Stratolaunch: General Company and Development Updates and Discussions

[Ronsmytheiii]

Orbital is far more suited for this sort of project than SpaceX is. Vastly more experience in air-launch, of course.

Not just air launch experience, they have experience with a type of rocket much more suitable for an air-launched platform that SpaceX doesnt have any experience in: solid rockets. Crewed vehicles really dont need too much accuracy, and if it is cheaper the LV could carry an orbital adjust module.

The cryogenically powered Falcon line would require the host aircraft to carry LOX and Kerosene at least for topping, and add on the complexities of the piping to reach the LV and disconnect, plus the launch site needs its own cryogenic infrastructure to support the launch.

SpaceX and Stratolaunch really were an odd couple, and really did not fit into SpaceX's vertically integrated business model. OSC however is a much better fit, and is used to horizontal coordination.

[iamlucky13]

Yeah, I'm not suggesting that Orbital would propose Prometheus for Stratolaunch, just that they would probably not be pushing for DC either.

The larger point, though, is that Antares is a much better fit for adapting to Stratolaunch than Falcon. If I understand the article right, the problem with Falcon was all the changes to the first-stage structure that were needed. OSC already subcontracts the first stage structure for Antares, so it would be significantly easier for them to change providers than SpaceX to redesign their production lines.

The obvious contender to build a new first stage structure is Scaled Composites, who were already going to build the wing and fillet for the Falcon (besides the airplane, of course!). A vehicle with a Scaled first stage structure and everything else (engines, avionics, upper stages) common to Antares could be quite a potent combination.

I'm not following. It sounds like you're saying it's easier for OSC to make changes to the structure because they can just tell someone else to do it, so it's just as easily said as done, and that designing an entirely new stage is easier than modifying an existing one.

For SpaceX's part, the way I read between the lines is they've got dozens of orders for a launcher produced with a high degree commonality across both stages and multiple versions, and they're only willing to compromise that commonality to a very limited degree as a bet that Stratolaunch will succeed commercially.

SpaceX may have created a competitor for themselves. For OSC' this may be a good thing, their Antares launcher may be able to find a new market through this venture.

Or they may be concerned that participating in Stratolaunch is a risk. Remember when Stratolaunch was announced there were suggestions that SpaceX was rather hands off. They'd sell their rocket, but Stratolaunch was taking the risk and would reap most of the rewards if successful.

[Go4TLI]

Or they may be concerned that participating in Stratolaunch is a risk. Remember when Stratolaunch was announced there were suggestions that SpaceX was rather hands off. They'd sell their rocket, but Stratolaunch was taking the risk and would reap most of the rewards if successful.

But by your definition SpaceX was under no risk at all. 

[Go4TLI]

I don't see this as a bad day for SpaceX at all. They still retain all their current contracts and now no longer have to go through expensive retooling. An up front cost savings all around. SpaceX sticks with it's bread and butter launches which continue to bring in new clients.

I would not call it a "bad day" but I would also not call it a "good day".  SpaceX over-commits itself and then under-delivers.  History is my validation of that point.   

There had to be negotiations, letters of intent or whatever signed and agreed to long before the Stratolaunch initiative was announced.  They were advertised as a "partner" and now they are not. 

See this post from last week....

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=30381.msg982950#msg982950

[QuantumG]

There had to be negotiations, letters of intent or whatever signed and agreed to long before the Stratolaunch initiative was announced.  They were advertised as a "partner" and now they are not. 

At the original press conference, the question was asked if SpaceX is a partner. The answer was no. They were merely a subcontractor.

I do think it's disappointing to see them pull out of a deal (any deal), but we don't have the information required to make that judgement at this time.

[mr. mark]

I think SpaceX is relieved to get out of this deal. Orbital's Pegasus has under delivered as of late and has a non positive business trend outlook for an air launch vehicle. As the business case for Stratolaunch is unclear, SpaceX made the best business decision possible. From a flight perspective, I am sure the model will work from a business case, I am not so sure.       

