Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10 Next
1
DIV H will not "starved" for payloads.  It had the prime user booked on it until 2025
2
...               

SpaceX can't afford ITS development on its own.  Until they find another partner willing to spend tens of billions of dollars, I wouldn't hold your breath.

...

Not everyone requires tens of billions of dollars to build a launch vehicle.  Recall the study that showed it would have taken $4B to build F9 using NASA's approach, but it actually took $390k (1/10th the estimate)?  Tens of billions becomes a few billion... and the builders have so much relevant experience and applicable technology now.  $1-2B seems reasonable; tens of billions sounds like wishful thinking (a.k.a., denial).
Remember that ITS is a much more complex system than F9. It's not even just a launch vehicle. Musk estimated that developing reusability for Falcon 9 cost them about $1b. SX has gotten over $3b in total from the commercial crew program. ITS needs a crew vehicle an order of magnitude larger than Dragon 2 and a reusable launch vehicle an order of magnitude larger than F9.
3
SpaceX Mars / Re: 9m ITS Development Updates and Discussion Thread
« Last post by guckyfan on Today at 10:42 PM »
The ET was a one time only and not something that would  be regular

Very true. ITS  is not a fragile Shuttle ET. It is a rugged design for many reuses. They can drive it fast and during the night with minimal interrruption of traffic.
4
SpaceX Mars / Re: 9m ITS Development Updates and Discussion Thread
« Last post by watermod on Today at 10:40 PM »
Since we know the use of existing factory and launch pad, how will SpaceX transport it between the two? Road, train or water still seem very difficult for 9m diameter booster.
Airlift it similar to Energia/Buran booster?

Airlift is likely out because the SpaceX factory is next to a general aviation airport whose only runway is just 4,956 ft in length, which is about half the length needed for an Antonov An-225 Mriya.

I think instead we can look to the experience of the Shuttle Endeavour and it's External Tank (ET), where both of those traveled 16 miles inland on surface streets from either the Los Angeles International Airport (Shuttle) or the Marina del Rey harbor (the ET) to the California Science Center.

SpaceX may have already surveyed possible routes to the LAX airport or the harbor in order to ensure that if they built a 9m diameter ITS at their Hawthorne facility that it wouldn't end up as a permanent exhibit there...  :o
8) This calls for Elon's boring machine to make an underground path to the port!   8)
5
SpaceX General Section / Re: SpaceX Falcon Heavy Discussion (Thread 6)
« Last post by Jim on Today at 10:40 PM »
...               

SpaceX can't afford ITS development on its own.  Until they find another partner willing to spend tens of billions of dollars, I wouldn't hold your breath.

...

Not everyone requires tens of billions of dollars to build a launch vehicle.  Recall the study that showed it would have taken $4B to build F9 using NASA's approach, but it actually took $390k (1/10th the estimate)?  Tens of billions becomes a few billion... and the builders have so much relevant experience and applicable technology now.  $1-2B seems reasonable; tens of billions sounds like wishful thinking (a.k.a., denial).

The last sentence is wishful thinking and willful suspension of disbelieve.  F9 development costs are much more because development hasn't finished.  Also, "$1-2B seems reasonable" is seriously delusional.
6
I am excited that the launch has been delayed. I now have the opportunity to possibly fly to Florida and see it.

This will be a 48 hour turn around in the event of a scrub correct? I want to make sure I have enough days in the event of a short delay.
Scrub delays are variable but usually 24 hours.
Yes, but the last Dragon mission was a 48 hour because of the late load needing to be replaced. I was wondering if anyone had any info for this one, but I guess we will just have to wait and see. Hopefully it's 24.  :P

Wrong answer. Hopefully its NO SCRUBS.
7
Polls Section / Re: POLL: Mini-ITS Diameter
« Last post by QuantumG on Today at 10:39 PM »
hehe... and the whole "existing facilities" part sounds Hawthorney... could be reading too much into it.
8
I get a maximum of 21 engines as well, or about 14.4mlbf.  I suspect Raptor won't be quite as powerful in its initial implementation, so ITS-21 is in the ballpark of 39A capability.  It's hard to imagine using sub scale raptor on the booster, but it might be useful on the spaceship.

Now that I think about it, if SpaceX starts with spaceship suborbital tests, using sub scale raptor might speed things up a bit.  Musk has already talked about increasing the expansion ratio to 150 on the sub scale engine, perfect for doing suborbital tests with a 9m BFS...

Using sub scale Raptors on the booster might speed things up also and could make the 9 meter design to the original 42 engines again?
42 sub scale engines is maybe better than 21 full scale engines, so that the future full scale ITS is "just" a dimensional upgrade.
Gimballing center 7 engines vs outer double ring engines remains the same.
9
SpaceX Mars / Re: 9m ITS Development Updates and Discussion Thread
« Last post by Jim on Today at 10:34 PM »
The ET was a one time only and not something that would  be regular
10
Since we know the use of existing factory and launch pad, how will SpaceX transport it between the two? Road, train or water still seem very difficult for 9m diameter booster.
Airlift it similar to Energia/Buran booster?

Airlift is likely out because the SpaceX factory is next to a general aviation airport whose only runway is just 4,956 ft in length, which is about half the length needed for an Antonov An-225 Mriya.

I think instead we can look to the experience of the Shuttle Endeavour and it's External Tank (ET), where both of those traveled 16 miles inland on surface streets from either the Los Angeles International Airport (Shuttle) or the Marina del Rey harbor (the ET) to the California Science Center.

SpaceX may have already surveyed possible routes to the LAX airport or the harbor in order to ensure that if they built a 9m diameter ITS at their Hawthorne facility that it wouldn't end up as a permanent exhibit there...  :o
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10 Next