Author Topic: IAC 2017 -- BFR v0.2 - DISCUSSION THREAD 2 (Post Speech)  (Read 108047 times)

Offline Chris Bergin

Second discussion thread for Elon's second BFR overview at the IAC.

Open discussion, but everyone has to be civil and posts need to be useful. No "You're concern trolling". No "Wowzers. LOLZ. Cool" <---true, but that doesn't add to anything. Most of you know we're going for quality over quantity here, best we can. Bad posts will be removed. Don't quote bad posts (or your post will be removed too, obviously). Report to mod if you see a bad post (against the above rules)

New Articles (more to follow) :

 [September 29, 2017] The Moon, Mars, & around the Earth - Musk updates BFR architecture, plan

 [October 4, 2017] Sputnik at 60: Ambition ties first satellite to SpaceX’s BFR, Mars plans

 Previous major discussion thread:
  IAC 2017 -- ITS (BFR) v0.2 Pre and During Speech

 Live Thread from the event:
  IAC 2017 --Elon Speech

Full video:



Additional NSF Articles Of High Relevance:

 [March. 7, 2014] SpaceX advances drive for Mars rocket via Raptor power
 [Aug. 29, 2014] Battle of the Heavyweight Rockets – SLS could face Exploration Class rival
 [Sept. 27, 2016]SpaceX reveals ITS Mars game changer via colonization plan
 [Jul. 24, 2017] Includes Subscale BFR on 39A

 Major NSF L2 Resources:

 L2 Level: Evaluations And Renderings - Thread 2 (Includes link to Thread 1)
 ITS Cargo Modules AIAA - by the Author
 Rocket and Spacecraft Traj Sim
 The Evolution of the Interplanetary Transport System Overview
 SpaceX McGregor, includes Raptor Testing and photos
 Master All SpaceX Pads Updates, Photos and Status, including for BFR


NSF Public Threads:
 
   Discussion before and during the 2017 presentation:

      IAC 2017 -- ITS v0.2
      9m ITS Development Updates and Discussion Thread

   
   Discussion after the 2016 presentation:
 
      ITS Propulsion – The evolution of the SpaceX Raptor engine
      ITS Development Updates and Discussion Thread


Elon's presentation at IAC 2016:



SpaceX: ITS Video from 2016:



Offline Lampyridae

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1645
  • Liked: 64
  • Likes Given: 121
Re: IAC 2017 -- BFR v0.2 - DISCUSSION THREAD 2 (Post Speech)
« Reply #1 on: 09/29/2017 01:58 PM »
The biggie for me is the lunar base. Looks to me like a real near-term possibility. One wonders how big both of these things will grow... Mars is a more attractive long-term destination, whilst the Moon is less colony and more of a new city not too far from the comforts of home.

I wonder how set in stone the ITS is now? Would he go for a further size reduction?
SKYLON... The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen's preferred surface-to-orbit conveyance.

I was wondering about the updated design of the solar panels. The surface seems substantially smaller than last year, when Elon stated the goal was 200kW of power. The ship is still intended for 100 passenger and not that drastic of a downscale: will the smaller panels rendered be sufficient? Also they haven't shown the deployment process, which is a step back from last year, and it's not obvious what their location is when inside the ship. I know their design probably still is in its early phase, but is there anyone willing to share their thought on them?

Failure is not only an option, it's the only way to learn.
"Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the custody of fire" - Gustav Mahler

Online jpo234

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 633
  • Liked: 424
  • Likes Given: 62
Re: IAC 2017 -- BFR v0.2 - DISCUSSION THREAD 2 (Post Speech)
« Reply #3 on: 09/29/2017 02:05 PM »
I'm curious: ESA chief Woerner is the one who has banged the drum for the Moon village for some time now. Would ESA be willing to rely on a SpaceX vessel to make this happen?
You want to be inspired by things. You want to wake up in the morning and think the future is going to be great. That's what being a spacefaring civilization is all about. It's about believing in the future and believing the future will be better than the past. And I can't think of anything more exciting than being out there among the stars.

Offline Martin FL

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2225
  • Liked: 50
  • Likes Given: 135
Re: IAC 2017 -- BFR v0.2 - DISCUSSION THREAD 2 (Post Speech)
« Reply #4 on: 09/29/2017 02:06 PM »
Elon mentioned buidling a stock pile of Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavys for customers before buulding nothing but BFR. Where could he store all of these stages?

