Crispy - 13/11/2007 7:49 AMWhen you're building so many engines, I suppose you still get economies of scale even when you're upgrading the design every 2-3 years.
pippin - 13/11/2007 8:48 AMQuoteG-pit - 13/11/2007 2:12 AMAlso they are gearing up to "Produce more rocket engines than the rest of US production combined" in 2008.Lemme guess: They need about the "rest of US production combined" number of engines to make one F9, right?EDIT: OKOKOK, maybe two...
G-pit - 13/11/2007 2:12 AMAlso they are gearing up to "Produce more rocket engines than the rest of US production combined" in 2008.
William Barton - 13/11/2007 2:59 PMQuotepippin - 13/11/2007 8:48 AMQuoteG-pit - 13/11/2007 2:12 AMAlso they are gearing up to "Produce more rocket engines than the rest of US production combined" in 2008.Lemme guess: They need about the "rest of US production combined" number of engines to make one F9, right?EDIT: OKOKOK, maybe two...How many engines are produced in the US each year, given that the Atlas V 1st stage engines are imported? The 50 cited in the article would be enough for ten Falcon 9s, 25 Falcon 1s, or, come to think of it, one Falcon 9 Heavy with 22 assorted engines left over...
pippin - 13/11/2007 9:09 AMQuoteWilliam Barton - 13/11/2007 2:59 PMQuotepippin - 13/11/2007 8:48 AMQuoteG-pit - 13/11/2007 2:12 AMAlso they are gearing up to "Produce more rocket engines than the rest of US production combined" in 2008.Lemme guess: They need about the "rest of US production combined" number of engines to make one F9, right?EDIT: OKOKOK, maybe two...How many engines are produced in the US each year, given that the Atlas V 1st stage engines are imported? The 50 cited in the article would be enough for ten Falcon 9s, 25 Falcon 1s, or, come to think of it, one Falcon 9 Heavy with 22 assorted engines left over... 10 F9??? you mean: 5 F9, one F9 takes 10 engines.I guessed at about 12 flights of Atlas and Delta IV, with, say, 6 RS68 for the Delta and one RL10 for any of the Deltas and Atlas'. What I don't know is about DII, AFAIK the RS27s have all been produced but what about 2nd/3rd stage?Jim?
William Barton - 13/11/2007 3:14 PMYou're right, I meant five F9s. I don't have enough fingers and toes to do the calculation correctly on the first try. :laugh:
kkattula - 14/11/2007 10:15 AMBeats me how upgrading the J-2X can cost 1.2 billion, when Space-X have built this engine, 3 others, several factories, test stands, 2 launch pads, 2 new launch vehicle designs, and a manned/unmanned capsule, for an order of magnitude less.
stockman - 14/11/2007 10:17 AMQuotekkattula - 14/11/2007 10:15 AMBeats me how upgrading the J-2X can cost 1.2 billion, when Space-X have built this engine, 3 others, several factories, test stands, 2 launch pads, 2 new launch vehicle designs, and a manned/unmanned capsule, for an order of magnitude less. Capatilism/Free enterprise vs Government Pork project thinking.
stockman - 14/11/2007 4:17 PMQuotekkattula - 14/11/2007 10:15 AMBeats me how upgrading the J-2X can cost 1.2 billion, when Space-X have built this engine, 3 others, several factories, test stands, 2 launch pads, 2 new launch vehicle designs, and a manned/unmanned capsule, for an order of magnitude less. Capatilism/Free enterprise vs Government Pork project thinking.
Analyst - 14/11/2007 9:03 AMQuotestockman - 14/11/2007 4:17 PMQuotekkattula - 14/11/2007 10:15 AMBeats me how upgrading the J-2X can cost 1.2 billion, when Space-X have built this engine, 3 others, several factories, test stands, 2 launch pads, 2 new launch vehicle designs, and a manned/unmanned capsule, for an order of magnitude less. Capatilism/Free enterprise vs Government Pork project thinking.Great. Now they only have to keep their schedule, which is already impossible, even taking the latest revision; reach LEO; keep their costs in check to keep their prices; be reliable; have a launch infrastructure; customer service ... Analyst
Analyst - 14/11/2007 12:03 PMGreat. Now they only have to keep their schedule, which is already impossible, even taking the latest revision; reach LEO; keep their costs in check to keep their prices; be reliable; have a launch infrastructure; customer service ... Analyst
wannamoonbase - 14/11/2007 4:36 PMQuoteAnalyst - 14/11/2007 12:03 PMGreat. Now they only have to keep their schedule, which is already impossible, even taking the latest revision; reach LEO; keep their costs in check to keep their prices; be reliable; have a launch infrastructure; customer service ... AnalystMy point exactly. SpaceX may yet prove they can do it. But they have only proven themselves to about the 10 or 20% level. They have so far to go yet.As for a million pound thrust engine, these things don't scale linearly. The amount of work to develop that engine would be very prohibitive. And so what if Elon built a monster rocket, how many customers exist that look for those payloads. Not nearly enough to maintain the low cost because of high volume that they need. If 90% of the cost of a rocket is in the engine than save your money there and SpaceX seems to want to do that by high volume production. Big engine doesn't help in this matter.As crazy as it sounds to use 27 engines it might be what is required to put rocket engines on an assembly line, then who knows where that could go. Getting 27 liquid engines all running properly for the full flight, that will be something to see. I fully intent to be present to watch that lift off.I do wish them the best and I hope they are successful.