Author Topic: SpaceX COTS Demo 1 Updates  (Read 638931 times)

Offline Ben the Space Brit

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7206
  • A spaceflight fan
  • London, UK
  • Liked: 806
  • Likes Given: 900
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #460 on: 11/19/2010 05:38 pm »
So what will SpaceX do, when the shuttle retires?

That depends on the SLS.  If the new SLS uses ATK segmented SRMs, then the Freedom Star and Liberty Star will still be operational and ready to collect their core stages.  Otherwise, they'll have to find an alternative - maybe even lease or purchase one of the ships for their own use.
"Oops! I left the silly thing in reverse!" - Duck Dodgers

~*~*~*~

The Space Shuttle Program - 1981-2011

The time for words has passed; The time has come to put up or shut up!
DON'T PROPAGANDISE, FLY!!!

Offline beancounter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1249
  • Perth, Western Australia
  • Liked: 106
  • Likes Given: 172
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #461 on: 11/20/2010 03:57 am »
So what will SpaceX do, when the shuttle retires?

That depends on the SLS.  If the new SLS uses ATK segmented SRMs, then the Freedom Star and Liberty Star will still be operational and ready to collect their core stages.  Otherwise, they'll have to find an alternative - maybe even lease or purchase one of the ships for their own use.
SpaceX won't stay with the old expensive methods.  No matter what Jim believes they are outdated and expensive and SpaceX will find more efficient and ways of retrieval.  In this case, I'll stick with my comments above.  Jim will, no doubt, stick with his as well. 
That's the value in  a democracy, differing views can exist together.  Either way, SpaceX will make its own decisions.  As some other blogger once posted, and I quote ' time will tell '.
Cheers
Beancounter from DownUnder

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37441
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #462 on: 11/20/2010 11:14 am »

SpaceX won't stay with the old expensive methods.  No matter what Jim believes they are outdated and expensive and SpaceX will find more efficient and ways of retrieval.

What is old and outdated about the SRB ships?  And how can it be more efficient?

And another comment.  Spacex has been getting their comeuppance on a lot of things and finding out that they have to end up doing it the old school ways. This goes back to the very first launch. 

Offline beancounter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1249
  • Perth, Western Australia
  • Liked: 106
  • Likes Given: 172
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #463 on: 11/21/2010 11:49 am »

SpaceX won't stay with the old expensive methods.  No matter what Jim believes they are outdated and expensive and SpaceX will find more efficient and ways of retrieval.

What is old and outdated about the SRB ships?  And how can it be more efficient?

And another comment.  Spacex has been getting their comeuppance on a lot of things and finding out that they have to end up doing it the old school ways. This goes back to the very first launch. 
It's ok Jim, seems I touched a raw nerve for which I apologies.  I just think people are entitled to their view, even when it differs from your's.  See previous comment. 

Cheers.
Beancounter from DownUnder

Offline ugordan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8520
    • My mainly Cassini image gallery
  • Liked: 3543
  • Likes Given: 759
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #464 on: 11/21/2010 11:56 am »
Views are views, but you clearly stated previously his "view" is just plain wrong.

Normally you make a lot of sense Jim and I have great respect for your comments but here on this one, you're just plain wrong.

Of course, you backed out of that later, but still - what exactly makes you an expert on booster recovery to give your "view" more credence than his?

Do you really believe absolutely everything related to the Shuttle program is bloated 10x over what is really needed and that SpaceX would undoubtedly be better and cheaper off with buying their own recovery vessels instead of using already existing ones?
« Last Edit: 11/21/2010 12:00 pm by ugordan »

Offline rnc

  • Member
  • Posts: 38
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #465 on: 11/21/2010 12:10 pm »
"recovery" would still be the better word for both nasa and spacex. "salvage" has a specific meaning within the marine industry, and normally applies to shipping in peril.

nasa have the best track record in recovering launch vehicle structures from the sea. spacex have none. lets wait and see how spacex do. they certainly have much to learn.

regards.

Offline SpacexULA

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1756
  • Liked: 53
  • Likes Given: 73
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #466 on: 11/21/2010 02:30 pm »
What is old and outdated about the SRB ships?  And how can it be more efficient?

And another comment.  Spacex has been getting their comeuppance on a lot of things and finding out that they have to end up doing it the old school ways. This goes back to the very first launch. 
It's ok Jim, seems I touched a raw nerve for which I apologies.  I just think people are entitled to their view, even when it differs from your's.  See previous comment. 

Cheers.



I don't really see how SpaceX would manage to do much better than the Liberty/Freedom Star, & a 9 person crew.  Much smaller and the ships would not be quick enough/have the capacity to carry the spent stages. 

I was honestly floored when i read that the SRB recovery team was only 9 people. 

No Bucks no Buck Rogers, but at least Flexible path gets you Twiki.

Offline ugordan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8520
    • My mainly Cassini image gallery
  • Liked: 3543
  • Likes Given: 759
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #467 on: 11/21/2010 02:48 pm »
Much smaller and the ships would not be quick enough/have the capacity to carry the spent stages. 

Moreso because F9 stages nominally drop much further downrange than SRBs, IIRC. The former burn out 1 minute later and at almost 2x the burnout velocity than the latter.

Offline docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6334
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 4207
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #468 on: 11/21/2010 04:50 pm »
Two words: ocean tug.  Yes, a radar boat would have to do tracking, but then they're not as tied to NASA's schedule if ATK's lobbyists get their way. 
DM

Offline SpacexULA

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1756
  • Liked: 53
  • Likes Given: 73
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #469 on: 11/21/2010 05:30 pm »
Come on guys, really?

If the Falcon 9 1st stage manages to survive reentry, and splashdown mostly intact, it will be one of the most valuable pieces of aerospace hardware to be pulled out of the ocean since Skylab 4's return.

It would be the first non SRB 1st stage ever recovered intact for inspection, why in heck would SpaceX go cheap on it's recovery?  How does this sound for a nightmare scenario "SpaceX's Falcon 9 1st stage survived reentry and spashdown, but the tug boat/scrap team they sent out to recover it, though ignorance about spacecraft, allowed it to sink to the bottom of the ocean floor"

Even SpaceX does not know what condition the 1st stage will be in when it returns, it could be taking on water from the second it impacts, it could be on fire, who knows?  There is only one trained team in the world that has experence in recovering aerospace hardware from the Atlantic ocean, and that's the SRB team.  It doesn't matter if they cost 100 times what Joe's towing service costs, they are worth it. 

Now down the road, if SpaceX is dropping 11 1st stages a year into the Atlantic, it might be worth the money to get their own boat and team, but till then, let the experts do it.
No Bucks no Buck Rogers, but at least Flexible path gets you Twiki.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37441
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #470 on: 11/21/2010 06:14 pm »
Two words: ocean tug.  Yes, a radar boat would have to do tracking, but then they're not as tied to NASA's schedule if ATK's lobbyists get their way. 

Spaced wont be launching enough for that to be a factor

Offline beancounter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1249
  • Perth, Western Australia
  • Liked: 106
  • Likes Given: 172
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #471 on: 11/22/2010 01:00 am »
Two words: ocean tug.  Yes, a radar boat would have to do tracking, but then they're not as tied to NASA's schedule if ATK's lobbyists get their way. 

Spaced wont be launching enough for that to be a factor

Insufficient data to support or disprove this statement at this time.

However, speculating and assuming 'Spaced' is SpaceX:
Should Bigelow get his stations up and operating with 2 or 3 stations as he's stated, and should SpaceX get into HSF, and should SpaceX get a decent slice of that business, then SpaceX could well be launching at least once per month.  It may then be worth their while to do their own thing. 

SpaceX certainly seems to have a perchant for doing things in-house - the latest report is the turbopump.

Assuming also that they get 1st stage return and reusability sorted as well.  That's by no means assured but it would be fantastic if they could.
Beancounter from DownUnder

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37441
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #472 on: 11/22/2010 01:03 am »

Insufficient data to support or disprove this statement at this time.


Plenty of data is available, why else would I make.
« Last Edit: 11/22/2010 01:03 am by Jim »

Offline beancounter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1249
  • Perth, Western Australia
  • Liked: 106
  • Likes Given: 172
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #473 on: 11/22/2010 01:11 am »

Insufficient data to support or disprove this statement at this time.


Plenty of data is available, why else would I make.

Ok.  What's wrong with the above assumptions?  If you agree the assumptions then the end result is possible.  If they don't hold then I'll agree that in-house 'might' not make sense but either way it's not a given.
Beancounter from DownUnder

Offline SpacexULA

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1756
  • Liked: 53
  • Likes Given: 73
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #474 on: 11/22/2010 01:13 am »
Two words: ocean tug.  Yes, a radar boat would have to do tracking, but then they're not as tied to NASA's schedule if ATK's lobbyists get their way. 

Spaced wont be launching enough for that to be a factor

Insufficient data to support or disprove this statement at this time.

However, speculating and assuming 'Spaced' is SpaceX:
Should Bigelow get his stations up and operating with 2 or 3 stations as he's stated, and should SpaceX get into HSF, and should SpaceX get a decent slice of that business, then SpaceX could well be launching at least once per month.  It may then be worth their while to do their own thing. 

SpaceX certainly seems to have a perchant for doing things in-house - the latest report is the turbopump.

Assuming also that they get 1st stage return and reusability sorted as well.  That's by no means assured but it would be fantastic if they could.

SRB recover is a 3 day operation last I checked, SpaceX acknowledged that the max launch rate from the cape will be around 12 a year, and even if the SLS matched the max flight rate of the Shuttle, which is not likely, that still has the SRB recovery teams only busy 54 days a year.  That's not a full schedule at a good therietical max for the teams work.

If SpaceX has 6 a year from the cape and SLS launches 2-3 times a year, which is the likely maxes, the SRB recovery teams will still never have as much work as they did at the max of the Shuttle program.



No Bucks no Buck Rogers, but at least Flexible path gets you Twiki.

Offline beancounter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1249
  • Perth, Western Australia
  • Liked: 106
  • Likes Given: 172
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #475 on: 11/22/2010 01:17 am »
Two words: ocean tug.  Yes, a radar boat would have to do tracking, but then they're not as tied to NASA's schedule if ATK's lobbyists get their way. 
Spaced wont be launching enough for that to be a factor

Insufficient data to support or disprove this statement at this time.

However, speculating and assuming 'Spaced' is SpaceX:
Should Bigelow get his stations up and operating with 2 or 3 stations as he's stated, and should SpaceX get into HSF, and should SpaceX get a decent slice of that business, then SpaceX could well be launching at least once per month.  It may then be worth their while to do their own thing. 

SpaceX certainly seems to have a perchant for doing things in-house - the latest report is the turbopump.

Assuming also that they get 1st stage return and reusability sorted as well.  That's by no means assured but it would be fantastic if they could.

SRB recover is a 3 day operation last I checked, SpaceX acknowledged that the max launch rate from the cape will be around 12 a year, and even if the SLS matched the max flight rate of the Shuttle, which is not likely, that still has the SRB recovery teams only busy 54 days a year.  That's not a full schedule at a good therietical max for the teams work.

If SpaceX has 6 a year from the cape and SLS launches 2-3 times a year, which is the likely maxes, the SRB recovery teams will still never have as much work as they did at the max of the Shuttle program.


OK, thanks for sharing.
Beancounter from DownUnder

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37441
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #476 on: 11/22/2010 01:20 am »

Insufficient data to support or disprove this statement at this time.


Plenty of data is available, why else would I make.

Ok.  What's wrong with the above assumptions?  If you agree the assumptions then the end result is possible.  If they don't hold then I'll agree that in-house 'might' not make sense but either way it's not a given.

It has nothing to do with available missions to fly.  They won't achieve those flight rates.

Offline beancounter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1249
  • Perth, Western Australia
  • Liked: 106
  • Likes Given: 172
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #477 on: 11/22/2010 06:01 am »

Insufficient data to support or disprove this statement at this time.



Plenty of data is available, why else would I make.

Ok.  What's wrong with the above assumptions?  If you agree the assumptions then the end result is possible.  If they don't hold then I'll agree that in-house 'might' not make sense but either way it's not a given.

It has nothing to do with available missions to fly.  They won't achieve those flight rates.

'They won't achieve those flight rates.'  ???
Beancounter from DownUnder

Offline butters

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2399
  • Liked: 1693
  • Likes Given: 598
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #478 on: 11/22/2010 07:25 am »
It has nothing to do with available missions to fly.  They won't achieve those flight rates.

Setting aside the quantitative definition of "those flight rates" for a moment, what do you believe is the bottleneck in their operation?

Once they get into the swing of things, 6 per year shouldn't be unmanageable. At 8 per year I think they start to outgrow the Hawthorne facility and consider setting up a facility in Florida for tankage, leaving Hawthorne for engines and spacecraft.

They'll need that to reach 12 per year, which is probably the practical limit for LC-40 and McGregor as they exist today. They'll also want a voluminous Florida facility for processing recovered first stages and further down to line for developing a larger vehicle like Falcon X.

They might be able to manage six F9s in 2012 given sufficient demand, but I don't see them launching twelve F9s before 2015 even under ideal circumstances.

Offline Tnarg

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 102
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: COTS Demo 1
« Reply #479 on: 11/22/2010 09:11 am »
SpaceX certainly seems to have a perchant for doing things in-house - the latest report is the turbopump.

True, SpaceX are good at what they do and If they think they can do a better job then there suppilyers they will take it in house.  But recovery of the first stage seems a little outside there basic skill set.  If there is a small effent team doing the job well then I dont see why SpaceX would want to change things.

Tags:
 

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