Author Topic: How big a stage could SpaceX build at Hawthorne?  (Read 87094 times)

Offline Lobo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6915
  • Spokane, WA
  • Liked: 672
  • Likes Given: 437
Re: How big a stage could SpaceX build at Hawthorne?
« Reply #60 on: 08/03/2011 11:15 pm »
Anyone have any idea if a Merlin 2 size engine can be truck from Hawthorne to Texas and Florida assembled?
If it's approximated F-1 size then yes, probably.

If it's about the weight of the F-1, then it's dry mass is about 8.4mt.
So you are ok mass-wise. Probably could ship a couple on a single trailer.  The problem would be the nozzles.  The F-1 nozzel was about 12.2 ft wide, and I think most trailers are only about 8.5 ft wide.  But you could probably get a Wide Load permit for the difference.
If the nozzle isn't a single cast piece (have not idea how a Merlin 2 nozzle would be made), and if you could like ship two halves to be assembledin TX for testing, and/or in Florida, then they should be able to go in a single standard sized trailer. 

Or they could go by rail or transport plane.  I don't knwo the rail specifications to know if they could be shipped whole on rail or not.  If SpaceX could rent or lease a cargo plane that could land at the airfield next to Hawthorne (big if), then they could just fly the engines to TX for testing, then on to Florida for integration.

Offline Lee Jay

  • Elite Veteran
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8566
  • Liked: 3603
  • Likes Given: 327
Re: How big a stage could SpaceX build at Hawthorne?
« Reply #61 on: 08/03/2011 11:25 pm »
Anyone have any idea if a Merlin 2 size engine can be truck from Hawthorne to Texas and Florida assembled?
If it's approximated F-1 size then yes, probably.

If it's about the weight of the F-1, then it's dry mass is about 8.4mt.
So you are ok mass-wise. Probably could ship a couple on a single trailer.  The problem would be the nozzles.  The F-1 nozzel was about 12.2 ft wide, and I think most trailers are only about 8.5 ft wide.  But you could probably get a Wide Load permit for the difference.
If the nozzle isn't a single cast piece (have not idea how a Merlin 2 nozzle would be made), and if you could like ship two halves to be assembledin TX for testing, and/or in Florida, then they should be able to go in a single standard sized trailer. 

Or they could go by rail or transport plane.  I don't knwo the rail specifications to know if they could be shipped whole on rail or not.  If SpaceX could rent or lease a cargo plane that could land at the airfield next to Hawthorne (big if), then they could just fly the engines to TX for testing, then on to Florida for integration.


You can ship stuff that's 4.2m in diameter over the road and 3.8m in diameter over the rails, without going to something extremely unusual (ordinary wide-load permits for roads, etc.).

Offline Lobo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6915
  • Spokane, WA
  • Liked: 672
  • Likes Given: 437
Re: How big a stage could SpaceX build at Hawthorne?
« Reply #62 on: 08/04/2011 05:04 pm »

You can ship stuff that's 4.2m in diameter over the road and 3.8m in diameter over the rails, without going to something extremely unusual (ordinary wide-load permits for roads, etc.).

OK, I'm not familiar with all the rules and regs.  If you can ship 4.2m wide over the road with ordinary wide-load permits, then you'd be ok width wise to do that, as long as the Merlin 2 is close to the F-1's dimensions and weight.

Weight should be a problem, especially if you were just hauling one per trailer.  (Which would seem likely, as they are valuable cargo).

The next problem would be height.  If the nozzle was 12.2 ft in diameter at the widest, YOu'd be tight.  A double drop trailer can haul around 11 ft, 8 inches.  I'm not sure if theres, anything lower that that.
I suppose there would be "tall load" permitting too.  Just have to plan your route to make sure you aren't going upder an bridges that are too low.  I saw a truck hauling a crane literally hit an overpass and wedge under it.  IT tore the crane arm back and snapped a bunch of the cables.  It was a big mess.  They had to restrict traffic accross that bridge for some time until they could do a structural ananlysis on it to make sure it hadn't been too badly damaged.

So maybe the nozzle could be separated from the motor and the two shipped next to each other so that you wouldn't run into those height issues.

Offline Lee Jay

  • Elite Veteran
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8566
  • Liked: 3603
  • Likes Given: 327
Re: How big a stage could SpaceX build at Hawthorne?
« Reply #63 on: 08/04/2011 05:08 pm »
The 4.2m thing over the road is about height, not width.  You can go well over 5m wide.

