Author Topic: Who will follow in the F9R's footsteps?  (Read 92098 times)

Offline Kaputnik

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3079
  • Liked: 722
  • Likes Given: 821
Re: Who will follow in the F9R's footsteps?
« Reply #20 on: 12/23/2014 11:19 pm »
IMHO, it's not inconceivable that the supposed higher payload volumes that a SpaceX reusability breakthrough might allow would also benefit the expendable launchers, most of whom wouod be able to offer better per-launch pricing at higher rates.
Then factor in the wage differential between California and, say, India, and you might find that expendables are able to offer a cost competitive service.
"I don't care what anything was DESIGNED to do, I care about what it CAN do"- Gene Kranz

Offline meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14158
  • N. California
  • Liked: 14046
  • Likes Given: 1392
Re: Who will follow in the F9R's footsteps?
« Reply #21 on: 12/23/2014 11:52 pm »
The Baikal - rotating wing, jet engine, landing gear - Complex Contraption, Batman!
its not far off from Shuttles liquid flyback booster ideas.
if anyone can make this work it is the Russians.

100% agreed.  They know their airframes, jet engines, etc.  And nobody else will try something like this...  Except maybe some Americanskis....

But it's too convoluted to be economical, and the new reality imposed by SpaceX is that you have to come up with alternative systems that not only work, but actually make financial sense.  (The same rule that applies to SpaceX)

Taking a look at an F9R vs. the winged contraption, I don't see how it's even close.
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1002
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: Who will follow in the F9R's footsteps?
« Reply #22 on: 12/24/2014 01:42 am »
The Baikal - rotating wing, jet engine, landing gear - Complex Contraption, Batman!
its not far off from Shuttles liquid flyback booster ideas.
if anyone can make this work it is the Russians.

100% agreed.  They know their airframes, jet engines, etc.  And nobody else will try something like this...  Except maybe some Americanskis....

But it's too convoluted to be economical, and the new reality imposed by SpaceX is that you have to come up with alternative systems that not only work, but actually make financial sense.  (The same rule that applies to SpaceX)

Taking a look at an F9R vs. the winged contraption, I don't see how it's even close.
I would not quite write it off as "not economical" without knowing the best possible turnaround times etc, and just because it has jet engine + landing gear. Many other flying contraptions get around just fine with these. The first order variables for driving the costs have still very little to do with the configuration of the rocket. Both Plesetsk cosmodrome and Angara are built for highly automated worfklow. And then you have to factor in personnel cost deltas etc.

Also don't forget that it is Russians that have ever actually achieved any statistically meaningful launch rates with orbital launch vehicles, in late 70ies / early 80ies. They know a thing or two about fast turnaround, including from inhospitable places like Plesetsk.

But this thread was supposed to be about "who will be the next to try to recover boosters" not about who will conquer the commercial launch market ( nobody will, as a large part of payloads do not follow simple $/lb pricing at all )
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13463
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 11864
  • Likes Given: 11086
Re: Who will follow in the F9R's footsteps?
« Reply #23 on: 12/24/2014 02:40 am »
I think the more interesting question is if SpaceX will lay down any footsteps.

And by laying down footsteps, I mean lowering launch costs substantially because they are able to refly boosters without a reduction in reliability.

I don't expect that to happen for quite a while, if ever.

We're not going to have that argument here. First post clearly lays out that you start by assuming success.

(takes mod hat off)

Me, I think XCor is poised to do great things.
The Chinese are contenders as well.

I'm discounting ULA because of their charter and because I think their masters will play a different game.
I'm discounting Blue Origin and hoping to be pleasantly shocked. Bezos is richer than Musk, so his heart must not be in it as much. But maybe something will change. Once Bezos throws a lot of money in, things could change fast. And Amazon has perfected fast follower, as I've opined many times before.
I'm discounting ArianeSpace/ESA because I expect them to proceed along the path they laid out for some considerable number of years.
I'm not sure how reusable Angara would be without engineering? Where the Russians end up depends on that I think, as I can't see them starting a whole new program.
"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 meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14158
  • N. California
  • Liked: 14046
  • Likes Given: 1392
Re: Who will follow in the F9R's footsteps?
« Reply #24 on: 12/24/2014 02:50 am »
The Baikal - rotating wing, jet engine, landing gear - Complex Contraption, Batman!
its not far off from Shuttles liquid flyback booster ideas.
if anyone can make this work it is the Russians.

100% agreed.  They know their airframes, jet engines, etc.  And nobody else will try something like this...  Except maybe some Americanskis....