[Go4TLI]

There had to be negotiations, letters of intent or whatever signed and agreed to long before the Stratolaunch initiative was announced.  They were advertised as a "partner" and now they are not. 

At the original press conference, the question was asked if SpaceX is a partner. The answer was no. They were merely a subcontractor.

I do think it's disappointing to see them pull out of a deal (any deal), but we don't have the information required to make that judgement at this time.

The terms partner or subcontractor is symantics.  I refer you to this page:

http://www.stratolaunch.com/team.html

All indications, regardless of the terms, are these companies were working together as a team.  My point stands that there had to be negotiations and commitments established and agreed to by all parties involved. 

SpaceX has a history of promising much and then taking much longer to deliver results, if at all (Falcon 1, Falcon 5 and now this)

[Go4TLI]

I think SpaceX is relieved to get out of this deal.   

This is what I'm talking about.  Nobody forced them to commit to this in the first place.  If they had concerns (current commitments and promises and those being made still) they should have politely declined allowing the venture to look elsewhere. 

[pippin]

Um, the statement in the article says it and also makes perfect sense:

the current launch vehicle design has departed significantly from the Falcon derivative vehicle envisioned by SpaceX and does not fit well with their long-term strategic business model

With all the other things SpaceX is doing right now they _have_ to be severely limited on development capabilities. Typically, for all tech companies that's the limiting factor to their business: what they can do with their engineering workforce. That's why they all have R/E ratios in their business plans and strategy departments defining what "core" business means.
Engineering workforce is expensive, hard to grow and if it grows too far it gets less and less effective.
And for SpaceX it's especially bad since they are so vertically integrated so they don't just need engineers for systems but also for components.

For SpaceX it makes perfect sense to do what all successful companies faced with abundant growth opportunities do: focus on your top priorities.

They were probably in there because Stratolaunch - maybe lacking other viable options - WANTED them in there and they were "OK, if it fits what we have". Later it turned out it would not be close enough to their own line of business and require too many resources... bye...

Not at all a bad day for SpaceX, shows they know what their business is and are busy enough following it.

[pippin]

Looks like it is just a plane without a payload.

But hey, WHAT A COOL PLANE it will be!

[Go4TLI]

Um, the statement in the article says it and also makes perfect sense:

the current launch vehicle design has departed significantly from the Falcon derivative vehicle envisioned by SpaceX and does not fit well with their long-term strategic business model

With all the other things SpaceX is doing right now they _have_ to be severely limited on development capabilities.

I agree with most of this statement.  However, SpaceX has deviated significantly from their own long-term plan at one time or another as well.  Knowing that in development that is often the case (as they do know) if they were treading on such a thin line in the first place, I see no practical reason for them to become part of this venture at the get-go. 

Again, I believe it is over-commitment on the part of SpaceX. 

[notsorandom]

My memory is fuzzy but wasn't there an interview dating back quite a few years ago during Falcon 1 era in which Elon said that SpaceX had looked at air launch and decided against it. If I remember right he said that there were no advantages they could see to it that outweighed the disadvantages of such a scheme. I looked around for that quote when Stratolaunch was announced with no luck.

[manboy]

Looks like it is just a plane without a payload.

Given that Orbital doesn't have a crewed capsule, I wonder if Stratolaunch will still aim for manned spaceflight.

The first thing that pops into my head is Dreamchaser...

You realize how much Dream Chaser weighs?

[manboy]

Not just the capsule. OSC designed a winged mini-shuttle called Prometheus that very narrowly lost out to Dreamchaser in CCDev-2. There are probably some raw feelings about that at OSC still today.

Regardless, air-launch Antares, anyone? Call it Pegasus II?

Narrowly?

[QuantumG]

My memory is fuzzy but wasn't there an interview dating back quite a few years ago during Falcon 1 era in which Elon said that SpaceX had looked at air launch and decided against it. If I remember right he said that there were no advantages they could see to it that outweighed the disadvantages of such a scheme. I looked around for that quote when Stratolaunch was announced with no luck.