Online jpo234

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 633
  • Liked: 424
  • Likes Given: 62
Re: IAC 2017 -- BFR v0.2 - DISCUSSION THREAD 2 (Post Speech)
« Reply #5 on: 09/29/2017 02:07 PM »
I know their design probably still is in its early phase

Is it? They want to start building this thing in about 6 months...
Surely the design must be fairly advanced by now?
You want to be inspired by things. You want to wake up in the morning and think the future is going to be great. That's what being a spacefaring civilization is all about. It's about believing in the future and believing the future will be better than the past. And I can't think of anything more exciting than being out there among the stars.

I know their design probably still is in its early phase

Is it? They want to start building this thing in about 6 months...
Surely the design must be fairly advanced by now?
Maybe they chose to share less accurate renders, I don't know. Looking at them again they seem to be rather inconsistent, even compared to last year: you can only see the protrusions to accomodate the landing legs in the moon/mars surface renders. Last year the depiction of the legs was consistent, and you could at least guess where the solar panels would go when stored.
« Last Edit: 09/29/2017 02:23 PM by AbuSimbel »
Failure is not only an option, it's the only way to learn.
"Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the custody of fire" - Gustav Mahler

Offline Brovane

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1032
  • United States
  • Liked: 479
  • Likes Given: 991
Re: IAC 2017 -- BFR v0.2 - DISCUSSION THREAD 2 (Post Speech)
« Reply #7 on: 09/29/2017 02:26 PM »
So any thoughts that the 9m Diameter and length of the BFR stages were set either by what the Hawthorne factory floor can handle or what the road network can handle for moving stages to the port of LA? 
"Look at that! If anybody ever said, "you'll be sitting in a spacecraft naked with a 134-pound backpack on your knees charging it", I'd have said "Aw, get serious". - John Young - Apollo-16

Offline DreamyPickle

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 148
  • Home
  • Liked: 62
  • Likes Given: 15
Re: IAC 2017 -- BFR v0.2 - DISCUSSION THREAD 2 (Post Speech)
« Reply #8 on: 09/29/2017 02:27 PM »
The biggie for me is the lunar base. Looks to me like a real near-term possibility.

Only if somebody else builds it. SpaceX claims the BFS can refuel in Earth orbit and then go to the moon and back without ISRU. It's pretty clear that they are excluding lunar ISRU because they don't want to invest in it. This is different from Mars where the second mission is explicitly planning to build the ISRU plant.

But offering 150 tons to the lunar surface is still amazing. And a Crewed BFS capable of Mars missions can automatically to provide life support on the lunar surface for at least half an year.

Offline titusou

  • Member
  • Posts: 48
  • Taiwan
  • Liked: 63
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: IAC 2017 -- BFR v0.2 - DISCUSSION THREAD 2 (Post Speech)
« Reply #9 on: 09/29/2017 02:34 PM »
Moving my scale image over as I think it help discussion on difference between 2016/2017.

Titus

Offline Garrett

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1106
  • France
  • Liked: 104
  • Likes Given: 74
Re: IAC 2017 -- BFR v0.2 - DISCUSSION THREAD 2 (Post Speech)
« Reply #10 on: 09/29/2017 02:37 PM »
What I don't get is why they haven't yet proposed using the BFR itself as an LEO Space Station (e.g. as a successor to the ISS). It will be capable of spending long durations in space, so it seems perfectly suited for this.

For example, one could have two BFR's set up for orbital space station activites. They would then alternate going up and down to orbit (say, every 6 months or so). When a ship is on the ground, it could be fitted out with the next set of experiments. Then, it would launch with a full crew and cargo for the 6 months, so no need for visiting vehicles during that time (so less microgravity perturbations). Also, no need for EVA's for repairs. After the 6 months, it would return and the second vehicle would take its place, and so on. So, basically like the Shuttle Orbiter/Spacelab, with much more volume, more crew (12-ish say) and the capability to stay on orbit for long periods of time.

