Mad Rocket Scientist Posted September 28, 2018 Share Posted September 28, 2018 Is that a F1 first stage? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted September 28, 2018 Share Posted September 28, 2018 Falcon 1, yes. Today is the anniversary of the successful launch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultimate Steve Posted September 28, 2018 Share Posted September 28, 2018 10 years today since the first successful launch of Falcon 1! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaceception Posted September 28, 2018 Share Posted September 28, 2018 And look how much has changed. I wonder what the original SpaceX team would think if they could see what their little company will become. Heck, I wonder what they think now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xd the great Posted September 29, 2018 Share Posted September 29, 2018 If spaceX is going full on with the bfr, why are they still trying to recover fairings from the f9? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted September 29, 2018 Share Posted September 29, 2018 1 hour ago, Xd the great said: If spaceX is going full on with the bfr, why are they still trying to recover fairings from the f9? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MinimumSky5 Posted September 29, 2018 Share Posted September 29, 2018 1 hour ago, Xd the great said: If spaceX is going full on with the bfr, why are they still trying to recover fairings from the f9? Because its going to be at least 10 years before BFR reaches a semi-reasonable launch rate, and until then, making the F9 even cheaper than it already is just good business sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted September 29, 2018 Share Posted September 29, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, MinimumSky5 said: Because its going to be at least 10 years before BFR reaches a semi-reasonable launch rate, and until then, making the F9 even cheaper than it already is just good business sense. SpaceX has 5.5 years left to launch 2,213 Starlink satellites to meet their licensing requirements from the FCC. That's several hundred F9 launches.(depending on packing, how many can be delivered in a single plane, etc). If they need 600 launches, and they start next year, they need 10 F9 launches a month. If they can pack in 40, then 5 a month. This is a powerful incentive to get BFR flying ASAP. Edited September 29, 2018 by tater Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rakaydos Posted September 29, 2018 Share Posted September 29, 2018 4 hours ago, Xd the great said: If spaceX is going full on with the bfr, why are they still trying to recover fairings from the f9? Because it's research that can be done for pocket change, relative to everything else they're doing, that can significantly reduce their cost for each launch they are being paid for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sh1pman Posted September 29, 2018 Share Posted September 29, 2018 5 hours ago, tater said: SpaceX has 5.5 years left to launch 2,213 Starlink satellites to meet their licensing requirements from the FCC. Maybe they can renegotiate this license for a couple more years if it turns out to be impossible to launch this many satellites in time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikegarrison Posted September 29, 2018 Share Posted September 29, 2018 (edited) On 9/27/2018 at 4:14 PM, CatastrophicFailure said: I imagine that suit will just quietly go away after a few weeks. Well the suit has gone away, but I'm not sure I would call it "quietly". Musk agreed to pay $20M and resign as Chairman of Tesla. I suppose that means he can focus more on SpaceX. Edited September 29, 2018 by mikegarrison Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ment18 Posted September 29, 2018 Share Posted September 29, 2018 34 minutes ago, mikegarrison said: Well the suit has gone away, but I'm not sure I would call it "quietly". Musk agreed to pay $20M and resign as Chairman of Tesla. I suppose that means he can focus more on SpaceX. nope, hes still ceo, just not board chairman for 3 years Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordFerret Posted September 30, 2018 Share Posted September 30, 2018 @mikegarrison @ment18 The SEC nailed Musk for $20 million AND Tesla for $20 million. Double whammy. He's also to step down for at least 3 years ... it could end up being longer depending on his behavior and the business practices of Tesla itself. https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/29/sec-settles-charges-with-teslas-elon-musk-will-remain-as-ceo.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikegarrison Posted September 30, 2018 Share Posted September 30, 2018 (edited) The stuff that plays well with SpaceX, like slick videos showing a network of point-to-point suborbital flights, doesn't play as well in public companies where investors (or the government) can sue you for making false claims. Edited October 1, 2018 by mikegarrison Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rakaydos Posted October 1, 2018 Share Posted October 1, 2018 6 hours ago, mikegarrison said: The stuff that plays well with SpaceX, like slick videos showing a network of point-to-point suborbital flights, doesn't play as well in public companies where investors (or the government) can sue you for making false claims. I'm pretty sure tampering with stock price by making claims about changes in company status (taking Tesla private) is an entirely different level than PR footage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xd the great Posted October 1, 2018 Share Posted October 1, 2018 3 hours ago, Rakaydos said: I'm pretty sure tampering with stock price by making claims about changes in company status (taking Tesla private) is an entirely different level than PR footage. I wont be surprised if someone told him he got the funding and pulled it back after the tweet. He made a lot of enemies in aerospace industry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricktoberfest Posted October 1, 2018 Share Posted October 1, 2018 (edited) Either way, the way they worded it was kind of like he knew there were more barriers to securing the funding than a simple shareholder vote. Several other things had to go right too and they weren’t a sure thing. That’s why they said they went after him Edited October 2, 2018 by Ricktoberfest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wumpus Posted October 1, 2018 Share Posted October 1, 2018 17 hours ago, mikegarrison said: The stuff that plays well with SpaceX, like slick videos showing a network of point-to-point suborbital flights, doesn't play as well in public companies where investors (or the government) can sue you for making false claims. SpaceX isn't public, Tesla is. Two entirely different legal requirements. On 9/29/2018 at 10:48 AM, tater said: SpaceX has 5.5 years left to launch 2,213 Starlink satellites to meet their licensing requirements from the FCC. That's several hundred F9 launches.(depending on packing, how many can be delivered in a single plane, etc). If they need 600 launches, and they start next year, they need 10 F9 launches a month. If they can pack in 40, then 5 a month. This is a powerful incentive to get BFR flying ASAP. A lot depends on just how confidant they are with Falcon Heavy. Somebody on stackexchange did a quick calculation and claimed that 20 fit on Falcon 9 (fully expendable), while 64 fit on Falcon Heavy (presumably non-expendable, I'm pretty sure Falcon Heavy LEO mass is limited by what the Falcon structure can physically support). But 64 birds are a lot to risk on a rocket that you are less than confident in (they have sold a single flight and don't appear to be pushing any more). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultimate Steve Posted October 1, 2018 Share Posted October 1, 2018 12 minutes ago, wumpus said: SpaceX isn't public, Tesla is. Two entirely different legal requirements. A lot depends on just how confidant they are with Falcon Heavy. Somebody on stackexchange did a quick calculation and claimed that 20 fit on Falcon 9 (fully expendable), while 64 fit on Falcon Heavy (presumably non-expendable, I'm pretty sure Falcon Heavy LEO mass is limited by what the Falcon structure can physically support). But 64 birds are a lot to risk on a rocket that you are less than confident in (they have sold a single flight and don't appear to be pushing any more). I believe they are volume limited, not mass limited. F9 and FH have the same fairing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted October 1, 2018 Share Posted October 1, 2018 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insert_name Posted October 2, 2018 Share Posted October 2, 2018 What's the planned t-0? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xd the great Posted October 2, 2018 Share Posted October 2, 2018 3 hours ago, insert_name said: What's the planned t-0? 2:21 am GMT +0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted October 2, 2018 Share Posted October 2, 2018 Awww, yisss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted October 2, 2018 Share Posted October 2, 2018 And boom... er... bing... boom bad... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatastrophicFailure Posted October 2, 2018 Share Posted October 2, 2018 I take it back. BOOM after all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.