Aethon

Blue Origin Thread (merged)

Recommended Posts

Well, this is an interesting development, especially in light of the minor hullabaloo about EM-1.

 

Tho my first thought is, Jeff Bezos is gonna be soooooooooooooo miffed. :sticktongue: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/27/2017 at 1:56 PM, Spaceception said:

Step one is to start relaunching Falcon boosters.

Step one is to actually launch FH. Step 2 ia to get Dragon 2 up..

Edited by Snark
Political joke redacted out

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, this is glorious, this means SpaceX is going to have their own astronauts, and not just be a rental car for NASA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to be the devil's advocate here, does this go in the same pile of SpaceX announcements as "we're going to launch the Falcon Heavy in 2016"?

 

EDIT: or indeed "we're going to launch the FH in 2013 or 2014" as per the original plan circa 2011

Edited by Steel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, CatastrophicFailure said:

Well, this is an interesting development, especially in light of the minor hullabaloo about EM-1.

Exactly what i thought, it almost seems like trolling...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Steel said:

Just to be the devil's advocate here, does this go in the same pile of SpaceX announcements as "we're going to launch the Falcon Heavy in 2016"?

"Late 2018" (holy crap 2018 is next year) could turn into "Mid 2019" pretty easily but they'll probably still do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Next year ? Maybe in Elon Time™, but not in our universe. SpaceX really needs to stop adding more goalposts and start striking a few goals. At this stage, the hype is starting to look like the Russian space program.

Dragon2 hasn't flown yet. Falcon Heavy hasn't flown yet. I doubt anyone would be crazy or confident enough to put humans on the maiden flight of a new rocket and a new spacecraft. Even man-rating Falcon 9, at this stage, seems a bit premature with its current flight record. They really need to get a couple of test flights in there first, including at least one unmanned circumlunar flight to test reentry. It would be really suicidal otherwise.

Also, this means that Dragon2 is going to be get all new inertial navigation and deep space comm systems. No more reliance on GPS and TDRS.

If they do manage to do a manned circumlunar flight before SLS/Orion, it will certainly a bit of a humiliation for NASA.

Edited by Nibb31

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Nibb31 said:

I doubt anyone would be crazy or confident enough to put humans on the maiden flight of a new rocket and a new spacecraft.

I know, right?

Spoiler

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RCgothic said:

Is Dragon 2 even rated beyond LEO? :0.0:

I don't think it's rated for anything yet, having not actually flown or completed an in-flight abort test

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Nothalogh said:

I know, right?

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

Different day and age. STS-1 was still the Cold War, it couldn't fly unmanned, and the Orbiter had gone through years of development test flights. And it wasn't flying a 6-day mission around the freaking Moon on its first flight either.

Edited by Nibb31

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Nibb31 said:

Next year ? Maybe in Elon Time™, but I seriously doubt it.

Dragon2 hasn't flown yet. Falcon Heavy hasn't flown yet. I doubt anyone would be crazy or confident enough to put humans on the maiden flight of a new rocket and a new spacecraft. Even man-rating Falcon 9, at this stage, seems a bit premature with its current flight record. They really need to get a couple of test flights in there first, including at least one unmanned circumlunar flight. It's really too crazy otherwise.

Also, this means that Dragon2 is going to be get all new inertial navigation and deep space comm systems. No more reliance on GPS and TDRS.

And a heat shield capable of reentry from the Moon, and all of the rest. Okay, they may skip the larger service module with extra propulsion, if they just go for a free return.

This sounds a bit like the Russian Zond Moon program: Get "some" spacecraft with "some" astronauts on "some" trip to the Moon so that we can say we have beaten NASA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Nibb31 said:

Different day and age.

Maybe that's what made those things possible.

And maybe that's the only way.

Edited by Nothalogh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Tullius said:

And a heat shield capable of reentry from the Moon, and all of the rest. Okay, they may skip the larger service module with extra propulsion, if they just go for a free return.

This sounds a bit like the Russian Zond Moon program: Get "some" spacecraft with "some" astronauts on "some" trip to the Moon so that we can say we have beaten NASA.

Yes, it would definitely be more like Zond than Apollo 8. There is no way they could enter and leave lunar orbit.

Still, Zond was a bit of a hit and miss. They are going to need a couple of test flights before they can send actual people.

Just now, Nothalogh said:

Maybe that's what made those things possible.

