Author Topic: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 5  (Read 139823 times)

Offline Dave G

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1585
  • Liked: 604
  • Likes Given: 790
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 5
« Reply #40 on: 06/01/2017 09:04 PM »
I am sure I will be shouted down but I am going to put out that it stands a reasonable chance that SpaceX could build ITS at Michoud.  Especially if we see a deal between SpaceX and NASA (US Gov) for cooperation on the ITS...

If SpaceX partners with NASA on ITS, then yes, we could see it manufactured in Michoud.

But if you look at the role of NASA, it's about exploration. The design of ITS seems optimized for long-term transport, i.e.  hundreds of people paying $500K per ticket to colonize Mars.  Kind of like the difference between Christopher Columbus and the Pilgrims.  Christopher Columbus got government backing.  The Pilgrims didn't.

So to me, ITS seems more like a commercial venture.  In order to finance such a venture, SpaceX will need to grow their business and expand into other areas, e.g. satellite internet service.

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8154
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 4903
  • Likes Given: 3328
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 5
« Reply #41 on: 06/01/2017 10:00 PM »
This thread is wandering all over. Hawthorne, NUMMI, Stennis, Michaud, even McGregor are all kind of not Boca Chica.

Thanks.
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline Brovane

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1009
  • United States
  • Liked: 465
  • Likes Given: 957
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 5
« Reply #42 on: 06/01/2017 10:07 PM »
If you read the quote carefully, the decision to have the number of people present was a TRW decision as part of a government contract.  It wasn't a requirement by Stennis.  Already SpaceX has used Stennis for Raptor testing.  https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016/10/its-propulsion-evolution-raptor-engine/

So you think SpaceX will go through the cost of building from scratch a test facility to support full duration burns of a ITS 1st stage when a government facility already exists that can support this testing?


There is nothing at Stennis that can currently support full duration burns of an ITS 1st stage. It will require some serious modifications to existing test stands. SpaceX might just as well decide to build a new one. Probably not at Stennis.

Wouldn't that depend on the thrust level of the ITS 1st stage? 
"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 Nomadd

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2546
  • Boca Chica, Texas
  • Liked: 3050
  • Likes Given: 211
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 5
« Reply #43 on: 06/01/2017 11:09 PM »
 Slow news week, but we do what we can. Somebody put up some less generic signs today.
 Indy passed by on her way to the breakers. I always wished they'd make reefs out of them instead.
« Last Edit: 06/01/2017 11:12 PM by Nomadd »

Offline Johnnyhinbos

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 810
  • Boston, MA
  • Liked: 795
  • Likes Given: 117
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 5
« Reply #44 on: 06/02/2017 12:01 AM »
As one of only two people to dive the Oriskany on the one year anniversary of her sinking as a reef, I couldn't agree more. However, unfortunately I also know the mind blowing expense of such an endeavor. It's a huge shame.
John Hanzl. Author, action / adventure www.johnhanzl.com

Offline IanThePineapple

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 383
  • NaN
  • Liked: 93
  • Likes Given: 53
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 5
« Reply #45 on: 06/02/2017 12:26 AM »
I'm not very fluent on aircraft carrier knowledge, why are there carriers down by Brownsville?
Proud creator of Ian's Paper Model Rocket Collection:
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=42383.0

Offline John Alan

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 388
  • Central IL - USA - Earth
  • Liked: 175
  • Likes Given: 997
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 5
« Reply #46 on: 06/02/2017 12:40 AM »
I'm not very fluent on aircraft carrier knowledge, why are there carriers down by Brownsville?

This should answer your question...  ;)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forrestal-class_aircraft_carrier
« Last Edit: 06/02/2017 12:42 AM by John Alan »

Offline Cowboy Dan

  • Member
  • Posts: 7
  • Fort Worth, Texas
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 17
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 5
« Reply #47 on: 06/02/2017 12:50 AM »
International Ship Breakers (scrap yard), located in Port Brownsville.  Don't seem to have a web page.  https://www.facebook.com/International-Shipbreaking-Port-Of-Brownsville-160756887336278/

Offline Dave G

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1585
  • Liked: 604
  • Likes Given: 790
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 5
« Reply #48 on: 06/02/2017 12:59 AM »
I'm not very fluent on aircraft carrier knowledge, why are there carriers down by Brownsville?

Decommissioned aircraft carriers go to Brownsville to get broken down for scrap metal.  They also sell some of the smaller parts on eBay.

