tater Posted February 10, 2018 Share Posted February 10, 2018 (edited) 32 minutes ago, ZooNamedGames said: Issue is majority of the appeal of his plans have fallen short. A reusable means for heavy lift to L/MEO has been abandoned with the decaying support for Falcon Heavy. What decaying support? He has said it will fly several times per year. Upper stage reusability is not worth retrofitting to F9. Quote Dragon V2 is no longer propulsive, That was partially funding (they got half what Boeing got, after all). It's partially being smart. Quote BFR had to be shrunk, It was changed, intelligently. You're treating this the way people often treat politicians. They get pounded for "flip flopping." Changing your mind because of data is what people are supposed to do. ITS was too big. It needed a bespoke facility. It had only one purpose. Dev would therefor be so expensive, it would languish. The changed design reflects what they learned in the interim, and makes far more sense. It is a follow-on to F9/FH. It takes the dev for upper stage reuse, and does it clean slate, instead of desperately trying to retrofit it on a 3.7m rocket. It's vastly more sensible, and in fact I think this demonstrates the opposite of what you are saying. The more free they are to follow what works, the more likely it is to happen. Quote Falcon Heavy fuel crossfeed was abandoned, Good. Not needed. FH already throws more than needed. Stuff that fits on a skinny rocket is not mass limited, only propellant is. Most all customers are GEO sats. They can be as massive as will fit under the fairing, and still get to GEO full of propellant. Quote manned missions aboard the Falcon Heavy was also abandoned. He said it was still possible, actually. Once it flies 7 times, then it is every bit as man-rated as F9. What's the point of that, exactly? Humans to the Van Allen belts? D2 is not a place to spend a long time. It has no SM, can't reach LLO, etc. No point. Quote I'm sorry but it's this questionable track record that has been apprehensive to support him. His track record is great, IMO. I much prefer organizations that are technically agile, and not wed to specific designs out of some sort of religious fervor. Quote Meanwhile the SLS will be on a launchpad by the same date. It will, as it will continue to get funding until it is finally embarrassed by another vehicle's capabilities that flies at a fraction of the price. 8 minutes ago, Canopus said: Em-1 is set for Late 2019 or early 2020. Thats just 5 years. BFR won‘t even fly unmanned in that time. EM-1 is likely June 2020, I posted something up thread about that I'm sure. BFS might be making Grasshopper flights in that timeframe. That's basically a form factor with engine(s), nothing close to flight article for space, but very useful for testing basic design ideas. Edited February 10, 2018 by tater Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZooNamedGames Posted February 10, 2018 Share Posted February 10, 2018 2 minutes ago, tater said: What decaying support? He has said it will fly several times per year. Upper stage reusability is not worth retrofitting to F9. That was partially funding (they got half what Boeing got, after all). It's partially being smart. It was changed, intelligently. You're treating this the way people often treat politicians. They get pounded for "flip flopping." Changing your mind because of data is what people are supposed to do. ITS was too big. It needed a bespoke facility. It had only one purpose. Dev would therefor be so expensive, it would languish. The changed design reflects what they learned in the interim, and makes far more sense. It is a follow-on to F9/FH. It takes the dev for upper stage reuse, and does it clean slate, instead of desperately trying to retrofit it on a 3.7m rocket. It's vastly more sensible, and in fact I think this demonstrates the opposite of what you are saying. The more free they are to follow what works, the more likely it is to happen. Good. Not needed. FH already throws more than needed. Stuff that fits on a skinny rocket is not mass limited, only propellant is. Most all customers are GEO sats. They can be as massive as will fit under the fairing, and still get to GEO full of propellant. He said it was still possible, actually. Once it flies 7 times, then it is every bit as man-rated as F9. What's the point of that, exactly? Humans to the Van Allen belts? D2 is not a place to spend a long time. It has no SM, can't reach LLO, etc. No point. His track record is great, IMO. I much prefer organizations that are technically agile, and not wed to specific designs out of some sort of religious fervor. It will, as it will continue to get funding until it is finally embarrassed by another vehicle's capabilities that flies at a fraction of the price. And you can continue to believe that but meanwhile I will await for actual developments past "this is a good idea" as that exactly ideology is what put us so far behind in the 90s and 2000s as we kept putting new and good ideas on the table for money and developments to shift. Until I see it- I just can't support it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted February 10, 2018 Share Posted February 10, 2018 Just now, ZooNamedGames said: And you can continue to believe that but meanwhile I will await for actual developments past "this is a good idea" as that exactly ideology is what put us so far behind in the 90s and 2000s as we kept putting new and good ideas on the table for money and developments to shift. Until I see it- I just can't support it. Meanwhile, SLS has been in dev for 13 years, and it will be 20 by the time people fly in it. All because they are incapable of being agile. They started running, by borrowing Constellation stuff, right? LOL. SpaceX has fired Raptor now hundreds of times, apparently. Their engineering dev team is moving fully to BFR/S as soon as they are done with block 5 finalization (already pretty much done, I think, it flies soon). They are pushing for fairing recovery, not just because they cost money, but for operational issues related to BFS construction. Fairings are their composite fabrication right now. Freeing those people allows them to make BFS grasshopper for testing. They also have an incentive to move relatively quickly, as Bezos is also all-in for reusability, and NG will be flying before EM-2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAL59 Posted February 10, 2018 Share Posted February 10, 2018 14 minutes ago, Canopus said: hats just 5 years. BFR won‘t even fly unmanned in that time. Remember, the first unmanned BFR Mars missions launch in 2022. Thats only 4 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZooNamedGames Posted February 10, 2018 Share Posted February 10, 2018 1 minute ago, tater said: Meanwhile, SLS has been in dev for 13 years, and it will be 20 by the time people fly in it. All because they are incapable of being agile. They started running, by borrowing Constellation stuff, right? LOL. SpaceX has fired Raptor now hundreds of times, apparently. Their engineering dev team is moving fully to BFR/S as soon as they are done with block 5 finalization (already pretty much done, I think, it flies soon). They are pushing for fairing recovery, not just because they cost money, but for operational issues related to BFS construction. Fairings are their composite fabrication right now. Freeing those people allows them to make BFS grasshopper for testing. They also have an incentive to move relatively quickly, as Bezos is also all-in for reusability, and NG will be flying before EM-2. I still can't support what I can't see. It's just another Sea Dragon to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAL59 Posted February 10, 2018 Share Posted February 10, 2018 Just now, ZooNamedGames said: I still can't support what I can't see. It's just another Sea Dragon to me. That rhymes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZooNamedGames Posted February 10, 2018 Share Posted February 10, 2018 1 minute ago, DAL59 said: That rhymes. Lol, totally unintended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted February 10, 2018 Share Posted February 10, 2018 4 minutes ago, DAL59 said: Remember, the first unmanned BFR Mars missions launch in 2022. Thats only 4 years. Yeah, that's not happening. 5 minutes ago, ZooNamedGames said: I still can't support what I can't see. It's just another Sea Dragon to me. What part of Sea Dragon was actually built and tested? The huge engine? Nope. Not at all. Landing the stages, and actually refurbishing them? Nope, just considered. So literally none of it was ever even tested, vs the engine existing, and propulsive landing actually being well established. Oh, and reuse. BFR is substantially more real than Sea Dragon ever was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZooNamedGames Posted February 10, 2018 Share Posted February 10, 2018 9 minutes ago, tater said: Yeah, that's not happening. What part of Sea Dragon was actually built and tested? The huge engine? Nope. Not at all. Landing the stages, and actually refurbishing them? Nope, just considered. So literally none of it was ever even tested, vs the engine existing, and propulsive landing actually being well established. Oh, and reuse. BFR is substantially more real than Sea Dragon ever was. Engine test alone does not qualify in my mind. Propulsive landing has been proven for a 3.7m rocket, not a 9m one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted February 10, 2018 Share Posted February 10, 2018 The physics is the same (for the booster, anyway). BFR (booster) is just F9, writ large. It’s a solved problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Phil Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 Yeah. The hard part is the upperstage/ship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAL59 Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 1 minute ago, Bill Phil said: Yeah. The hard part is the upperstage/ship. Which is currently being built. Its not like the FH where they postponed construction to do the f9 instead- they are building it right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Phil Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 1 minute ago, DAL59 said: Which is currently being built. Its not like the FH where they postponed construction to do the f9 instead- they are building it right now. I don't know about the upper stage. It's more complex and will probably need a lot more development than the booster. The booster is essentially a scaled up F9 first stage, albeit with new propellants and engines. But it's much less complex than the upper stage. I can see it being under construction very soon for early tests (Grasshopper tests, basically), and the upper stage still being designed and engineered at the moment, but with test articles rolling out sometime, perhaps before the next decade. It's being built, but it's two vehicles, essentially, that make up the system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sh1pman Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 Looks like Musketeers have hijacked the thread! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAL59 Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 54 minutes ago, Bill Phil said: I don't know about the upper stage. It's more complex and will probably need a lot more development than the booster. The booster is essentially a scaled up F9 first stage, albeit with new propellants and engines. But it's much less complex than the upper stage. I can see it being under construction very soon for early tests (Grasshopper tests, basically), and the upper stage still being designed and engineered at the moment, but with test articles rolling out sometime, perhaps before the next decade. It's being built, but it's two vehicles, essentially, that make up the system. They are doing grasshopper tests with the upper stage next year. They are building the lower stage after. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Phil Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 (edited) 20 minutes ago, DAL59 said: They are doing grasshopper tests with the upper stage next year. They are building the lower stage after. Is there anything to corroborate that? I can see why they might build the upper stage first (although I would build the first stage since it's shape is relatively simple). Anyhow... at this point SLS should've been flying... I think it would be prudent to drop it and focus on actual space probes. Not only could that help stimulate the launch market (billions of dollars per year on more space probes, which means more payloads) but it will also lead to more science in the end. I'd love another Saturn Orbiter, perhaps a more advanced Titan probe as well (airship? submarine?). I wonder if FH can loft EC to a similar trajectory as SLS... Edited February 11, 2018 by Bill Phil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAL59 Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 1 minute ago, Bill Phil said: Is there anything to corroborate that? I can see why they might build the upper stage first (although I would build the first stage since it's shape is relatively simple). They bought a site for bfr upper stage hop testing, and he said it on reddit. https://www.teslarati.com/spacex-mars-rocket-test-texas-late-2018/ Quote Will be starting with a full-scale Ship doing short hops of a few hundred kilometers altitude and lateral distance. Those are fairly easy on the vehicle, as no heat shield is needed, we can have a large amount of reserve propellant and don't need the high area ratio, deep space Raptor engines. Next step will be doing orbital velocity Ship flights, which will need all of the above. Worth noting that BFS is capable of reaching orbit by itself with low payload, but having the BF Booster increases payload by more than an order of magnitude. Earth is the wrong planet for single stage to orbit. No problemo on Mars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 Musk said at the FH presser that they were building the ship first, because it was the hard part. Regarding SLS (DSG, really)I think that FH is actually a short term plus for its proponents, since it provides a cost effective way to enable/supply DSG. So it’s not entirely off topic for DSG given the noise about something like COTS for DSG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YNM Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 8 hours ago, DAL59 said: Or inflatable. You can't have inflatable machinery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 An inflatable hab is certainly possible, even for DSG. That's at least on-topic for SLS/Orion/DSG, lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibb31 Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 13 hours ago, DAL59 said: Remember, the first unmanned BFR Mars missions launch in 2022. Thats only 4 years. If you believe that, I have a bridge to sell you. Do you know how much time it takes to design a new car or a new aircraft ? 10 hours ago, DAL59 said: Which is currently being built. Its not like the FH where they postponed construction to do the f9 instead- they are building it right now. Source please ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NSEP Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 BFR is OP, Elon pls nerf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotius Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 2 hours ago, Nibb31 said: Do you know how much time it takes to design a new car or a new aircraft ? It took SpaceX roughly 16 years to go from there: To here: How much time to go further? No idea. But apparently they keep moving in this direction Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_Augustus_ Posted February 11, 2018 Author Share Posted February 11, 2018 13 hours ago, Bill Phil said: I wonder if FH can loft EC to a similar trajectory as SLS... SLS actually still wins in this category since it has more payload capacity and a cryogenic upper stage, but FH would be a lot better than flying it on an Atlas V. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 (edited) 4 hours ago, Nibb31 said: Source please ? Raptor has been test fired hundreds of times at this point. Musk said in a press conf under a week ago that the engineering dev team is transitioning to BFR exclusively as block 5 comes online---which he said was pretty much done. They've... I want to say "bent metal," but in this case I guess "wrapped fiber" on a composite tank, which they destructively tested. Their stated plan is to start fabricating a grasshopper version for testing. So it's not entirely implausible that certain elements are in fact under construction for testing, though aside from Raptor, that's pretty speculative. All that said, as I posted above, 2022 to Mars... ain't happening, lol. Regarding Europa Clipper... not likely to fly on FH (read: not going to happen), unless FH flies a lot and demonstrates the sort of reliability they'd want. People around here bash ULA, but when you absolutely, positively want it to get to space safely... ULA is where you go. Edited February 11, 2018 by tater Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts