Author Topic: Who will compete with SpaceX? The last two and next two years.  (Read 313330 times)

Offline inonepiece

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 129
  • Liked: 111
  • Likes Given: 138
Re: Who will compete with SpaceX? The last two and next two years.
« Reply #1000 on: 10/03/2017 12:09 am »
Of course the project is far more ambitious than the Shuttle and launches could end up costing so much that they can't find any customers.
I can't imagine Musk continuing with a project that he saw going that way, because he has been very consistent about his goals: to make space travel cheaper, in order to become a multi-planet species.

Online Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8862
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 10199
  • Likes Given: 11933
Re: Who will compete with SpaceX? The last two and next two years.
« Reply #1001 on: 10/03/2017 12:45 am »
Blue Origin is an attempt by Bezos to rebalance the rocket business equation upset by SpaceX and Musk...

Let's not rewrite history here - Blue Origin was started two years BEFORE SpaceX was, so no, Bezos was not trying to "rebalance the rocket business equation".

Quote
Musk is (I think) driven by the desire to improve the state of the art in rockets and be multiplanetary...

There is no need to guess - SpaceX was founded with the goal of reducing space transportation costs and enabling the colonization of Mars. Musk has been very public about that.

Quote
My guess... Is the other Rocket System players worldwide (China, Russia, Europe, India) are making some incremental changes to at least stay in the business...

Making changes to an expendable rocket that do not result in a reusable rocket is wasted money, since they won't gain new business and they are likely to still lose business from outside of their country.

Quote
But just like Boeing and Airbus now dominate the Airliner industry with some other profitable yet smaller players filling in behind...

Space transportation systems are still rooted in the original space race, and it's really only been with the advent of SpaceX that there is now a truly commercial launch provider. But countries still have a desire - need even - to keep their own domestic space transportation systems for their own domestic space payloads. So as long as those needs exist they won't give SpaceX or any other commercial launcher their domestic business, and certainly countries like China can subsidize their launches for domestic customers.

What Musk and Bezos are focusing on is the truly commercial market, and for here in the U.S. the part of the U.S. Government market that the U.S. Government wants to not be dedicated to ULA.

Also, Musk and Bezos are hoping that by lowering the cost to access space that they will INCREASE the market for payloads to space, which would then overall increase the amount of revenue they can garner.

Quote
The end game could be these two upstarts rising to domination... with the rest fading back to become more specialized... serving only country or specialized needs...
However... at some point... I would expect at least a third major player to appear on the world stage...
But only after say 2050...

As I've been saying, the race is on to be the LAST launch provider to convert to reusable launch systems...  ;)
If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6257
  • Liked: 4164
  • Likes Given: 6078
Re: Who will compete with SpaceX? The last two and next two years.
« Reply #1002 on: 10/03/2017 07:14 pm »
European study on reusable rocket design... Prometheus/Callisto
Found here:
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=41330.msg1730895#msg1730895

Quote
Evaluation of Future Ariane Reusable VTOL Booster stages
Quote
Reusability is anticipated to strongly impact the launch service market if sufficient reliability and low refurbishment costs can be achieved.  DLR is performing an extensive study on return methods for a reusable booster stage for a future launch vehicle.  The present study focuses on the vertical take-off and vertical landing (VTOL) method.  First, a restitution of a flight of Falcon 9 is resented in order to assess the accuracy of the tools used.

Conclusions involve RTLS and down-range landings, gas generator engines, same engine on second stage as on first (except for the vac nozzle); 11 engines on the 5.5m hydrolox version and 9 on the methlox version.  Imitation is sincerest form of flattery.
« Last Edit: 10/03/2017 07:15 pm by AncientU »
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline jpo234

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2021
  • Liked: 2280
  • Likes Given: 2184
Re: Who will compete with SpaceX? The last two and next two years.
« Reply #1003 on: 10/04/2017 11:06 am »
Cross post, but I think it belongs here, too.

Tory Bruno about BFR: https://www.reddit.com/r/ula/comments/736dcv/what_are_everyones_thoughts_on_spacexs_recently/dnoqe74/

Quote
A few thoughts:

I continue to be impressed with Elon's unique ability to create excitement and interest in space.

I am flattered that several of our ideas are present in his Mars transport ConOps: Distributed launch, in orbit refueling, long duration cryo propulsion, etc..

This is an impressively ambitious plan.

I am also confident in our competitive strategy with Vulcan and ACES.

I admire his single minded focus on Mars.

I remain committed to serving the missions of my NASA, NRO, USAF, and Commercial customers, both in the future and today.

I would like to see energy applied to the very real issue of the health effects of long term deep space travel as well as other Human Safety issues. Last year, in Guadalajara, Elon said that "People would die" and, during Q&A, that he, himself, would not make the trip. It would be a great message if he committed personally.

I think our visions for becoming a multi-planetary species are a little different. Elon talks about how the Earth will inevitably suffer an extinction level event some day. So, if the species is to survive, it will be because Elon placed a life boat of thousands or perhaps millions on Mars who will carry on after the billions on earth are killed. When we open our risk window up to cosmic time scales, we all have to agree that the Universe is a pretty dangerous place, so this viewpoint has merit.

I see our expansion beyond Earth a little differently. This is nothing less than our Human destiny. When we have a permanent and expanded presence outside this planet, it will fundamentally change what it means to be Human. This can happen in just a handful of years. A tremendous wealth of natural resources exists just in our Earth-Moon neighborhood. When we create a CisLunar economic zone, Nearly all of the things that are rare here on earth will be available in abundance, there will be nearly free, ubiquitous energy anywhere on the planet. Poverty will be eliminated. The conflicts that arise through a shortage of resources will end. The basic state of human dignity will lift beyond anything previously seen in human history.

A thriving CisLunar economy will be self-sustaining. It will create wealth, not be a sink of resources. And it will afford us the opportunity to learn how to live in a non-earth-like environment, doing, so at a safe, week's journey from home. So that, as we press out to Mars and beyond, we will have learned the skills necessary to survive there. Tera forming is a very long way off. For the next century or so, we need to build the skills and experience necessary to live on planets without it.
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.

Quote
When we create a CisLunar economic zone, Nearly all of the things that are rare here on earth will be available in abundance, there will be nearly free, ubiquitous energy anywhere on the planet. Poverty will be eliminated. The conflicts that arise through a shortage of resources will end. The basic state of human dignity will lift beyond anything previously seen in human history.

Wow, talking about bold claims, so ULA's mission is now solving every human problem with the development of a cislunar architecture? Hey, Elon's vision is no longer the most ambitious, after all he only wants to go to Mars  ;D

But seriously what resources is he talking about exactly? Helium?
And do we really need 'a century or so' to learn how to live on Mars without terraforming it? Is he saying we should focus on the moon and don't even attempt to go to Mars till 2100?
Is it really that inconceivable that to learn how to live on Mars we should actually try and do it? That once you have a cheap, reliable and established route to (and from) Mars (what BFR aims to provide) you have the possibility to actually try instead of 'pressing out to Mars and beyond'... for 100 years?

Will it be risky at the beginning? Of course. Will the risk be worth it? That's a question neither Tory Bruno nor Elon Musk can answer. It's a question that only the first astronauts and explorers that will sign up to go have the right and privilege to answer.
« Last Edit: 10/04/2017 11:55 am 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 AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6257
  • Liked: 4164
  • Likes Given: 6078
Re: Who will compete with SpaceX? The last two and next two years.
« Reply #1005 on: 10/04/2017 01:13 pm »
Cross post, but I think it belongs here, too.

Tory Bruno about BFR: https://www.reddit.com/r/ula/comments/736dcv/what_are_everyones_thoughts_on_spacexs_recently/dnoqe74/

...

Interesting that he doesn't mention the LockMart Mars Base camp/lander plan...

The 'our ideas' line is me-too-ism at it finest.
« Last Edit: 10/04/2017 01:15 pm by AncientU »
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12096
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 18201
  • Likes Given: 12162
Re: Who will compete with SpaceX? The last two and next two years.
« Reply #1006 on: 10/04/2017 01:18 pm »
The 'our ideas' line is me-too-ism at it finest.
Indeed.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=43851.msg1731474#msg1731474

That said: there is nothing really new about the BFR concept, as laid out by Elon in 2016 and 2017. Most of it has been proposed before so much of it isn't Elon's idea either.
BUT, this is the first time that a private company is seriously attempting to make this a reality, without relying solely on government funding.
« Last Edit: 10/04/2017 01:22 pm by woods170 »

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6257
  • Liked: 4164
  • Likes Given: 6078
Re: Who will compete with SpaceX? The last two and next two years.
« Reply #1007 on: 10/04/2017 05:10 pm »
The 'our ideas' line is me-too-ism at it finest.
Indeed.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=43851.msg1731474#msg1731474

That said: there is nothing really new about the BFR concept, as laid out by Elon in 2016 and 2017. Most of it has been proposed before so much of it isn't Elon's idea either.
BUT, this is the first time that a private company is seriously attempting to make this a reality, without relying solely on government funding.

That's what is so damned frustrating about this business*... these concepts have been on the table for two generations (~50 years) and only now is someone taking the initiative to realize their benefits on an appropriate scale for interplanetary travel.

* And yes, decades of stagnation(!) in spite of denial by those content with the status quo ante.
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline jpo234

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2021
  • Liked: 2280
  • Likes Given: 2184
Re: Who will compete with SpaceX? The last two and next two years.
« Reply #1008 on: 10/04/2017 05:24 pm »

That's what is so damned frustrating about this business*... these concepts have been on the table for two generations (~50 years) and only now is someone taking the initiative to realize their benefits on an appropriate scale for interplanetary travel.

* And yes, decades of stagnation(!) in spite of denial by those content with the status quo ante.

My suspicion is, that it took until now to make these concepts viable. Before it would have taken a program in the magnitude of Apollo to realize them. Now, thanks to technological advances, it's within the reach of a single company.

« Last Edit: 10/04/2017 05:24 pm by jpo234 »
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 Pipcard

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 622
  • Liked: 275
  • Likes Given: 130
Re: Who will compete with SpaceX? The last two and next two years.
« Reply #1009 on: 10/04/2017 05:49 pm »

That's what is so damned frustrating about this business*... these concepts have been on the table for two generations (~50 years) and only now is someone taking the initiative to realize their benefits on an appropriate scale for interplanetary travel.

* And yes, decades of stagnation(!) in spite of denial by those content with the status quo ante.

My suspicion is, that it took until now to make these concepts viable. Before it would have taken a program in the magnitude of Apollo to realize them. Now, thanks to technological advances, it's within the reach of a single company.
I think it's also because STS ruined the image of RLV economic viability for a few decades. "Not enough demand," they would say.
« Last Edit: 10/04/2017 06:02 pm by Pipcard »

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8144
  • Liked: 6801
  • Likes Given: 2965
Re: Who will compete with SpaceX? The last two and next two years.
« Reply #1010 on: 10/04/2017 06:02 pm »

That's what is so damned frustrating about this business*... these concepts have been on the table for two generations (~50 years) and only now is someone taking the initiative to realize their benefits on an appropriate scale for interplanetary travel.

* And yes, decades of stagnation(!) in spite of denial by those content with the status quo ante.

My suspicion is, that it took until now to make these concepts viable. Before it would have taken a program in the magnitude of Apollo to realize them. Now, thanks to technological advances, it's within the reach of a single company.
I think it's also because STS ruined the image of RLV economic viability for a few decades. "Not enough demand," they would say.

Shuttle wasn't a true RLV, though. It was a partial RLV, and a significant fraction of its cost was expended hardware for every mission.

Offline speedevil

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4406
  • Fife
  • Liked: 2762
  • Likes Given: 3369
Re: Who will compete with SpaceX? The last two and next two years.
« Reply #1011 on: 10/04/2017 06:04 pm »
My suspicion is, that it took until now to make these concepts viable. Before it would have taken a program in the magnitude of Apollo to realize them. Now, thanks to technological advances, it's within the reach of a single company.

Methane-oxygen high performance engines are great.
It's not clear to me that a three stage rocket system broadly similar, propane/lox (for example) couldn't work similarly.
Control and navigation systems much before the 90s would be a problem.

With a three stage system, you wouldn't have been talking about passenger transport, or Mars colonisation.

Second stage reentry gets a lot harder.
« Last Edit: 10/04/2017 06:06 pm by speedevil »

Offline Pipcard

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 622
  • Liked: 275
  • Likes Given: 130
Re: Who will compete with SpaceX? The last two and next two years.
« Reply #1012 on: 10/04/2017 06:16 pm »

That's what is so damned frustrating about this business*... these concepts have been on the table for two generations (~50 years) and only now is someone taking the initiative to realize their benefits on an appropriate scale for interplanetary travel.

* And yes, decades of stagnation(!) in spite of denial by those content with the status quo ante.

My suspicion is, that it took until now to make these concepts viable. Before it would have taken a program in the magnitude of Apollo to realize them. Now, thanks to technological advances, it's within the reach of a single company.
I think it's also because STS ruined the image of RLV economic viability for a few decades. "Not enough demand," they would say.

Shuttle wasn't a true RLV, though. It was a partial RLV, and a significant fraction of its cost was expended hardware for every mission.
Indeed, the partial reusability aspect of Falcon 9 is much better than STS. But the main argument that was used to dismiss RLVs was that there wasn't enough demand to support the flight rates - even Robotbeat claimed that 40+ flights/year were needed for a fully reusable launch vehicle (8 for partial), although he currently believes that the internet constellation can fulfill that requirement.
« Last Edit: 10/04/2017 06:21 pm by Pipcard »

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6257
  • Liked: 4164
  • Likes Given: 6078
Re: Who will compete with SpaceX? The last two and next two years.
« Reply #1013 on: 10/04/2017 06:23 pm »

That's what is so damned frustrating about this business*... these concepts have been on the table for two generations (~50 years) and only now is someone taking the initiative to realize their benefits on an appropriate scale for interplanetary travel.

* And yes, decades of stagnation(!) in spite of denial by those content with the status quo ante.

My suspicion is, that it took until now to make these concepts viable. Before it would have taken a program in the magnitude of Apollo to realize them. Now, thanks to technological advances, it's within the reach of a single company.

I agree that if we would have done these things immediately after Apollo, it would have taken a comparable effort to Apollo -- we had the team assembled, but not the leadership.

Things have been 'easier' -- than 1960s technology -- for decades.  Such things as a fuel-rich architecture and reusable launch systems have been within reach of current NASA 'development' expenditures for decades.  We just didn't have the leadership and/or vision to develop them.
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8144
  • Liked: 6801
  • Likes Given: 2965
Re: Who will compete with SpaceX? The last two and next two years.
« Reply #1014 on: 10/04/2017 07:01 pm »

That's what is so damned frustrating about this business*... these concepts have been on the table for two generations (~50 years) and only now is someone taking the initiative to realize their benefits on an appropriate scale for interplanetary travel.

* And yes, decades of stagnation(!) in spite of denial by those content with the status quo ante.

My suspicion is, that it took until now to make these concepts viable. Before it would have taken a program in the magnitude of Apollo to realize them. Now, thanks to technological advances, it's within the reach of a single company.
I think it's also because STS ruined the image of RLV economic viability for a few decades. "Not enough demand," they would say.

Shuttle wasn't a true RLV, though. It was a partial RLV, and a significant fraction of its cost was expended hardware for every mission.
Indeed, the partial reusability aspect of Falcon 9 is much better than STS. But the main argument that was used to dismiss RLVs was that there wasn't enough demand to support the flight rates - even Robotbeat claimed that 40+ flights/year were needed for a fully reusable launch vehicle (8 for partial), although he currently believes that the internet constellation can fulfill that requirement.

Sure, but that's a different issue. Shuttle's problem wasn't that it was only partially reusable or that it didn't fly enough. Its problem was that it was hugely inefficient. There's no demand for launch on a partially reusable vehicle that needs a standing army of 20,000 people and still throws away $200M worth of hardware every launch.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1