Author Topic: FX, FXH, FXX, Merlin 2  (Read 66321 times)

Offline RocketmanUS

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2226
  • USA
  • Liked: 71
  • Likes Given: 31
FX, FXH, FXX, Merlin 2
« on: 11/11/2011 05:03 am »
Discuss the possibility of a Falcon X, Falcon X Heavy, Falcon XX, and Merlin 2 engine.

Their possible configurations or something in between.

Also any changes that might make them better including reusability.


Offline tigerade

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 718
  • Low Earth Orbit
  • Liked: 51
  • Likes Given: 36
Re: FX, FXH, FXX, Merlin 2
« Reply #1 on: 11/11/2011 05:05 am »
I believe this are all paper rockets, or more accurately powerpoint rockets.  I've never heard anything about them except that one presentation last year.

Offline RocketmanUS

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2226
  • USA
  • Liked: 71
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: FX, FXH, FXX, Merlin 2
« Reply #2 on: 11/11/2011 05:36 am »
Yes a concept they had.

Some info on them at:
http://nextbigfuture.com/2010/08/spacex-talks-falcon-x-heavy-for-125.html

I believe the FXH can be made reusable and lift up to 140k kg to LEO.
So that their would not be a need for the FXX.
The FX ( reusable ) for payloads up to 38k kg to LEO.

They could need to be a little wider to hold the extra fuel needed for return.

The Merlin 2 as I understand it was to have two settings, 1.2Mlb or 1.7Mlb at launch. The 1.2Mlb was for FX,FXH and the 1.7Mlb setting for the FXX. So the Merlin 2 would have plenty of thrust for a reusable Falcon.

thread on SpaceX's Grasshopper RLV
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=26884.0

thread on SpaceX 1st and 2nd stage reusability
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=21923.0

Offline Ben the Space Brit

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7206
  • A spaceflight fan
  • London, UK
  • Liked: 806
  • Likes Given: 900
Re: FX, FXH, FXX, Merlin 2
« Reply #3 on: 11/11/2011 08:24 am »
I woulod say that FX can be considered a competitor to the equally paper-only Atlas-V P2/3A and FXX to the Atlas-V P3B.

Both FXX and Atlas-V P3B could be considered commercial alternatives to the SLS as they both fall into the same performance category (70-150t IMLEO and >25t through escape).  Both FX and A-V P2/3A fit in my 'General Purpose Launch Vehicle' concept that can be optimised for any HSF application from CLV to heavy CaLV (20-100t+ IMLEO).  I believe that it could be possible to have fully-reusable CCBs for both FX and A-V P2/3A; SpaceX have outlined one way to make the upper stage reusable too.

But, as tigerade rightly points out, neither are seriously in development.  They're just concepts right now and, with NASA and its Congressional supporters politically and ideologically committed to SLS, they are not likely to move into serious development any time soon.
« Last Edit: 11/11/2011 08:26 am by Ben the Space Brit »
"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 Kaputnik

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3079
  • Liked: 722
  • Likes Given: 821
Re: FX, FXH, FXX, Merlin 2
« Reply #4 on: 11/11/2011 10:40 am »
It's hard to say what SpaceX are up to, but it's an interesting thought experiment to try and guess.
From what we know of Grasshopper and from the RTLS reusable Falcon video, they seem to be planning on landing first stages using a single Merlin 1. Therefore any switch to a Merlin 2, with significantly higher thrust, would go completely against this plan.
My guess would be that Merlin 1 is the way ahead, with the only forseeable big change being the 'Raptor' development (whether that is an engine or a whole stage, and whether it is LH2 or CH4 fuelled). However I cannot see Raptor being significantly greater thrust than Merlin, since it is intended for upper stages anyway.

As an aside, SpaceX seem to think that they can land a 10t Dragon on Mars, using its standard 3.6m heatshield. Nobody really knows how they plan on meeting this claim, but if we suspend reality for a moment and give them the benefit of the doubt, that means that even with a standard Falcon or FH fairing, they could be landing over 20t in one go. Applying the same hammerhead configuration to a FX would yield more than 50t. So the need for monolithic BFRs like FXX goes away, and a modular approach makes more sense.
But, then again, I don't believe that they can actually land a Dragon on Mars so this is all moot.
"I don't care what anything was DESIGNED to do, I care about what it CAN do"- Gene Kranz

Offline apace

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 812
  • Liked: 4
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: FX, FXH, FXX, Merlin 2
« Reply #5 on: 11/11/2011 10:59 am »
What happened to the trade studies from SpaceX and others for the HLV?

Offline jabe

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1223
  • Liked: 179
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: FX, FXH, FXX, Merlin 2
« Reply #6 on: 11/11/2011 11:01 am »
my 2 cents..they proposed to give options other then SLS..
I'm guessing that Spacex is hoping for depots to developed.  Possibly gives a much larger launch rate for F9 and if FH is successful, combining depots with FH it will be fun to watch without the need to build a FXH..and cheaper..
jb

Offline go4mars

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3748
  • Earth
  • Liked: 158
  • Likes Given: 3463
Re: FX, FXH, FXX, Merlin 2
« Reply #7 on: 11/11/2011 02:32 pm »
I think F9 and FH are technology & production test beds for larger systems.  They will use this system (that pays for itself along the way) to improve their methods until they have a solid characterization of the challenges associated with reusable hardware architectures.  This step-wise approach to their sub-scale demonstrator fleet might culminate in something that demonstrates staged combustion, different fuels, cross-feed, characterization of reentry forces, 1st stage avionics, landing software, re-entry materials and hardware, etc.  They might even eventually test M2 on an expendable version before scaling up to a rapidly reusable crossfeeding BFR that can deliver 50 tonne chunks of payload to the surface of Mars in a fully reusable architecture (implies methane engines will factor in at some point).  Remember, the BFR isn't trying to be competition for SLS.  It is for enabling large-scale Mars colonization at a price point of roughly the cost of an average home in California.  That's the big untapped market that requires reusable big falcon rockets.  The timeframe for developing the reusable Mars architecture will (I think) necessarily be after the IPO, and the optimal timing for an IPO will be some time after FH has had success and ISS resupply has commenced.  That timing might be at odds with mid-term prospects for the global economy.  Hopefully not, and time will tell. 

The other thing that might play in here, is the prospect of just the first stage of a rapidly reusable BFR being developed first, and instead of a second stage, a sub-orbital passenger vehicle could provide fast intercontinental mass-transit.  Which would ideally help with development costs for the Mars architecture. 

Without an IPO, an arch-angel investor could fund a lot of this (like Buffet/Gates/Saudi etc. or income from Tesla and Solar city might play in. 

This of course is all over a long timeframe. 
« Last Edit: 11/11/2011 02:46 pm by go4mars »
Elasmotherium; hurlyburly Doggerlandic Jentilak steeds insouciantly gallop in viridescent taiga, eluding deluginal Burckle's abyssal excavation.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: FX, FXH, FXX, Merlin 2
« Reply #8 on: 11/11/2011 02:35 pm »
And everyone will get a pony too.

Offline beb

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 271
  • Liked: 12
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: FX, FXH, FXX, Merlin 2
« Reply #9 on: 11/11/2011 02:59 pm »
It's important to remember than Elon Musk is a dot-com billionaire. He comes from an industry where vaporware is not only endemic but most required as a business plan. So all this talk about future rockets FX, FXH and FXX is just that: talk.

As for the Merlin2. Right now the DOD is interested in a 500K rocket engine. I think that's what we're going to see a 500K (possibly methane) engine.

But people should take the things Musk says with a grain of salt.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: FX, FXH, FXX, Merlin 2
« Reply #10 on: 11/11/2011 03:07 pm »
It's important to remember than Elon Musk is a dot-com billionaire. He comes from an industry where vaporware is not only endemic but most required as a business plan. So all this talk about future rockets FX, FXH and FXX is just that: talk.

As for the Merlin2. Right now the DOD is interested in a 500K rocket engine. I think that's what we're going to see a 500K (possibly methane) engine.

But people should take the things Musk says with a grain of salt.
When was the last time you saw Musk talking about those? Musk wasn't the one really pushing FX, FXX, Merlin 2 etc. That's pretty much just SpaceX amazing people, plus a couple powerpoints from SpaceX. Musk has been pushing crewed Dragon, reusable Falcon 9, and Falcon Heavy. Ambitious enough.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Online oldAtlas_Eguy

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5304
  • Florida
  • Liked: 5005
  • Likes Given: 1444
Re: FX, FXH, FXX, Merlin 2
« Reply #11 on: 11/11/2011 04:18 pm »
First you need an engine development. The only new engine development is the SC engine of unknown thrust and unknown prop type. With a 300-500klbf RP-1/LOX engine using the same 9:1 configuration a vehicle with the same length and 5-6m diameter which can be launched initially on the same pads as F9, a greater than double performance of the F9/FH or 30-35MT/105-125MT can be achieved at roughly the same prices or up to 50% more as that of the F9/FH. This would drop LEO $/kg rates by about 30% or to $3,500/$1,800 for single/heavy. This approach would use the experience gained from the F9 and FH and just scale up those designs including being able to use the RLV concepts being explored for the F9. A 1+mlbf engine as the next engine just does not seem to be in the near future plans.

Such a vehicle would replace the FH usage completely leaving the F9 as the small sat launcher then the X vehicle as the large GEO sat launcher and then the XH vehicle as a BEO or tanker launcher.

Offline Lurker Steve

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1420
  • Liked: 35
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: FX, FXH, FXX, Merlin 2
« Reply #12 on: 11/11/2011 04:56 pm »
First you need an engine development. The only new engine development is the SC engine of unknown thrust and unknown prop type. With a 300-500klbf RP-1/LOX engine using the same 9:1 configuration a vehicle with the same length and 5-6m diameter which can be launched initially on the same pads as F9, a greater than double performance of the F9/FH or 30-35MT/105-125MT can be achieved at roughly the same prices or up to 50% more as that of the F9/FH. This would drop LEO $/kg rates by about 30% or to $3,500/$1,800 for single/heavy. This approach would use the experience gained from the F9 and FH and just scale up those designs including being able to use the RLV concepts being explored for the F9. A 1+mlbf engine as the next engine just does not seem to be in the near future plans.

Such a vehicle would replace the FH usage completely leaving the F9 as the small sat launcher then the X vehicle as the large GEO sat launcher and then the XH vehicle as a BEO or tanker launcher.


How about they finish the development of the FH first ? Any idea on how much SpaceX has committed to the development of the FH, before you go and obsolete it before the first flight ?

How much was spent to develop the F1, only to halt production after 5 flights ?

Eventually, you need to launch production rockets enough times to pay for the development costs. NASA and/or the DOD will not be funding this development.

Offline Jason1701

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2232
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 152
Re: FX, FXH, FXX, Merlin 2
« Reply #13 on: 11/11/2011 05:02 pm »
It's important to remember than Elon Musk is a dot-com billionaire. He comes from an industry where vaporware is not only endemic but most required as a business plan. So all this talk about future rockets FX, FXH and FXX is just that: talk.

As for the Merlin2. Right now the DOD is interested in a 500K rocket engine. I think that's what we're going to see a 500K (possibly methane) engine.

But people should take the things Musk says with a grain of salt.
When was the last time you saw Musk talking about those? Musk wasn't the one really pushing FX, FXX, Merlin 2 etc. That's pretty much just SpaceX amazing people, plus a couple powerpoints from SpaceX. Musk has been pushing crewed Dragon, reusable Falcon 9, and Falcon Heavy. Ambitious enough.