As I've said before, Brownsville is somewhat unique.  The shipping channel is world class.  There's maple rail and road infrastructure to/from the seaport.  There's an international airport 4 miles away.  And the land, taxes, and labor are all cheap.

Offline cppetrie

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 303
  • Liked: 146
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 5
« Reply #49 on: 06/02/2017 01:00 AM »
I'm not very fluent on aircraft carrier knowledge, why are there carriers down by Brownsville?

This should answer your question...  ;)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forrestal-class_aircraft_carrier
More specifically one of the largest marine recyclers, International Shipbreakers, Ltd is based in Brownsville and they have been the dismantlers of numerous decommissioned navy vessels including some carriers.
http://us.emrgroup.com/selling-decommissioned-marine-structures

Offline IanThePineapple

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 383
  • NaN
  • Liked: 93
  • Likes Given: 53
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 5
« Reply #50 on: 06/02/2017 01:36 AM »
Wow, I'd just like to walk through that old carrier and see what it's like. Probably empty, dark and overall creepy, but still would be interesting.

Also, how would one obtain a piece of this carrier on eBay...  ::)
Proud creator of Ian's Paper Model Rocket Collection:
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=42383.0

Offline Nomadd

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2546
  • Boca Chica, Texas
  • Liked: 3050
  • Likes Given: 211
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 5
« Reply #51 on: 06/02/2017 01:40 AM »
Wow, I'd just like to walk through that old carrier and see what it's like. Probably empty, dark and overall creepy, but still would be interesting.

Also, how would one obtain a piece of this carrier on eBay...  ::)
Way off subject, but I wandered around the Queen Mary all day without seeing another person a few years back. It's easy to see why people think it's haunted.

Offline IanThePineapple

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 383
  • NaN
  • Liked: 93
  • Likes Given: 53
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 5
« Reply #52 on: 06/02/2017 02:00 AM »
Wow, I'd just like to walk through that old carrier and see what it's like. Probably empty, dark and overall creepy, but still would be interesting.

Also, how would one obtain a piece of this carrier on eBay...  ::)
Way off subject, but I wandered around the Queen Mary all day without seeing another person a few years back. It's easy to see why people think it's haunted.

Oh, we've gone so far from topic. But I'd say it's fine given the really slow updates (not towards you, but just the slow progress down there)

That Queen Mary walkthrough sounds very eery. Was the lighting dim to make it creepier?
« Last Edit: 06/02/2017 02:01 AM by IanThePineapple »
Proud creator of Ian's Paper Model Rocket Collection:
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=42383.0

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8154
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 4903
  • Likes Given: 3328
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 5
« Reply #53 on: 06/02/2017 02:05 AM »
Oh, we've gone so far from topic. But I'd say it's fine given the really slow updates 
You'd be wrong. This topic gets a fair bit of latitude[1] compared to most, but do try to stay at least remotely on topic if possible. If you have nothing to say, then saying nothing is often a great approach.

1 - people who contribute a lot of useful information[2] to a thread often get more latitude than those that don't...
2 - even a really profound question can be useful information...
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline TomH

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1972
  • CA
  • Liked: 652
  • Likes Given: 195
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 5
« Reply #54 on: 06/02/2017 02:28 AM »
I am sure I will be shouted down but I am going to put out that it stands a reasonable chance that SpaceX could build ITS at Michoud.

With overhead cranes removed, the ceiling allows a maximum tank construction diameter of 10.0m as was the case with Saturn V. With the cranes in place, the maximum is 8.8m, as was the case with STS tanks and SLS. You would have to tear off the entire roof, raise the walls, build a new roof, install new cranes. Possible? Sure. Likely? Highly doubtful.

Offline IanThePineapple

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 383
  • NaN
  • Liked: 93
  • Likes Given: 53
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 5
« Reply #55 on: 06/02/2017 02:44 AM »
I am sure I will be shouted down but I am going to put out that it stands a reasonable chance that SpaceX could build ITS at Michoud.

With overhead cranes removed, the ceiling allows a maximum tank construction diameter of 10.0m as was the case with Saturn V. With the cranes in place, the maximum is 8.8m, as was the case with STS tanks and SLS. You would have to tear off the entire roof, raise the walls, build a new roof, install new cranes. Possible? Sure. Likely? Highly doubtful.

It would be really tough to transport entire ITS stages by barge, I wouldn't be surprised if they did the New Glenn approach and built right at the site, or even sent it in pieces from Hawethorne to be assembled at the launch site.
Proud creator of Ian's Paper Model Rocket Collection:
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=42383.0

Offline Nomadd

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2546
  • Boca Chica, Texas
  • Liked: 3050
  • Likes Given: 211
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 5
« Reply #56 on: 06/02/2017 04:22 AM »
 I think the EIS for Boca Chica said the buildings could be up to 68 feet tall. And there's already something that looks like a beam for a gantry type crane good for 500 tons or so sitting here, which seems excessive for Falcon ops. Maybe good for an assembled FH with maximum payload with lots of margin.
 Everybody was trying to figure out what kind of crane these pieces could make, but there's no real reason to believe they're all for the same crane.
« Last Edit: 06/02/2017 04:29 AM by Nomadd »

Offline Dave G

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1585
  • Liked: 604
  • Likes Given: 790
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 5
« Reply #57 on: 06/02/2017 10:42 AM »
I think the EIS for Boca Chica said the buildings could be up to 68 feet tall.

Relevant sections of EIS below, with heights highlighted.  Max building height is 85 ft.  Max structure height is 250 ft.

Quote
2.1.2.1 Vertical Launch Area
Proposed facility and infrastructure construction at the vertical launch area would include the following:
• Integration and Processing Hangar (Hangar)
• Launch pad and stand with its associated flame duct
• Water tower
• Lightning protection towers (four total)
• Retention basin for deluge water
• Propellant storage and handling areas
• Workshop and office area
• Warehouse for parts storage
• Roads, parking areas, fencing, security, lighting, and utilities

Integration and Processing Hangar
The Hangar at the vertical launch area would be used for the preparation of the launch vehicle for launch and the final fueling and integration of the payload onto the vehicle. It would require approximately 43,200 square feet (ft2 ) of space (360 x 120 x 65 ft high) and would be constructed of prefabricated steel framework with steel or aluminum sheet walls. To support the Hangar, approximately 30 concrete pilings, 3 ft in diameter, would be installed with an impact pile driver. The Hangar would be air conditioned, and the fueling facilities would have a scrubber system (up to two active scrubbers) to minimize emissions to the environment in the event of a payload fuel spill inside the facility. The scrubbers consist of “scrubbing towers,” storage tank with liquid level indicator, service panel, circulation pump, and a liquid separator with liquid level indicator. The system would be mounted on a “low boy” trailer for easy transport. Spill containment for the scrubber system would depend on the materials used in these systems, and then if required would be sized for 110 percent of the maximum credible spill as required by law. Containment would be constructed of a non-porous material, such as concrete or a non-reactive plastic. The concrete would be lined with a leak-proof barrier that is compatible with the materials handled. The scrubber systems are monitored by testing the residual fluid contained in the scrubber.

Launch Pad
The concrete road from the Hangar to the launch pad would be approximately 75,110 ft2 . The launch pad and stand are used to translate the launch vehicle to a vertical position and to support it on the pad prior to launch. It consists of a concrete and steel structure with a flame duct, a launch mount, and upper deck. To support the launch pad and stand, approximately 20 concrete pilings, 3 ft in diameter, would be installed with an impact pile driver. The height of the entire launch pad would be approximately 50 ft and would require approximately 17,900 ft2 of space. The flame duct would extend east/southeast from the launch pad to direct the heat and combustion products and the initial sound blast toward the Gulf of Mexico. The pad would also include two concrete and steel wings to protect equipment that is required to be very close to the pad. All pad lighting would consist of high pressure sodium (HPS), halogen, or LED (light-emitting diode) light fixtures. However, for safety reasons SpaceX may occasionally require bright spotlighting for short durations (1-2 days maximum) when illuminating the launch vehicle for the proposed one night launch event per year. These spot lights are typically metal halide. The number of pole lights would be finalized during the site design process. SpaceX will coordinate with USFWS and NPS on the preparation of a detailed Lighting Management Plan (refer to Chapter 6 for further information on Mitigation and Special Conservation Measures). The Falcon vehicle system transporter erector would serve as the service tower for vehicle umbilical support while the launch vehicle is vertical. Additionally, four lightning protection towers, approximately 230 ft in height, would be constructed adjacent to the launch pad.

Deluge Water System
One water tower would be installed at the vertical launch area for sound and vibration suppression. The water tower would contain at least 250,000 gal and would be approximately 250 ft high, which is required to provide sufficient pressure to the pad systems. During an actual launch, the water tower would discharge up to 100,000 gal of water for a Falcon 9 launch operation and up to 200,000 gal for a Falcon Heavy launch operation. During a launch, approximately half of the water would be vaporized. All water not vaporized would be contained in a retention basin underneath the pad. This water would then be sampled and analyzed to determine if the water contained controlled contaminants at levels that exceed the TCEQ water quality standards. Appropriate sampling protocols and water quality criteria would be developed in coordination with TCEQ and in accordance with Texas Surface Water Quality Standards Texas Administrative Code, Title 30 Environmental Quality, Part 1 - Texas Commission On Environmental Quality, Chapter 307: Texas Surface Water Quality. Water containing contaminants that exceed the water quality criteria would be removed and hauled to an approved industrial wastewater treatment facility outside of the vertical launch area. All other water not containing prohibited chemicals would be pumped back to the water tower. All water (including deluge and potable water) would be either delivered by truck or withdrawn from a well located adjacent to the water tower, and drilled into a highly transmissive (i.e., yielding relatively large water quantities) portion of the Gulf Coast Aquifer.

2.1.2.2 Control Center Area
Proposed facility and infrastructure construction at the control center area would include the following:
• Two launch control center buildings
• Two payload processing facilities
• Launch vehicle processing hangar
• Two RF transmitter/receivers
• Generators and diesel storage facilities
• Roads, parking areas, fencing, security, lighting, and utilities
• A satellite fuels and gas storage facility

Launch Control Center Buildings
The one-story control center buildings would be approximately 14,186 ft2 and 30-45 ft in height, and would be used for command and control of the launch vehicle, payload, and ground systems during launch and test operations. Each control center building would consist primarily of several large rooms for control consoles, conference rooms, and support rooms. In addition, each facility would house office areas for site personnel.

Payload Processing Facilities
The payload processing facilities would be used to conduct final processing of payloads prior to integrating them with the launch vehicle. This processing would include final spacecraft checkouts, RF checks, payload fueling, and other activities as required. The facilities would be designed to support the processing of two payloads simultaneously, to allow for a better throughput. Each building would be approximately 14,669 ft2 and 65-85 ft in height

Launch Vehicle Processing Hangar
The proposed 30,774 ft2 , 50-65 ft tall launch vehicle processing hangar would be used to conduct refurbishment of flown stages, or for pre-integration preparation of the launch vehicle stages before they go to the pad hangar for final integration. Use of this facility would improve the overall vertical launch area throughput by minimizing the vehicle’s activities associated with the launch vehicle in the vertical launch area Hangar. This facility would be similar to the Hangar at the vertical launch area, but shorter.
« Last Edit: 06/02/2017 11:27 AM by Dave G »

Offline rsdavis9

Or make the composite structures whereever (even hawthorne) and transport by helicopter or plane to the seaside assembly plant. The individual tanks shouldn't weigh too much? I am assuming that there is individual tanks?

Why? They used Janicki Industries of Sedro-Woolley, WA to build the giant test tank, a company with large aerospace credentials and they'll set up a shop at your facility. ISTM SpaceX could put up a big hangar-like shop most anywhere including the Brownsville shipping channel, a Space Florida site....where ever, close to a launch site. Extra points if it has waterway access, which is dirt cheap transportation using no expensive air assets.


I was only thinking of the highly skilled workforce which presumably doesn't want to be relocated to boca chica.
bob

Offline Brovane

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1009
  • United States
  • Liked: 465
  • Likes Given: 957
Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 5
« Reply #59 on: 06/02/2017 01:50 PM »
I am sure I will be shouted down but I am going to put out that it stands a reasonable chance that SpaceX could build ITS at Michoud.

With overhead cranes removed, the ceiling allows a maximum tank construction diameter of 10.0m as was the case with Saturn V. With the cranes in place, the maximum is 8.8m, as was the case with STS tanks and SLS. You would have to tear off the entire roof, raise the walls, build a new roof, install new cranes. Possible? Sure. Likely? Highly doubtful.

It would be really tough to transport entire ITS stages by barge, I wouldn't be surprised if they did the New Glenn approach and built right at the site, or even sent it in pieces from Hawethorne to be assembled at the launch site.

Do you think BO will be doing full duration static Burns of the New Glenn on the ground at the Cape? 
"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

Tags: