Author Topic: Where will BFR be built? (Read 271382 times)

alexterrell · « **Reply #160 on:** 10/12/2017 08:36 am »

And the other question .... with hindsight ... was it a mistake to build a rocket factory in down town LA.

Of course, if Musk had known what he wanted from BFR, he'd have built the factory further out and given it its own launchpad.

That of course is like asking "which nitwit built Windsor castle right under the Heathrow flight path?"

alexterrell · « **Reply #161 on:** 10/12/2017 08:46 am »

Quote from: woods170 on 10/12/2017 08:35 am

Quote from: Semmel on 10/12/2017 07:50 am
Quote from: docmordrid on 10/12/2017 07:10 am
BFF?

Wild guess: Helodriver was on a mobile and it autocorrected 'BFR' to 'BFF' because it only knows every day life acronyms.
Nothing to worry about then. 'BFR' will be an everyday life acronym within a few years from now.

Or will the name be changed? "BFR" is actually a Cisco term from about 10 -15 years ago, and relates to a Big Router. However, once they launched it, it got given a boring name.

And "technically" speaking, should it be FBR, as in this usage "F" is always used as a superlative for an adjective, and not as an adjective in itself? (Note difference between "F-enormous dog" and "enormous F-ing dog")

Indeed, whilst we expect the rocket to be amazing (or F-amazing), we do not expect it to attempt procreation.

woods170 · « **Reply #162 on:** 10/12/2017 10:04 am »

Quote from: alexterrell on 10/12/2017 08:46 am

Quote from: woods170 on 10/12/2017 08:35 am
Quote from: Semmel on 10/12/2017 07:50 am
Quote from: docmordrid on 10/12/2017 07:10 am
BFF?

Wild guess: Helodriver was on a mobile and it autocorrected 'BFR' to 'BFF' because it only knows every day life acronyms.
Nothing to worry about then. 'BFR' will be an everyday life acronym within a few years from now.
Or will the name be changed? "BFR" is actually a Cisco term from about 10 -15 years ago, and relates to a Big Router. However, once they launched it, it got given a boring name.

And "technically" speaking, should it be FBR, as in this usage "F" is always used as a superlative for an adjective, and not as an adjective in itself? (Note difference between "F-enormous dog" and "enormous F-ing dog")

Indeed, whilst we expect the rocket to be amazing (or F-amazing), we do not expect it to attempt procreation.

See this post: https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=43934.msg1735754#msg1735754

No adjective for the letter 'F'.

jebbo · « **Reply #163 on:** 10/12/2017 10:08 am »

Given the Shotwell interview confirmed a new factory by the port, I was wondering if SpaceX already owns land around there?

[ wondering about lot ownership maps similar to those in the Boca Chica thread ]

--- Tony

nacnud · « **Reply #164 on:** 10/12/2017 11:25 am »

This maybe relevant.

SpaceX wants to double its footprint at the port of Los Angeles

jebbo · « **Reply #165 on:** 10/12/2017 11:43 am »

I think this is the area in question:

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Outer+Harbor%2FBerth+46/@33.7207373,-118.2777146,1493m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x80dd37bf38979e7b:0x9157079449c6a915!8m2!3d33.7149875!4d-118.2751125

And if anyone has a GIS viewer (I'm at work so don't), the full data is downloadable from here:

https://egis3.lacounty.gov/dataportal/2015/07/15/port-of-los-angeles-berths-docks-slips/

From looking at the map and article, I'm not sure there's really the room to build a factory here (or the permission). So I wonder about nearby areas ...

--- Tony

DreamyPickle · « **Reply #166 on:** 10/12/2017 11:55 am »

Quote from: jebbo on 10/12/2017 11:43 am

I think this is the area in question:

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Outer+Harbor%2FBerth+46/@33.7207373,-118.2777146,1493m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x80dd37bf38979e7b:0x9157079449c6a915!8m2!3d33.7149875!4d-118.2751125

There seem to be some large empty lots on Signal Street on the peninsula to the east.

jebbo · « **Reply #167 on:** 10/12/2017 12:00 pm »

Quote from: DreamyPickle on 10/12/2017 11:55 am

There seem to be some large empty lots on Signal Street on the peninsula to the east.

Indeed ... but Berths 51-53 I think are on the west side of the east channel. At least they are if you assume sequential numbering: berth 46 at the south, and SSA marine are berths 54-55 at the north.

Edit: looking closer, I wonder if that long building that houses SSA marine (who look like they only have the northern bit) is actually berths 51-53.

--- Tony

nacnud · « **Reply #168 on:** 10/12/2017 12:08 pm »

From the article.

jebbo · « **Reply #169 on:** 10/12/2017 01:13 pm »

Thanks! That matches the map associated with the Port of Los Angeles permit (I couldn't find it directly from the article above; brain clearly not working today

).

The text of the permit is here https://www.portoflosangeles.org/Board/2017/February%202017/020217_Regular_Agenda_Item_2.pdf

From the wording, I'd say we have to look elsewhere for where they'd build a factory.

--- Tony

Nydoc · « **Reply #170 on:** 10/12/2017 02:02 pm »

I think that next to Holiday Harbor would be a prime location to build a factory. They could even take the F9 cores directly there as they could fit vertically under the Vincent Thomas Bridge.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Holiday+Harbor/@33.7678838,-118.2507696,1832m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m8!1m2!2m1!1sholiday+harbor,+la!3m4!1s0x0:0x7466311cfedeed4a!8m2!3d33.768606!4d-118.2496637

JBF · « **Reply #171 on:** 10/12/2017 02:42 pm »

That area between the trolley station and the overflow parking lot looks like a prime location.

philw1776 · « **Reply #172 on:** 10/12/2017 02:45 pm »

Quote from: philw1776 on 10/02/2017 04:18 pm

Quote from: geza on 10/02/2017 12:51 pm
Elon Tweeted in July, that "A 9m diameter vehicle fits in our existing factories ...".
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/888813713800785923

Then, he anounced the 9 m diameter, as decision. Any more queston?

Well, immediately after that tweet, somebody asked about the transport and Elon didn't answer, as far as I know.

Exactly!

folks need to remember that a key SpaceX culture is co-location of R&D with manufacturing. As someone who ran R&D and put products into manufacturing I have experienced the benefits of co-location and the inefficiencies and developer disconnect with remote manufacturing.. Co-location offers efficient, quick problem resolution, and design in level appreciation of mfg issues by otherwise potentially ivory towerish new product developers. I don't see CA developers moving to Boca or Michoud, no matter how much less expensive the Real Estate.

I do remain open to the possibility of SpaceX leasing expensive harbor proximate facilities within easy commute distance of present Hawthorne facilities where the engines, electronics, etc. are finally mated and integrated with the airframe/tankage before shipment to Boca and Canaveral.

Reply #7
Thank you, Gwynne

Coastal Ron · « **Reply #173 on:** 10/12/2017 03:55 pm »

According to a Reddit transcript of the Q&A, Shotwell said it would cost $2.5M to move a BFR thru the streets to a port. To them that was too expensive when compared to creating a new manufacturing facility at an L.A. port - an interesting data point.

jebbo · « **Reply #174 on:** 10/12/2017 03:57 pm »

Quote from: Coastal Ron on 10/12/2017 03:55 pm

According to a Reddit transcript of the Q&A, Shotwell said it would cost $2.5M to move a BFR thru the streets to a port. To them that was too expensive when compared to creating a new manufacturing facility at an L.A. port - an interesting data point.

Implies they are thinking about a large number of flights. Assuming equipment can be moved, how much does a factory cost to build? [ I have absolutely no idea! ]

--- Tony

rsdavis9 · « **Reply #175 on:** 10/12/2017 04:01 pm »

well the article upthread says 23k/month for space at the port.
And we have 2.4m/trip from shotwell.
Obviously the quote of 32k/mnth is probably just for area to move/store boosters but maybe they could build a HIF.

EDIT: dislexic number for rent.

speedevil · « **Reply #176 on:** 10/12/2017 04:59 pm »

Quote from: Coastal Ron on 10/12/2017 03:55 pm

According to a Reddit transcript of the Q&A, Shotwell said it would cost $2.5M to move a BFR thru the streets to a port. To them that was too expensive when compared to creating a new manufacturing facility at an L.A. port - an interesting data point.

The whole cost may be slightly more complex - for example, it's likely there would be possibly significant lag time between requesting approval for transport and it happening.
Plus, if you might want to wheel the rocket back into the factory to do major stuff to it, there are obvious savings.

$2.5M once may not be an issue. $20M and a few extra months of slip for 4 back and forth trips might be quite a different matter.
The slip may be rather more important.

Negan · « **Reply #177 on:** 10/12/2017 05:33 pm »

I wonder if they'll attempt to tunnel to the location from Hawthorne and create a fast transportation system to the port.

geza · « **Reply #178 on:** 10/12/2017 06:04 pm »

At least, Shotwell confirmed, that building BFR in Hawthorne was the default option. Consistently with the info that the 9 m was sized for Hawthorne. Obviously, they studied the road transportation option, as we did :-). Now, half-co-locaton. Half an hour drive.

Ronsmytheiii · « **Reply #179 on:** 10/12/2017 06:08 pm »

Quote from: Robotbeat on 10/09/2017 11:21 pm

Quote from: Ronsmytheiii on 10/09/2017 10:42 pm
Why not just assemble at the Seal Beach location where the Saturn SII stages were assembled and shipped? Could even still use Hawthorne facilities for most production.
Because then you're splitting up your workforce, losing much of the advantage SpaceX has built up. You'll get a cultural divide if you have two locations like that. If something doesn't fit or needs rework, you'll have to send it through the city then back, slowing everything down. Better to just move it once when it's fully complete and be done with it.

...also, it doesn't fit with what Musk has actually said or with any other information we have.

And yet......

Quote from: dror on 10/12/2017 07:31 am

Other than reaffirming previous data, the only real 'news' seems to be that they are looking to build a new factory for BFR in LA on the water.

So again, Seal beach?

edit: To add on to why it would be ideal, it is a short drive from the Seal Beach campus to the Anaheim landing dock for a barge, about 1.34 miles (2.19 km). It is on the property for the Naval Weapons Station Seal Beach so they might have to get permission.