All this BFR talk in this thread is fine but I just wish you all weren't going around and around in circles on it.At least the latest flareup of jawboning about acoustic energy died down after only a day. See you in a month.Got a good chuckle at the new dude who called out Dave G, one of the veteran contributors of actual facts to this thread.Nomadd, when do you get back?
Quote from: Jcc on 11/05/2017 01:44 amBut they absolutely do need it if they will launch commercial comsats AND launch 4000+ Starlink sats.Not necessarily.SpaceX wants to launch 4,425 Starlink satellites by the end of 2024, but each satellite is really small, so assuming 32 sats per launch, that's around 2 Falcon 9 launches per month....
But they absolutely do need it if they will launch commercial comsats AND launch 4000+ Starlink sats.
Quote from: Dave G on 11/05/2017 02:44 amQuote from: Jcc on 11/05/2017 01:44 amBut they absolutely do need it if they will launch commercial comsats AND launch 4000+ Starlink sats.Not necessarily.SpaceX wants to launch 4,425 Starlink satellites by the end of 2024, but each satellite is really small, so assuming 32 sats per launch, that's around 2 Falcon 9 launches per month....So long as you consider 386kg (850lbs) and as 'big as a refrigerator' really small... With existing F9 fairing, will most likely be volume limited to 16-20 sats per launch -- larger fairing will help, but not likely to get to 32 per launch. EM talked about 50-ish launches per year -- weekly -- for the LEO (4,425 sat) constellation; 7,500 VLEO sats almost triples the launch demand.Not sure how Boca Chica fits into the picture, but flying this^ much out of the Cape plus Vandenberg will be difficult and expensive.
Quote from: AncientU on 11/05/2017 11:09 amQuote from: Dave G on 11/05/2017 02:44 amQuote from: Jcc on 11/05/2017 01:44 amBut they absolutely do need it if they will launch commercial comsats AND launch 4000+ Starlink sats.Not necessarily.SpaceX wants to launch 4,425 Starlink satellites by the end of 2024, but each satellite is really small, so assuming 32 sats per launch, that's around 2 Falcon 9 launches per month....So long as you consider 386kg (850lbs) and as 'big as a refrigerator' really small... With existing F9 fairing, will most likely be volume limited to 16-20 sats per launch -- larger fairing will help, but not likely to get to 32 per launch. EM talked about 50-ish launches per year -- weekly -- for the LEO (4,425 sat) constellation; 7,500 VLEO sats almost triples the launch demand.Not sure how Boca Chica fits into the picture, but flying this^ much out of the Cape plus Vandenberg will be difficult and expensive.Whatever the final numbers, as I said, the BFR satellite delivery spacecraft will hold way more Starlink satellites, and it will be fully reusable, which means launch costs will be lower. So it's possible SpaceX may want to transition Starlink away from Falcon 9 sooner than later, and go straight to BFR at Boca Chica.And by the way, given the backlash I've gotten for pointing out an obvious possibility, I have to ask: Why is there so much emotional attachment to Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy?
They are rockets.(not PowerPoints)
They need to get Starlink operational within the deadlines imposed by spectrum licensing.
Elon isn't risk averse. Quite the opposite.
Yes, this makes sense, but what's the minimum number of satellites they would need to meet these deadlines?
Quote from: oldAtlas_Eguy on 10/28/2017 03:11 pmNOTE the FCC 6 year requirement on how many sats have to be deployed in that 6 year period is still undefined. The 800 sat value would be the smallest number probably acceptable with full deployment 4,425 sats the actual requirement without a waiver.It is defined, 50% in six years and full deployment in 9 years
NOTE the FCC 6 year requirement on how many sats have to be deployed in that 6 year period is still undefined. The 800 sat value would be the smallest number probably acceptable with full deployment 4,425 sats the actual requirement without a waiver.
1) What orbits do Starlink Sats need to get to? - I would guess high inclination orbits.2) Can they get to them from BC? - NoSo.... ?
To fulfill licensing requirements they need to launch half of their constellation by end of 2023, so just over 2000, not over 4000. They will likely want more, but don't have to.But it seems we are getting slightly OT for the Texas launch site thread.
1) What orbits do Starlink Sats need to get to? - I would guess high inclination orbits.2) Can they get to them from BC? - No
Quote from: nacnud on 11/05/2017 01:07 pm1) What orbits do Starlink Sats need to get to? - I would guess high inclination orbits.2) Can they get to them from BC? - NoYes.Doglegs late in the ascent (needed to thread the needle, you can't dogleg early) impose ruinous penalties but if you're volume limited anyway....NOT saying they will do this but it is possible. As discussed many times before.
By the way, nearly all of the property SpaceX purchased at Boca Chica is under the name "Dogleg Park LLC".
I think the best thing for this thread is for everyone to quit filling speculation noise, sit back, wait for our resident wanderlust to drift back in...