Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10 Next
1
Is there any information on which parts of the falcon are predicted to wear out fastest?

e.g.  Might the cooling channels degrade faster than the turbo-pumps?

any thoughts on hypothetical f9 used part economics could be interesting
2
SpaceX General Section / Re: SpaceX Core Spotting
« Last post by Ronsmytheiii on Today at 07:12 AM »
Houston_here yesterday @Reddit
Quote
Just saw an F9 booster headed west on I-10 in New Mexico today.  I was too slow with the camera but my guess was it was headed to Texas for testing?  Can anyone confirm?

:Edit this occurred around 2PM. 
Also,. I was headed West.  The booster was headed East.


Must have been this booster, taken on 14 August:

https://www.instagram.com/p/BXwZFZ_lDHz/

3
Congrats to all. 

Thanks you to Steven and Yoichi for the coverage.

 8)
4
Some TDRS-M artwork which has not been posted yet, I believe
7
Commercial Space Flight General / Re: Vector Space Systems
« Last post by Bananas_on_Mars on Today at 06:42 AM »
Quote
Highlight video of the historic first launch at @CamdenSpaceport of our Vector-R prototype block 0.002 on August 3rd



Again I'm amazed they think nothing about showing OSHA violations in their promotional videos...
Working from a pallet on a forklift is not a good practice!
9
Advanced Concepts / Re: nuclear generated rocket fuel
« Last post by Eric Hedman on Today at 06:33 AM »

1.They make me do the math, but you can have your bald assertion.

2.So RP-1 is $2.50 a pound which means it is $16.87 a gallon. This is about 4 times the price of kerosene in the USA at retail.

3.And I wouldn't be surprised if you could make synthetic fuel and sell it now at that half price using coal and water.


1.  It is intuitively obvious that it would be more expensive.  There is an process that makes cheap propellant.  Building a plant that use nuclear power is to going add cost to the product.  I would be willing to bet that it would be more than 10 times.

2.  The cost compared to the domestic product is meaningless.  It has no bearing on the matter.

3. Really?. Synthetic is many more times the cost.   Kerosene is cheap

1. I said use existing powerplants.

2. I gave the cost of retail kerosene as a worst case. I couldn't easily find a whoilesale cost of kerosene.  The retail cost of kerosene is certainly higher than the wholesale cost.

3. while you qouted an outrageous price for a specific synthetic fuel, the actual cost of creating synthetic fuel is about 30% more than digging it up.  Of course, that was a few years back when oil was much more expensive. But the price of coal has fallen also. This is what a synthetic fuels engineer told me.
Ignoring economics for the moment, synthetic fuel production usually requires temperatures of 750 to 850 degrees C.  The peak temperatures of pressurized water in a nuclear reactor is around 580 degrees C.  It's not hot enough by a long shot even if you could tap into the water coming right out of the core.  The temperature drops at every step after that.

The next issue is that regulators would never allow large volumes of combustible liquids anywhere near a nuclear reactor even if they did run hot enough.  This idea doesn't fly for a number of reasons.
10
 Congrats to Japan, JAXA and all concerned, and thanks to Steven for coverage.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10 Next