Next steps in commercial space flight

[rcoppola]

Every once in a while, something significant happens. And while it may be recognized for being so, only through the passage of time is it revealed to what extent it changed....well, everything.

Of course, I'm referring to the SpaceX announcement of Red Dragon in 2018. However what intrigues me the most is, "What happens next?" Not with regards to mission planning but from a more general science, culture, business, politics and even international relations perspective.

The context: For the first time in history a privately owned and operated company has the will and the means to land a sizable spacecraft on another celestial body. Plans and capabilities untethered to the mood of the country, or that of its' President and elected Representatives. What are the implications of such an endeavor and those that follow, not being within the purview of Congressional control through funding and direct oversight? What new rules of engagement will manifest? New lines will be drawn, new alliances forged, old power structures defended yet inevitably breached. Or not?

For instance, how far will members of Congress, their largest current benefactors, and yes, some NASA employees go in maneuvering to counter this changing landscape? How far can they go? This outlier from Rep. Lamborn questioning how Musk finances his companies may be an overreach, but it won't be the last. What about the legions of Commercial and Government SpaceFlight Think-Tanks, Groups, Lobbyists? And how will other major Space Agencies from around the world view, respond to this?  How will this impact other spaceflight/craft/launch companies? How will they respond? Will they need to?

We here at NSF are an informed lot and I believe we share some responsibility to help inform others and when possible, direct the conversation in a meaningful and thoughtful way. So please keep things civil and help me and many others wrap our heads around, "What happens next?"

[The Amazing Catstronaut]

This is just a prediction. I'm certain reality will be far from the case.

A general, gradual, diversification as to how governmental space organisations approach planetary science missions. It'll be slow, it may take over multiple decades, but if this sets a precedent I can see all unmanned space science missions slowly moved into competitive commercial contract work. NASA/ESA/whoever, decides on the mission's capabilities, decides where they want it sent, and pays for the delivery of that payload. JPL will do less of the development side of R&D and will take on a more advisory, liaison role. Slowly governmentally manufactured spacecraft will go the way of serf based agriculture - replaced by cheaper, quicker evolving alternatives. Agencies will pay companies to do much of the work for them whilst in return the agencies collect all the data they wanted. Eventually the only directly government operated spacecraft will be related to national security.

That's just the unmanned side of the coin.

[nadreck]

If cost of Red Dragon is an interim baseline on what can be afforded for say roughly $100M ($50,000/kg) when you send 2t to Mars (or the moon).

This is a very new paradigm. This makes the potential to at least survey for resources on Mars or the Moon for significantly less than than the costs of a communications satellite until recently.  This doesn't make exploitation affordable yet, but at least some resource companies with vision (say like BHP Billiton who in the 90's poured $1.5B into setting up a diamond mine a degree or so south of the arctic circle in Canada's Northwest Territories) would probably risk a quarter of a billion to stake out Lunar resources at the poles, or some other project just in case they could take advantage of it a decade later when there was at least a chance of an order of magnitude drop in the costs.

Some prestigious universities could suddenly afford their own interplanetary probes. People like Spaceflight Industries who have been doing well with subdividing payload capacity for micro and nano satellites might do the same for instruments and/or rovers to different locations on the Moon or Mars. Their clients might be academia, multinational corporations, governments and even NGOs.

[Oli]

I don't get the hype.

First of all, most of the cost estimates here are absolutely ridiculous. Second, Red Dragon will test certain technologies for NASA and SpaceX, but it's still an order of magnitude smaller than what is needed for human missions. Whether Red Dragon will be picked over other reentry concepts like MSL, InSight for science missions is also questionable.

It's obviously great that SpaceX pushes for those technologies and I think it can make a real impact in terms of what it will cost for NASA to do manned missions. But screaming "revolution!" every time SpaceX announces some new plans is ridiculous.

[Space Ghost 1962]

I don't get the hype.

First of all, most of the cost estimates here are absolutely ridiculous. Second, Red Dragon will test certain technologies for NASA and SpaceX, but it's still an order of magnitude smaller than what is needed for human missions.

Dragon 2 is soon to fly with crew aboard. Dragon has been flying for years. Booster recovery already impacts launch pricing even though one is within a year of being reflown.

Yeah, you could do missions with the components, because missions are being done with the components. And they appear to work and are priced economically.

So you can consider a platform for a Mars program out of it. Robert Zubrin's “Mars Semi-Direct” concept would make use of three Falcon Heavy launches every two years, as an example.

Whether Red Dragon will be picked over other reentry concepts like MSL, InSight for science missions is also questionable.

The EDL for MSL is planned to be reused for several missions, and Phoenix's will be reused for InSight.

Neither of these comes from volume reused components like Dragon, which has flown more times.

It is unlikely that Atlas/Ariane will reuse the same boosters for a Mars mission. This does not seem to be a big jump, or "hype" to me.

[QuantumG]

Announce two years in advance, add more years of slippage, and anything seems ho hum. Things must seem a lot more revolutionary to people who aren't paying attention. There's people out there who hear about CRS-8 docking to the ISS and are like "OMG that's revolutionary!!" SpaceX should be commended for making their achievements seem routine.

[Oli]

So you can consider a platform for a Mars program out of it. Robert Zubrin's “Mars Semi-Direct” concept would make use of three Falcon Heavy launches every two years, as an example.

A manned program? No way.

Neither of these comes from volume reused components like Dragon, which has flown more times.

And I would argue that a heavily customized version of a LEO crew vehicle is not going to be cheaper than or better suited for robotic science missions.

[Zed_Noir]

I don't get the hype.

First of all, most of the cost estimates here are absolutely ridiculous. Second, Red Dragon will test certain technologies for NASA and SpaceX, but it's still an order of magnitude smaller than what is needed for human missions. Whether Red Dragon will be picked over other reentry concepts like MSL, InSight for science missions is also questionable.

The Red Dragon have a payload capacity of 2 to 4 metric tons to Mars surface depending on orbital mechanics. Even if the Red Dragon is triple the cost of the regular Dragon 2.That is still cheaper then the MSL platform that can lands only a few hundred kilograms of payload on Mars.

Since the Dragon is in mass production. You can actually have a whole flotilla of landers descending on Mars during each launch window with payloads not optimized for low mass.

[MattMason]

I don't get the hype.

First of all, most of the cost estimates here are absolutely ridiculous. Second, Red Dragon will test certain technologies for NASA and SpaceX, but it's still an order of magnitude smaller than what is needed for human missions. Whether Red Dragon will be picked over other reentry concepts like MSL, InSight for science missions is also questionable.

It's obviously great that SpaceX pushes for those technologies and I think it can make a real impact in terms of what it will cost for NASA to do manned missions. But screaming "revolution!" every time SpaceX announces some new plans is ridiculous.

I'd say that a totally-privately created American launch vehicle and spacecraft, not led by JPL, which is sending a human-capable spacecraft to Mars is a pretty momentous deal.

[Oli]

The Red Dragon have a payload capacity of 2 to 4 metric tons to Mars surface depending on orbital mechanics.

From the docs I've red its ~2t useful payload.

Even if the Red Dragon is triple the cost of the regular Dragon 2.That is still cheaper then the MSL platform that can lands only a few hundred kilograms of payload on Mars.

Why? How much does the MSL entry system cost? How much does Dragon 2 cost? The MSL platform can land a 1t rover the size of Curiosity, something Dragon certainly cannot.

Since the Dragon is in mass production.

Red Dragon won't be in "mass production".

I'd say that a totally-privately created American launch vehicle and spacecraft, not led by JPL, which is sending a human-capable spacecraft to Mars is a pretty momentous deal.

Privately created, under financing and advisement from NASA. Certainly not human-capable. I'm sure it will be stripped of anything that makes it LEO human-capable.

[sanman]

Announce two years in advance, add more years of slippage, and anything seems ho hum. Things must seem a lot more revolutionary to people who aren't paying attention. There's people out there who hear about CRS-8 docking to the ISS and are like "OMG that's revolutionary!!" SpaceX should be commended for making their achievements seem routine.

Still, I can't help but notice that the SpaceX announcement is coming on the heels of China's announcement that it will send a lander to Mars in 2021.

I imagine that SpaceX wants to take the lead in Mars exploration, and be second to none. This is in spite of Musk saying that he feels a manned mission to Mars would require a multi-national multi-govt collaborative effort. The power of the mass-market, when fully tapped, can easily dwarf that of mere state agencies.

Once you get into a large multi-state collaboration, then all sorts of politics will intervene, and slowdowns from any party will push back the entire effort. It seems like Musk doesn't want to be hostage to all that. Isn't something similar within the United States responsible for the comparatively slow progress of the US space program?

But how will the interaction between different private players play out? What kind of strategic collaborations  and transactions will occur between private companies to accelerate the progress of space exploration? Even if Musk is taking the lead on Mars, there's still the Moon and asteroids which others might be inclined to put their prime focus on.

[meekGee]

I don't get the hype.

First of all, most of the cost estimates here are absolutely ridiculous. Second, Red Dragon will test certain technologies for NASA and SpaceX, but it's still an order of magnitude smaller than what is needed for human missions. Whether Red Dragon will be picked over other reentry concepts like MSL, InSight for science missions is also questionable.

It's obviously great that SpaceX pushes for those technologies and I think it can make a real impact in terms of what it will cost for NASA to do manned missions. But screaming "revolution!" every time SpaceX announces some new plans is ridiculous.

Nah, we only yelled "revolution" once...  Now it's just fun watching it play out.

[Robotbeat]

Stuff like this happening might drive a bubble in space investment (and there sort of is one already in the microlaunch market). Lots of crazy ideas may seem a lot less crazy and get some actual investment. Which definitely doesn't guarantee any kind of success. But there's a lot of money sloshing around the US right now like $13 trillion in investment capital looking for somewhere to rest.

It really changes the whole game. If you can send 2-4 tons to Mars for $200 million or so, that's only a bit more expensive than resupplying ISS. And that's not a minimum, I think SpaceX (and others) could lower it even further.

This makes a near-term Mars base much more realistic and sustainable. Still need an ascent vehicle, but if SpaceX succeeds in all this and, despite all odds, actually fields BFR/BFS (or even a miniature version), then that isn't a problem. And every step of success raises their odds.

This is a risky mission. About even odds it will fail (less if they do supersonic retropropulsion with Dragon at Earth first). But if they succeed, I'm going to have to do some Bayesian updating of the odds of Mars settlement (not just a mission) in my lifetime.


...if SpaceX launches another 30 times between now and then, however, they have a pretty good chance (50:50) of having another failure. That would slow everything down again and probably push this off to the next window. Stuff can happen, I'm not going to treat this as a sure thing. But it certainly may happen, and it would be a big deal. You'll have a ~6 ton lander on Mars. The largest anything has been gently set on Mars is 900kg, nearly an order of magnitude smaller, and at MUCH larger cost.


...I think SpaceX doing this on Mars, and other possible steps like regular reuse, crew to ISS, Falcon Heavy full reuse, perhaps fielding Raptor, will likely increase the rate of private and public space exploration/utilization. More money will enter the industry. Bezos will do something. DoD and NASA will be more willing to try private space companies (because the political power of the old players will wane and the well-bred skeptics at NASA will be increasingly satisfied).

...but there will be bumps along the way.

[Zed_Noir]

If you can land a 6 ton lander on Mars surface. You probably can use the same lander design to deliver some kind of rover on Venus surface. 

[Robotbeat]

If you can land a 6 ton lander on Mars surface. You probably can use the same lander design to deliver some kind of rover on Venus surface. 

That's tough. It's like being inside an autoclave. Supercritical CO2 atmosphere with 450 Celsius temperature if you're /lucky/. Can be done, but you're going to need either super simple high temperature electronics or really aggressive active cooling, dumping heat into a furnace. You'll need a very powerful RTG/ASRG for that.

...but it can be done.

[sanman]

If you can land a 6 ton lander on Mars surface. You probably can use the same lander design to deliver some kind of rover on Venus surface. 

That's tough. It's like being inside an autoclave. Supercritical CO2 atmosphere with 450 Celsius temperature if you're /lucky/. Can be done, but you're going to need either super simple high temperature electronics or really aggressive active cooling, dumping heat into a furnace. You'll need a very powerful RTG/ASRG for that.

...but it can be done.

I thought Silicon Carbide electronics is being considered for potential Venus use. Doesn't Russia make significant use of diamond-based electronics in its space program? Maybe that might be suitable for Venus, too.

[Robotbeat]

If you can land a 6 ton lander on Mars surface. You probably can use the same lander design to deliver some kind of rover on Venus surface. 