Obviously, experiments requiring longer durations would need another orbiting platform, but there's plenty of room in LEO!
- "Nothing shocks me. I'm a scientist." - Indiana Jones

Offline Garrett

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1106
  • France
  • Liked: 104
  • Likes Given: 74
Re: IAC 2017 -- BFR v0.2 - DISCUSSION THREAD 2 (Post Speech)
« Reply #11 on: 09/29/2017 02:39 PM »
So any thoughts that the 9m Diameter and length of the BFR stages were set either by what the Hawthorne factory floor can handle or what the road network can handle for moving stages to the port of LA? 
Factory. Elon's Tweet from a while back: "A 9m diameter vehicle fits in our existing factories .."
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/888813713800785923
- "Nothing shocks me. I'm a scientist." - Indiana Jones

Online jpo234

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 633
  • Liked: 424
  • Likes Given: 62
Re: IAC 2017 -- BFR v0.2 - DISCUSSION THREAD 2 (Post Speech)
« Reply #12 on: 09/29/2017 02:43 PM »
Moving my scale image over as I think it help discussion on difference between 2016/2017.

Titus

Can you add SLS and New Glenn?
You want to be inspired by things. You want to wake up in the morning and think the future is going to be great. That's what being a spacefaring civilization is all about. It's about believing in the future and believing the future will be better than the past. And I can't think of anything more exciting than being out there among the stars.

Offline ZachF

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 363
  • NH, USA, Earth
  • Liked: 229
  • Likes Given: 58
Re: IAC 2017 -- BFR v0.2 - DISCUSSION THREAD 2 (Post Speech)
« Reply #13 on: 09/29/2017 02:44 PM »
Wing diameter is approx 13.9m using pixel measure.

Offline UltraViolet9

  • Member
  • Posts: 51
  • Undisclosed
  • Liked: 53
  • Likes Given: 15
Re: IAC 2017 -- BFR v0.2 - DISCUSSION THREAD 2 (Post Speech)
« Reply #14 on: 09/29/2017 02:47 PM »
What I don't get is why they haven't yet proposed using the BFR itself as an LEO Space Station (e.g. as a successor to the ISS). It will be capable of spending long durations in space, so it seems perfectly suited for this.

DragonLab didn't go anywhere and Bigelow has not taken off.  So the demand is probably not there absent a major space agency saying they want to outfit an ITS and rent it for a half-year.  Possible, but I think that's unlikely because the major space agencies that could afford to do so would want to develop or maintain native experience in designing/developing/building/operating large spacecraft.

Offline MikeAtkinson

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1684
  • Bracknell, England
  • Liked: 455
  • Likes Given: 53
Re: IAC 2017 -- BFR v0.2 - DISCUSSION THREAD 2 (Post Speech)
« Reply #15 on: 09/29/2017 02:47 PM »
What I don't get is why they haven't yet proposed using the BFR itself as an LEO Space Station (e.g. as a successor to the ISS). It will be capable of spending long durations in space, so it seems perfectly suited for this.

For example, one could have two BFR's set up for orbital space station activites. They would then alternate going up and down to orbit (say, every 6 months or so). When a ship is on the ground, it could be fitted out with the next set of experiments. Then, it would launch with a full crew and cargo for the 6 months, so no need for visiting vehicles during that time (so less microgravity perturbations). Also, no need for EVA's for repairs. After the 6 months, it would return and the second vehicle would take its place, and so on. So, basically like the Shuttle Orbiter/Spacelab, with much more volume, more crew (12-ish say) and the capability to stay on orbit for long periods of time.

Obviously, experiments requiring longer durations would need another orbiting platform, but there's plenty of room in LEO!

I think this is a deliberate policy. After last years presentation, Elon said that if you were going to Mars you might as well visit the moon. This year the moon took center stage. Also this year Elon introduced point-to-point, next year I would not be surprised if he says that if you can do point to point you can do orbital tourism. Then the year after that says if you can do orbital tourism then why not have space stations based on BFR.

He thinks that you should show a bit of leg, but not everything.

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4969
  • Liked: 2965
  • Likes Given: 4190
Re: IAC 2017 -- BFR v0.2 - DISCUSSION THREAD 2 (Post Speech)
« Reply #16 on: 09/29/2017 02:48 PM »
The biggie for me is the lunar base. Looks to me like a real near-term possibility.

Only if somebody else builds it. SpaceX claims the BFS can refuel in Earth orbit and then go to the moon and back without ISRU. It's pretty clear that they are excluding lunar ISRU because they don't want to invest in it. This is different from Mars where the second mission is explicitly planning to build the ISRU plant.

