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

[Robotbeat]

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.

Not too harsh, just wrong.

[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.

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

When I wrote my statement I was confident that it is clear and unequivocal. Reading it again reconfirmed my confidence.

[spacenut]

I'm reading the book, "Elon Musk" by Ashlee Vance.  Musk has an idea, and in his mind thinks it can be done in say 2 years.  He seems to think that everyone else can work like him, long hours, all nighters, etc.  Reality slows things down.  I would put more credence in what Shotwell says in reality.  He is a very brilliant man, but not everyone else is, nor do they want to work 18 hours a day and on weekends.  Everyone needs to read the book. 

He will get the 9m booster, Raptor, and ITSy working, but add a little time to it.  Hurricanes happen in Florida and Texas, suppliers have delays, workers have family problems, etc.  The sub-scale Raptor has already been tested.  Boosters are being recovered and refurbished.  Launch rate is increasing.  Pad 40 at the Cape is about to restart operations, then the crews can move to Boca Chica.  Things are moving, a little slow, but speed of launches is increasing. 

Next two years, no one will really be able to compete with SpaceX.  Further out, maybe Blue Origin.  ULA is hurting and Vulcan may be too little too late.  Further out with the 9m ITS coming down the pike, SpaceX is still out front. 

[Robotbeat]

The whole point of this year isn't "descoping," ie just building a smaller ITS but doing the same basic thing but smaller, but:

Here's how we're actually going to deploy ITSy (well, BFR) to make a bunch of money doing what we do now with Falcon 9.

No doubt there'll be a bunch of details about Mars, but the biggest change (not necessarily the focus of the talk, but the most significant change) is making BFR into a workhorse. And I'm not sure if the constellation will be mentioned, but the constellation is now so big (12,000) it essentially needs something like ITSy/BFR.

So BFR (including the upper stage reuse that is the hardest part about the spaceship) will pay for itself.

[speedevil]

SpaceX will be starting over again soon too though.

In a very weird way.
'Do I want to fly on Ariane 6, which has had two flights at 100% success in 12 months, or do I want to fly on the same ITSy which did 12 test flights on one month'.

[Robotbeat]

Yeah, SpaceX will have plenty of internally generated demand to use for ITSy until it gets a good 30 consecutive successes under its belt.

[Basto]

SpaceX will be starting over again soon too though.

In a very weird way.
'Do I want to fly on Ariane 6, which has had two flights at 100% success in 12 months, or do I want to fly on the same ITSy which did 12 test flights on one month'.

If you honestly think SpaceX (or anyone) could launch 12 test flights in one month...

It is unlikely that ITS will fly before Ariane 6. But it's irrelevant, F9 will continue to be the SpaceX workhorse for years to come.

[Robotbeat]

SpaceX will be starting over again soon too though.

In a very weird way.
'Do I want to fly on Ariane 6, which has had two flights at 100% success in 12 months, or do I want to fly on the same ITSy which did 12 test flights on one month'.

If you honestly think SpaceX (or anyone) could launch 12 test flights in one month...

It is unlikely that ITS will fly before Ariane 6. But it's irrelevant, F9 will continue to be the SpaceX workhorse for years to come.

Easily 12 suborbital test flights in one month. I expect SpaceX to do so.

And I'd bet money ITSy will reach space before Ariane 6 does.

[ZachF]

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

Yep, I would expect them to develop cargo first, tanker second, then spaceship third.

[John Alan]

I agree... A6 will fly before ITSy... no doubts...
But I believe ITSy will fly more often and reach "mature" status (25+ flights) sooner...

On the other thought... F9 system will be still be flying payloads and making money in 2030...

Just my 2 cents on recent comments above... 

[abaddon]

Not too harsh, just wrong.

Maybe.  Personally, I'll take all the claims of ITS(anything) being ready in just a few years with a mammoth block of salt.

F9 is great.  FH is going to be great.  ITS will be great, eventually.  They just all take or will take longer in reality than they do in our collective minds.

It's not bad to dream, but right now, I'm personally far more excited about FH nearing 1st flight than ITSy, which is right now a prototype engine and a lot of digital designs.

As an aside, calling someone with more skeptical projections than you "wrong" when you clearly don't possess a time machine is silly.

