Author Topic: Testing BFR S1 and S2  (Read 1901 times)

Offline raketa

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 211
  • Liked: 36
  • Likes Given: 24
Testing BFR S1 and S2
« on: 09/29/2017 07:11 PM »
BFR S1 is probably easier to develop, but could McGregor tested 31 rocket beast?
1/Phase 1 - testing BFR S1 hopper
BFR S1 with limited number of engine, will test landing approach in Texas

2/Phase 2 - testing stand BFR S1 -full power
Platform build in Pacific ocean close to CA shore(retired oil plaform)
-BFR S1 testing stand, to test full power 31 engines

3/Phase 3 -testing BFR S1 flight
Flight from Platform with dummy BFS and land back on platform

4/Phase 4 - BFR S1  will start to fly with BFS that will land on drone ship or platform  in pacific ocean Hawaii, Alaska

5/Phase 5 - BFS will go orbital

Online envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2563
  • Liked: 1144
  • Likes Given: 724
Re: Testing BFR S1 and S2
« Reply #1 on: 09/29/2017 07:44 PM »
BFR S1 is probably easier to develop, but could McGregor tested 31 rocket beast?
1/Phase 1 - testing BFR S1 hopper
BFR S1 with limited number of engine, will test landing approach in Texas

2/Phase 2 - testing stand BFR S1 -full power
Platform build in Pacific ocean close to CA shore(retired oil plaform)
-BFR S1 testing stand, to test full power 31 engines

3/Phase 3 -testing BFR S1 flight
Flight from Platform with dummy BFS and land back on platform

4/Phase 4 - BFR S1  will start to fly with BFS that will land on drone ship or platform  in pacific ocean Hawaii, Alaska

5/Phase 5 - BFS will go orbital

There's no good way to get a 9m diameter stage to McGregor. They will have to test at Stennis, or build a stand either at the Cape or at Boca Chica.

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4685
  • Liked: 2806
  • Likes Given: 3925
Re: Testing BFR S1 and S2
« Reply #2 on: 09/29/2017 08:26 PM »
I suspect they will test individual engines and one full stage fire on a test stand, probably at the Cape.  After that, test individual engines and static fire new stage on launch pad.  Once flying, no static fire.

Landing 'practice' will be regular launches with cradle landings down at/near landing pads. 
Once confident, cradle will be launch mount.

I don't expect to see a grasshopper stage of testing at all, and especially at McGregor (where they cannot do and launch/landing testing any more).
« Last Edit: 09/29/2017 08:27 PM by AncientU »
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline biosehnsucht

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 167
  • Liked: 40
  • Likes Given: 47
Re: Testing BFR S1 and S2
« Reply #3 on: 09/29/2017 09:42 PM »
I expect the first test flights to be a BFR with disposable BFS boiler plate, or if feeling ballsy an actual BFS.

I don't think they'll be doing anything smaller, or hover tests, etc.

Online guckyfan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6311
  • Germany
  • Liked: 1577
  • Likes Given: 1382
Re: Testing BFR S1 and S2
« Reply #4 on: 09/30/2017 02:11 PM »
I expect the first test flights to be a BFR with disposable BFS boiler plate, or if feeling ballsy an actual BFS.

I don't think they'll be doing anything smaller, or hover tests, etc.

The IAC 2016 plan had testing BFS first, then BFR. I guess they will do that now as well. They can launch BFS with SL Raptor from Boca Chica for suborbital flights.

Online Norm38

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 968
  • Liked: 368
  • Likes Given: 492
Re: Testing BFR S1 and S2
« Reply #5 on: 09/30/2017 06:16 PM »
When did McGregor get shut down for flight tests?
And does the inability to text BFR at McGregor mean that facility's days are numbered? Would they still truck all the engines out there for testing?  Or find somewhere closer to Hawthorn to do it?

Offline Zed_Noir

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2190
  • Canada
  • Liked: 280
  • Likes Given: 434
Re: Testing BFR S1 and S2
« Reply #6 on: 09/30/2017 11:51 PM »
When did McGregor get shut down for flight tests?
And does the inability to text BFR at McGregor mean that facility's days are numbered? Would they still truck all the engines out there for testing?  Or find somewhere closer to Hawthorn to do it?

More likely near a launch site.

Offline Patchouli

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4190
  • Liked: 117
  • Likes Given: 208
Re: Testing BFR S1 and S2
« Reply #7 on: 10/01/2017 12:07 AM »
BFR S1 is probably easier to develop, but could McGregor tested 31 rocket beast?
1/Phase 1 - testing BFR S1 hopper
BFR S1 with limited number of engine, will test landing approach in Texas

2/Phase 2 - testing stand BFR S1 -full power
Platform build in Pacific ocean close to CA shore(retired oil plaform)
-BFR S1 testing stand, to test full power 31 engines

3/Phase 3 -testing BFR S1 flight
Flight from Platform with dummy BFS and land back on platform

4/Phase 4 - BFR S1  will start to fly with BFS that will land on drone ship or platform  in pacific ocean Hawaii, Alaska

5/Phase 5 - BFS will go orbital

Developing BFR also would be lower risk as it probably can be used with an interim expendable upper stage if BFS runs into delays.

