Quote from: Robotbeat on 10/08/2017 10:50 amQuote from: savuporo on 10/08/2017 03:54 amThere is no way they will be doing electric propulsion and deep space navigation &tracking in houseWhy not? SpaceX is doing their own electric propulsion, and universities sometimes develop thrusters. It's not THAT complicated.SpaceX has considerable resources to hire experienced engineers and technicians in this field and there's not too many companies that even build commercial electric propulsion systems. There's very few startups working on electrical propulsion of any kind.I'd be willing to bet it really is THAT complicated.
Quote from: savuporo on 10/08/2017 03:54 amThere is no way they will be doing electric propulsion and deep space navigation &tracking in houseWhy not? SpaceX is doing their own electric propulsion, and universities sometimes develop thrusters. It's not THAT complicated.
There is no way they will be doing electric propulsion and deep space navigation &tracking in house
Quote from: Darkseraph on 10/08/2017 06:20 pmQuote from: Robotbeat on 10/08/2017 10:50 amQuote from: savuporo on 10/08/2017 03:54 amThere is no way they will be doing electric propulsion and deep space navigation &tracking in houseWhy not? SpaceX is doing their own electric propulsion, and universities sometimes develop thrusters. It's not THAT complicated.SpaceX has considerable resources to hire experienced engineers and technicians in this field and there's not too many companies that even build commercial electric propulsion systems. There's very few startups working on electrical propulsion of any kind.I'd be willing to bet it really is THAT complicated.Just as importantly, they have the legal resources to defend or fight over applicable IP. A company with most recent $20M funding round may not
Quote from: savuporo on 10/08/2017 06:59 pmJust as importantly, they have the legal resources to defend or fight over applicable IP. A company with most recent $20M funding round may notThat doesn't make sense. Just about the only assets any small space company has is IP.
Just as importantly, they have the legal resources to defend or fight over applicable IP. A company with most recent $20M funding round may not
Musk doesn't think it's that hard:QuoteTeaming with local propulsion companies? Not really. I don't think so. We're going to build our own propulsion unit. People in the space industry have a really difficult time manufacturing things. They're pretty good at designing them in the first place but they don't actually know how to make them in volume. It's possible we could license some technology or something but the main propulsion system we have in mind for the satellite is a Hall effect thruster which, not to trivialize it too much, is basically like a loud speaker, okay. It's like a magnetic field accelerating ions, it's pretty easy to make. I mean, there's degrees of Hall thruster, like how good it is, but at the end of the day it's not that hard. So it's not clear that it would make sense to outsource something that's not that hard.http://shitelonsays.com/transcript/spacex-seattle-2015-2015-01-15
Teaming with local propulsion companies? Not really. I don't think so. We're going to build our own propulsion unit. People in the space industry have a really difficult time manufacturing things. They're pretty good at designing them in the first place but they don't actually know how to make them in volume. It's possible we could license some technology or something but the main propulsion system we have in mind for the satellite is a Hall effect thruster which, not to trivialize it too much, is basically like a loud speaker, okay. It's like a magnetic field accelerating ions, it's pretty easy to make. I mean, there's degrees of Hall thruster, like how good it is, but at the end of the day it's not that hard. So it's not clear that it would make sense to outsource something that's not that hard.
Planetary Resources has their own in-house manufacturing capacity, which you would know if you had skimmed through this thread first (go up-thread and you'll see tours of their facility). They aren't just going to contract with Airbus or Boeing. (Although I wouldn't be TOO surprised if they buy a COTS thruster).Skepticism is fine as long as you do a minimal amount of research first.Planetary (heh) is one of the few firms with actual resources behind it.(Doesn't mean they'll succeed, of course, but a Hall Effect thruster isn't /that/ complicated. It's within reach of universities, which is roughly what Planetary Resources' facilities look like.)
Quote from: Robotbeat on 10/08/2017 07:42 pmQuote from: savuporo on 10/08/2017 06:59 pmJust as importantly, they have the legal resources to defend or fight over applicable IP. A company with most recent $20M funding round may notThat doesn't make sense. Just about the only assets any small space company has is IP.I'm not following. Planetary Resources has existing electric propulsion IP on the shelf that will power their probes, that they can freely deploy ? Not Busek, SNECMA etc ? EDIT: I mean do you simply assume you can just take whatever from here and make as many copies as you want ?
Quote from: Robotbeat on 10/08/2017 05:48 pmPlanetary Resources has their own in-house manufacturing capacity, which you would know if you had skimmed through this thread first (go up-thread and you'll see tours of their facility). They aren't just going to contract with Airbus or Boeing. (Although I wouldn't be TOO surprised if they buy a COTS thruster).Skepticism is fine as long as you do a minimal amount of research first.Planetary (heh) is one of the few firms with actual resources behind it.(Doesn't mean they'll succeed, of course, but a Hall Effect thruster isn't /that/ complicated. It's within reach of universities, which is roughly what Planetary Resources' facilities look like.)Facilities - yes, I saw. But that's like a micro-sat hobbyshop, right? So I can believe a nanosat, or maybe the telescope, if they get the optics from somewhere else.But what's shown in their video is a very advanced and capable spacecraft. As advanced as the best probes sent out by JPL.Meanwhile, again - they've "launched" one cubesat the was stillborn, and have another one planned that is lost in the schedule, right?How does that jive with all the capabilities they boast?--Also, unless Alan Boyle was there on a Sunday morning, I only saw about 5 people in the video.2 were at an "operations center" doing some sort of simulation on a Mac. Two others were in the lab.The company I work at has 50 people and labs. It doesn't look like THAT.
Quote from: savuporo on 10/08/2017 08:11 pmQuote from: Robotbeat on 10/08/2017 07:42 pmQuote from: savuporo on 10/08/2017 06:59 pmJust as importantly, they have the legal resources to defend or fight over applicable IP. A company with most recent $20M funding round may notThat doesn't make sense. Just about the only assets any small space company has is IP.I'm not following. Planetary Resources has existing electric propulsion IP on the shelf that will power their probes, that they can freely deploy ? Not Busek, SNECMA etc ? EDIT: I mean do you simply assume you can just take whatever from here and make as many copies as you want ?No, of course not. But Hall Effect thrusters are several decades old and out of patent.
In order to be practical for moving large amounts of water around, you're going to have to use a thruster which can use water as a propellant. None exist proven commercially; all are experimental.Such a thing is a core technology for an asteroid mining company, and you're going to need them very cheap. They'll have to eventually develop them, so might as well start now.
Quote from: meekGee on 10/08/2017 10:28 pmQuote from: Robotbeat on 10/08/2017 05:48 pmPlanetary Resources has their own in-house manufacturing capacity, which you would know if you had skimmed through this thread first (go up-thread and you'll see tours of their facility). They aren't just going to contract with Airbus or Boeing. (Although I wouldn't be TOO surprised if they buy a COTS thruster).Skepticism is fine as long as you do a minimal amount of research first.Planetary (heh) is one of the few firms with actual resources behind it.(Doesn't mean they'll succeed, of course, but a Hall Effect thruster isn't /that/ complicated. It's within reach of universities, which is roughly what Planetary Resources' facilities look like.)Facilities - yes, I saw. But that's like a micro-sat hobbyshop, right? So I can believe a nanosat, or maybe the telescope, if they get the optics from somewhere else.But what's shown in their video is a very advanced and capable spacecraft. As advanced as the best probes sent out by JPL.Meanwhile, again - they've "launched" one cubesat the was stillborn, and have another one planned that is lost in the schedule, right?How does that jive with all the capabilities they boast?--Also, unless Alan Boyle was there on a Sunday morning, I only saw about 5 people in the video.2 were at an "operations center" doing some sort of simulation on a Mac. Two others were in the lab.The company I work at has 50 people and labs. It doesn't look like THAT.The satellites pictured look like microsats.
The NASA contract is structured in terms of the 4-inch-square Cubesat units. Spaceflight would handle 24 units, or 24U, in 2018. The options apply to 24U in 2019 and another 24U in 2020.Those 24 units could cover 24 satellites of a 1U size, but the batch is more likely to include multiple-unit satellites, such as the six-unit Arkyd 6 satellite that Redmond, Wash.-based Planetary Resources has readied for an orbital test.
Quote from: Robotbeat on 10/08/2017 06:55 pmIn order to be practical for moving large amounts of water around, you're going to have to use a thruster which can use water as a propellant. None exist proven commercially; all are experimental.Such a thing is a core technology for an asteroid mining company, and you're going to need them very cheap. They'll have to eventually develop them, so might as well start now.That is DSI approach, use steam for thrust. ISP of around 200. For an exploration vehicle SEP is better as it gives a larger DV and refuelling with water will not be option until PR are harvesting water. That will take different vehicle and few more years. In mean time SEP exploration vehicle can keep on looking for more target asteriods.
Quote from: Robotbeat on 10/08/2017 11:34 pmQuote from: savuporo on 10/08/2017 08:11 pmQuote from: Robotbeat on 10/08/2017 07:42 pmQuote from: savuporo on 10/08/2017 06:59 pmJust as importantly, they have the legal resources to defend or fight over applicable IP. A company with most recent $20M funding round may notThat doesn't make sense. Just about the only assets any small space company has is IP.I'm not following. Planetary Resources has existing electric propulsion IP on the shelf that will power their probes, that they can freely deploy ? Not Busek, SNECMA etc ? EDIT: I mean do you simply assume you can just take whatever from here and make as many copies as you want ?No, of course not. But Hall Effect thrusters are several decades old and out of patent.You understand that all improvements and developments over last 20 years are filed for and extensively covered, right ? If you have an army of IP lawyers that someone the size of SpaceX can afford, you may be able to navigate around it. A modest startup with a few ten million funding ? HardlyAnd, to add to it. It would just hardly make any business sense.
Oh please, Hall Effect thrusters are old tech at this point. You aren't forced to use newer patented ideas. There are patents on every part of a spacecraft, so your argument applies with equal force to everything else. You've just latched on to Busek for some reason.
FWIW they've raised at least $50M so far.