Musk actively downplayed the concepts. NSF posters are echoing him when they call FX/XX a single guy's idea that never went anywhere.

The trade studies went into the RACs, which (I think likely) had GR&As biased in favor of SD.

Offline ArbitraryConstant

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2014
  • Liked: 628
  • Likes Given: 311
Re: FX, FXH, FXX, Merlin 2
« Reply #14 on: 11/11/2011 05:24 pm »
It's important to remember than Elon Musk is a dot-com billionaire. He comes from an industry where vaporware is not only endemic but most required as a business plan. So all this talk about future rockets FX, FXH and FXX is just that: talk.

As for the Merlin2. Right now the DOD is interested in a 500K rocket engine. I think that's what we're going to see a 500K (possibly methane) engine.

But people should take the things Musk says with a grain of salt.
Uh, didn't Musk actually come out and say specifically they weren't building an FX, FXH or FXX, and that he was annoyed they'd been publicly discussed at all?

So this isn't something Musk said that we should take with a grain of salt, this is something Musk specifically denied that fans and detractors alike have taken way too seriously.

Discuss the possibility of a Falcon X, Falcon X Heavy, Falcon XX, and Merlin 2 engine.
Musk has specifically said they aren't building any of these vehicles, and Merlin 2 as it's been discussed seems unlikely since Merlin 1D already exceeds the 2's claimed T/W ratio.

Whatever this new staged combustion engine is, that'll tell us more about SpaceX's future direction than previous disclosures. Specifically whether there's a first stage version, and how big it is.
« Last Edit: 11/11/2011 05:25 pm by ArbitraryConstant »

Offline manboy

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2086
  • Texas, USA, Earth
  • Liked: 134
  • Likes Given: 544
Re: FX, FXH, FXX, Merlin 2
« Reply #15 on: 11/11/2011 05:30 pm »
It's important to remember than Elon Musk is a dot-com billionaire. He comes from an industry where vaporware is not only endemic but most required as a business plan. So all this talk about future rockets FX, FXH and FXX is just that: talk.

As for the Merlin2. Right now the DOD is interested in a 500K rocket engine. I think that's what we're going to see a 500K (possibly methane) engine.

But people should take the things Musk says with a grain of salt.
Uh, didn't Musk actually come out and say specifically they weren't building an FX, FXH or FXX, and that he was annoyed they'd been publicly discussed at all?

So this isn't something Musk said that we should take with a grain of salt, this is something Musk specifically denied that fans and detractors alike have taken way too seriously.
Than he probably shouldn't have said this

Quote
“we’re confident we could get a fully operational vehicle to the pad for $2.5 billion—and not only that, I will personally guarantee it,” Musk says. In addition, the final product would be a fully accounted cost per flight of $300 million, he asserts. “I’ll also guarantee that,” he adds, though he cautions this does not include a potential upper-stage upgrade.
"Cheese has been sent into space before. But the same cheese has never been sent into space twice." - StephenB

Offline RocketmanUS

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2226
  • USA
  • Liked: 71
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: FX, FXH, FXX, Merlin 2
« Reply #16 on: 11/11/2011 05:33 pm »
I totally agree on finishing F9, FH, Dragon cargo and crew first.

Some good points have been said.

That said, I,m looking for any specs that might have been published on the FX,FXH,FXX.

Their posted specs on the Merlin 2 was to be able to launch on F9-FXX. I believe the Merlin 2 on the F9 was to test the M2 and for customers that only want a single engine on the first stage ( read some place DoD might have wanted a single engine only on the first stage ).

My point of this thread is for info and a possible future with a bigger Falcon rocket, not meant that we should have it now but maybe start R and D around 2015 to 2017.

Is there any info on a new SpaceX first stage engine other than the Merlin 1d?

Note:
Yes I am for fuel depots. The fuel is the biggest part of mass needed in LEO for BEO missions. I do hope that SpaceX gets it's FH and red Dragon ( Mars cargo version )
Red Dragon thread
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=26269.0
« Last Edit: 11/13/2011 05:17 am by RocketmanUS »

Offline Jason1701

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2232
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 152
Re: FX, FXH, FXX, Merlin 2
« Reply #17 on: 11/11/2011 05:35 pm »
It's important to remember than Elon Musk is a dot-com billionaire. He comes from an industry where vaporware is not only endemic but most required as a business plan. So all this talk about future rockets FX, FXH and FXX is just that: talk.

As for the Merlin2. Right now the DOD is interested in a 500K rocket engine. I think that's what we're going to see a 500K (possibly methane) engine.

But people should take the things Musk says with a grain of salt.
Uh, didn't Musk actually come out and say specifically they weren't building an FX, FXH or FXX, and that he was annoyed they'd been publicly discussed at all?

So this isn't something Musk said that we should take with a grain of salt, this is something Musk specifically denied that fans and detractors alike have taken way too seriously.
Than he probably shouldn't have said this

Quote
“we’re confident we could get a fully operational vehicle to the pad for $2.5 billion—and not only that, I will personally guarantee it,” Musk says. In addition, the final product would be a fully accounted cost per flight of $300 million, he asserts. “I’ll also guarantee that,” he adds, though he cautions this does not include a potential upper-stage upgrade.

Musk saying that they can build something if given a fat government contract in no way means they are pursuing it in lieu of that.

Online oldAtlas_Eguy

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5304
  • Florida
  • Liked: 5005
  • Likes Given: 1444
Re: FX, FXH, FXX, Merlin 2
« Reply #18 on: 11/11/2011 06:17 pm »
Here is the possible NET timelines for any new next gen vehicle:
1) 3-4 years development for new SL engine - ~ 2015
2) At least 18-24 months from final design engine testing start to first launch. ~ 2017-2018

It’s not something that would happen soon and this timeline also assumes fast development with full spending. With the several other projects already being started any next gen booster development will be a slow start making an in earnest start of development years away, sometime after first successful FH flight and after as well as the first 1st stage recovery. Any next gen booster would get funds for development after FH, RLV development and CCDev. There is not likely to be much funds left other than for the SC engine development. FH has been projected to cost $300+M for pad, development and first test flight or about $100M per year of spending. RLV spending during the next few years will probably be for the test flights of the Grasshopper at <$10M, and CCDev spending (SpaceX funded portion) in the order of $20-50M. The revenue for the projected 6 flights next year ~$600M  (1 COTS and 3CRS with 2 sat). That’s ~$120M in profit that can be applied to new development projects. In other words there are not sufficient funds next year or for the next few years until 2014 or later for any significant next gen booster development. Making 2020 the earliest you would see a next gen SpaceX booster fly, with FH having been operational for 7 years, unless they are contracted by NASA or DOD to develop such a booster prior to 2015 something which has a very low probability.

Offline go4mars

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3748
  • Earth
  • Liked: 158
  • Likes Given: 3463
Re: FX, FXH, FXX, Merlin 2
« Reply #19 on: 11/11/2011 06:57 pm »
I agree with that in general, but the timeline could be upset by a sudden infusion of fresh dollars (IPO).  But I suspect IPO will be along your predicted timeframe (2014ish).  Although Elon has mentioned 2012.  Well, if the contract arrangement for big gov't sats gets figured out, reuse looks more likely, FH goes up at least once (preferably crossfed), ISS resupply happens, LAS hardware seems to be working, and the plans for future markets and hardware are laid out, then sure.  IPO in 2012.  I'll be surprised if it happens by then.
Elasmotherium; hurlyburly Doggerlandic Jentilak steeds insouciantly gallop in viridescent taiga, eluding deluginal Burckle's abyssal excavation.

Tags:
 

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