New Prediction:Merlin based kerlox booster results in a reduced mass to orbit, but keeps the same methalox upper stage + payload bay we've seen. Long term expectation to develop a proper carbon fiber BFB, but that's up there with RaptorVac Development.
"Starship" is a bit too Virgin Galactic for my taste. Oh well, if marketing didn't work I suppose so much money wouldn't be spent on it.
Quote from: rakaydos on 11/20/2018 05:50 amNew Prediction:Merlin based kerlox booster results in a reduced mass to orbit, but keeps the same methalox upper stage + payload bay we've seen. Long term expectation to develop a proper carbon fiber BFB, but that's up there with RaptorVac Development.They already have1) 3.6m aluminium tooling2) 9m carbon fiber toolingMaking an aluminium-based intermediate vehicle bigger than 3.6 meters would only slow them down.And when they have raptor engine for BFS, they can also manufacture raptor engine for BFB. Merlin would not save anything. Also engines using different fuels would just make launch operations more complex, meaning more time for constructing the launch infrastructure.Things that are reasonable are legs instead of cradle for the early BFB.
Maybe I'm reading too much into this, but this tweet makes me wonder.https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1064741510560632832I can't easily recall an occasion where Elon made a wholly untruthful or farcical statement about his businesses' interests or intentions. Does anyone have such a recollection to bring me back down to Earth?
Maybe I'm reading too much into this, but this tweet makes me wonder.I can't easily recall an occasion where Elon made a wholly untruthful or farcical statement about his businesses' interests or intentions. Does anyone have such a recollection to bring me back down to Earth?
Quote from: RotoSequence on 11/20/2018 06:58 amMaybe I'm reading too much into this, but this tweet makes me wonder.I can't easily recall an occasion where Elon made a wholly untruthful or farcical statement about his businesses' interests or intentions. Does anyone have such a recollection to bring me back down to Earth?He's a Douglas Adams fan. He wants to name the starships as they were referred to in the Hitchhiker's Guide:The starship "Heart of Gold", the starship "Bistromath", the starship "Business End" etc.
Quote from: Oersted on 11/19/2018 10:11 pmThe latest public skydiver reëntry config has two hinged wings/legs in the lower position and a fixed back fin/leg in the upper position.Well, if you ditch the wing hinges and reduce the square-footage (but not the leg length) of the back fin so it becomes sizeably smaller than the other to fins... - what would happen then?As I see it the skydiver position would flip around, with the two bigger fins going to the rear of the skydiving BFS.So, Musks new "delightfully counter-intuitive" configuration could perhaps be three fixed fins/legs equally spaced 120 degrees apart. The two bigger fins jutting out from the upper back of the skydiving spaceship and the third belly-mounted fin pointing straight down, covered in TPS as the rest of the underside of the ship.I think that would create a passively stable reëntry configuration on the roll axis.It would also be a modification that wouldn't concern the body of the BFS too much.Or to take the train of thought even further down this track, two upper fins on the back, perhaps looking much like the Tintin design fins, and one F9-style extending leg on the belly.My intuition (for what it's worth) says the two Tintin fins should be passively stable during reentry, and the belly leg should produce no negative aerodynamic effects during reentry, plus be significantly lighter than the third Tintin leg-fin.
The latest public skydiver reëntry config has two hinged wings/legs in the lower position and a fixed back fin/leg in the upper position.Well, if you ditch the wing hinges and reduce the square-footage (but not the leg length) of the back fin so it becomes sizeably smaller than the other to fins... - what would happen then?As I see it the skydiver position would flip around, with the two bigger fins going to the rear of the skydiving BFS.So, Musks new "delightfully counter-intuitive" configuration could perhaps be three fixed fins/legs equally spaced 120 degrees apart. The two bigger fins jutting out from the upper back of the skydiving spaceship and the third belly-mounted fin pointing straight down, covered in TPS as the rest of the underside of the ship.I think that would create a passively stable reëntry configuration on the roll axis.It would also be a modification that wouldn't concern the body of the BFS too much.
Well, there was the "Cyborg Dragon" tweet back in July:The worst conceivable possibility is that Mr. Musk's tweets are not the pronouncements of a wholly rational and responsible person.
Why do I get the feeling Elon Musk said this just to read the comments in this forum?
Oh wellhttps://twitter.com/universal_sci/status/1064738867419455489https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1064740532700643329QuoteNo, we’re just going to accelerate BFR
No, we’re just going to accelerate BFR
Does Musk observe the BFR/BFS nomenclature in his tweets?We here routinely use BFR/BFS/BFB/BFC/BFD... But I am not sure Musk always does.
Quote from: meekGee on 11/19/2018 03:02 pmDoes Musk observe the BFR/BFS nomenclature in his tweets?We here routinely use BFR/BFS/BFB/BFC/BFD... But I am not sure Musk always does.Hmmm what were you saying about Elon not differentiating in his use of naming, well he certainly has now!