If SpaceX next reusability goals are 24hr Booster turnaround and rapid reuse of S2 and farings, what are the limiting factors to very frequent launches?Could the current launchpads have 2 or more HIFs so there could be parallel processing?
Quote from: Ludus on 04/14/2017 03:07 amIf SpaceX next reusability goals are 24hr Booster turnaround and rapid reuse of S2 and farings, what are the limiting factors to very frequent launches?Could the current launchpads have 2 or more HIFs so there could be parallel processing?One very important limiting factor is that there aren't enough payloads to require a launch every day. It isn't necessary. Pushing to have such an unnecessary capability would drive up costs (you would need more people and more launch infrastructure) for no good reason. - Ed Kyle
While lack of payloads is a reasonable concern, SpaceX has a solution in the works that will solve that problem for the forseeable future- the CommX Internet Constelation.
Quote from: rakaydos on 04/14/2017 06:09 amWhile lack of payloads is a reasonable concern, SpaceX has a solution in the works that will solve that problem for the forseeable future- the CommX Internet Constelation.Whether that will work out on the scale envisioned by SpaceX is anyone's guess.
Could the current launchpads have 2 or more HIFs so there could be parallel processing?
Quote from: Oli on 04/14/2017 11:10 amQuote from: rakaydos on 04/14/2017 06:09 amWhile lack of payloads is a reasonable concern, SpaceX has a solution in the works that will solve that problem for the forseeable future- the CommX Internet Constelation.Whether that will work out on the scale envisioned by SpaceX is anyone's guess.Fair point, but SpaceX is betting that it will. What's the track record on betting against SpaceX (other than bets about WHEN things happen) so far? Not zero, SpaceX has shifted approaches before and will again, but not that good, IMHO.
They still have to fulfill the promise of creating new markets. The reason SpaceX was able to break into the launch market in the first place was because the dominant players had given up on that.
. I am encouraged by the automation that reduces the responsibilities of the range. This should reduce the frequency of cancellation, but I have no idea how frequently the automation will help.
Quote from: jcliving on 04/14/2017 02:07 pm. I am encouraged by the automation that reduces the responsibilities of the range. This should reduce the frequency of cancellation, but I have no idea how frequently the automation will help.The "frequency of cancellation" was already rare. The automation was more in cost savings than in preventing delays. There was only one case of causing a delaying the last 5 years or so
Quote from: Jim on 04/14/2017 02:25 pmQuote from: jcliving on 04/14/2017 02:07 pm. I am encouraged by the automation that reduces the responsibilities of the range. This should reduce the frequency of cancellation, but I have no idea how frequently the automation will help.The "frequency of cancellation" was already rare. The automation was more in cost savings than in preventing delays. There was only one case of causing a delaying the last 5 years or soWhat is meant by "frequency of cancellation" ?
Quote from: jcliving on 04/14/2017 02:07 pm. I am encouraged by the automation that reduces the responsibilities of the range. This should reduce the frequency of cancellation, but I have no idea how frequently the automation will help.The "frequency of cancellation" was already rare. The automation was more in cost savings than in preventing delays. There was only one case of causing a delaying the last 5 years or so.Again, you are over estimating the effect of this on launch rates.
The key determining factor for availability of platforms is reuse. There is not a single vendor that can produce 50+ platforms per year. The only way to achieve this is reuse.
Given the launch manifest backlog, payloads are not a limiting factor.
Given everything I wrote, did you really decide to pick on this minor part of my diatribe?
Quote from: edkyle99 on 04/14/2017 03:48 amQuote from: Ludus on 04/14/2017 03:07 amIf SpaceX next reusability goals are 24hr Booster turnaround and rapid reuse of S2 and farings, what are the limiting factors to very frequent launches?Could the current launchpads have 2 or more HIFs so there could be parallel processing?One very important limiting factor is that there aren't enough payloads to require a launch every day. It isn't necessary. Pushing to have such an unnecessary capability would drive up costs (you would need more people and more launch infrastructure) for no good reason. - Ed KyleWhile lack of payloads is a reasonable concern, SpaceX has a solution in the works that will solve that problem for the forseeable future- the CommX Internet Constelation. They need to put up 800 satelites just to do initial tests and bring the system online- Then they need to put the rest of the constelation up before those first 800 decay out of VLEO, then replace the decaying ones, then replace the rest, then replace the replacements......yea, payloads wont be an issue.