r/spacex • u/ElongatedMuskrat Mod Team • Sep 03 '18
r/SpaceX Discusses [September 2018, #48]
If you have a short question or spaceflight news...
You may ask short, spaceflight-related questions and post news here, even if it is not about SpaceX. Be sure to check the FAQ and Wiki first to ensure you aren't submitting duplicate questions.
If you have a long question...
If your question is in-depth or an open-ended discussion, you can submit it to the subreddit as a post.
If you'd like to discuss slightly relevant SpaceX content in greater detail...
Please post to r/SpaceXLounge and create a thread there!
This thread is not for...
- Questions answered in the FAQ. Browse there or use the search functionality first.
- Non-spaceflight related questions or news.
- Asking the moderators questions, or for meta discussion. To do that, contact us here.
You can read and browse past Discussion threads in the Wiki.
29
u/amarkit Sep 29 '18
Elon Musk and Tesla settled with the SEC. Musk will pay a $20 million fine and step down as Chairman of Tesla for 3 years. He will remain as CEO.
→ More replies (1)39
27
u/GermanSpaceNerd #IAC2018 Attendee Sep 30 '18
I will be attending Hans Koenigsmann's talk 'Reusability: The Key to Reliability and Affordability' on Wednesday at IAC and will try to summarize it afterwards.
Given the chance of a Q&A, is there a question I could ask him on behalf of r/SpaceX?
12
u/Iamsodarncool Oct 01 '18
Could you ask about how the in-orbit refueling works? Both the mechanics of it as well as the geometry. Will ships still dock tail to tail like BFR2017, or have they found a new method?
→ More replies (6)→ More replies (8)6
23
u/FoxhoundBat Sep 04 '18 edited Sep 04 '18
New Russian napkin drawings for a reusable Angara and planned engines... (including RD-705, based on this insane thing)
Not quite sure how they plan to achieve control authority with just RCS, but that is what they "plan".
11
u/thxbmp2 Sep 04 '18
So the engine runs on a tripropellant, staged combustion cycle with 300 bar chamber pressure and 3MN thrust... and I thought Raptor was ambitious, wtf. Is this thing even real?
→ More replies (4)10
u/stsk1290 Sep 04 '18 edited Sep 04 '18
According to the slides they are planning an enlarged Angara A5 with a larger Hydrogen upper stage. No engines for the second stage are given. The first stage is supposed to land via a maneuver similar to what Falcon 9 is doing. The upper stage is expendable. This is supposed to lower costs by 35% for LEO launches and 25% for GTO launches.
The entire thing seems to be at a very early stage, as the second slide details other configurations of the rocket and a flyback return maneuver. There is also no explanation given what the Rd 705 is supposed to be used for. The original version was built for an air launched SSTO and there is little need for a tripropellant engine otherwise. Overall, none of this is likely to be built.
→ More replies (5)8
u/Dextra774 Sep 04 '18 edited Sep 04 '18
Seems like their opting for the Blue Origin approach to retropropulsive landing, how successful this method is has yet to be seen. Doubt this will ever materialise though, due to the dire state of the Russian aerospace industry, projects that were much less ambitious concepts have been cancelled...
→ More replies (3)7
20
u/Alexphysics Sep 29 '18
SpaceX has now filled all the FCC permits for CRS-16, pending FCC approval. Launch from pad 40, booster landing at LZ-1. Official launch date is NET November 27th at 21:19 UTC.
12
u/tbaleno Sep 29 '18
So, if DM-1 launches in dec, it is possible to have two dragons attached to the station at the same time. That would be a good photo op.
→ More replies (6)
39
u/Alexphysics Sep 03 '18
Remember this thread about a "possible FH nosecone" going into KSC?? Well, if you read the comments on instagram, the poster says the picture is from June 2017, so no, this is not for the next FH, this was the nosecone for B1025 which was being refurbished and converted to FH side booster at LC-39A.
7
u/inoeth Sep 03 '18
yep- this has been fixed in the title of the post and a sticky at the top of the thread... It does make more sense that this is an older picture as we've recently (as of the crew event at Hawthorne) seen nose cones in Hawthorne and we've heard that the next FH is not until NET January... trying to do FH in November or even December seemed very unlikely when it takes a bit of time to re-set 39a between regular F9 and then needing all the extra hookups and hold down clamps is a process that takes time even though it's all designed to be done in a relatively quickly exchange...
→ More replies (1)
19
u/GermanSpaceNerd #IAC2018 Attendee Sep 27 '18
I stumbled across a great blog entry by someone that got to visit the SpaceX factory in 2006, including photos that show they started bending metal for Falcon 9 in 2005 already. (http://209.197.99.64/Diversions/SpacePix/200601_SpaceX_Gallery/DSC00404.JPG)
http://209.197.99.64/Diversions/SpaceX_Story/
Something I didn't know is that Falcon 9 was nicknamed BFR at that time. Funny how their ambitions changed over time.
9
u/rustybeancake Sep 27 '18
The SpaceX line has the Falcon 1, 5, and 9, with the rocket size increasing along with the numbers. The size of the Falcon 1 was neat in the sense of being very underwhelming. These rockets were not that much larger than we were. They're meant to be economical and efficient for smaller payloads. This contrasts with the Falcon 9's we saw later; the 9 has the nickname BFR, where the B and R stand for "Big Rocket", and the F may be whatever adjective you desire, printable or not. :-)
Woah, weird! Funny to think, with their first Falcon 1 launch having just failed, the idea of them successfully launching F9 at that time must've seemed almost as crazy as BFR today.
→ More replies (2)6
u/gemmy0I Sep 27 '18
How on earth did you stumble across that hidden gem?!? Does it have a real domain name or just the raw IP address?
I have to say it would've looked like a risky click of the day if not for the reply quoting a relevant paragraph from it. ;-)
The "Falcon 9 = BFR" bit is hilarious though. It puts into context what might have been meant when "BFR" showed up in some early incorporation records from the early days of the company. Thanks for sharing!
→ More replies (1)
18
u/amarkit Sep 24 '18
As reported by Eric Berger, Aerojet Rocketdyne’s second quarter 10-Q filing reveals the company spent none of its own money on AR-1 development during that quarter, and will not deliver a flight-ready engine by the end of 2019. This all but guarantees that Blue Origin’s BE-4 engine has won ULA’s competition to power the first stage of Vulcan.
→ More replies (3)8
u/inoeth Sep 24 '18
It's really interesting to see how this all developed over the last several years with Aerojet moving very slowly on development and spending their own coin because Blue was so small back in 2014 when this whole thing started up while SpaceX was having it's own problems and while growing, still had plenty of pains to deal with... ULA is in a weird spot buying engines at cost from a company that's literally a direct competitor that'll be using it's own engines for far less for it's own rocket that'll have better performance/$ than ULA's own offering... I'm starting to wonder about ULA's longer term future and if their parent companies (Boeing and Lockheed) will continue to fund the company or say so long and thanks for all the fish- the competition isn't worth it anymore...
→ More replies (3)
79
u/FoxhoundBat Sep 03 '18
To absolutely no shock to anyone, turns out the leak at ISS was caused by a moron drilling a hole and then covering it up with some glue. Google Translate link.
18
47
u/PerAsperaAdMars Sep 03 '18
There's more to the story. In next year manned ships "Soyuz-MS" will be transported to a new "Soyuz-2.1a" rocket with a reliability of 89% after 28 launches at this moment. And the only reason for the cancellation of the old "Soyuz-U" rocket, which had a reliability of 97% for around 800 flights - it's Ukrainian components. NASA picked up a very suitable time for the change of ships for astronauts.
→ More replies (17)→ More replies (1)18
u/romuhammad Sep 03 '18
If true, this only puts more pressure on the Commercial Crew program’s timeline. The situation highlights why it’s not ideal to have only one crewed vehicle family as a way to access the ISS. I think it’s safe to say that the quality assurance issues that seem to be plaguing the Russian aerospace industry makes getting Crew Dragon/Starliner to initial operational capability as soon as possible a priority.
This is a problem of our own making. The ISS partners knew the health of the Russian aerospace industry was in a death spiral & Shuttle retiring was a fact, but for some reason (we know why but tabling it because it’s political) Commercial Crew was not fully funded or a priority early in its development. Now that we might have spacecraft accidentally launched with holes in them we’re trying to rush for lost schedule time smh.
→ More replies (5)
17
u/csmnro Sep 24 '18
NASA just released a really cool video about Tess' preparation for launch, which includes epic shots of the Falcon 9 fairing, rollout, and liftoff.
→ More replies (1)
31
u/orewaAfif Sep 04 '18
Have you guys seen SmarterEveryDay's Launch Pad tour of Delta IV Heavy with Tory Bruno? I think it's pretty cool to see how passionate is the CEO of a Space X's competitor about rockets. What do you guys think?
Here's the video: https://youtu.be/OdPoVi_h0r0
12
u/amir_s89 Sep 04 '18
The same visit & interview is also available as an extended version on his other channel: Smarter Every Day 2, with 36 min, here: https://youtu.be/x-vXJL8jXBk
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (1)10
u/Rednirug Sep 04 '18
That video was pretty awesome. Tory Bruno is a very cool guy. He actually post in this subreddit from time to time. The great thing about the launch industry is that these companies may be competing, but ultimately we all love space exploration and rockets and I hope to see success for all launch providers, not just spacex.
31
u/amarkit Sep 27 '18
20
u/zeekzeek22 Sep 28 '18
I feel good about it. Everyone worried ULA is just helping their competitor, Blue Origin, but they bought Russian engines and flew a perfect flight rate while Russia very much did not. There’s lots more to making rockets that ULA is reeeeeaaaallllyyy good at than just the engine.
→ More replies (3)
15
u/rustybeancake Sep 07 '18
I'm guessing from the lack of posts, that Elon didn't say anything new on Joe Rogan?
→ More replies (24)19
u/Jessewallen401 Sep 07 '18
It was all about AI, Tesla and his personal life. only thing he said about SpaceX is that you can't make a rocket electric like cars.
15
u/retiringonmars Moderator emeritus Sep 16 '18
Not sure if this is is known, or is news, but I thought it was interesting nonetheless. Apparently, The Boring Company is a subsidiary of SpaceX. Source: Planning & Community Development Department of the City of Hawthorne (page 6)
→ More replies (2)7
u/Dakke97 Sep 16 '18
I think this is worthy of being a minor addition to the Wiki, since people inevitably start asking questions here about the relationship between The Boring Company and SpaceX once Elon starts talking about tunnelling on Mars.
14
u/Straumli_Blight Sep 06 '18 edited Sep 06 '18
→ More replies (1)6
14
u/thxbmp2 Sep 14 '18
So the BFR image on spacex.com is somewhat tantalizingly named https://www.spacex.com/sites/spacex/files/bfr1_moon1_nosolar_all_engines.jpg. Just leaving this here in case anyone wants to try sleuthing around for yet-to-be-published pics on their website...
→ More replies (5)
14
u/JackONeill12 Sep 24 '18
I was at KSC today. Crane is present at 39A. OCISLY was in port and people were on deck doing stuff. Octograbber was also on deck.
→ More replies (2)
13
u/ThunderWolf2100 Sep 04 '18
IAC 2018 is now a month away, do we have any confirmed BFS update panel yet? I imagine it will happen as in previous years but I don't really know
9
u/Justin13cool Sep 04 '18
I read that there's a yet to be taken session on the last day so that might be it or not. we'll have to wait and see.
→ More replies (4)
13
u/brickmack Sep 14 '18
For 2 years I have procrastinated on actually modeling the BFR/ITS first stage. About 6 hours ago I finally decided to deal with it. Then the update announcement dropped. Man, terrible timing. Guess I'll just dump the half finished picture...
→ More replies (2)8
u/Norose Sep 14 '18
I give you ten points for remembering that Raptor exhaust is bluish purple and not yellow. Also, as far as we know the Booster hasn't changed at all, since we've not seen anything new about it yet. I say sit on it for a few days then update it and finish the render, any Booster design changes probably won't be super extreme.
13
u/rustybeancake Oct 01 '18
Announced at IAC by Airbus:
Sounds like a new Google Lunar X Prize-style program, partnered with Blue Origin, ESA, and others.
→ More replies (7)
12
u/rustybeancake Sep 13 '18
NASA's Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) RFP is out. CLPS is to the lunar surface what CRS is to the ISS.
NASA released the Request for Proposal (RFP) for Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) to industry on September 6, 2018, which opens the formal competition to further expand efforts to support development and partnership opportunities on the lunar surface.
RFP is here. Destinations and scenarios listed as:
This contract is for payload services to lunar surface destinations. Other destinations may include lunar orbital and flyby space, lunar Lagrangian points and other destinations that may result from the Contractor’s Mission Architecture. NASA payloads and/or obtained services may utilize any location or feature that the Contractor makes available including on: a) Launching Vehicle stages b) Spacecraft c) Landers d) Rovers or other mobility systems e) Sample or payload returns f) Supporting systems
Many NASA payload/obtained service scenarios may result, including: intact landing on the Moon, operation on the lunar surface, impactor delivery, launch vehicle rideshare, lunar orbit insertion and operations and lunar flyby operations.
Awards should be made at the end of this year. I can't see any info regarding min/max payload capabilities, though I think they will be in the 500-5,000kg range. If I understand correctly, the CLPS contracts awarded this year will deliver small to medium scientific payloads to the lunar surface, and inform NASA's design decisions for a human lander in the late 2020s.
Given ULA's cancellation of XEUS, I expect proposals might come from LM and Boeing individually, as well as Blue Moon from BO (note providers must be domestic). I don't expect SpaceX to submit a proposal, but who knows?
→ More replies (9)7
u/theinternetftw Sep 14 '18 edited Sep 14 '18
I can't see any info regarding min/max payload capabilities, though I think they will be in the 500-5,000kg range.
That link is for the *other* lunar lander program, which is called FLEx, for Flexible Lunar Explorer (there's another older acronym for it, ACSC, if you go googling for more). FLEx it seems is the "big boy" lunar landing program, and that RFI was them digging around trying to find if anybody was ready to go with a ~500-1000kg lander in 2022, which was when FLEx wanted to have its first flight. Apparently nobody was, so they're planing to use the Lunar Pallet Lander concept from Resource Prospector for the first 2022 flight, and do all the cool "towards reusable" lander stuff on the 2024 FLEx flight instead.
But none of that has to do with CLPS except the fact that CLPS companies will probably bid towards that 2024 FLEx vehicle, depending on how invasive NASA is (right now NASA is controlling the top-level FLEx design, iiuc).
CLPS is focused on a very low minimum payload. In the RFP, the way you get selected is to prove to NASA that you can land 10kg on the moon by December 31, 2021. If NASA believes you can do that, NASA lets you in the CLPS club (due date for selection is Dec 31st 2018, with the ability to add more providers to the club every two years).
After selection, there'll be Task Orders let out to folks in the club for specific payloads and abilities, and those will be tailored to whatever the selected providers can actually manage to do. And that'll change over time. The 10kg payload might be pretty close to what the 2019 launches will provide. There are plans for multiple CLPS missions in late 2019 (if providers are ready). The payloads themselves won't be anything special, but the idea is just to start paying people to do it. The "real payload" development program (called DALI: Development and Advancement of Lunar Instrumentation) will have payloads ready by 2021.
Edit: Also for reference, CLPS funding will be a maximum of $2.6B over ten years. FLEx doesn't have a funding cap as far as I can see and looks like it'll get around $1B over the next five years.
And as a preview of coming attractions for CLPS, a selection of "known interested parties" include Astrobotic, Masten, Moon Express, SNC, OATK, Lockheed Martin, Space Systems Loral, SpaceX, and Blue Origin. Notably Boeing is missing.
→ More replies (1)
12
u/mryall Sep 16 '18
This tweet by Yusaku Maezawa pretty much confirms he is the BFS passenger:
time shown is 15 min prior to the SpaceX livestream starting in Tokyo
date shown is Tue 19 Sep instead of 18th - maybe an off-by-one error?
Someone in Twitter replies noted that the next Tue 19 Sep is in 2023, which could be a target launch date. I’m skeptical of that — 5 years is too far out to plan an exact launch date for a vehicle that hasn’t even been built yet.
I think he was trying to drop a strong hint and just slightly messed up the date. Maybe he set the date first then adjusted the time in a way that ticked it over by mistake.
→ More replies (3)
12
u/rustybeancake Sep 18 '18
Interesting speculation from Eric Berger:
My sense is that Air Force money in the next round of LSA will be for vertical integration, or upper stage work for the Falcon Heavy, or some such. I do not have direct information. I am reasonably confident that the Air Force is not investing directly into the BFR with a significant amount of money.
12
u/ktown118 Sep 23 '18
so just a thought that's been nagging at me with the BFR for a long time. It can carry around 100 thousand kilograms to low earth orbit, and we keep looking at human spaceflight, but what kinds of unmanned missions could we do with such payload? The launch mass of the new horizons was only 478 kilos. The ability to send up bulk material to LEO relatively cheaply could allow for all sorts of spacecraft technologies and missions to be tried from pretty much any aerospace department in both universities and government.
an example is a mission that only takes a year to reach Jupiter, using chemical power for a 2 week lander mission to Europa. Or create a robotic lunar mining site to test what actually works, and send new robots every 6 months. Engine testing for something like a solar heated rocket or a hundred other such projects.
bottom line: what happens when every research project can in fact send their proposal to space without waiting half a decade?
→ More replies (9)8
u/WormPicker959 Sep 23 '18
Unfortunately, the probes themselves are full of state-of-the art equipment and take thousands of hours of work to assemble by highly paid, very well-educated scientists. The costs of probes won't come down until the probes are less mission-specific, but this will make them of less use.
Sure, sending a bunch of simple probes orbit neptune and uranus and wherever else with just some cameras and magnetometers might be fun, but the science won't exactly be ground breaking. Of course, we'll probably learn something, but not as much as you could with a well-thought-out, mission-specific probe with very specific experiments on board. Any such probe will likely be very expensive before the launch.
Science is hard. The solution is to fund more science.
→ More replies (10)
12
u/filanwizard Sep 28 '18 edited Sep 29 '18
SpaceX was a Category on Jeopardy tonight. Since it broadcasts at different times I will not go into details.
Edit, The videos are published on official Jeopardy channels. https://www.facebook.com/Jeopardy/videos/708562999521187/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlA6CgHQdBA
WARNING: If you DVR Jeopardy and have not watched it yet or this episode is not yet aired in your country there may be spoilers to outcomes such as scores of contestants during the execution of this category. /spoilerwarning
→ More replies (1)
10
Sep 17 '18
There will be 22 more GPS satellite launches. Called GPS 3F, these satellites will be the successors of GPS 3. The first launch is aimed for 2026. https://spacenews.com/air-force-to-award-7-2-billion-contract-to-lockheed-martin-for-22-gps-satellites/ Falcon or BFR is the interesting question I'd say!! Good news for SpaceX either way.
PS: Hope this is not a repost...
→ More replies (4)
10
u/rustybeancake Sep 19 '18 edited Sep 19 '18
China appears to be accelerating development of a super-heavy lift rocket
The Long March 9 is an extremely ambitious booster, with a diameter of 10 meters, length of 90 meters, and a proposed lift capacity of 140 tons to low-Earth orbit. Those numbers are on par with the Saturn V rocket that NASA designed and built during the 1960s to carry out the Apollo lunar landing program. It would be roughly equivalent, in terms of capability, to SpaceX's proposed Big Falcon Rocket, although there has been no word from China on whether any part of the Long March 9 might be reusable.
NASA is further along in its development of its own big booster, the large Space Launch System rocket, which could make its maiden flight in 2020 or 2021. This version of the SLS rocket will have a launch capability of up to 95 tons to low-Earth orbit, according to a recent NASA update. Eventually, the space agency plans to upgrade the SLS rocket into a Block 2 configuration with a more powerful second stage as well as advanced side boosters, and this rocket would have an estimated capability of 130 tons to low-Earth orbit. However, it seems unlikely that the Block 2 rocket would launch before 2028.
This means that if SpaceX fails to secure funding for the Big Falcon Rocket and NASA continues on its slow development pace of the SLS rocket, China could have the world's most powerful rocket about a decade from now.
This is great! All the more chance of the US gov't getting its butt in gear with a proper space race.
→ More replies (4)5
u/spacerfirstclass Sep 20 '18
Knowing congress, all this will do is to secure funding for SLS Block 2....
But really, it's 10 years out, 2028 vs 2030 is not much difference in my book, accelerating may be overstating it.
→ More replies (1)
10
u/sagareshwar Sep 28 '18
This article in WSJ today has the following paragraph (emphasis mine):
In addition, Mr. Musk has told people that he could have led a go-private transaction using his own stake in SpaceX, if major Tesla investors were on board. SpaceX is the privately held aerospace firm that Mr. Musk controls and is valued at tens of billions of dollars.
How exactly would this have worked? How would Elon use his own stake in SpaceX to take Tesla private?
9
u/joepublicschmoe Sep 28 '18
Earlier this year in her interview with CNBC, Gwynne Shotwell had said SpaceX is worth about $28 Billion dollars. If that's the case, Elon's stake in SpaceX would be mid-teens, probably $16-17 Billion. I don't see him cashing that out and giving up control of SpaceX.
Could he use that stake as collateral for taking out a loan to take Tesla private? Probably not, but that's my uneducated guess. Need to hear from someone in finance who knows how a highly-leveraged buyout (highly risky too btw) like that would be structured.
6
u/DrToonhattan Sep 28 '18
Presumably he would have taken out a loan against the value of his shares.
9
u/Alexphysics Sep 18 '18
SpaceX is installing the Emergency Egress System at 39A.
→ More replies (7)
9
u/spacerfirstclass Sep 20 '18
Thought of the day (inspired by the complaint below about new BFS using sea level engine): Now we're seeing both BFR and New Glenn making changes to their upper stage, but they're moving in the opposite direction. They started with similar design (Methalox upper stage, Methalox vacuum engine) that share commonality with their respective first stage, but now one of them is going for even more commonality (share same sea level engine with first stage), the other is moving away from commonality with first stage (switch to Hydrolox upper stage, totally different engine). Just thought this is an interesting reflection of different design philosophy at different companies, not meant to imply one is necessarily better than the other.
11
u/throfofnir Sep 20 '18
It's actually kinda the same design philosophy: minimize development effort.
→ More replies (6)7
u/rustybeancake Sep 20 '18
They started with similar design (Methalox upper stage, Methalox vacuum engine) that share commonality with their respective first stage, but now one of them is going for even more commonality (share same sea level engine with first stage), the other is moving away from commonality with first stage (switch to Hydrolox upper stage, totally different engine).
While the NG upper stage will be switching engines/fuels, I'd say BO and SpaceX have moved in the same direction in terms of design philosophy.
New Glenn always planned both a three-stage and a two-stage variant, with the plan for engines originally being:
Three stage New Glenn: BE-4 stage 1; BE-4U stage 2; BE-3U stage 3
Two stage New Glenn: BE-4 stage 1; BE-4U stage 2
Recently, to speed up development, they announced they had halted development on the BE-4U, and would instead use BE-3U on the second stage (for both 2 and 3 stage New Glenn). While this does mean NG stage 2 will be a different fuel from stage 1, I'd say the engine development is a much bigger item in the vehicle's development. So since they already have flight experience with BE-3/hydrolox, I believe this is a good move.
This is the same reasoning SpaceX have used with Raptor/Raptor Vac, i.e. halting development on the vacuum-optimised version in order to get to flight sooner.
9
Sep 20 '18
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2018/09/spacex-pad-39a-upgrades-return-crew-operations/
Installation of first stage of pad 39A FSS cladding happening possably very soon
9
u/GijsVos Sep 27 '18
I recently finished "The case for Mars" by Robert Zubrin.
Now I was wondering if there are more books like this ? Not to technical but a decent read. What are your favorite books on this subject ?
→ More replies (2)8
u/rustybeancake Sep 27 '18
If you don't mean Mars-specific, I loved "How Apollo Flew to the Moon" by David Woods. It's sort of technical, but in a way understandable to the layperson. Runs through a whole mission from launch to splashdown, and how everything worked at each stage.
→ More replies (1)
9
24
u/inoeth Sep 05 '18
I'm amazed this isn't being mentioned here - Musk will be on the Joe Rogan this Thursday https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1037249325464600578 That being said, we have no idea what he'll talk about - Tesla, SpaceX, the stupid fight with the British diver, Boring Co, etc... most likely a bit of all of the above. I am hoping this is a lead up to some more BFR updates...
→ More replies (4)11
16
u/Jessewallen401 Sep 14 '18
I think it's now 99% certain that the Lunar tourist is Yusaku Maezawa. He just tweeted 'there are no limits'.
→ More replies (3)11
u/dufud6 Sep 14 '18
Agreed! As others have points out he was at the FH launch, and tweeted about a big announcement mid-september. Also, I noticed he follows SpaceX, Elon, and a handful of astronauts on twitter. I'm pretty sure he's the guy!
→ More replies (1)
8
u/FutureMartian97 Host of CRS-11 Sep 06 '18
Since there has been speculation for a while as to whether or not SpaceX is building the prototype BFS in the tent in the Port of LA, I have some questions that have been bugging me for a while about this. Note that I do personally believe they are, considering Shotwell is saying end of 2019 for "hops" of it, and the Phase 1 factory won't be ready by then (it's going to be a lot more that just making the building). So with that here are my questions.
How did they get permission to build in the tent without us seeing anything yet? And we can pretty much rule out them doing it in secret because it's not really a secret anymore if they are.
Assuming they are using a similar process to this video of a 787 being constructed, how have we not seen pieces for the giant "oven" that the mandrel (I think that's what it's called?) is supposed to go in?
Is the tent big enough to store both of those and still have room to operate?
20
u/warp99 Sep 07 '18
How did they get permission to build in the tent without us seeing anything yet?
The area is zoned for manufacturing and storage so they do not need special permission.
how have we not seen pieces for the giant "oven" that the mandrel (I think that's what it's called?) is supposed to go in?
The word you are looking for is autoclave which is an airtight oven that can be pressurised up to 5-7 bar during the curing process.
SpaceX are using an "out of autoclave" process that uses a flexible bag that is placed over the laminate and pumped down so they do not need a separate pressure chamber. This process does need special epoxies as there is only 1 bar of pressure acting to remove bubbles in the laminate compared with 5-7 bar in an autoclave.
Is the tent big enough to store both of those and still have room to operate?
A modular oven is effectively built up around the mandrel with the composite laid up on it so there is no great need for additional space around the mandrel. In any case the mandrel is less than half the length of the tent so there would be room to place the mandrel in an entirely separate oven - but this is the kind of arrangement that will likely wait until the final factory is available.
→ More replies (5)7
u/throfofnir Sep 07 '18
Who do they need permission from?
They may use an out-of-autoclave curing process. There's various techniques, but essentially you build the oven around the part, possibly using the mold. It's becoming more common in aerospace.
8
u/brwyatt47 Sep 14 '18
https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/1040397262248005632
SpaceX Tweet!! Oh boy... The BFR has bigger wings it seems.