[Basto]

SpaceX will be starting over again soon too though.

In a very weird way.
'Do I want to fly on Ariane 6, which has had two flights at 100% success in 12 months, or do I want to fly on the same ITSy which did 12 test flights on one month'.

If you honestly think SpaceX (or anyone) could launch 12 test flights in one month...

It is unlikely that ITS will fly before Ariane 6. But it's irrelevant, F9 will continue to be the SpaceX workhorse for years to come.

Easily 12 suborbital test flights in one month. I expect SpaceX to do so.

And I'd bet money ITSy will reach space before Ariane 6 does.

Like Ed I would also take that bet.

I think you fail to understand the test flight process. After each flight they spend weeks/months analyzing tons of data to see if reality matches simulations. Then they tweak hardware and software and go again.

Grasshopper did 8 total test flights over the course of a year.

The point I was trying to make though is that even without ITS in the next 4-5 years F9 and FH would be sufficient to keep pressure on their competitors.

[AncientU]

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.

Reality hit when the AMOS testing destroyed their operational East Coast launch pad.  Hundreds of millions of lost revenue compounded by hundreds of millions of pad repairs... go back and look at when 'cost' entered EM's vocab.

That said, I agree that Falcon family will be bread and butter launcher for SpaceX for the next decade.  Disagree that we will wait that long for a methlox BFR to fly.

[abaddon]

Ariane 6 is much further along in development than ITS.  It is also a much more conservative design based in large part on existing hardware or incremental advancement of existing hardware.  It's flat out a much easier rocket to roll out from the base they already have.

Why would anyone think Ariane 6 won't fly before ITS?  I genuinely don't understand how that would seem remotely plausible.

[AncientU]

Ariane 6 is much further along in development than ITS.  It is also a much more conservative design based in large part on existing hardware or incremental advancement of existing hardware.  It's flat out a much easier rocket to roll out from the base they already have.

Why would anyone think Ariane 6 won't fly before ITS?  I genuinely don't understand how that would seem remotely plausible.

Plausible or not, it is irrelevant.  A-6 is competing with Falcon 9 Block 5 and Falcon Heavy -- that's all that matters WRT Ariane 6.

ITSy will be competing with SLS and maybe New Glenn/New Armstrong... it needs to fly on a competitive timescale to those vehicles, and I expect it will.  Next week we'll know more about the timeline, capabilities, etc.(yeah!) 

[abaddon]

Plausible or not, it is irrelevant.

Look, obviously A6 is an F9/FH competitor (not ITS), but what I wrote was very much relevant to the discussion of whether A6 would fly before ITS or not.  You may not be interested in that discussion -- which is fine -- but that doesn't make it irrelevant.

[ZachF]

If an ITSy launch costs less than an A6 launch (Which is highly probable), A6 will be competing with ITSy.

[ZachF]

I agree... A6 will fly before ITSy... no doubts...
But I believe ITSy will fly more often and reach "mature" status (25+ flights) sooner...

On the other thought... F9 system will be still be flying payloads and making money in 2030...

Just my 2 cents on recent comments above... 

I would be willing to bet ITSy gets to launch #3 before SLS does.

[matthewkantar]

I remember after the first hint F-9 was going to go from # to * for first stage engine configuration, many people here doubted it. They said the sketch from the sat manufacturer, a sketch that clearly showed a new configuration, was just some draftsperson's whim. Why would they undertake such a massive change to a rocket that is finally working well?

SpaceX obviously does not think of ITS as some flight of fancy, they bent carbon to build a full scale tank as part of the program. They have ten times the resources and personnel available than they did when F-9 was being developed.

SpaceX will drop F-9 like a hot potato, with no whiff of sentimentality, as soon as they are able.

Matthew

[AncientU]

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.

Does appear the manpower reductions are forcing a hit to schedule reliability.  Evacuating launch crews from Vandenberg back to the Cape for Irma preps (the right thing to do) caused NROL-42 to slip.  Now a technical event is pushing it again with knock-on to subsequent NROL-52 as shown below.

With so much noise about the build up to NROL-42, I am guessing the silence around 52 is leading to it being not longer in Sept.   Since we are 8 days away from the NET.

It's been 5 Oct since L-42 slipped to 22 Sep.

This may sip again due to l-42 further slipping.