But it's too convoluted to be economical, and the new reality imposed by SpaceX is that you have to come up with alternative systems that not only work, but actually make financial sense.  (The same rule that applies to SpaceX)

Taking a look at an F9R vs. the winged contraption, I don't see how it's even close.
I would not quite write it off as "not economical" without knowing the best possible turnaround times etc, and just because it has jet engine + landing gear. Many other flying contraptions get around just fine with these. The first order variables for driving the costs have still very little to do with the configuration of the rocket. Both Plesetsk cosmodrome and Angara are built for highly automated worfklow. And then you have to factor in personnel cost deltas etc.

Also don't forget that it is Russians that have ever actually achieved any statistically meaningful launch rates with orbital launch vehicles, in late 70ies / early 80ies. They know a thing or two about fast turnaround, including from inhospitable places like Plesetsk.

But this thread was supposed to be about "who will be the next to try to recover boosters" not about who will conquer the commercial launch market ( nobody will, as a large part of payloads do not follow simple $/lb pricing at all )

Fair enough - they might try.

But if their motivation is not financial, why would they even bother with reuse? And if the motivation is reuse, then they don't want to fall into the trap of an expensive reusable system.

So my money is still on China.

Regarding a reusable D-IV, one of the things that are difficult is the deep cryo-cycle, which limits the life of the airframe, so it might be a Methane D-IV, and so it's really a new vehicle, not a derivative.  But yeah, who knows.  It depends of Boeing decides to risk its own $ on this venture, where the upside is limited (in Boeing-scale). 
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline Patchouli

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
  • Liked: 253
  • Likes Given: 457
Re: Who will follow in the F9R's footsteps?
« Reply #25 on: 12/24/2014 05:21 am »
The Baikal - rotating wing, jet engine, landing gear - Complex Contraption, Batman!
its not far off from Shuttles liquid flyback booster ideas.
if anyone can make this work it is the Russians.
between parachutes, vtvl and winged ideas, wings are definitely the hardest route. which is why only organizations with a lot of resources will ever try them with orbital launchers.


good perspective here : http://up-ship.com/blog/?p=11739


Due to the single engine on the URMs and the geographic location a flyback booster may be the best way to recover the boosters.
Air bags and parachutes also can be used but then you have the problem of recovering a booster in the middle of nowhere.

But economics aside Baikal would be one way to address the issue of dropping rocket parts on land.

Now if ULA goes reusable will they go with a flyback booster or a VTVL?
LM a major contractor for ULA seemed to favour flyback designs while Blue Origin favoured VTVL.
« Last Edit: 12/24/2014 05:28 am by Patchouli »

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6809
  • California
  • Liked: 8485
  • Likes Given: 5384
Re: Who will follow in the F9R's footsteps?
« Reply #26 on: 12/24/2014 06:47 am »
forgot Lockheed
http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/news/press-releases/2011/december/1205ssc-Reusable-Booster.html

But would they have spent any real resources on it without a USAF study contract?  ??? And whatever happened to that "Reusable Booster System Flight Demonstrator Program"? 3+ years have passed, and is there anything to show for it?

A lot of space angencies and corporations can powerpoint reusable boosters. Russia has. China has. India has. But that's the easy part. So this thread almost needs a follow-up question - who is likely to spend real $$$ on actually doing it?
« Last Edit: 12/24/2014 06:48 am by Lars-J »

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1002
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: Who will follow in the F9R's footsteps?
« Reply #27 on: 12/24/2014 07:21 am »
But that's the easy part. So this thread almost needs a follow-up question - who is likely to spend real $$$ on actually doing it?
I thought this is the question of the thread. I.e. who will actually try to fly reusable boosters next, after Shuttle SRBs and F9R.

One possible contender was left out : Rocket Lab of New Zealand. Although i would bet that organizations that have barely reached space are far less likely to try than the ones that routinely fly to space due to available resources.
On the other hand, smaller organizations tend to be less risk averse and more hungry to gain an edge.

EDIT: quoting OP just to reiterate
Quote
We've already had a thread called "who will compete with SpaceX", but I thought it would be fun to ask a more focused question: which will be the next entity to start flying reusable boosters?
« Last Edit: 12/24/2014 07:44 am by savuporo »
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline TrevorMonty

Re: Who will follow in the F9R's footsteps?
« Reply #28 on: 12/24/2014 08:37 am »
Blue Origin Be3  powered  RLV should be flying in 2015. But it will be suborbital. They have already demonstrated they can do vertical landing boosters.

Rocket lab are not considering RLV at this stage. Once flying regularly they may reconsider but with 110kg payload and 30-40% penalty would make it hard to justify.

The Russians have studied recovering boosters by using helicopters to snatch parachuting boosters from the air. The Angara booster is light enough for this to be feasible, adding a parachute shouldn't be that difficult.

Offline john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10350
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 2430
  • Likes Given: 13605
Re: Who will follow in the F9R's footsteps?
« Reply #29 on: 12/24/2014 12:54 pm »
Nonsensical question.  It assumes that F9R is successful as a reusable vehicle. Why would anybody be next if the first isn't successful?
Fair point. Let's say those who already are looking to fly reusably are not bothered if SpaceX succeeds or fails. There approaches do not rely on it working to begin with.

A lot of space angencies and corporations can powerpoint reusable boosters. Russia has. China has. India has. But that's the easy part. So this thread almost needs a follow-up question - who is likely to spend real $$$ on actually doing it?
Well on that basis...

The answer would be the British National Space Agency with about $90m to Reaction Engines.

Everyone else....

India talked about some kind of Shuttle type lifting body. Seemed more like a hypersonics research programme to me.

Russia talked about the Klipre lifting body shuttle, something like the SNC Dream Chaser. That didn't go anywhere.
MCT ITS BFR SS. The worlds first Methane fueled FFSC engined CFRP SS structure A380 sized aerospaceplane tail sitter capable of Earth & Mars atmospheric flight.First flight to Mars by end of 2022 TBC. T&C apply. Trust nothing. Run your own #s "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" R. Simberg."Competitve" means cheaper ¬cheap SCramjet proposed 1956. First +ve thrust 2004. US R&D spend to date > $10Bn. #deployed designs. Zero.

Offline mmeijeri

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7772
  • Martijn Meijering
  • NL
  • Liked: 397
  • Likes Given: 822
Re: Who will follow in the F9R's footsteps?
« Reply #30 on: 12/24/2014 01:02 pm »
Boeing and Lockheed likely won't allow them to do it.  They would rather they do the work themselves.

I'm sure that's true if NASA funds the whole thing. But what if they had to do this on their own dime? Would they let ULA die and start a new LV development program themselves, rather than trying to work through ULA or even simply letting ULA die and not getting back into the launch services business at all?
Pro-tip: you don't have to be a jerk if someone doesn't agree with your theories

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: Who will follow in the F9R's footsteps?
« Reply #31 on: 12/24/2014 08:26 pm »

LM a major contractor for ULA ……...

LM is not a contractor for ULA, neither is Boeing.  ULA is a separate company owned by LM and Boeing.  There is no sharing or movement of people or hardware between the parent companies.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: Who will follow in the F9R's footsteps?
« Reply #32 on: 12/24/2014 08:28 pm »

I'm sure that's true if NASA funds the whole thing. But what if they had to do this on their own dime? Would they let ULA die and start a new LV development program themselves, rather than trying to work through ULA or even simply letting ULA die and not getting back into the launch services business at all?

Still true no matter what.  If they are going to use their own dime, LM and Boeing are going to spend it themselves vs giving it to ULA.

Offline meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14158
  • N. California
  • Liked: 14046
  • Likes Given: 1392
Re: Who will follow in the F9R's footsteps?
« Reply #33 on: 12/25/2014 01:58 am »

I'm sure that's true if NASA funds the whole thing. But what if they had to do this on their own dime? Would they let ULA die and start a new LV development program themselves, rather than trying to work through ULA or even simply letting ULA die and not getting back into the launch services business at all?

Still true no matter what.  If they are going to use their own dime, LM and Boeing are going to spend it themselves vs giving it to ULA.

Except that's a bigger "if" than any of the other "if"s that have been considered on this thread so far.

Boeing and LMCO are much larger companies than SpaceX.  Their sales are measured in airplanes per day.  The reason they are in the launch business is that it is expensive enough that it is a significant source of profit.  E.g. Boeing and SLS.

Nobody has proven yet that the launch market is elastic, and if SpaceX can do what they say they can, and even supposing for a minute that Boeing and LMCO can change gears and catch up, nobody knows if there will be enough market to justify it for Boeing and LMCO.

So are they willing to jump into a multi-B adventure, on their own dime, without knowing if there's a market?  I doubt it.  Which is why I don't think they will be the next to follow.

The Chinese (or Russians) OTOH might do it because SpaceX is American, and they want to keep up. As simple as that.
« Last Edit: 12/25/2014 03:32 am by meekGee »
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Re: Who will follow in the F9R's footsteps?
« Reply #34 on: 12/25/2014 02:03 am »
What if the market isn't elastic and SpaceX have invested their treasure in building a reusable rocket for no good reason? Assuming it works, and that's the only way we'd find out that the market isn't elastic, they'll have a vehicle that vastly lowers the price of launch and only a dozen or two launches per year to fly. Wouldn't that be worse for their competitors?
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14158
  • N. California
  • Liked: 14046
  • Likes Given: 1392
Re: Who will follow in the F9R's footsteps?
« Reply #35 on: 12/25/2014 03:40 am »
What if the market isn't elastic and SpaceX have invested their treasure in building a reusable rocket for no good reason? Assuming it works, and that's the only way we'd find out that the market isn't elastic, they'll have a vehicle that vastly lowers the price of launch and only a dozen or two launches per year to fly. Wouldn't that be worse for their competitors?

Exactly.  It would.

Many have done the numbers here in this forum.  If launch prices drop dramatically, and the market does not expand, then SpaceX will barely survive, and other players will die off.  All the more reason for Boeing to look at this and say: "Why do we need this headache?  This used to be a lucrative market. Now SpaceX is driving it towards commodity pricing, but still at low volume.  Thanks, but no thanks".

I just don't see them deciding to spend Boeing-scale money on a reusable launcher without a guaranteed market. Though if they did, I'm sure curious to see what they'll come up with.

ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1002
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: Who will follow in the F9R's footsteps?
« Reply #36 on: 12/25/2014 06:02 am »
If launch prices drop dramatically, and the market does not expand, then SpaceX will barely survive, and other players will die off. ...

There are other reasons to try to recover booster rockets than this launch price idea.

- Chinese, and presumably Russians would like to stop dropping rocket stages on villages. Bad for PR
- Recovering a booster allows more accurate assessment of design margins, and hence potential boost in total performance through further optimizations. Performance matters for other reasons than price
- Assessment allows potential reliability improvements. Reliability matters - especially for things like once in a decade JWST scale projects. ~10 billion payload with a good 1% chance of blowing up is insane.

Would be nice to keep the thread away from the hypothetical economics rathole as there are other threads, and actually focus on the topic - who would try.
 
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14158
  • N. California
  • Liked: 14046
  • Likes Given: 1392
Re: Who will follow in the F9R's footsteps?
« Reply #37 on: 12/25/2014 06:25 am »
If launch prices drop dramatically, and the market does not expand, then SpaceX will barely survive, and other players will die off. ...

There are other reasons to try to recover booster rockets than this launch price idea.

- Chinese, and presumably Russians would like to stop dropping rocket stages on villages. Bad for PR
- Recovering a booster allows more accurate assessment of design margins, and hence potential boost in total performance through further optimizations. Performance matters for other reasons than price
- Assessment allows potential reliability improvements. Reliability matters - especially for things like once in a decade JWST scale projects. ~10 billion payload with a good 1% chance of blowing up is insane.

Would be nice to keep the thread away from the hypothetical economics rathole as there are other threads, and actually focus on the topic - who would try.
Agreed on the other reasons, but the economics are very important in assessing who will (or won't) be making the next reusable rocket.

ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10350
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 2430
  • Likes Given: 13605
Re: Who will follow in the F9R's footsteps?
« Reply #38 on: 12/25/2014 07:25 am »
What if the market isn't elastic and SpaceX have invested their treasure in building a reusable rocket for no good reason?
Well for starters SpaceX hasn't done so yet
Quote
Assuming it works, and that's the only way we'd find out that the market isn't elastic, they'll have a vehicle that vastly lowers the price of launch and only a dozen or two launches per year to fly. Wouldn't that be worse for their competitors?
First off the semi reusable F9 they've talked about can't lower the launch price below 44% without do 100s of launches.  That may sound like a significant saving but empirical evidence suggests it's not enough. IIRC when the Russians started offering commercial launches they were substantially cheaper than Western competitors but AFAIK the launch volume did not grow very much in terms of annual launches.

This simple fact, that incrementally dropping the price of launch by 10, 20 or even 50% (in the case of the EELV) causes no substantial increase in the market is why suppliers don't bother to do so.  :(

Basically lower prices at same market volume --> lower profits

Yes, that's the maths that has driven the launch "market" for the last 40+ years.
MCT ITS BFR SS. The worlds first Methane fueled FFSC engined CFRP SS structure A380 sized aerospaceplane tail sitter capable of Earth & Mars atmospheric flight.First flight to Mars by end of 2022 TBC. T&C apply. Trust nothing. Run your own #s "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" R. Simberg."Competitve" means cheaper ¬cheap SCramjet proposed 1956. First +ve thrust 2004. US R&D spend to date > $10Bn. #deployed designs. Zero.

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Re: Who will follow in the F9R's footsteps?
« Reply #39 on: 12/25/2014 07:57 am »
If SpaceX are ever successful at lowering the cost of launch significantly (be it with F9R or something else entirely), and no new market for launch materializes to make use of it, wouldn't that be even worse for SpaceX's competitors than if one did?
« Last Edit: 12/30/2014 02:42 pm by Lar »
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0