Definitely. Many things are much more complex than they were then because the world is a much more complex place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Nibb31 said:

Definitely. Many things are much more complex than they were then because the world is a much more complex place.

Only because we let get that way.

What would Von Braun think of us?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Nibb31 said:

Different day and age. STS-1 was still the Cold War, it couldn't fly unmanned, and the Orbiter had gone through years of development test flights. And it wasn't flying a 6-day mission around the freaking Moon on its first flight either.

The key point there is that the Orbiter couldn't autoland. So they basically had no choice but to send it up with pilots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question, conventionally in order to fly NASA people, a rocket must be "man rated" according to NASA's standards, right?

Was the Soyuz/R-7 system ever man rated that way, or do we accept that it works because it does?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Nibb31 said:

Falcon Heavy hasn't flown yet. I doubt anyone would be crazy or confident enough to put humans on the maiden flight of a new rocket and a new spacecraft. 

SpaceX hadn't decided on the payload for the first FH flight.

Maybe it'll be an unmanned Dragon around the moon?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, _Augustus_ said:

SpaceX hadn't decided on the payload for the first FH flight.

Maybe it'll be an unmanned Dragon around the moon?

If it's little more than a boilerplate, that seems plausible with minimal extra expense for them. I think I remember reading somewhere that the D2 heat shield is meant for multiple reuses without refurbishment. If true, that right there could make it lunar-ready.  

Also remember, this big expensive deal wasn't made yesterday. It's probably been cooking behind the scenes for a while now. Yes, SpaceX has a lot to do before it happens, but they wouldn't've made such a big announcement if they didn't have confidence that their system will actually work. I'm guessing the big influx of cash from that deposit will probably go along way towards furthering that.

  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A few comments.

One, this could partially be to skew transition factions towards commercial crew vs SLS/Orion.

Two, it doesn't have to be "rated" for anything if the crew isn't NASA.

Three, while I think it's as likely to be on schedule as his 2 pm announcement today (lol), it's maybe analogous to Saturn 1B (AS-201) to Apollo 8 in terms of time frame---or less. 1966-1968 for that span. F9 is already a thing. FH is just 3 F9s after all. Dragon 2 has not flown, but should soon. While I doubt they hit the target time wise, it's certainly in the realm of possibility. EM-1 won't fly til 2019, and unless this spooks NASA into risking crew on that, EM-2 no sooner than already scheduled (2021-2023 (likely closer to '23)). Crewed EM-1 would certainly slip at least a year past 2019, anyway, so this is likely to beat NASA even if it slips 2-3 years.

Edited by tater

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, tater said:

Two, it doesn't have to be "rated" for anything if the crew isn't NASA.

At least somebody is thinking around here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, CatastrophicFailure said:

Also remember, this big expensive deal wasn't made yesterday. It's probably been cooking behind the scenes for a while now. Yes, SpaceX has a lot to do before it happens, but they wouldn't've made such a big announcement if they didn't have confidence that their system will actually work.

The same way they were confident that Falcon Heavy would fly in 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017?  The history of SpaceX is a tale of big pronouncements accompanied by a steady and ever increasing slip to the right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/24/2017 at 5:44 AM, KSK said:

Not really. It happens all the time for moving cargo around on Earth. Container ships and palletized freight for example. In both cases you have a standard transporter system and adapt the cargo to fit it. Cheaper and easier than having bespoke transporters for myriad different cargo types.

Or am I missing something?

It feels like necroposting but it's only been a few days. Anyway, I thought I'd add the anecdote that the auto industry absolutely designs around existing packaging.

An extreme example is large off highway mining trucks. The weight of the trucks is limited by the tires and the tires are limited by the size (and weight) that can be shipped on the interstate system. 

Another example from traditional automotive is shipping of various components. Generally the shipping dunnage is returnable and when you make millions of cars and trucks a year, that has to be considered for new designs. It's worth noting that generally a business case is required for changing shipping dunnage or if dunnage can be reused on a new program, it is a benefit since it has usually already been paid off. If you plan to make a cost saving change, you have to show that you won't affect the dunnage, or at least account for the cost of changing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DerekL1963 said:

The same way they were confident that Falcon Heavy would fly in 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017?  The history of SpaceX is a tale of big pronouncements accompanied by a steady and ever increasing slip to the right.

One of the things that backburnered FH was the lack of a customer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.