Who will compete with SpaceX? The last two and next two years.

[rpapo]

For the time being, SpaceX is under no obligation, nor any particular pressure, to drop its prices.  Their prices are already lower than anybody but perhaps India's prices.  And if they continue to behave as they have, those profits will be plowed into making their other ambitions come true.

But only for the time being.  Blue Origin may well have an influence on prices in a few years.  I don't see the other players exerting any real price pressure on SX.

[oldAtlas_Eguy]

As a competitor to SpaceX there is a seemingly troubling trend lately for ULA and that is an increase in the rate of technical scrubs on launches. Although it does not look to be significantly different more or less than experienced by SpaceX, it is a definite increase than what was experienced in the past.

Even though this may be a real trend it can also just be a coincidence. Such clustering of unrelated events do occur but do not have an actual cause or meaning.

But this is the catch: ULA has been performing forced manpower reductions at the same time of an increase in more technical scub occurrences. As an ex-AF LV systems manager this sends alarm bells off very loudly. It is something that would encourage more scrutiny to determine if there is any actual cause or is it really a coincidence.

But the item here and that is that ULA is seemingly loosing ground in the perception of its advantages over SpaceX.

[spacenut]

Could be some of the forced layoffs are people over 55 who have maybe 20-30 years and have a pension with them.  Younger people have less experience in their case. 

[Ludus]

For the time being, SpaceX is under no obligation, nor any particular pressure, to drop its prices.  Their prices are already lower than anybody but perhaps India's prices.  And if they continue to behave as they have, those profits will be plowed into making their other ambitions come true.

But only for the time being.  Blue Origin may well have an influence on prices in a few years.  I don't see the other players exerting any real price pressure on SX.

If current trends continue, by 2021-2022 SpaceX F9 will have a history of well over 100 launches and ULA and Ariane will be starting over with less experienced systems, so if anything the case would be for SpaceX charging more.

[QuantumG]

If current trends continue, by 2021-2022 SpaceX F9 will have a history of over 100 launches and ULA and Ariane will be starting over with less experienced systems

SpaceX will be starting over again soon too though.

[Ludus]

If current trends continue, by 2021-2022 SpaceX F9 will have a history of over 100 launches and ULA and Ariane will be starting over with less experienced systems

SpaceX will be starting over again soon too though.

ITSy? Raptor S2? Is there any evidence that Block 5 (or 6) F9 won’t still be the main vehicle in four years?

[QuantumG]

ITSy? Raptor S2? Is there any evidence that Block 5 (or 6) F9 won’t still be the main vehicle in four years?

I'll get back to ya in October

[Robotbeat]

I think Falcon 9 will still be flying at least some payloads in 5 years, maybe longer.

ITSy will take some years to ramp up, but once it has got some flight history will be the main, and eventually only, vehicle family that SpaceX flies.

[Ludus]

I think Falcon 9 will still be flying at least some payloads in 5 years, maybe longer.

ITSy will take some years to ramp up, but once it has got some flight history will be the main, and eventually only, vehicle family that SpaceX flies.

It could work out something like the Dragon 1 to Dragon 2 transition. SpaceX would have accumulated a large collection of fully rapidly reusable F9s and FH center cores and can do a major refurb to extend their operation further if needed. Customers will have become comfortable with flight proven hardware to the point it no longer matters or effects price. S2 and Faring are reusable. There’s a stockpile of Merlin engines and spare parts.

SpaceX transitions Hawthorne production to all Raptor/BFR/BFS while still flying mostly F9/FH at a very high rate. There are several years when SpaceX is only building the Raptor family and mostly commercially flying the Merlin family.

[guckyfan]

They may need to keep F9 and Dragon until the ISS is terminated. They can carry cargo Dragon in the payload bay of BFS. But not Crew Dragon because of abort. I can not see BFS docking at the ISS. Dragon on the nose of BFS?

[docmordrid]

As long as a subscale BFS isn't significantly more massive than a fully loaded Orbiter and does not interfere mechanically, why couldn't it dock at ISS?

[woods170]

As long as a subscale BFS isn't significantly more massive than a fully loaded Orbiter and does not interfere mechanically, why couldn't it dock at ISS?

Question is: why would it need to dock at ISS?

[vapour_nudge]

Apologies to Anita Bryant:

"Paper Rockets, paper rockets
Oh how real those rockets seem to me
But they're only imitations
Like your imitation love for Elon"

[guckyfan]

Question is: why would it need to dock at ISS?

SpaceX will need to fulfil its Commercial Crew contract. So it needs to fly F9 with Dragon 2 until the ISS is decomissioned. Or send something else NASA certified.

[woods170]

Question is: why would it need to dock at ISS?

SpaceX will need to fulfil its Commercial Crew contract. So it needs to fly F9 with Dragon 2 until the ISS is decomissioned. Or send something else NASA certified.

That still not gives an answer as to why BFS would need to dock at ISS. BFS won't be used for CCP.

[Robotbeat]

Chances are, ITSy won't include a mini-BFS at first. Reusable upper stage, but not a MiniBFS.

[docmordrid]

Question is: why would it need to dock at ISS?

SpaceX will need to fulfil its Commercial Crew contract. So it needs to fly F9 with Dragon 2 until the ISS is decomissioned. Or send something else NASA certified.

That still not gives an answer as to why BFS would need to dock at ISS. BFS won't be used for CCP.

IIRC, NASA has floated the idea of opening ISS up to commercial operations, which in principal could mean qualifyingI additional vehicles. If SpaceX builds an ITSy BFS...

[Mader Levap]

As far I am concerned, what Elon will present - thing nicknamed ITSy by fans here - on this year's IAC will be notional and abstract. Like original ITS, only more realistic.

In other words, less notional than previous pipedream, but still fantasy. Expect more descoping in a year, as paintrain called "reality" hits Musk's unbounded ambitions.

What amuses me to no end are claims like predicting obsoletness of F9/FH due to ITS(y) when latter are very paper rockets and will be for long years (fervent "THIS time SpaceX will do something actually on time!!!11" denials nothwithstanding). Their job is safe for long time (at least 10 years).

If you find this criticism too harsh, too bad. Elon really should be more realistic from beginning and amazing peoples shouldn't lap it up.

[woods170]

As far I am concerned, what Elon will present - thing nicknamed ITSy by fans here - on this year's IAC will be notional and abstract. Like original ITS, only more realistic.

In other words, less notional than previous pipedream, but still fantasy. Expect more descoping in a year, as paintrain called "reality" hits Musk's unbounded ambitions.

What amuses me to no end are claims like predicting obsoletness of F9/FH due to ITS(y) when latter are very paper rockets and will be for long years (fervent "THIS time SpaceX will do something actually on time!!!11" denials nothwithstanding). Their job is safe for long time (at least 10 years).

If you find this criticism too harsh, too bad. Elon really should be more realistic from beginning and amazing peoples shouldn't lap it up.

Hey, I will be the first to acknowledge that Elon's timelines are not even remotely close to reality.
But descoping will likely only happen once: this year.
And not because of a paintrain called reality but a paintrain called cost.
Reality hit Elon and SpaceX real hard when they started working on FH. But nevertheless, FH is no longer a paper rocket. Despite all problems they kept pushing and descoped FH only once. Not because of reality but because of cost: crossfeed went out the window.

[AbuSimbel]

As far I am concerned, what Elon will present - thing nicknamed ITSy by fans here - on this year's IAC will be notional and abstract. Like original ITS, only more realistic.

In other words, less notional than previous pipedream, but still fantasy. Expect more descoping in a year, as paintrain called "reality" hits Musk's unbounded ambitions.

What amuses me to no end are claims like predicting obsoletness of F9/FH due to ITS(y) when latter are very paper rockets and will be for long years (fervent "THIS time SpaceX will do something actually on time!!!11" denials nothwithstanding). Their job is safe for long time (at least 10 years).

If you find this criticism too harsh, too bad. Elon really should be more realistic from beginning and amazing peoples shouldn't lap it up.

Hey, I will be the first to acknowledge that Elon's timelines are not even remotely close to reality.
But descoping will likely only happen once: this year.
And not because of a paintrain called reality but a paintrain called cost.
Reality hit Elon and SpaceX real hard when they started working on FH. But nevertheless, FH is no longer a paper rocket. Despite all problems they kept pushing and descoped FH only once. Not because of reality but because of cost: crossfeed went out the window.

Hey if you dare do something ambitious reality will undoubtedly hit you, that's fine. Of course if you persevere you might also hit reality, at least a bit