But offering 150 tons to the lunar surface is still amazing. And a Crewed BFS capable of Mars missions can automatically to provide life support on the lunar surface for at least half an year.

150t is approximately one Lunar Village.  One flight!
ESA will jump at the opportunity to have affordable transportation, as will NASA, etc.

I'm curious: ESA chief Woerner is the one who has banged the drum for the Moon village for some time now.
Would ESA be willing to rely on a SpaceX vessel to make this happen?

...exactly.

« Last Edit: 09/29/2017 02:50 PM by AncientU »
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Online speedevil

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 460
  • Fife
  • Liked: 209
  • Likes Given: 192
Re: IAC 2017 -- BFR v0.2 - DISCUSSION THREAD 2 (Post Speech)
« Reply #17 on: 09/29/2017 02:50 PM »
Being uncritical of schedules for the moment.


2022, two cargo vehicles landed on Mars means launch June 2022 (how do the orbital mechanics stack up?)
What does this mean as a minimum?

It means the booster and tanker have accumulated 40 or so flights in order to refuel the vehicles.
It means they have launched ~2000 tons of cargo (fuel) to orbit.
Landing has been extremely well proven on earth, and on mars.

It probably means that individual boosters have a demonstrated flying reliability.

All this at the same time EM1 and EM2 are supposed to launch, for a billion per launch, rather than a million.
 
« Last Edit: 09/29/2017 03:06 PM by speedevil »

Online RonM

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2150
  • Atlanta, Georgia USA
  • Liked: 1017
  • Likes Given: 792
Re: IAC 2017 -- BFR v0.2 - DISCUSSION THREAD 2 (Post Speech)
« Reply #18 on: 09/29/2017 02:51 PM »
What I don't get is why they haven't yet proposed using the BFR itself as an LEO Space Station (e.g. as a successor to the ISS). It will be capable of spending long durations in space, so it seems perfectly suited for this.

For example, one could have two BFR's set up for orbital space station activites. They would then alternate going up and down to orbit (say, every 6 months or so). When a ship is on the ground, it could be fitted out with the next set of experiments. Then, it would launch with a full crew and cargo for the 6 months, so no need for visiting vehicles during that time (so less microgravity perturbations). Also, no need for EVA's for repairs. After the 6 months, it would return and the second vehicle would take its place, and so on. So, basically like the Shuttle Orbiter/Spacelab, with much more volume, more crew (12-ish say) and the capability to stay on orbit for long periods of time.

Obviously, experiments requiring longer durations would need another orbiting platform, but there's plenty of room in LEO!

Kind of a waste of a vehicle that can be launched with very little turn around. How many flights does it miss out on in 6 months? Lots of lost revenue.

Three BFR cargo flights can put a space station as big as ISS in orbit. Drop off a 150 ton space station in a single flight.

Offline ZachF

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 363
  • NH, USA, Earth
  • Liked: 229
  • Likes Given: 58
Re: IAC 2017 -- BFR v0.2 - DISCUSSION THREAD 2 (Post Speech)
« Reply #19 on: 09/29/2017 02:54 PM »
What I don't get is why they haven't yet proposed using the BFR itself as an LEO Space Station (e.g. as a successor to the ISS). It will be capable of spending long durations in space, so it seems perfectly suited for this.

For example, one could have two BFR's set up for orbital space station activites. They would then alternate going up and down to orbit (say, every 6 months or so). When a ship is on the ground, it could be fitted out with the next set of experiments. Then, it would launch with a full crew and cargo for the 6 months, so no need for visiting vehicles during that time (so less microgravity perturbations). Also, no need for EVA's for repairs. After the 6 months, it would return and the second vehicle would take its place, and so on. So, basically like the Shuttle Orbiter/Spacelab, with much more volume, more crew (12-ish say) and the capability to stay on orbit for long periods of time.

Obviously, experiments requiring longer durations would need another orbiting platform, but there's plenty of room in LEO!

Kind of a waste of a vehicle that can be launched with very little turn around. How many flights does it miss out on in 6 months? Lots of lost revenue.

Three BFR cargo flights can put a space station as big as ISS in orbit. Drop off a 150 ton space station in a single flight.

If we can bring up large, heavy chunks, lets build a robust ring station.  8)

Tags: