Market for new build Falcon 1's?

[llanitedave]

You don't NEED a Falcon 1.  It's time has come and gone.  It's not worth fantasizing about.

[R7]

"As an online space related discussion grows longer, the probability of someone suggesting SuperDracos approaches 1."


—regardless of topic, scope or feasibility—

I read you clear the first time, tried to point out the red.

Also, sooner or later 3D-printing must be mentioned so here goes: aren't SDs 3D-printed from Inconel now? 3D-print Kestrels and design a sea level Kestel for use in the first stage. Low-tech fully pressurefed F1.9R.

You don't NEED a Falcon 1.

You are right, but Pegasus costs so much.

[llanitedave]

Pegasus payloads can become secondaries on a Falcon 9 or Falcon Heavy.

[R7]

Guaranteed that there's enough primary customers flying to suitable orbits? Could mean a long wait.

[Lourens]

India's PSLV has put up quite a few payloads in the up-to-one-tonne category. It's maximum payload to LEO is more, but there are some payloads apparently at least, if the price is right. And they're not the only launcher in this market. If you want a polar orbit, it may not be so easy to find an F9 going the right way for you to hitch a ride...

[go4mars]

Also, sooner or later 3D-printing must be mentioned so here goes: aren't SDs 3D-printed from Inconel now? 3D-print Kestrels and design a sea level Kestel for use in the first stage.

Ah the other rule...  I'll jump in too.
Oh, and once in orbit and no early abort required, 3D print extra extra large nozzle extensions in space.  Could also be done for huge draco or superdraco vacuum bells. 

[garidan]

I secondo the idea Falcon 1M (M=Methane) could be a falcon 9 tank with only 1 Raptor engine and legs. With the equivalent power of 4 Merlin 1D engines it's a sort of reusable falcon 5, or a Grasshoper III.
It would be a good platform to test Raptor while doing business and migrating toward methane.
By using a "standard" Falcon 9 second stage, the only pad change would be a second fuel line and support for methane.

[zaitcev]

I don't see any reason why they wouldn't sell Merlin-1D engines to a US third party willing to pay (have to be US because of ITAR).

We know that Elon was resistant to the idea of selling Merlins previously, when it was bandied around by independent start-ups. It seems clear that F1 in SpaceX is deader than dead. However, it may be possible to sell him on a notionally independent subsidiary that remains under his complete control through stake ownership. It's basically a question of finding someone who's charismatic enough yet interested enough in a small business like that.

[ChrisWilson68]

Once SpaceX develops the second stage recovery technology and methodology, a single Raptor powered second stage could launch about one tonne to LEO in an SSTO mode with some recovery prop left over. A Raptor second stage would be more expensive to build initially but considering recovery and refurbishment of an SSTO should be much more economical than a two stage rocket, it makes sense.

There's no reason to believe the recovery and refurbishment of an SSTO vehicle would be more economical than that of a two stage vehicle with the same payload capacity.  In fact, there's good evidence the opposite is true.

To do SSTO you have to push everything to the edge of what's possible.  Pushing things to the edge of what's possible makes things much much less economical.

[ChrisWilson68]

Well, the SuperDraco is the closest thing SpaceX currently have to a Kestrel. If someone were to do a new version of the F1, a Merlin 1D on the original first stage plus a single SuperDraco on the original second stage may make sense. Then you can use currently available and mass-produced engines, and all you need is the tanks.

Except that SuperDraco uses hypergolic propellant and Kestrel uses RP-1 and LOX.  So you'd be doing a bunch of new development work.  And it would be more expensive to operate.

It would be easier and cheaper to just re-start production of Kestrel.

Not that there's any sane reason to restart Falcon 1 production anyway.

[Comga]

To the Original Post of this thread....

A small article on page 82 of the December 30, 2013 and January 6, 2014 print edition of Aviation Week has a paragraph of text and an illustration of a "Rusable Smallsat Launcher".  Swiss Space Systems (S3) is proposing a three stage system to launch "250 kg payloads for $11 million".  It consists of a small "expendable upper stage" launched from an "unmanned shuttle" that looks like a black Dream Chaser with three engines.  This is to be launched from the back of an Airbus A300 that looks to be unmodified, other than a shiny black paint job.   This looks hopeless, all wrong.

Like Launcher 1 and who knows who else, these are large systems going after the market that SpaceX has decided to ignore. I side with SpaceX, much to my own dismay.

[CuddlyRocket]

Swiss Space Systems (S3) is proposing a three stage system to launch "250 kg payloads for $11 million". ... This looks hopeless, all wrong.

Given that Gwynne Shotwell has said SpaceX is targeting $7 million per launch for the F9R, that's something of an understatement!

[Lar]

To the Original Post of this thread....

A small article on page 82 of the December 30, 2013 and January 6, 2014 print edition of Aviation Week has a paragraph of text and an illustration of a "Rusable Smallsat Launcher".  Swiss Space Systems (S3) is proposing a three stage system to launch "250 kg payloads for $11 million".  It consists of a small "expendable upper stage" launched from an "unmanned shuttle" that looks like a black Dream Chaser with three engines.  This is to be launched from the back of an Airbus A300 that looks to be unmodified, other than a shiny black paint job.   This looks hopeless, all wrong.

Like Launcher 1 and who knows who else, these are large systems going after the market that SpaceX has decided to ignore. I side with SpaceX, much to my own dismay.

There's an entire thread on this proposed system, IIRC and I think this is it

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=31278.msg1022107#msg1022107

[RanulfC]

I fanwanked some SuperDracos for additional liftoff thrust

There's probably a Godwin's law's equivalent about invoking superdracos in any space related topic. Twas a reasonable thread.

Probably NOT "superdracos" but I suggest that the term "fanwanked" be forever barred from use... Really...

Randy

[RanulfC]

Once SpaceX develops the second stage recovery technology and methodology, a single Raptor powered second stage could launch about one tonne to LEO in an SSTO mode with some recovery prop left over. A Raptor second stage would be more expensive to build initially but considering recovery and refurbishment of an SSTO should be much more economical than a two stage rocket, it makes sense. That is, if there is a market for 1000 kg to LEO at all.

That is, if there is a market for 1000 kg to LEO which is not adequately served as secondary payloads on other LVs, in sufficient volume to recoup the development costs for being able to launch the thing from ground level, including the opportunity cost of forgoing whatever else their staff might have been doing instead of pursuing this business. 

(It's possible that they'd be doing some of that development work anyway to support parts of their test program, but likely not all of it, particularly not when it comes to adapting their launch sites.)

First of all I highly doubt SpaceX will revive the Falcon-1 or 5, they have pretty much "bypassed" that level at this point. As to selling engines, I believe, (but can't seem to find) HMXHMX note that to his knowledge they WOULD sell engines, but with restrictions.

Lastly on the "market" for small payloads to LEO and "secondary" payload servicing. I've talked to a lot of people who regularly attend the "SmallSat" conferences here in Utah and consensus I get is that while flying as secondary payloads is "acceptable" due to the cost it is highly limited and there is a LOT of possible customers who (if the price was comparable) would much rather charter a SPECIFIC launch to an orbit that allows them to get the maximum use out of their vehicle. But no one sees any viable concept on the horizon. SSS, VG-L1, etc so far the general attitude is "wait-and-see-if-they-actually-launch-something" first.

On the other hand we have still more companies coming along, (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=33757.0;all) though I have no details of what payload range they are aimed at. The "biggest" factor is going to be price. If you can get a dedicated launch of your specific vehicle for around the price of flying as a secondary payload or less then there is probably a "market" but I have to ask since I have no idea, what exactly is the general "price-range" we're looking at here?

Randy

[Comga]

snip

If you can get a dedicated launch of your specific vehicle for around the price of flying as a secondary payload or less then there is probably a "market" but I have to ask since I have no idea, what exactly is the general "price-range" we're looking at here?

Randy

Try SpaceFlight Services for a list of secondary payload pricing.

For instance, they want $5M for 180 kg to LEO.

That's a tough price point to match, particularly if you want to amortize a lot of development work, or a giant carrier jet, or some other massive infrastructure.

[Wigles]

snip

If you can get a dedicated launch of your specific vehicle for around the price of flying as a secondary payload or less then there is probably a "market" but I have to ask since I have no idea, what exactly is the general "price-range" we're looking at here?

Randy

Try SpaceFlight Services for a list of secondary payload pricing.

For instance, they want $5M for 180 kg to LEO.

That's a tough price point to match, particularly if you want to amortize a lot of development work, or a giant carrier jet, or some other massive infrastructure.

Thanks, I hadn't seen that link before.

My post was estimating roughly 4000lb for $15Mil. Using an ESPA/SSPS-like ring weighing roughly 200kg, this could put 5x 300kg sats into an orbit. Using the pricing on Spaceflight Services that should go for $34 Mil.

Although I do note that there seems to be a large availability on their shedule page so there would need to be enough demand to put sats into dedicated orbits which are not serviced by typical larger rockets.

[TrevorMonty]

In regards to recovery of F1, isn't GH1 a modified F1 and that lands using a single Merlin.

[QuantumG]

isn't GH1 a modified F1

No. F1 was much smaller than GH1.

and that lands using a single Merlin.

Yes.

[guckyfan]

In regards to recovery of F1, isn't GH1 a modified F1 and that lands using a single Merlin.

Grasshopper is a modified Falcon 9 1.0 tank with a Merlin 1D engine.