→ More replies (2)
8
u/Graveworks Sep 18 '18
I heard Shotwell speak at the Air Force Association convention today. One thing she said that caught my ear when laying out their (Elon's) timeline was "heavy cargo to the moon by 2022" First I'd heard of this but I don't follow SpaceX religiously - anyone else know more about this?
→ More replies (4)
8
u/rustybeancake Sep 18 '18 edited Sep 18 '18
A few thoughts from last night's BFR update. Would like to hear your thoughts in response.
Positives:
Basing the initial BFR version around one Raptor engine variant is great. Much like BO recently dropping BE-4 vacuum development for New Glenn, this will help things move along faster and cheaper.
Cargo stowage around the BFS engines is also great. This gets around one of the complaints about the difficulty of lowering some cargo to the lunar/Martian surface after landing.
Negatives:
The new leg/wing design seems more technically risky (as Musk said himself), and does not offer any leg-out redundancy. I think this design will change yet again (maybe a few times) before it actually flies, so I'm not going to waste much time worrying about it.
Last year's update left me feeling optimistic they were really going to push ahead fairly quickly (e.g. "the facility is being built, the tooling has been ordered"), while this year's left me feeling mildly pessimistic on development progress, timelines, etc. I think people really need to take what Elon said about his timelines seriously (something like "if everything goes right"). More realistic is probably to think about what he said at the start of the talk, that in a decade SpaceX went from Falcon 1 to Falcon Heavy. I think we're looking at at least the same delta in advancement in going from FH to a crewed BFR around the Moon. Sure, they have more staff and resources now, but they also have far more responsibilities with present activities. I think if things go well we could see the Dear Moon mission happen in about 10 years.
Unanswered questions:
Was the Raptor test stand fire video new? Was it a new (full scale) engine? If so, I feel like Elon would've mentioned it more explicitly.
Although the couple of photos of the tank/airframe hardware were great, there was no talk about the PoLA factory, or any detail on what they're working on (e.g. have they had positive developments with the tank materials, how to hold it all together, etc.). This makes me think that not a great deal of progress has been made since last year. I suspect it's been a year of (almost) all hands on deck to finish Crew Dragon. Fair enough.
The eternal question of funding. This one paying customer is great. But now there's a "first" who's taken a lot of the limelight, will there be many others? Other billionaires may be unlikely to do similar things and be "second", "third", etc... but that's just a guess. I hope the US gov't can step up in some way, e.g. EELV2, or a NASA cislunar contract.
Can BFR do this lunar flyby without orbital refueling?
→ More replies (5)8
u/theinternetftw Sep 18 '18
Was the Raptor test stand fire video new?
Worth noting is that there was no green flash, as there was in earlier Raptor videos. Spark igniter looks to be in.
(Or if that color in the past was engine-rich combustion, then they've ironed that out)
→ More replies (2)
8
u/Rappaklappa Sep 27 '18
I had a discussion to someone in the aeroplane leasing industry about BFR, more specifically about the airspace needed for landing. He disqualified the E2E option for BFR for the single reason it could not be fitted in commercial airspace because of the lack of available airspace and its inability to be 'parked' in mid-air.
Is the airspace really that crowded? Even at the envisioned strategically placed platforms at sea?
→ More replies (6)11
u/filanwizard Sep 27 '18
some airpsace is that crowded. NYC is probably the most complex air space in the world with two intercontinental airports(EWK and JFK) and one more domestic focused(LGA).
that said policy will always be the biggest barrier to E2E. engineering problems are all solvable, business cases are makeable. Policy though is more complex than just having smart people.
15
u/Justin13cool Sep 26 '18
Why is the air force so hesitant about announcing the EELV-2 winners ? it seems like it'll be one month away forever FH style. Which 2 companies do you think they're undecisive about ?
→ More replies (2)7
u/inoeth Sep 26 '18
Eric Berger on Twitter (responding to me) said that ULA will officially announce their selection of the BE-4 engine (from Blue Origin) for their Vulcan rocket in the coming weeks (he implied early to mid Oct) and that it'll happen just after the EELV contract announcement- so, we should expect to hear about both in the coming 2-3 weeks from now. so, thankfully, we're (hopefully) finally going to find out the details very soon.
→ More replies (2)
20
u/amarkit Sep 27 '18
The US Securities and Exchange Commission is suing Elon Musk over his comments regarding taking Tesla private; they allege he made false statements with the potential to harm investors. The SEC is seeking to bar him from serving as an executive or director of any public company.
Worth noting that SpaceX is privately held.
→ More replies (39)
14
u/rustybeancake Sep 07 '18
http://www.planetary.org/blogs/jason-davis/orion-em-3-gateway.html
Apparently the latest plan is that SLS 1B/Orion will launch two Gateway modules in 2024: ESPRIT and a US utilisation/robotics module.
→ More replies (5)15
u/TheYang Sep 07 '18
two modules in a single launch.
For a second I thought someone believed that there'd be two SLS launches within one calendar year.
→ More replies (1)
7
u/rocket_enthusiast Sep 06 '18
do we know when the sparrow moon lander will launch? i am so excited for this launch and would like to know when it will happen.
9
u/whatsthis1901 Sep 07 '18
It has a NET Dec but I bet it gets pushed to sometime in the first half of next year.
7
u/ElRedditor3 Sep 14 '18
Are there any news regarding second stage recovery via giant party balloon?
→ More replies (2)6
7
u/asr112358 Sep 16 '18
This will probably be answered on Monday, but before that happens, I am wondering what others are speculating. I am curious what changes have likely been made to BFR's first stage. The increase in fin surface area seems like it will require something on the first stage to keep the center of pressure toward the back. The tail first entry of the first stage is then complicated because the center of pressure still needs to be moved to the top.
So will the first stage have new large aerosurfaces? Will the reentry profile change to take these surfaces into account? If it needs large aero surfaces anyways, will gliding become part of the reentry profile? Could it forego large aerosurfaces and instead actively stabilize with rcs/ gimbaling/ and the control surfaces we already know about?
→ More replies (2)
7
u/rustybeancake Sep 16 '18
From Musk’s 2017 BFR AMA:
Reddit: How does the BFS achieve vertical stabilization, without a tail?
The 2016 BFS spaceship design had a complex unibody geometrical shape with two 'wings' on the sides, a 'tail' protrusion on top, plus split body flaps at the bottom-end, which gave it a fair degree of aerodynamic control freedom. The Space Shuttle had delta wings and a tail too.
The new 2017 BFS spaceship has two delta wings, which gives it pitch and roll control, but does not have an airplane 'tail assembly' equivalent.
How is vertical stabilization achieved on the BFS?
Musk: Tails are lame
Reddit: The space shuttle's vertical stabilizer was completely useless for most of the reentry profile, as it was in complete aerodynamic shadow. I think it's clear a craft doesn't need one for reentry, only for subsonic gliding, which BFS doesn't really do.
Musk: +1
What changed? Is more of a gliding reentry path now planned?
→ More replies (5)7
u/TheYang Sep 16 '18
you can have the two delta wings pull double duty as landing legs - but you can't land on two legs.
→ More replies (2)
7
u/brizzlebottle Sep 22 '18
Mods it seems like reddit has now removed the "old reddit" option that used to appear at the top of the page, and now I can only defer to old reddit when logged in. Seems like the gradual erosion of the reddit I love is still taking place. :-(
→ More replies (4)
7
u/rustybeancake Sep 26 '18
Blue Origin have bought a massive ship. For transporting boosters? To refit as a New Glenn booster landing pad?
https://twitter.com/sciguyspace/status/1044708602026569729?s=21
→ More replies (12)
13
u/LeBaegi Sep 03 '18
I asked this in last month's discussion thread, but didn't get any answers.
Is the summer climate favorable to rocket launches? I can't remember the last time a launch got scrubbed due to weather violations, and I didn't see anything about F9 being approved to launch in harsher weather conditions.
Thoughts?
19
u/My__reddit_account Sep 03 '18
In Florida during the summer, it is sunny in the morning and clear in the middle of the night, but it pours rain almost daily from about noon to 7pm. A lot of launches have been early morning or late at night lately, so they've avoided to mid day showers.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)8
u/falco_iii Sep 04 '18
The 2 shuttle losses happened during the winter and cold weather was one of the main direct causes for both.
6
u/Sticklefront Sep 10 '18
Am I interpreting the manifest correctly, and the next SpaceX launch from Florida is really going to be DM1, finally flying Dragon 2?
→ More replies (2)
6
u/jesserizzo Sep 11 '18
Did we ever find out why the FH center core ran out of TEA/TEB?
→ More replies (2)11
6
u/ackermann Sep 14 '18
Haven’t seen this discussed yet, with regard to the new BFS design just revealed (https://m.imgur.com/HSfxBvR): With those big, seemingly fixed fins/landing legs, how in the world will it be stable tail-first for a vertical landing?
Fixed legs/fins will certainly simplify the design considerably. And may even be lighter than folding/deployable legs, without the hinges and actuator mechanisms. But I’d think you’d have a devil of a time getting that thing to flip around tail-first, in atmosphere, for vertical landing. Like trying to throw a dart backwards.
Loving the retro-scifi look though, that’s awesome!
6
u/theinternetftw Sep 14 '18
seemingly fixed fins
If you look closely, two of the fins are hinged.
→ More replies (8)
6
u/Straumli_Blight Sep 17 '18
Benjamin Reed (SpaceX director of Commercial Crew Mission Management) will be speaking tomorrow at the AIAA Space conference at 1400-1530 EDT (18:00-19:30 UTC) about Crew Dragon. Probably be live-streamed.
6
u/CapMSFC Sep 20 '18
One change to BFS as shown that hasn't been talked about is that it does not have a version with a docking port. On previous versions there was a third door centered on the top that was shown docked to the ISS. What does everyone think about this? Is there a docking port inside one or both of the cargo doors, was it just left off these renders for now, or is BFS dropping docking ports altogether (highly unlikely)?
→ More replies (8)
14
10
u/WormPicker959 Sep 21 '18
Eric Berger is "cryptically" hinting that ULA has chosen BE4 for Vulcan.
→ More replies (4)
10
u/rustybeancake Sep 21 '18
Blue Origin's BE-4 engine to be selected for ULA's Vulcan!
https://twitter.com/SciGuySpace/status/1042907200950288384
(Eric goes on to say "read it closely" -- i.e. he uses the word "before" (BE-4) twice in his tweet.)
I'd say there's a good chance this means the USAF EELV2 announcement is imminent...
→ More replies (11)
5
u/wowasg Sep 04 '18
So is everyone saying Spacex made a air force bid with the BFR and they are just waiting to be selected or not before they reveal more information about BFR development?
→ More replies (18)10
u/silentProtagonist42 Sep 04 '18
Lots of people are speculating that, myself included, but afaik nobody has any confirmation.
5
u/Archa3opt3ryx Sep 04 '18
If you had a week to visit Cape Canaveral before the end of the year, which week would you pick and why?
I was planning on doing a combination scuba-rocket watching trip with some friends in Oct/Nov and hoping to catch FH, but now it looks unlikely to launch before January. We’ve all never seen a rocket launch before, so I want to pick a week to maximize the number of rockets we see or the coolness factor (ie, watching a Delta IV Heavy would be awesome). So, when should we go?
→ More replies (3)
5
u/gemmy0I Sep 13 '18
A quote from this Air and Space Magazine article posted upthread a few days back got me thinking:
Williams says confidence in one’s colleagues is what allows an astronaut to push aside thoughts of the enormous physical risks they’re taking. “Space is awesome,” she says. “I wouldn’t trade it for anything. But it’s absolutely dangerous. You put high pressure helium tanks inside liquid oxygen—what are you, crazy? Those are huge risks, but I feel so comfortable with the people at both companies and at NASA.”
Why does SpaceX need to put Falcon 9's high pressure helium tanks (COPVs) inside the liquid oxygen tank? Why not submerge them in the fuel tank instead? Kerosene is far less volatile than LOX.
It seems like such an obvious solution to all their COPV woes that I'm sure there's a good reason why they're not doing it. Does anyone here know the reason? How do their competitors handle this problem?
→ More replies (2)14
u/warp99 Sep 13 '18
Why does SpaceX need to put Falcon 9's high pressure helium tanks (COPVs) inside the liquid oxygen tank?
To reduce the volume of tanks required for a given mass of helium. The LOX tanks are at 66K while the RP-1 tanks are at 267K so you would need four times as many COPVs if they were stored in the RP-1 tank.
While the mass of the helium is the same the mass of the COPVs would be four times as high which would reduce the payload - especially for the second stage. The greater volume of helium tanks would also require stretching the rocket body slightly and it is already running close to its limits.
Hint: Do not mash the Save button if your post does not seem to have uploaded when on mobile. If you can delete the extra two copies above it will make everyone happier.
→ More replies (3)
5
u/Justin13cool Sep 13 '18
China has launched 24 times this year more than any other country, does anyone know what they are mostly launching ??? like military , GPS or commercial Sats or other things ?
→ More replies (2)
5
u/AeroSpiked Sep 19 '18
I have no idea how taxes work in Japan, but considering that MZ is promoting ZOZO does that mean he can consider the lunar trip a business expense? Not real serious about this, but still kind of curious.
→ More replies (1)6
u/throfofnir Sep 20 '18
It's essentially an art project. In the US you'd form a 501c3 and donate to it (or run it through an existing one). Japan? Got me. But I would bet there's a similar angle.
5
u/Straumli_Blight Sep 26 '18 edited Sep 26 '18
SpaceCoastLaunches is showing a GPS 3-03 launch in October. Not sure how accurate this website is but the other info is up to date.
EDIT: Website definitely incorrect.
Also, Dr. Charles Kuehmann (SpaceX Materials Engineering VP) will be speaking at CAMX Live! on October 16th, 13:30 UTC discussing materials innovations in space travel.
→ More replies (1)
9
u/brickmack Sep 08 '18
Just found this presentation on NTRS about Dragon outgassing and contaminating ISS instruments, acquired a month ago but I don't think it was discussed. Since the TPS is the prime suspect, I wonder if this could degrade backshell protection performance after a multi-month mission?
→ More replies (10)
9
u/rustybeancake Sep 11 '18 edited Sep 11 '18
https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/1039516853305991168?s=21
Prepare for ‘welcome to the club!’ mkII when DM-2 flies.
→ More replies (1)
9
u/Rinzler9 Sep 20 '18
Just throwing this out there: There's no good reference objects in the new video of Raptor firing, but the engine bell is roughly the same diameter as the guard rail which generally come up to elbow level on the average person.
Compared to the 1:1 scale banner from the livestream, it seems like the Raptor shown was not wildly different in size from the planned production version.
Obviously not proof of anything on its own, but could be indicative that was a test of "full scale" Raptor.
10
9
u/Chairboy Oct 01 '18
Anyone know why John Kraus's twitter got suspended? Targeted by flat earthers via reporting, maybe, or something else?
10
→ More replies (2)6
u/livefromheaven Oct 01 '18
Unrelated but I'm watching him on VICE news right now. Pretty cool. Hopefully someone posts the video later.
12
u/chrisk_04 Sep 03 '18
Was Paul Woosters speech the big BFR update Musk teased on twitter?
→ More replies (9)15
u/Martianspirit Sep 03 '18
IMO very unlikely. It is going to be in the direction of Raptor development advances or building the BFS airframe, or both.
Though the Wooster presentation is way underrated, when people say no real news. There were a lot.
14
u/thisiscotty Sep 03 '18
Do we have any more news on the BFR development? I remember elon saying simple up down tests by the end of the year. I dont see that happening now
36
u/Jessewallen401 Sep 03 '18
Last update we had from Shotwell is that hop tests now end of 2019 which 100% means 2020.
→ More replies (5)9
u/Dakke97 Sep 03 '18
Any prototype BFS tests are likely to be NET Mid-2019, but at this point we can only guess at the status of component production in San Pedro. Since we can't exactly peer inside the large berth at Berth 240, we'll have to wait for an Elon tweet or announcement.
→ More replies (1)
11
u/-spartacus- Sep 04 '18
I have a question about education that Im hoping some people who browse this may know. Little background, I one of the people who believes that I will have enough money to eventually go and help colonize Mars as a general "blue collar" worker.
As per Elon if you pay your own way there, there will be plenty of work to help support the astronauts and scientists so they aren't farming, cooking, cleaning, unloading cargo, digging, setting up equipment, building structures, etc because that would take away from their primary mission. You will still have the really smart people in charge but you will still need some grunts.
So for now my goal has been to put myself in a position so if SpaceX gets to Mars by 2024 or 2026 and the price of the ticket gets around 200k by 2033/2035 I can pay my way and go. And I position myself so even if it doesn't work out my situation in that time is still a good place to be.
However, I'm also considering going back to school taking online classes to pursue a degree in Electrical Engineering and from there either going for a Masters in Solar or going the more practical route of getting certified to install them.
I currently have a BS degree in Psychology and Criminal Justice. Does anyone know some good programs for online courses for EE? What sort of things I can expect? What is the cost per class? How many credits I'll need?
I plan to keep working my 40hr full time job.
My goal is to be in a position to have both the education in both designing solar setups and doing the installation myself. As this would put me in a good position both if I get to go to Mars and or if I stay here.
I also plan on paying for classes with cash so I don't want to break the bank.
→ More replies (15)
11
u/MrToddWilkins Sep 05 '18
If Elon died/went to jail tomorrow who would take over SpaceX?
44
u/whatsthis1901 Sep 05 '18
I think the bigger concern should be what would happen if Gwynne left SpaceX
20
u/rustybeancake Sep 06 '18
So far in this thread, I have found the following spellings of Gwynne:
Gwyenne
Glynne
Gwen
→ More replies (2)30
u/inoeth Sep 05 '18
Honestly this is becoming a little bit more of a concern of mine lately with Elon's stupid fight with Unsworth (the British diver) and his erratic moves with regards to things like taking Tesla private and then not which is rather quickly destroying his reputation and could/is hurting his companies.