Great thing about missing something Elon said is that he no doubt will say it again

Well, I think it's important to keep in mind that the payload to orbit advantage from an air launch is negligible. I think this audience understands that, but most people don't, because it seems like, well, you're high up there and so surely that's good and you're going at, say, 0.7 or 0.8 Mach and you've got some speed and altitude, you can use a higher expansion ratio on the nozzle, doesn't all that add up to a meaningful improvement in payload to orbit? The answer is no, it does not, unfortunately. It's quite a small improvement. It's maybe a 5% improvement in payload to orbit, something like that, and then you've got this humungous plane to deal with. Which is just like have a stage. From SpaceX's standpoint, would it make more sense to have a gigantic plane or to increase the size of the first stage by five percent? Uhh, I'll take option two. And then, once you get beyond a certain scale, you just can't make the plane big enough. When you drop the vehicle, the rocket, you have the slight problem that you're not going the right direction. If you look at what Orbital Sciences did with Pegasus, they have a delta wing to do the turn maneuver but then you've got this big wing that's added a bunch of mass and you've able to mostly, but not entirely, convert your horizontal velocity into vertical velocity, or mostly vertical velocity, and the net is really not great. So, Orbital, for example, is an interesting example. They started off with the Pegasus as an air launch vehicle and then ultimately did not do any air launch vehicles.

From http://shitelonsays.com/transcript/elon-musk-lecture-at-the-royal-aeronautical-society-2012-11-16

[simonbp]

Not just the capsule. OSC designed a winged mini-shuttle called Prometheus that very narrowly lost out to Dreamchaser in CCDev-2. There are probably some raw feelings about that at OSC still today.

Regardless, air-launch Antares, anyone? Call it Pegasus II?

Narrowly?

Yes, the figures of merit for both proposals were so similar that it was effectively a subjective judgment call on NASA's part to pick Dreamchaser over Prometheus. If you read the selection statement, OSC actually had the better technical case, while SNC apparently had the better business case.

http://procurement.ksc.nasa.gov/documents/SelectionStatement-Final_Signed.pdf

[ArbitraryConstant]

What engine will this use instead?

Solid? One or two AJ-26?

SpaceX may have created a competitor for themselves.

This will be the biggest aircraft in the world and still only able to launch a fraction of what Falcon 9 can, which itself is too small for many commercial launches, especially to GTO.

[neilh]

I think SpaceX is relieved to get out of this deal.   

This is what I'm talking about.  Nobody forced them to commit to this in the first place.  If they had concerns (current commitments and promises and those being made still) they should have politely declined allowing the venture to look elsewhere. 

Actually, according to the Stratolaunch CEO, this is pretty much what happened, with SpaceX politely declining to be the contractor for Stratolaunch's revised design, as it would require SpaceX to put in more of a development effort than they had initially bargained for:

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/stratolaunch-and-spacex-part-ways-379516/

"Stratolaunch and SpaceX have amicably agreed to end our contractual relationship because the current launch vehicle design has departed significantly from the Falcon derivative vehicle envisioned by SpaceX and does not fit well with their long-term strategic business model," says Gary Wentz, Stratolaunch CEO, in a 27 November email.

[sdsds]

I have no access to proprietary information, but: there's no way Allen sees standard commercial payloads as his target market. Yet there must exist a customer with launch needs (current or future) that match the features of an air launch system. That customer knows the masses of the payloads and the orbits they need to reach. The "Birdzilla" carrier aircraft was sized to match a kerolox booster capable of carrying those payloads to their intended orbits. Orbital's analysis will first verify that a solid booster mounted under Birdzilla can't carry the payload to the necessary orbit; then show the characteristics of a (presumably AJ-26 based) kerolox booster that can.

Seeing that far into the smoke screen doesn't take rocket science!

[sewand]

With the rumors swirling around a private moon landing, I was actually hoping that Allen would drop Stratolaunch and redirect his billions to lunar.