Musk thinking out loud.

 

[Dragon029]

I'd argue that's the competition's fault; in 2014 Tesla made all of their patents (at least up until then) open source to accelerate the growth of the EV market. If other companies want to set up their own supercharger network equivalents, then there's nothing really stopping them.

 

[mrmalaya]

Well not to head totally OT, but those superchargers are as much about marketing as they are a practical response to market demand. Everybody else tries to work to an agreed standard, Tesla want everyone to work to their standard. They do make progress though, I just think there is more than one way to skin a cat.

My heart would love to see humanity properly travel into space , so I don't want to quibble too much

 

[Hobbes]

Still seems like too many engines with too much they could go wrong. Why not develop larger more powerful engines so that you can have fewer. At the moment it’s looking like the N-1 Vs Saturn V and we all know who won that race.

yes, the side with the deepest pockets won that race. The N-1 program was hampered by lack of money at every turn, a major problem was they didn't want to invest in a test stand for the first stage. The plan was for 14 test launches instead. The program petered out after Apollo 11, but the 4th launch came very close to a full burn on the first stage.
Also, only one of the launches may have failed due to interaction between the engines (vibrations knocking fuel lines loose). The other failures were related to QC (FOD) and the engine control system (shutting down all engines instead of just one).


BTW, Soyuz does not have 32 engines. It has 5 main engines, with 1 turbopump assembly and 4 combustion chambers each.

 

[sferrin]

but I see it as an attempt to dominate the market.

Is there a company that doesn't try to do that? That's what capitalism IS.

There is an almost cult like status behind Musk, and I love a visionary, but in this case the worlds media would be better served applying a bit of critical thinking rather than gushing over Elon Musk thinking out loud.

Why? What's wrong with dreaming big?

 

[CJGibson]

I seem to recall a bloke called Brunel. Big ideas, big kit, big money (other peoples').

Could Musk be this century's Brunel?

Chris

 

[FighterJock]

SpaceX is planning to phase out everything bar the BFR Mars colonising rocket. And that also includes the Falcon Heavy.

https://www.space.com/38323-spacex-phasing-out-rockets-for-mars-bfr-spaceship.html

 

[mrmalaya]

I have no problem with capitalism, I have no problem with visionaries and I think it is essential to have big dreams.


I just have a problem with one character being painted in too good a light. Perhaps my problem with this started when I heard the breathless interview on the BBC where an Australian academic creamed his pants on live air talking about how everyone was speechless because they knew Musk would make it happen.

It's nothing too personal, I won't even critique his performance, I just like the idea of there being more than one player in any market.

Like they did with Apple (perhaps until recently at least), the media are very close to canonising Elon Musk, despite the fact we just have some promising ideas to marvel at.

Hell, if there is cheap space transport, ultra rapid land transit and a world of automated vehicles in ten years I will be very happy if somewhat stunned.

 

[Orionblamblam]

the media are very close to canonising Elon Musk, despite the fact we just have some promising ideas to marvel at.

Ummm... You *do* know that the Falcon 9 has been flying actual payloads into orbit for several years, yes?

 

[sferrin]

I seem to recall a bloke called Brunel. Big ideas, big kit, big money (other peoples').

Could Musk be this century's Brunel?

Chris

Did Brunel ever deliver? Musk is already doing what the big guys can't.

 

[sferrin]

I have no problem with capitalism, I have no problem with visionaries and I think it is essential to have big dreams.


I just have a problem with one character being painted in too good a light. Perhaps my problem with this started when I heard the breathless interview on the BBC where an Australian academic creamed his pants on live air talking about how everyone was speechless because they knew Musk would make it happen.

It's nothing too personal, I won't even critique his performance, I just like the idea of there being more than one player in any market.

Go look at what Bezos is planning with New Glenn and what Stratolaunch has in the works. (Albeit the latter seems to have less of a game plan than Musk or Bezos.) Hell, there used to be pretty much only one player -ULA. I'm not sure what your issue is with SpaceX. If anything, Musk and SpaceX have made the market bigger.

 

[mrmalaya]

You know what, I think you have me wrong. Im not slagging off the efforts of those with the brains and money to try (i love amazon and paypal so i am funding it all right?).

I also get that they have made great progress in the reusable space launch field in the name of profit.

Take my cynicism as being more directed at the breathless coverage the Musk name gets in the UK (where Bezos is not even mentioned). You would think that only Musk could do these things. In the UK, the media dont talk about Falcon 9, they talk about hyperloop, flying to Sydney in half an hour and how Tesla are the only EV manufacturers.

The irony being, I actually quite like the guy.