Offline Lobo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6915
  • Spokane, WA
  • Liked: 672
  • Likes Given: 437
Re: How big a stage could SpaceX build at Hawthorne?
« Reply #64 on: 08/04/2011 09:30 pm »
The 4.2m thing over the road is about height, not width.  You can go well over 5m wide.

Ahhh, I misunderstood.

Well then, if a Merlin 2 is about the same size and weight as an F-1 (a reasonable assumption I think, as they are similar in performance and both kerolox) then yes, they could be easily transported via truck with standard oversized load permits.  If you transport them vertically, you could probably get two on a double drop trailer.  But I wouldn't be surprised if they just put one per trailer to make sure they weren't packed in there too tight, and to allow pleanty of room for whatever protective cradles and packaging they use.  And if your engines are several million each, you can afford a truck from each one.  ;-)

And also, if you lost a truck in an accident or something, you would risk damaging just one engine, not two.

Offline baldusi

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8356
  • Buenos Aires, Argentina
  • Liked: 2539
  • Likes Given: 8273
Re: How big a stage could SpaceX build at Hawthorne?
« Reply #65 on: 08/04/2011 09:54 pm »
The F-1 was transported on a special trailer, with the engine horizontal and the nozzle extension separated on vertical position (or was slanted? gotta see the F1 book again). That's why I proposed the same system for the Merlin. You can offer a lot better protection for the critical engine, and still move the nozzle extension in one piece.

Offline simonbp

  • Science Guy
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7138
  • Liked: 314
  • Likes Given: 183
Re: How big a stage could SpaceX build at Hawthorne?
« Reply #66 on: 08/04/2011 10:19 pm »
F-1 without the rear nozzle is small enough to fit in a standard shipping container...

Offline Lars_J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6160
  • California
  • Liked: 677
  • Likes Given: 195
Re: How big a stage could SpaceX build at Hawthorne?
« Reply #67 on: 08/04/2011 10:27 pm »
It's hard to see without specific numbers, but the infamous SpaceX propulsion PDF's that were leaked/released a while back with speculative Raptor & Merlin 2 info seemed to indicate that the Merlin 2 nozzle would be slightly larger than the F-1 nozzle. The nozzle seems to be ~15 ft in diameter from my eye approximation. But the slideshow had no hard figures.
« Last Edit: 08/04/2011 10:37 pm by Lars_J »

Offline Prober

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10348
  • Save the spin....I'm keeping you honest!
  • Nevada
  • Liked: 721
  • Likes Given: 729
Re: How big a stage could SpaceX build at Hawthorne?
« Reply #68 on: 08/04/2011 11:15 pm »
F-1 without the rear nozzle is small enough to fit in a standard shipping container...

I'll take one....
2017 - Everything Old is New Again.
"I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant..." --Isoroku Yamamoto

Offline Blackjax

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 509
  • Liked: 193
  • Likes Given: 138
Re: How big a stage could SpaceX build at Hawthorne?
« Reply #69 on: 08/05/2011 12:16 am »
The F-1 was transported on a special trailer, with the engine horizontal and the nozzle extension separated on vertical position (or was slanted? gotta see the F1 book again). That's why I proposed the same system for the Merlin. You can offer a lot better protection for the critical engine, and still move the nozzle extension in one piece.

Certainly looks entirely truckable:




Offline krytek

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 535
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: How big a stage could SpaceX build at Hawthorne?
« Reply #70 on: 08/12/2011 08:19 pm »
Another thread in the the section mentioned the F9's first stage might weight at around 12 tonnes. So I'm tempted to believe a 6 meter core can be transported by a helicopter.

Do you think a 6 or 8 meter core can make sense? I can't believe Spacex will make another launcher so it's base configuration will not be significantly more powerful than a FH, not enough bang per buck.

Offline ArbitraryConstant

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2014
  • Liked: 628
  • Likes Given: 311
Re: How big a stage could SpaceX build at Hawthorne?
« Reply #71 on: 08/12/2011 09:10 pm »
Do you think a 6 or 8 meter core can make sense? I can't believe Spacex will make another launcher so it's base configuration will not be significantly more powerful than a FH, not enough bang per buck.
Agree.

And not just FH, but FH with all likely upgrades like a LOX/LH2 US since that would be a cheaper growth path.