That's tough. It's like being inside an autoclave. Supercritical CO2 atmosphere with 450 Celsius temperature if you're /lucky/. Can be done, but you're going to need either super simple high temperature electronics or really aggressive active cooling, dumping heat into a furnace. You'll need a very powerful RTG/ASRG for that.

...but it can be done.

I thought Silicon Carbide electronics is being considered for potential Venus use. Doesn't Russia make significant use of diamond-based electronics in its space program? Maybe that might be suitable for Venus, too.

Right, which is why I said super simple high temperature electronics. Making memory is the hard part. It'd be like going back to the 60s/70s for the digital circuitry. Again, not impossible, but it'd make the sort of autonomy we expect from planetary rovers very difficult. May have to off-load a lot of the intelligence to a relay orbiter.

[Coastal Ron]

We know that Musk's plans for humans will wait until they have the BFR/MCT, so Red Dragon really just represents an opportunity for robotic missions.

But oh what it can do for robotic missions!

In order to significantly lower the cost of something it needs to be commoditized in some way.  We're seeing that currently with the Mars 2020 robotic mission, which uses the same basic design as the Mars Science Laboratory (MSL), however so far that's only a quantity of two.

The Red Dragon is based on commoditized hardware, which is the Dragon Crew vehicle, and that should be in production for a number of years for ISS support.  And it offers the ability to land far heavier payloads than NASA has been able to up to this point.  More for less?  Yes please!

The real question is whether other countries besides the U.S. will take advantage, and companies other than SpaceX?

If they do then this capability will play a significant role in preparing humanity to expand out into space.  If no one else takes advantage, then it just ends up being a revolutionary precursor to whatever comes next.

I hope it's the former and not the later...

[sanman]

The real question is whether other countries besides the U.S. will take advantage, and companies other than SpaceX?

If they do then this capability will play a significant role in preparing humanity to expand out into space.  If no one else takes advantage, then it just ends up being a revolutionary precursor to whatever comes next.

I hope it's the former and not the later...

Hmm, so you're hoping that other countries or corporations will similarly try to make use of Dragon's capabilities, along with NASA? Well, maybe Musk should enlist well known corporate entities and invite them to slap their logos onto the Dragon, NASCAR-style, so that their companies can proudly claim to have sponsored opening up Mars. I'm not sure that's really Musk's style, but it could help to defray the costs of this mission - or at least pay for a SuperBowl commercial, or something.

But since SpaceX doesn't seem to be into courting customers heavily through salesmanship, maybe this is where a Golden Spike or someone similar could play the role that you want, to generate more missions.

[vaporcobra]

The Red Dragon have a payload capacity of 2 to 4 metric tons to Mars surface depending on orbital mechanics.

From the docs I've red its ~2t useful payload.

Even if the Red Dragon is triple the cost of the regular Dragon 2.That is still cheaper then the MSL platform that can lands only a few hundred kilograms of payload on Mars.

Why? How much does the MSL entry system cost? How much does Dragon 2 cost? The MSL platform can land a 1t rover the size of Curiosity, something Dragon certainly cannot.

Since the Dragon is in mass production.

Red Dragon won't be in "mass production".

I'd say that a totally-privately created American launch vehicle and spacecraft, not led by JPL, which is sending a human-capable spacecraft to Mars is a pretty momentous deal.

Privately created, under financing and advisement from NASA. Certainly not human-capable. I'm sure it will be stripped of anything that makes it LEO human-capable.

You're honestly trying a little too hard to see the negative aspects of this, which certainly exist but do not make it any less of a stunning accomplishment (if/when it occurs).

As for your question about cost, MSL cost $2.5b (conservatively). It is a stunningly beautiful feat of engineering with finely-prepared instrumentation and an intensely complex and bespoke/tailor-made landing system that would be difficult and expensive to apply to anything other than Curiosity itself. My estimate for Red Dragon would probably max out at $300m. Actual costs for the spacecraft and launch vehicle are likely around $200m (no clue as to the actual cost of Dragon V2), and then add on approximately $100m for R&D/NASA collaboration. Literally an order of magnitude cheaper for 2x the payload with what is arguably an off-the-shelf solution (given Musk's very recent AMA on Twitter in which he explained that Dragon V2 was in part literally designed with the idea of propulsive landings on Mars in mind). It can't travel miles like Curiosity, but one can certainly imagine previously unconsidered options for local exploration around the landing site.