SpaceX Transportation of Stages options

[Dave G]

This makes complete sense to me, but I have never seen anything directly from Elon saying that it was what he had in mind.  Do you have a link for that statement?

It was when he testified before the Texas state legislature.  Look for the video.  Don't have the link handy.

[SpunkyEnigma]

This makes complete sense to me, but I have never seen anything directly from Elon saying that it was what he had in mind.  Do you have a link for that statement?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=3_iu75TFgX8#t=50

At the 50s mark the question is asked.

Chris:  Can we fix youtube links to allow #t=50 (time jumps) in the URL?

[CT Space Guy]

What about using the Shuttle Carrier Aircraft? I have not herd anything about the current status of these aircraft. Could SpaceX buy or lease them, and would they be able to do the job?

[Jim]

What about using the Shuttle Carrier Aircraft? I have not herd anything about the current status of these aircraft. Could SpaceX buy or lease them, and would they be able to do the job?

They wouldn't be able to do the job.  And they are not available.  They are spares for SOFIA and one is going on display with an orbiter mockup at JSC.

[cryptoanarchy]

What about using the Shuttle Carrier Aircraft? I have not herd anything about the current status of these aircraft. Could SpaceX buy or lease them, and would they be able to do the job?

They wouldn't be able to do the job.  And they are not available.  They are spares for SOFIA and one is going on display with an orbiter mockup at JSC.

Not directly but a 747 could do the job with similar modifications such as the split tail.  The first stage is longer than the shuttle but much lighter. 

[Jim]

Not directly but a 747 could do the job with similar modifications such as the split tail.  The first stage is longer than the shuttle but much lighter. 

The SCA did not have a split tail.  The original vertical stabilizer was never removed.  Only some non-moving tip fins were added to the horizontal stabilizer.   That is why I said an SCA could not do it.

[Dave G]

Not directly but a 747 could do the job with similar modifications such as the split tail.  The first stage is longer than the shuttle but much lighter.

In the previous video posted by SpunkyEnigma, Elon clearly states that SpaceX intends to build larger stages near their new commercial launch pad.  With this in mind, it seems a bit pointless to speculate about air transporting stages.

[Lars_J]

Any air transport of stages would likely require the development of a large cylindrical cargo container, similar to what the Russians did for one of their bombers in the below image:

[Lar]

Any air transport of stages would likely require the development of a large cylindrical cargo container, similar to what the Russians did for one of their bombers in the below image:

Shuttle was transported without a fully enveloping container, but in early days orbiters had a tailcone fitted to improve aerodynamics.

Not that SpaceX would do this, but would it be possible to fit something on the front of the stage to improve aerodynamics rather than encasing the whole stage? A fitted nosecone like thing presumably would be less weight.

[Robotbeat]

Do you guys remember how obscenely expensive it was to fly Shuttle around on a 747? It's like $2 million back in the day. And actually, the last time they did it, it was more like $18 million. I think it's safe to say it's not an economic option.

[Lar]

Do you guys remember how obscenely expensive it was to fly Shuttle around on a 747? It's like $2 million back in the day. And actually, the last time they did it, it was more like $18 million. I think it's safe to say it's not an economic option.

I do. Just about everything about the Shuttle cost a lot.

Realistically the only post F9 (stages larger than F9 S1) transport option is barge from a factory located on a waterway directly to the launch site.

However it's fun to speculate.

[Jim]

Any air transport of stages would likely require the development of a large cylindrical cargo container, similar to what the Russians did for one of their bombers in the below image:

That wasn't a container, that was the core tank (ET) for Energia.

[Robotbeat]

Or just building it near the launch site. There are wheeled vehicles for transporting basically arbitrarily large things. The issue is that highway transport is ridiculous over any but very short distances. If you're just going a few miles, no biggie. If you're going thousands of miles over land... yeah, that's a problem for anything much bigger than Falcon 9.

[CT Space Guy]

What about using the Shuttle Carrier Aircraft? I have not herd anything about the current status of these aircraft. Could SpaceX buy or lease them, and would they be able to do the job?

I would think if a 747 aircraft was used day to day as a cargo aircraft then used to transport stages as needed it would be much more cost effective.

[Lar]

Or just building it near the launch site. There are wheeled vehicles for transporting basically arbitrarily large things. The issue is that highway transport is ridiculous over any but very short distances. If you're just going a few miles, no biggie. If you're going thousands of miles over land... yeah, that's a problem for anything much bigger than Falcon 9.

If they build the massive stages in Brownsville on the barge channel, and launch from Boca Chica, it's an interesting question which is easier, road all the way (single digit miles if my read of the map is right), or barge most of the way and road the last tiny bit to the actual pad.

All road would still have a few intersections with wires that need lifting and etc, but you avoid a transship (and attendant cranes). Interesting trade study to be sure.

I would think if a 747 aircraft was used day to day as a cargo aircraft then used to transport stages as needed it would be much more cost effective.

A modified 747 is not going to be ideal for regular cargo and now you're putting wear and tear on the airframe. It might save money, it might not. And every takeoff and landing is a chance, however small, for an accident, what if you lose your aircraft in a cargo flight, what then?

[Lars_J]

What about using the Shuttle Carrier Aircraft? I have not herd anything about the current status of these aircraft. Could SpaceX buy or lease them, and would they be able to do the job?

I would think if a 747 aircraft was used day to day as a cargo aircraft then used to transport stages as needed it would be much more cost effective.

One option might be the "747 Dreamlifter", built to transport 787 fuselage sections and wings. I'm not sure if it is long enough for the F9v1.1 first stage. It is also limited by diameter to the 5.9m diameter of the 787 fuselage. But Boeing is using them all for 787 production, so they are not available at the moment.

[Jim]

so they are not available at the moment.

Boeing has stated they no plans to make them available.  They were purpose built and certified for only 787.

[llanitedave]

Barges are cheap, plentiful, and practical.  I don't see why a 747 is necessary.

[Zed_Noir]

Or just building it near the launch site. There are wheeled vehicles for transporting basically arbitrarily large things. The issue is that highway transport is ridiculous over any but very short distances. If you're just going a few miles, no biggie. If you're going thousands of miles over land... yeah, that's a problem for anything much bigger than Falcon 9.

Why highways? You could use multiple railroad tracks in parallel just like the way they handle the siege railroad  artillery in WWII (e.g. 80 cm Schwerer Gustav railroad gun). Come to think of it, doesn't the Proton LV uses a similar set up.

[kirghizstan]

If short transport is required i'll venture a guess spacex will simply pay for any road crossing lines to be bured to eliminate the need for them to be lifted everytime.  might cost more in long run but it is one less complication.