You'd also think a Merlin 2 would be a prerequisite for a larger core, since the number of Merlin 1s on such a beast would be unwieldy even for SpaceX, probably more than FH for just one core.

Offline Lars_J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6160
  • California
  • Liked: 677
  • Likes Given: 195
Re: How big a stage could SpaceX build at Hawthorne?
« Reply #72 on: 08/12/2011 09:15 pm »
Yep, I think FH is the limit of what SpaceX can practically accomplish with the Merlin 1 series of engines.

Bigger core stages should require larger engines - even if they don't go all they way to "Merlin 2" class engines.

Offline notherspacexfan

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 121
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: How big a stage could SpaceX build at Hawthorne?
« Reply #73 on: 08/12/2011 09:23 pm »
So I'm tempted to believe a 6 meter core can be transported by a helicopter.

An external load on a helicopter would likely not be allowed from Hawthorne because of the dense population and the proximity to LAX.

see:
http://rgl.faa.gov/regulatory_and_guidance_library/rgfar.nsf/farsbysectlookup/133.45

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: How big a stage could SpaceX build at Hawthorne?
« Reply #74 on: 08/12/2011 09:26 pm »
So I'm tempted to believe a 6 meter core can be transported by a helicopter.

An external load on a helicopter would likely not be allowed from Hawthorne because of the dense population and the proximity to LAX.

see:
http://rgl.faa.gov/regulatory_and_guidance_library/rgfar.nsf/farsbysectlookup/133.45
Helicopters have crappy range, anyways. I think he was talking about picking it out of the water, though.
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

Offline baldusi

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8356
  • Buenos Aires, Argentina
  • Liked: 2539
  • Likes Given: 8273
Re: How big a stage could SpaceX build at Hawthorne?
« Reply #75 on: 08/12/2011 09:37 pm »
The main reason for the Merlin 2 (besides a FX/XX), would be that most clients would consider it too unreliable. If they can get enough rate to show a good track record, then it might not be that important. Specially if it performs as well as they are hinting.
In any case, you could easily put 19 Merlin 1D on a 6m core. That should be enough (2.66Mlbf). Would you launch on that? Statistics really work against you. Unless SpaceX demonstrates the most catastrophic failures modes on a bench test, I still don't believe engine out.

Offline SpacexULA

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1756
  • Liked: 53
  • Likes Given: 73
Re: How big a stage could SpaceX build at Hawthorne?
« Reply #76 on: 08/12/2011 09:41 pm »
http://rgl.faa.gov/regulatory_and_guidance_library/rgfar.nsf/farsbysectlookup/133.45

I would say you would be air lifting it to LAX, to be picked up by a wide body cargo aircraft.
No Bucks no Buck Rogers, but at least Flexible path gets you Twiki.

Offline rcoppola

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2355
  • USA
  • Liked: 1967
  • Likes Given: 970
Re: How big a stage could SpaceX build at Hawthorne?
« Reply #77 on: 08/12/2011 10:02 pm »
Why not just build out a second production facility in TX once the engine reaches that maturation point and flight rates are assured. Starts to feel very NASA when you have production, testing, integration and launch facilitss spread out across the country...Does not seem as efficient as their vertically integrated model would appear..
Sail the oceans of space and set foot upon new lands!
http://www.stormsurgemedia.com

Offline rcoppola

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2355
  • USA
  • Liked: 1967
  • Likes Given: 970
Re: How big a stage could SpaceX build at Hawthorne?
« Reply #78 on: 08/12/2011 10:10 pm »
I'm just thinking how incredibly efficient it would be to be able to build, test, integrate and launch all in the same general proximity.

My concern is that because they are using legacy NASA locations and infrastructure, they will eventually get trapped into some of the same inefficiencies...
« Last Edit: 08/12/2011 10:16 pm by rcoppola »
Sail the oceans of space and set foot upon new lands!
http://www.stormsurgemedia.com

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: How big a stage could SpaceX build at Hawthorne?
« Reply #79 on: 08/12/2011 11:50 pm »
I'm just thinking how incredibly efficient it would be to be able to build, test, integrate and launch all in the same general proximity.

My concern is that because they are using legacy NASA locations and infrastructure, they will eventually get trapped into some of the same inefficiencies...

No, it isn't. Manufacturing, launch ops and mission ops are vastly different.  Plus there can't be  factories at every launch site.

Tags:
 

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