Quote from: rcoppola on 06/04/2010 11:03 pmQuestion: Could the f9 including Merlin 1c be scaled up to become a super hlv. 8-10m first stage with Merlins heading towrads an F1 size?The F9 (or F9H) is probably at the limit of what you want to launch with a Merlin 1c class engine. To go bigger, you need bigger engines - and SpaceX is most likely already at work on a "Merlin 2" engine.
Question: Could the f9 including Merlin 1c be scaled up to become a super hlv. 8-10m first stage with Merlins heading towrads an F1 size?
Space-Track elements imply 235 x 276 km x 34.5 deg. International Designation 2010-026A. Way to go, SpaceX!
Just how much bigger towards an F1 Saturn 1st stage engine are they plannng to go? Sorry, not the right thread, but today has really been reinvigorating.
Quote from: dad2059 on 06/04/2010 10:43 pm And you can bet the Pentagon was paying attentionNot really, they are stuck with EELV's
And you can bet the Pentagon was paying attention
Added: Feb 06, 2009 12:50 pmThe Launch and Range Systems Wing has completed a draft of the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) New Entrant Evaluation Plan (NEEP). This plan provides an approach for use by Air Force Space Command (AFSPC) Space and Missile Systems Center (SMC) Launch and Range Systems Wing (LRSW) to evaluate the capability of potential new entrants to perform Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) launch services. The Launch and Range Systems Wing would like to encourage comments to the NEEP from interested contractors and/or interested parties.
Quote from: Jim on 06/04/2010 10:47 pmQuote from: dad2059 on 06/04/2010 10:43 pm And you can bet the Pentagon was paying attentionNot really, they are stuck with EELV'sIsn't there the Draft EELV New Entrant Plan?https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=b06be3f88a05e8671842892fbaff99f3&tab=core&_cview=1QuoteAdded: Feb 06, 2009 12:50 pmThe Launch and Range Systems Wing has completed a draft of the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) New Entrant Evaluation Plan (NEEP). This plan provides an approach for use by Air Force Space Command (AFSPC) Space and Missile Systems Center (SMC) Launch and Range Systems Wing (LRSW) to evaluate the capability of potential new entrants to perform Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) launch services. The Launch and Range Systems Wing would like to encourage comments to the NEEP from interested contractors and/or interested parties.
Quote from: jabe on 06/04/2010 10:12 pmI may have missed it but did the second stage refire to raise perigee?No. There wasn't supposed to be a second firing on this flight.
I may have missed it but did the second stage refire to raise perigee?
Pardon my ignorance. I thought in order to achieve a circular orbit there must be an engine firing at apogee? The shuttle does this.
Musk mentioned they were going to announce some new launch contracts. I'll bet anything they pick up a chunk f the Iridium order.
Isn't there the Draft EELV New Entrant Plan?
Wow, that didnt take long at all:http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/06/04/congressional-reaction-to-falcon-9-launch/Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX), ranking member of the Senate Commerce Committee, released a brief statement about the launch that might best be catagorized as “damned with faint praise”:Quote This first successful test flight of SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket is a belated sign that efforts to develop modest commercial space cargo capabilities are showing some promising signs. While this test flight was important, the program to demonstrate commercial cargo and crew transport capabilities, which I support, was intended to enhance not replace NASA’s own proven abilities to deliver critical cargo and humans to low Earth orbit. Make no mistake, even this modest success is more than a year behind schedule, and the project deadlines of other private space companies continue to slip as well. This test does not change the fact that commercial space programs are not ready to close the gap in human spaceflight if the space shuttle is retired this year with no proven replacement capability and the Constellation program is simultaneously cancelled as the President proposes.
This first successful test flight of SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket is a belated sign that efforts to develop modest commercial space cargo capabilities are showing some promising signs. While this test flight was important, the program to demonstrate commercial cargo and crew transport capabilities, which I support, was intended to enhance not replace NASA’s own proven abilities to deliver critical cargo and humans to low Earth orbit. Make no mistake, even this modest success is more than a year behind schedule, and the project deadlines of other private space companies continue to slip as well. This test does not change the fact that commercial space programs are not ready to close the gap in human spaceflight if the space shuttle is retired this year with no proven replacement capability and the Constellation program is simultaneously cancelled as the President proposes.
Im sure they both had two versions prepared. I would love to see the other versions.
Quote from: rcoppola on 06/04/2010 11:13 pm Just how much bigger towards an F1 Saturn 1st stage engine are they plannng to go? Sorry, not the right thread, but today has really been reinvigorating.I've heard numbers like 1.7Mlbf thrown around for Merlin 2, which would be somewhat more powerful than F-1 (1.5Mlbf). But I'm not sure how credible this rumor may be.
This first successful test flight of SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket is a belated sign that efforts to develop modest commercial space cargo capabilities are showing some promising signs.
I love this line. Classic composition at its finest:QuoteThis first successful test flight of SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket is a belated sign that efforts to develop modest commercial space cargo capabilities are showing some promising signs.
Quote from: cd-slam on 06/04/2010 11:34 pmPardon my ignorance. I thought in order to achieve a circular orbit there must be an engine firing at apogee? The shuttle does this.No, the shuttle only does that for ET disposal
"...Development of a new kerosene-fueled engine also has been endorsed by David W. Thompson, chief executive of Orbital Sciences Corp. of Dulles, Va. In a Jan. 12 interview, Thompson said Sacramento, Calif.-based Aerojet has a sufficient inventory of Russian-built AJ-26 kerosene-fueled main engines to support the projected flight rate of Orbital’s planned Taurus 2 medium-lift rocket for four or five years.“But I think at some point it sure would be advantageous to the U.S. launch industry and the U.S. propulsion sector if we could develop a new booster engine in the million-pound-thrust class that could somehow be modular enough that it could support both Taurus 2 and Atlas 5,” Thompson said. “I know the Air Force has a study under way looking at things like this.”In a written response to Space News questions, Emily Shanklin, a spokeswoman for rocket maker Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) of Hawthorne, Calif., said: “SpaceX supports any efforts by NASA and the DoD to eliminate reliance on foreign suppliers of key national security technologies such as rocket propulsion and launch services. The US is about to be 100% reliant on foreign launch services to access the International Space Station and over half of our national security satellites are already launched into space on vehicles that rely on foreign propulsion systems.”Gil Klinger, director of the Space and Intelligence Office for the U.S. undersecretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics, said the industrial base implications of canceling NASA’s Constellation program are likely to “evolve over time.”There’s no question that with … the termination of shuttle operations and the cancellation of Constellation ... there’s going to have to be a fairly significant adjustment both in solid-rocket motor production area as well as in liquid propulsion,” Klinger said during a Feb. 23 Space News webcast. “We do have the [Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle] production ongoing, which will help stabilize the industrial base, as well as a number of new entrants — most notably SpaceX, which is developing two new liquid-fired engines. But there’s no question there’s going to be more pressure on an industrial base that was already feeling some degree of heat.”Klinger said the Obama administration is sensitive to the need to maintain a healthy U.S. propulsion industry. “And the good news is that NASA has, as I understand it, a significant amount of money in the president’s budget that has gone to the Hill for a propulsion program,” he said.Noting that NASA and the Defense Department already cooperate on some propulsion projects, Klinger added: “We also need to take stock of where we are going in light of the changes that NASA is undergoing. We will be doing that with NASA and internally through the Air Force in the coming months.”In addition to the first-stage engine work, NASA intends to devote an unspecified portion of the $3.1 billion budgeted for 2011 through 2015 to the development and in-space testing of new upper-stage engines, including a liquid-oxygen/methane engine and low-cost liquid oxygen/liquid hydrogen engines.NASA’s budget proposal also includes $25 million a year for so-called foundational propulsion research focused on areas such as:New or largely untested propellants.Advanced propulsion and manufacturing techniques.Combustion processes.Engine health monitoring and safety.
Musk asked about Hutchison comments. Musk: "why is she trying to hurt a Texas company?" (They test their engines there.)
“I don’t understand why she’s trying to hurt a Texas company. We do all of our engine development and testing in Texas. We’re one of the fastest growing employers in Texas. Why is she trying to hurt a Texas company? That’s wrong, and the people of Texas ought to be aware of that.”
