Jump to content

SpaceX Discussion Thread


Skylon

Recommended Posts

This is interesting.

 

His short take is that they make lots of decisions, and change what they are doing with new data. 51% consensus? Start making the thing. Better idea comes along, or substantial changes get that 51% vote? Change. Move forward, test things, learn, change design, test, etc. Cool to hear his take. He talks about BO, too.

Just now, Chemp said:

Is that an old picture? The ship still has "Mr Steven" on the bow.

It's clearly CA, so yeah (FL is flat, that has hills).

LOL, my answer somehow predated your question... KSP forum time machine!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

Looks like the only way to make a small reusable rocket pay for itself is to replace it with a big reusable rocket.

Size matters.

Spoiler

EnergeticBlindBoaconstrictor-size_restri

Won’t be seeing any expendable Superheavies... just sayin... -_-

20 minutes ago, Nightside said:

What is the cost of F9x vs FHR?

Last I heard F9x is down to $50M, Heavy around $150M, but no idea if that’s expendable... or how much it actually costs SpaceX to send up.

But, I suppose on the other hand, they are a bit short on the all-important  FH cores right now... :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, tater said:

LOL, my answer somehow predated your question... 

That’s hardcore XD

3 hours ago, CatastrophicFailure said:

I thought for sure Heavy would put an end to that. 

I assume they will use the shagged out stages that have already been reused a lot. I don’t keep track of them but might as well let them die doing what they love rather than melting them down for scrap.

(hmm, I think SpaceX are the first rockets I’ve anthropomorphised) >_<

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

An FH with all three cores RTLSing could probably do the work of an expendable F9, but we have to think about launch costs. In the end, an F9 is always cheaper to fly than an FH, regardless of whether you’re going to recover the boosters or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, RealKerbal3x said:

An FH with all three cores RTLSing could probably do the work of an expendable F9, but we have to think about launch costs. In the end, an F9 is always cheaper to fly than an FH, regardless of whether you’re going to recover the boosters or not.

They can not do RTLS with core too because no pad also don't think RTLS with core works so well. 
They might be a bit low on cores as they had little luck recover them  while many aging first stages. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Dale Christopher said:

(hmm, I think SpaceX are the first rockets I’ve anthropomorphised) >_<

They hate it when you do that...

:)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...