Another thing they can do is make a half height BFR with only 15 or 16 engines using the same tooling as the full sized version to serve the same payloads as Falcon 9 and Heavy.
In fact this could fly before the full sized BFS booster.
« Last Edit: 10/01/2017 12:09 AM by Patchouli »

Online darkenfast

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 733
  • Liked: 367
  • Likes Given: 705
Re: Testing BFR S1 and S2
« Reply #8 on: 10/01/2017 04:08 AM »
When did McGregor get shut down for flight tests?
And does the inability to text BFR at McGregor mean that facility's days are numbered? Would they still truck all the engines out there for testing?  Or find somewhere closer to Hawthorn to do it?
Local government negotiated a new agreement with SpaceX that limited both the sound levels and the nature of free-flying tests.  That seems to be why the big tripod is no longer used and has been replaced by the current stage test stand.  I don't think there is any reason why McGregor will not continue to thrive as a test site for engines and other loud, possibly explosive things. 

Offline MikeAtkinson

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1667
  • Bracknell, England
  • Liked: 449
  • Likes Given: 51
Re: Testing BFR S1 and S2
« Reply #9 on: 10/01/2017 07:25 AM »
I suspect they will test individual engines and one full stage fire on a test stand, probably at the Cape.  After that, test individual engines and static fire new stage on launch pad.  Once flying, no static fire.

Landing 'practice' will be regular launches with cradle landings down at/near landing pads. 
Once confident, cradle will be launch mount.

I don't expect to see a grasshopper stage of testing at all, and especially at McGregor (where they cannot do and launch/landing testing any more).

One possibility opened up by the presentation is that a floating launch platform will be used from the start. Then the platform can be used for static testing by being towed out into the pacific.

Offline OneSpeed

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 514
  • Liked: 513
  • Likes Given: 427
Re: Testing BFR S1 and S2
« Reply #10 on: 10/01/2017 07:58 AM »
I don't expect to see a grasshopper stage of testing at all, and especially at McGregor (where they cannot do and launch/landing testing any more).

Not McGregor, but perhaps the first BFR flight could be an S2 'grasshopper' at LZ1? Just fill the landing tanks and perform a hop with the landing engines. It could prove a large part of the landing envelope, and a lot of the systems.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26874
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 6777
  • Likes Given: 4807
Re: Testing BFR S1 and S2
« Reply #11 on: 10/01/2017 08:12 AM »
I don't expect to see a grasshopper stage of testing at all, and especially at McGregor (where they cannot do and launch/landing testing any more).

Not McGregor, but perhaps the first BFR flight could be an S2 'grasshopper' at LZ1? Just fill the landing tanks and perform a hop with the landing engines. It could prove a large part of the landing envelope, and a lot of the systems.
Boca Chica. They already have an environmental permit that covers suborbital launches from there, which sounds a lot like what you're describing.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Kaputnik

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2768
  • Liked: 430
  • Likes Given: 364
Re: Testing BFR S1 and S2
« Reply #12 on: 10/01/2017 09:30 AM »
At the very least, I could see them flying dev versions of either or both vehicles,nusing a partial prop load and reduced complement of SL-only engines. Possibly with quite crude fixed landing gear.
Waiting for joy and raptor

Offline livingjw

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 276
  • Liked: 270
  • Likes Given: 113
Re: Testing BFR S1 and S2
« Reply #13 on: 10/01/2017 03:32 PM »
It also seems that neither stage will be processed horizontally during normal operation and no TEL. Probably just Horizontal transporter and cranes for erection.

John

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4685
  • Liked: 2806
  • Likes Given: 3925
Re: Testing BFR S1 and S2
« Reply #14 on: 10/01/2017 03:43 PM »
BFR S1 is probably easier to develop, but could McGregor tested 31 rocket beast?
1/Phase 1 - testing BFR S1 hopper
BFR S1 with limited number of engine, will test landing approach in Texas

2/Phase 2 - testing stand BFR S1 -full power
Platform build in Pacific ocean close to CA shore(retired oil plaform)
-BFR S1 testing stand, to test full power 31 engines

3/Phase 3 -testing BFR S1 flight
Flight from Platform with dummy BFS and land back on platform

4/Phase 4 - BFR S1  will start to fly with BFS that will land on drone ship or platform  in pacific ocean Hawaii, Alaska

5/Phase 5 - BFS will go orbital

Developing BFR also would be lower risk as it probably can be used with an interim expendable upper stage if BFS runs into delays.

Another thing they can do is make a half height BFR with only 15 or 16 engines using the same tooling as the full sized version to serve the same payloads as Falcon 9 and Heavy.
In fact this could fly before the full sized BFS booster.

Doubt very much that they would make a sub-scale booster.  Tricky things about the booster will be the cradle landing and ignition of 31 engines simultaneously.  The landing tanks will also be a new feature (but maybe only on the spaceship) that needs to be shaken down.  The rest is straight-forward application of what they've learned with the sub-scale test platform called Falcon.
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline Kaputnik

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2768
  • Liked: 430
  • Likes Given: 364
Re: Testing BFR S1 and S2
« Reply #15 on: 10/01/2017 04:02 PM »
I suppose they could cobble together (cos, you know, rockets are lego and all that) a vehicle using the header tanks only, and an appropriate number of engines. In theory no one-off tooling required but to quote Elon Musk it might turn out 'way harder' than it sounds.
Waiting for joy and raptor

Online DOCinCT

Re: Testing BFR S1 and S2
« Reply #16 on: 10/01/2017 06:05 PM »
When did McGregor get shut down for flight tests?
And does the inability to text BFR at McGregor mean that facility's days are numbered? Would they still truck all the engines out there for testing?  Or find somewhere closer to Hawthorn to do it?
Back in 2016 when they renegotiated the agreement on the use of the land with the City of McGregor, TX.
Specifically prohibited the actual launching of any vehicle into the atmosphere or into space at the McGregor facility.  There are also limits on sound levels and duration of testing.

Tags: