sh1pman

I think that the only times when BFS is going to be launched with max payload mass, will be tanker launches, to refuel other ships somewhere. And tankers will definitely need vac Raptors. 150t vs 100t difference means that you need 33% fewer launches to fully refuel a ship. Tankers don’t need aft cargo anyway.

So, was the payload to LEO decreased from 150 to 100 because of no vac Raptors? Or is it the added dry mass from the fins?

Rare drawing of a BFS mounted on the side of the booster. (or it’s something completely different)

And I think, with these fancy new fins it will be able to glide pretty well before landing.

Squad needs to hunt the guy who makes SpaceX renders to do part revamps.

Or they could be spikes that pierce the ground. How's that for stability.

Or blast protection.

What if they decided to use some kind of expandable engine skirt, like DeltaIV second stage RL-10? That way they can make any of these 7 Raptor engines vacuum- or sea level-optimized, depending on the situation.

Yeah, it's funny sometimes. It often mistranslates missiles and rockets.

Big smart booster.

Funny, in my KSP replica of BFR I switched from 2 fins to 3, because it was a bloody nightmare to keep it stable during reentry otherwise.

It's on their official twitter though. Previously their artist renderings were accurate.

Knew you would Well, there it is, the market for 7 billion payloads. Edit: is that... thing... a BFS? On the picture?

Finally, some good news for a change. There's an interview with him about this future reusable rocket.

And Russia is the home of IRL KSP.

It really looks like a "sounds good, doesn't work" case. Like Concorde. It has to be ridiculously safe (for a rocket) to be viable. No more than 1 in 1000 flights should end in a RUD and LOCV for the economics to work. Preferably much less than that. It also has to fly ridiculously often (for a rocket) to pay for itself in a reasonable time.

Suborbital launch should cost about the same as orbital for BFR. And if orbital is 7 million, then I don't see how you can bring it down to half a million for a suborbital one. Safety and economics are huge unknowns indeed.

Don't believe it at all. The math doesn't work out.

I got it that its humans. But flying them where? Mars? Some kind of Bigelow-style space hotel? That's hardly a market for 7 billion people, more like a couple hundred richest people at most.

This. "This is fake news. Sad!"

7 billion potential payloads? What are they up to?

Prestigious or not, noone is going to hire a worker who doesn't know how to drill to do drilling.

“Anonymous sources” again. Some newspaper wrote something stupid, and EVERYONE else reported on it as if it was a fact. There was no official statement, and Roscosmos specifically asked not to trust these “sources”.