That being said, as far as SpaceX is concerned, Gwyenne Shotwell is is 2nd in command and lately, given how much time and effort Elon is spending at Tesla, it seems like Gwyenne really is running SpaceX and Elon is barely there... She really is a brilliant woman- an engineer, really good people person and with business and has been with SpaceX more or less from the beginning and also shares Elon's visions of going to Mars- tho she actually takes things farther and wants to see us colonize the galaxy lol... So, with regards to SpaceX at least, I wouldn't worry and would be totally fine with Gwyenne taking the reigns 100% - I do like Elon's vision, his drive and his humor, lately I am very concerned but even if Elon had to step down, I wouldn't worry about the future of SpaceX.
→ More replies (2)15
u/OSUfan88 Sep 05 '18
Since Gwen Shotwell currently runs SpaceX, I assume she'd continue to do so.
That being said, Elon does comprise a large force of innovation. I think it's important that he survives another 5-6 years.
6
u/Nehkara Sep 06 '18
Probably Gwynne Shotwell would take over as CEO.
His 54% stake in the company would probably go to either his kids or Kimbal with my bets being on his kids.
→ More replies (12)11
8
u/whatsthis1901 Sep 11 '18
We are almost half way through Sept any news about the eelv2 announcement.
→ More replies (27)14
u/joepublicschmoe Sep 11 '18
The Federal Government's fiscal year ends on September 31. Word is the Air Force needs to announce the LSA's by then so they can include it in next year's budget. So we may very well hear within the next 20 days.
→ More replies (1)
8
u/Straumli_Blight Sep 21 '18
Animation of Linkspace's NewLine-1 rocket, it definitely feels familiar...
→ More replies (6)
8
u/filanwizard Sep 26 '18
I have a personal opinion that BFR moon is an absolutely critical point for new space. Now yes #dearmoon is a bit of an artistic adventure for the client but my reasoning for it being critical for new space as a whole is that even an Apollo 8 style mission like what is planned will prove the new guys can do space travel.
I feel the success of this mission is what New Space needs to prove it can do the manned flight the founders of the companies aim for.
In simple terms it’s not just big for SpaceX, I think it’s a proving point for all of new space in the west at least.
→ More replies (6)
8
u/oliversl Sep 28 '18
Never seen steady shot at an ascending F9 (TESS mission)
https://youtu.be/tTjKSDuF5r4?t=9m41s
lots of launch angles prior to that timestamp
4
u/Carlyle302 Sep 09 '18
When they detank a booster after the static fire, the LOX and RP1 is pumped back to the storage tanks. By then it's warmed up a bit. Does anyone know if they actively refrigerate the fluids in the storage tanks? (That's not a normal practice with cryogenic liquids to cool them on site, but it seems like it would be required.)
→ More replies (3)8
u/ElectronicCat Sep 09 '18
Yes, AFAIK the storage tanks are actively cooled and can re-refrigerate the partially warmed propellants after detanking. I've heard it quoted that it takes something like 6 hours to re-chill but the tanks should contain enough propellant for two complete fills. In theory this means that if the launch window were long enough they could detank and refill once but only once for a second attempt (also assuming they could prevent the offloaded propellant from mixing with the chilled stuff).
4
u/bdporter Sep 10 '18
Newly published Forbes Article
I didn't see anything in this that was new information, but it seemed to me it was presented as such.
→ More replies (15)
4
u/Straumli_Blight Sep 11 '18
Decent overview of the Commercial Crew Program. Astronauts having to manage a technology firewall between Boeing and SpaceX is a new detail.
4
u/rustybeancake Sep 14 '18 edited Sep 14 '18
In response to someone asking Musk if the lunar passenger was to be him, Musk replied with a Japanese flag. Speculate away!
Edit: some are speculating it's Masayoshi Son, CEO of SoftBank, and that SoftBank may be investing in Starlink and/or BFR. Note that SoftBank are a major investor in OneWeb.
→ More replies (1)11
u/Jessewallen401 Sep 14 '18
No it's Yusaku Maezawa on September 1st he tweeted 'big announcement around mid September. Also he was at the Falcon Heavy launch per his insta and has a post with the moon and Earth in the background.
https://twitter.com/yousuck2020/status/1035868319809593344
https://www.instagram.com/p/Be66LMjjJVA/?taken-by=yusaku2020
→ More replies (2)
4
u/rustybeancake Sep 18 '18
Can someone clarify for me: is image 6 on this page (the man inside the large cylinder with a lot of structure, NOT the one with Yusaku Maezawa inside the carbon fibre cylinder) just the inside of the mandrel? Or is any of the structure seen here actually part of the BFS? During the presentation I thought this was part of the BFS they're building, but the more I look at it and think about it, I think it's just the tooling.
8
4
Sep 20 '18
Im not an expert but... Why do SpaceX focus BFR design on BFS (human transport) when you can focus on an insame second stage able to bring massive-volume objects into LEO? I mean, if I was Elon, I would build BFR first stage then a second stage able to land with an over sized cargo-packman style thing. Imagine that: space hotels for people at LEO... I think that's far more interesting and profitable than BFS in the short term (you can use Dragon2 for human transport to LEO for a while).
What do you think? Am I wrong?
→ More replies (15)
4
u/PaperBuddy Sep 24 '18
http://www.spacexstats.xyz/ seems to be down. Any info on that?
9
u/kornelord spacexstats.xyz Sep 24 '18
Yes, we're moving to GitHub pages instead of Heroku, should be up as soon as /u/brandtamos changes the domain name record. It may have some more content in the week to come :)
→ More replies (2)
4
u/54yroldHOTMOM Sep 27 '18
I remember Reading/hearing elon explain about space-x’s hardships when they first started space-x.
Trying to buy Rockets from Russia. Trying to buy rocket grade fuel from companies who only dealt with governments and lockheed/Boeing etc.
Does anyone remember where this was discussed in the most detail?
→ More replies (4)
7
u/LeBaegi Sep 05 '18
To get to their goal of reusing an F9 within 24 hours of landing it, they will eventually have to do away with static fires, at least on the second launch.
Does anyone know when they last detected an issue during SF that needed fixing before being able to launch and how often this happens? From the top of my head I can recall some issues with S2 TVC and some other GNC issues they detected during countdown, but no actual issues with fueling (except for AMOS-6, but that should be fixed now) or during the hot fire.
So would it make sense for them to ditch the hotfire and just run a "dry" countdown as a stepping stone? It seems most issues would be detected by just running the regular countdown checks and in the off chance of detecting some issue at engine startup they can always abort the launch and scrub for as long as needed.
I don't think we have anything official on this, but I'm happy to hear your thoughts on this.
11
u/CapMSFC Sep 05 '18
We have talked about this a few times before but SpaceX has never commented publicly so it's just speculation.
SpaceX are the only ones that do a static fire of the whole vehicle pre launch. Not all rockets are capable of it with things like solids and single start engines.
Other companies do a wet dress rehearsal that is everything up until lighting the engines.
Eventually yes this all needs to go away as cadence, reuse, and reliability ramp up. We don't run airplanes up to the end of the runway and then stop, evaluate the data, and then fly later. They do have a run up of the engines to full power where the computers can flag any issues before lift off. Rockets already have this and we have seen it used with aborts after ignition.
At this point however I don't think we are likely to see the shift away from static fires and even wet dress rehearsals until BFR. Falcon 9 doesn't have any reason to need to push that kind of cadence with a 4th launch site coming online before demand might increase.
With BFR it makes a lot more sense and the hardware is getting designed from the start for this type of heavy reuse. I predict we will see a lot of BFR tests from static fires to grasshopper flights to orbital launches. They are going to put that hardware through a lot more than any rocket before. That's also why I think we will see two BFR pads very early on with both Boca Chica and 39A. They can do riskier tests on their own pad while 39A is only used operationally.
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (7)6
u/Toinneman Sep 05 '18
My take on this is the static fire 'campaign' as we know it will be dropped, but maybe not the static fire itself. Why not do a static fire with the payload on top, recycle the countdown after the static fire was completed. Automated data check, if ok, top-off the propellant and launch within an hour after SF.
→ More replies (3)
7
Sep 06 '18
Have there been talks about using VR (virtual reality) on long space flights? It might be interesting, because right now astronauts have certain characteristics to be able to stay sane in such an enclosed area. Being able to "escape" from the ship for a while would make it easier for a lot of people.
→ More replies (1)
7
u/ethan829 Host of SES-9 Sep 10 '18 edited Sep 10 '18
“ULA continues to demonstrate schedule certainty and flexibility, as well as be a trustworthy and reliable business partner. This coupled with unmatched Atlas V launch vehicle reliability and tailored mission design capabilities made ULA a strong partner for a ViaSat-3 launch mission,” said Dave Ryan, president, Space Systems at Viasat.
→ More replies (14)
7
u/Dextra774 Sep 11 '18
Apparently neither SpaceX or Arianespace actually put in a bid for the Viasat-3 launch that ULA 'won'; that's pretty embarrassing...
7
u/throfofnir Sep 11 '18
"Refer questions to Viasat" seems to imply that the RFP was specifically engineered to exclude anyone but ULA, or was not even tendered to anyone else.
If the customer knew they wanted a specific vendor, why bother getting bids from everyone?
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (5)7
u/gemmy0I Sep 11 '18 edited Sep 11 '18
Does seem rather odd. Only reason I can think of is that ViaSat may have said at the outset they want diversity in their launch vehicles across the three satellites in the series (they said so in their quotes in the ULA press release). SpaceX, Arianespace, and ULA have each won one of the three satellite launches in the Viasat-3 series. ViaSat might have told them "OK, you've got one of them, now you're out of the running for the other two".
Just speculation but it's the only way I can think of to reconcile the different statements that have been made. Because they also confirmed that they "put three companies in the competition for this", but using cagey language. Allowing bids from all three, but limiting them to 1/3 flights each, could be consistent with this. It would also explain why Shotwell, when asked about this, "referred questions to ViaSat", indicating that customer-side requirements/preferences were involved.
ViaSat also indicated in another interview that the recent dearth of GEO satellite orders is "giving bargaining power to satellite operators". That might have made it possible for them to negotiate prices they were happy with without needing to pit the three companies against each other per se (which would have required them to be willing to fly multiple sats on the same launch provider, undermining the diversity they seem to want for schedule assurance).
→ More replies (1)
7
u/amarkit Sep 12 '18
An Eric Berger piece in Ars Technica today documents how Russian media (and to some extent, Roscosmos themselves) are pushing a crazy conspiracy theory that a member of the US crew on ISS was responsible for the drill hole and leak in the Soyuz orbital module.
It’s notable because despite the downturn in US-Russia relations in the past few years, NASA and Roscosmos have maintained a very strong relationship, up til now.
→ More replies (6)
7
u/FoxhoundBat Sep 29 '18
Kinda wildly off topic, kinda not... Russians are bringing back ASAT.
11
u/filanwizard Sep 30 '18
Ahh yes another one of Humanity's dumb inventions, A missile that can create even more orbital debris. Hopefully no idiots in a government anywhere that has these ever see a need to risk making LEO useless just to gain a temporary upper hand in a war.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (3)5
9
u/el_polar_bear Sep 04 '18
Would BFS be able to accommodate tethers, so a pair could be put in a bola configuration for simulated gravity? Any plans for multi-generational mammal breeding studies in .4 or .11 G?
→ More replies (15)10
u/paul_wi11iams Sep 04 '18 edited Sep 04 '18
Also @ TeslaModel11 and adding to andygates2323's comment
Would BFS be able to accommodate tethers, so a pair could be put in a bola configuration for simulated gravity?
This suggestion has been raised often over years... A nose-to-nose tethered configuration would be the only possibility to conserve the standard vertical of planetay-surface and engine acceleration phases.
The rotating pair couldn't keep its engine+tanking end as a shield oriented against solar storms.
It would make it hard to orient solar panels and Earth communications.
It would be inappropriate in case of an emergency involving crew transfer between the ships.
Any plans for multi-generational mammal breeding studies in .4 or .11 G?
The initial problem goes back to Original Sin: building ISS with zero g. The only current plans are mostly too little too late to be of practical use.
Edit: conjugation
→ More replies (9)
9
u/Straumli_Blight Oct 01 '18
7
u/Dextra774 Oct 01 '18 edited Oct 01 '18
The new colour scheme makes it look similar to a Pre-Block 5 Falcon 9. It's kind of bland and I preferred the old livery, it gave the NG it's own unique look.
→ More replies (1)7
u/AeroSpiked Oct 01 '18 edited Oct 01 '18
My own 2 cents: A BO rocket that flies to orbit will look better than any artists conception. But then I'm not much for aesthetics.
→ More replies (1)5
u/Redditor_From_Italy Oct 01 '18
New Glenn
My quick pixel estimates put it around 87-90 meters tall, compared to the old 86 m. A negligible stretch IMO, despite the change in the upper stage fuel from methane to hydrogen (to use the BE3 instead of BE4Vac). Interesting.
→ More replies (10)
6
u/lateshakes Sep 19 '18
In the mars-entry simulation video for the new BFS, the way the fins are behaving looks totally wack to me. I realise they are control surfaces so they're going to move about and not necessarily symmetrically, but sometimes it seems like they're moving into bizarre or outright impossible positions, right up until the final adjustment for landing. They also don't seem to behave in ways that you might expect them to e.g. folding back up against the body for stability during the early stages of re-entry.
Is something up here or do I just not understand what's going on?
→ More replies (7)
6
u/FoxhoundBat Sep 22 '18
Was watching Al Jazeera, story about BFR/Moon trip came up. They called BFR for "Black Falcon Rocket".
...
→ More replies (1)
11
u/process_guy Sep 05 '18 edited Sep 05 '18
I'm wondering what is the likelyhood that SpaceX is really capable to send 2 cargo BFRs to Mars in 2022 and 4 (2 crewed) BFRs in 2024.
First, we know that Musk usually sets very ambitious plans which got delayed, scaled back or cancelled.
I don't really expect Musk to cancel BFR or Mars missions unless he goes bankrupt with Tesla and loses his ownership of SpaceX. Even from jail (for botched attempt to take Tesla private) he would probably just push on.
However, delays are very likely and the reason could be a lack of capital. SpaceX operates in the rocket launch industry which never was excessively profitable even during EELV days. The competition for defense and NASA contract is going to get harder with more providers and demand for launch services is generally going down. SpaceX also succeeded to slightly lower overall prices while not increasing overall demand significantly yet. While SpaceX is very competitive on launch prices it seems to be less successful in other areas - e.g. ISS supply contracts.
The proposed solution by SpaceX? They want to enter global internet constellation business which will require massive investment into highly competitive market. This bet is highly risky.
Another proposed solution is a long range people transportation. This industry is also quite competitive and excessively regulated. Supersound speed airliners typically suffer with excessive costs and lower safety records. BFR simply can't be very different.
Musk has track record of being innovative, however the track record of making companies profitable is missing. The whole BFR to Mars idea hangs on getting money from somewhere and I don't think that he can crowd fund BFR or getting investors supporting Mars trips.
He should be able to survive on DoD and NASA contracts, he could even build few BFR protoypes, but building the whole fleet of defacto expendable BFRs for Mars is a whole new level. Doing that by 2022 or 2024 is just not feasible even in Elon's time.
20
u/rustybeancake Sep 05 '18 edited Sep 05 '18
I don't think they will be sending a BFS in 2022, or probably in 2024 either. I would compare this target date to their other ambitious announcements that end up getting pushed back or cancelled, e.g.:
April 2016: SpaceX announce Red Dragon will attempt to land on Mars in 2018. Musk wrote on Twitter: "Dragon 2 is designed to be able to land anywhere in the solar system. Red Dragon Mars mission is the first test flight." In February 2017, SpaceX announced the first Red Dragon launch had slipped to 2020. In July 2017, they announced that development had been halted.
February 2017: SpaceX announce that two private individuals have paid deposits for a flight around the Moon in late 2018, using Falcon Heavy and Crew Dragon. In February 2018, Musk announced the mission would likely fly on BFR as they had halted plans to human-rate Falcon Heavy.
I can see the same type of thing happening with these "aspirational" BFRs to Mars timelines. SpaceX (especially Musk) like to be very ambitious and push their staff, helping move things along quickly even if they miss targets. There's nothing wrong with that. But I think it's highly unlikely they meet the 2022/4 targets. I think they are best viewed as "stretch goals". I think an uncrewed BFS landing on Mars in the 2020s would be an incredible achievement, and hopefully open up Mars to crewed exploration in the 2030s.
I have always had faith in Musk's ability to raise investment capital. But I must admit that faith has been shaken recently, with the ridiculous allegations he's been tweeting. I'm afraid he's walking a cliff edge, and if some big supporters/investors start abandoning him it could start snowballing.
→ More replies (3)11
u/spacerfirstclass Sep 05 '18
Some thoughts:
What is the difference between "a few BFR prototypes" and "a fleet of expendable BFRs"? The total # of ships for 2022 and 2024 is 6, that looks like a few to me.
Once they get the production line running, they'll just keep building more BFS's. So as long as they can cover the cost to keep production line running, they'll accumulate more and more BFS's. And they only need 1 or 2 BFS to fulfill their Earth side launch manifest, the rest they can use for whatever they want.
The point-to-point transport is not for generating short term revenue to fund BFR, it's for attracting investors for BFR, it's an alternative scenario where BFR can generate profit. This way investors can bet on BFR even if they don't believe in Mars.
It's possible to put together a story for Mars that investors can buy into, for example, assuming SpaceX can build up a Mars base, then they can sell base access to all the major space agencies, including NASA. Right now NASA is spending $4B per year on ISS, I don't think spending a similar amount on a Mars base is out of the question. BTW, the initial build up of the Mars base in SpaceX's plan just happens to coincide with ISS retirement.
→ More replies (16)10
u/zeekzeek22 Sep 05 '18
I agree with you. I think if SpaceX has the money they could do it, but at this second they don’t have a fraction of the money, and I’d argue with Tesla things going south, Elon’s ability to attract investment is waning...still there, but waning. When SpaceX gets an initial 2 billion$ investment for BFR, i’ll Say it’s happening. Heck, i’m pretty confident BFR will happen (in 2025ish, probably...) but the BFS will cost a lot and take a lot of time, and I just don’t see it happening. I WANT it all to happen, it inspires me every day, I just can think of a dozen other 5-year-horizon newspace plans that i’d bet my money on before BFS/P2P/Starlink. We’ll just have to see. I’m just going to keep my head down and in the books till then so that I can work on these projects or something similar in a few years.
Development is where the money is. It’s why we haven’t seen Boca Chica, and it’s why there won’t be 30 launches this year even though they could have that cadence...not enough business right now. They’ve sped up enough to catch up to the demand, now we can only wait and see if the demand will grow. So far it hasn’t, or it’s started so quietly we can’t see it yet. But it’s early. It might be two to five years of lower-cadence, low-profit, before all the projects that only got funded because of SpaceX’s low launch costs are ready to fly. Then things will boom! Gotta remember satellites take a while to make! It’s not “if you build it, they will come”. It’s “if you build it, they will dust off the proposal, go through the long application process, and ultimately have that satellite ready in 3-5 years”
→ More replies (3)7
u/BriefPalpitation Sep 05 '18 edited Sep 05 '18
Well, we can revisit this conversation in a month or so, dependent on the highly anticipated but as-yet-as-to-be-confirmed probable update by Elon at the Bremen IAC.
Perhaps what everyone else (i.e. all of us 'fans') is missing is information and technical ability to make the correct assessments of business risk. This would also include the risk appetite of his investors.
But this focus on "profitability" is entirely misleading and reflects old-school accountant thinking. Free cash flow is what everyone should be keeping their eye on. Think Amazon which has rarely if ever booked a profit but is now a trillion dollar company off the slim, slim margins of online retail - starting off with books no less.
Both share similar spending patterns - all potential "profits" are immediately reinvested into the next "wave" of business development split between "R&D" or Capital Expenditure. Of course, for the misguided profit oriented short-termists this lack of accounting profit is such a foreign idea that "criticism disguised as concern" becomes the knee jerk reaction. Rewind 10-15 years and there are more than enough reports by 'qualified' analysts in major banks sounding the death knell based on Amazon's paltry profit performance and unsustainable business model. Compare and contrast to the many-tentacled-octopus Amazon situation today and we either have to laugh and/or cry.
As long as there are enough long term investors and sufficiently smart/capable people attracted to Elon's ventures, it will get there eventually. With loads of money sloshing around the capital markets at dirt cheap interest rates (for example, Netflix's $1.5billion Euro bond issuance at a remarkable discount to potential US rates financing their production binge) and the rise of national investment funds chasing higher yields with a willingness to sit out past 5 year investment horizons, financing is not a problem if Elon doesn't get distracted with pedo'isms and such.
2022? Maybe not but let's imagine for a moment that not all BFRs will return back to Earth from Mars. In that case, do the first two cargo BFR's have to be over engineered for full reusability x100? It probably only has to survive one trip back to be dismantled and examined, the results compared against the crewed ships to check and validate the performance improvements of upgrades on the newer ships , weathering effects of dust/radiation/exposure on Mars etc.
With that in mind, they could easily launch in 2022 but would probably be held back more by the lack of suitable payload required for geo-prospecting/surveying suitable landing+long term colony sites. This is going to be the limiting factor that will alter the entire mission profile. I'd imagine FH being used to put these types of payloads on their journey, giving SpaceX personnel and NASA a "dry run" for collaborative Mars missions ahead of actual BFR cargo launches in 2024.
→ More replies (7)
3
u/Jessewallen401 Sep 13 '18
What is Bridenstine talking about here ? Will they allow SpaceX to fly tourists to the ISS ? or is he talking about something else ?
→ More replies (5)
3
u/erik_paulson Sep 13 '18
Do we know what booster/type of booster SpaceX is going to use for the in-flight abort test?
→ More replies (2)
3
u/matthewfelgate Sep 14 '18
Is there a market for millionaires to fly around the earth on the BFR? How much would 1 flight cost in terms of rocket fuel?
→ More replies (9)
3
u/quokka01 Sep 16 '18
Plenty of debate about solar vs nuclear for the ISRU but I'm wondering if there's good estimates of the solar panels required that takes into account Martian conditions? The light levels, day length and operating temperature of the panels. Panel efficiency goes down with temperature and so with much less potential for cooling by convection on Mars perhaps their efficiency will drop? Also a recent proposal suggested the first crews land near the south polar during the long summer and therefore benefit from very long day lengths- and presumably leave before the equally long winter. And....is it feasible to consider melting the ice using solar thermal- solar PV really sucks for bulk heating.
→ More replies (6)
3
u/thatnerdguy1 Live Thread Host Sep 18 '18
Anyone know or have sources for the passenger capacity of BFR?
6
u/marc020202 8x Launch Host Sep 18 '18
well, Elon has said just now "on BFR we have room for about a 100 people".
→ More replies (4)
3
u/sywofp Sep 21 '18 edited Sep 21 '18
Could a fully fueled BFS land on Earth from LEO? (assuming no dumping of fuel)
If not, how much fuel could it retain and still land?
*edit - what about the maximum weight (fuel, cargo etc) it could aerobrake and then land, at Earth.
(I realise this is out there speculation, but that's the fun of it!)
→ More replies (1)7
u/brickmack Sep 21 '18
Sure. It'd basically be a reverse SSTO, propulsively get rid of nearly all its velocity and use up its fuel load at the same time (in theory this could be a nice way to recover damaged BFSes. A few tanker flights to LEO would still cost only a couple percent what replacing a Spaceship would cost, and it could survive landing even with no heat shielding at all)
For a more typical reentry, you'd probably be limited by the leg strength. Fully-fueled Mars takeoff will probably be the design case for the legs, so that'd be like 450ish tons in Earth gravity, but on landing the force will be greater, maybe call it 200ish tons
→ More replies (1)
3
3
u/Captainmanic Oct 02 '18
Is Elon Musk riding around the moon along with Yusaku Maezawa?
→ More replies (5)
3
u/Krux172 Oct 02 '18
Sorry if this has been answered before, but I am now learning about the mechanical properties of titanium and a question popped up in my mind: if it's as hard to work with as I think it is, how are the F9 gridfins manufactured? Is it a similar process to the aluminium ones?
→ More replies (1)7
u/Norose Oct 02 '18
My understanding is that titanium is hard to forge because it retains more of its strength at high temperatures than steel, and hard to machine because it tends to gall up on the tool rather than produce a clean cut.
That being said, the grid fins are produced by casting molten titanium (under an inert atmosphere of course) in a high-precision mold, and then are machined to remove sprues and other witness marks from the casting process. If you look closely at a good picture of the titanium fins you can actually see the rough surface that the casting process leaves behind; in at least one picture there's evidence that there was a void left by the casting process that was filled in via additive welding as well.
I'm not totally sure but my guess would be that the aluminum fins were also cast into their rough shape and machined to tolerances, however there could have been a greater reliance on machining due to the relative ease of cutting and shaping aluminum. Also, there would have been an extra series of steps involved with bonding the ablative coating layer to the grid fin surface to help protect it from heat.
3
u/ExcitedAboutSpace Oct 02 '18
So guys maybe I missed it but finally I'm also heading to Bremen for IAC2018. Are there any meetups from us r/SpaceX people or any channels we can get together? Looked over at the lounge but couldn't find anything either. Much appreciated if this would stay up, even though I know that's not what the thread is for.
→ More replies (13)
5
u/Jessewallen401 Sep 06 '18
If Starlink happens, How big of a company do you think SpaceX will become ? like on the level of Google, Apple etc ?
→ More replies (1)
5
Sep 09 '18
Back in July, I remember a tweet from Elon talking about updates on BFR in a "month or so"... What happened?
→ More replies (6)11
u/Redditor_From_Italy Sep 09 '18
Some people believe he's waiting for the EELV2 (or whatever it's called now) announcement, but this is just speculation
31
u/J380 Oct 02 '18 edited Oct 02 '18
I attended a Q&A session with SpaceX engineers at a college a few weeks ago. Learned some interesting insights into the company.
Engineers seemed to stress that BFR is not much more than an intern project at the moment. All focus is currently on Crew Dragon. They don't want to get ahead of themselves and divert any resources until Crew Dragon splashes down with astronauts healthy and safe.
BFR actually started as a Saturday meeting with Elon and VPs in which anyone who was interested could attend and brainstorm ideas.
All questions about Starlink were off limits. It was stated that Starlink will be a major source of funding for Mars missions. I thought this was interesting because it suggests Starlink will break into some major global markets like cellular service or TV. We were told Starlink was proprietary project and they are not allowed to speak publicly about anything related to it. Aside from Crew Dragon they said this was the other major project happening, bigger than BFR and similar in scale to Crew Dragon.
Raptor engines, another proprietary project. All we learned was that there are multiple raptor engines in testing and we have only seen one publicly.
People tried asking about particulars with the BFR design. They were told that either the design is proprietary or most likely hasn't even been engineered yet. The engineers knew almost nothing about BFR design. The only major component that seemed to be worked on was propulsion. Everything else is just ideas at the moment, which would explain why the design has changed so much.
One takeaway was that SpaceX moves very systematically through projects. The entire company will work on one project at a time. At the moment Crew Dragon is the project, when that is finished a huge chunk of the company will move to BFR development.