Next steps in commercial space flight

[b0objunior]

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.

Your cost comparison is muddy. Comparing a static lander with a rover is not fair for both.

[ciscosdad]

Spacex is merely the first of a string of companies that will do business in space. (Arguably the most important as it will be an enabler). Planetary resources and the others are preparing. We are seeing the first non government move off planet, and in due course it will become a trickle then eventually a flood.

We can't see the forest for the trees. We have become accustomed to the achievements of Spacex, without seeing the bigger picture. The OP was correct in identifying the significance of what is coming, and this mission, even if its delayed or unsuccessful.

[redliox]

What happens next is we'll see if a commercial lander can do better than 40 years of NASA engineering, at least 30 of which has been limited by budget cuts *coughMarsPolarLandercough*.

Standardization could allow for a lander at every launch window, chiefly Mars but this is a capsule that could hypothetically reach either Venus or Jupiter/Europa as well; result being more probes in generally, say perhaps one every year in contrast to a handful a decade, so long as there's an entity paying (university, NASA, ESA, Mars Society, Coca Cola, ect).  There could be a nice bloom of unmanned spaceflight...

If I had to give a specific "what happens next" involving Red Dragon and Mars exploration, three words: Mars Sample Return.  Caltech is going to grit its teeth...eh Blackstar? 

The biggest change may be in NASA's attitude.  The timing of NASA cutting the LDSD funding with the team-up with SpaceX seems far too coincidental, as if acknowledging "Ok Elon, we admit your idea is better than ours."  They won't kill SLS, but we'll see a realignment of programs that may curiously complement the SpaceX way of getting to Mars.  In Constellation terms, NASA is acknowledging there will never be a Mars version of Altair because its hands are tied, so it's turning to Red Dragon to fill a need.  There will be a NASA mothership carrying a red dragon alongside.

I don't think it'd be wise to guess too far ahead, after all we need to see if SpaceX proves itself.  If Red Dragon lands, it will change the game for Mars just as it did for LEO.  Boeing, Lockheed, and even JPL may want to step up their game.

[The Amazing Catstronaut]

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 missing the point, Oli. The dragon platform is completely adaptable as a Mars lander. It also breaks ground on how we land on Mars.

The cost isn't ridiculous since much of the technology presently exists. For this to be a lander which hasn't been run through JPL is a wonder in of itself.

Privately created, yes, but also privately motivated. You have a right to be skeptical of their ability to perform the mission, but claiming it isn't revolutionary is ignoring the state of play and calling it information.

I don't think it'd be wise to guess too far ahead, after all we need to see if SpaceX proves itself.  If Red Dragon lands, it will change the game for Mars just as it did for LEO.  Boeing, Lockheed, and even JPL may want to step up their game.

Boeing and Lockheed probably need a change in approach, but they'll adapt, it's what they're good at. JPL probably needs its role redefined - it'd be good if one day JPL is only designing/defining payloads, not the lander/spacecraft/probe itself. None of that expertise and proud tradition of service needs go to waste, it'll just be refocused by the years.

[redliox]

Boeing and Lockheed probably need a change in approach, but they'll adapt, it's what they're good at. JPL probably needs its role redefined - it'd be good if one day JPL is only designing/defining payloads, not the lander/spacecraft/probe itself. None of that expertise and proud tradition of service needs go to waste, it'll just be refocused by the years.

All 3 in their own ways have been used to having "monopolies" in their fields.  More universities beyond Caltech have gotten involved with probes since the 1990s, but they continue to have the loudest voice and biggest influence, yet even they can't figure a straightforward Mars sample return scheme.  And neither Starliner or Orion have legs to land on.  SpaceX is going to embarrass them all.

[The Amazing Catstronaut]

All 3 in their own ways have been used to having "monopolies" in their fields.  More universities beyond Caltech have gotten involved with probes since the 1990s, but they continue to have the loudest voice and biggest influence, yet even they can't figure a straightforward Mars sample return scheme.  And neither Starliner or Orion have legs to land on.  SpaceX is going to embarrass them all.

Right, but they'll up their game in an attempt to keep those positions. They won't just let them slide out from under them.

[rayleighscatter]

Stuff like this happening might drive a bubble in space investment (and there sort of is one already in the microlaunch market).

We're already in a bubble of space investment, especially in launchers of any size, but also satellites, unmanned, suborbital, habs, etc.

It may now be less of how much money will be pumped in, but rather when and how big the pull back will be when the bubble bursts.

[Oli]

You're missing the point, Oli. The dragon platform is completely adaptable as a Mars lander. It also breaks ground on how we land on Mars.

It's another one of those "build it and they'll come" arguments. The question is whether NASA actually has the need for a static 2t lander. Mars Sample Return is a planned NASA mission, current concepts are based on the sky crane system with a landing platform and a fetch rover. The entry and descent stage come at a cost of $220m, the cruise stage an additional $90m (both without reserves), given a total mission cost of $2.5bn that's not going to break the bank ($2.5bn is without orbiter or the Mars Returned Sample Handling facility). Maybe Dragon could be used for that, but I guess it would have be modified for a rover.

Other than that, maybe drilling would be interesting, or landing at higher altitudes, but NASA doesn't have any concrete plans for those.

[sanman]

You're missing the point, Oli. The dragon platform is completely adaptable as a Mars lander. It also breaks ground on how we land on Mars.

It's another one of those "build it and they'll come" arguments. The question is whether NASA actually has the need for a static 2t lander. Mars Sample Return is a planned NASA mission, current concepts are based on the sky crane system with a landing platform and a fetch rover. The entry and descent stage come at a cost of $220m, the cruise stage an additional $90m (both without reserves), given a total mission cost of $2.5bn that's not going to break the bank ($2.5bn is without orbiter or the Mars Returned Sample Handling facility). Maybe Dragon could be used for that, but I guess it would have be modified for a rover.

Other than that, maybe drilling would be interesting, or landing at higher altitudes, but NASA doesn't have any concrete plans for those.

NASA has a need to save $$$, so by Red Dragon meeting their needs for less $$$, then why would NASA pass that over to do another SkyCrane more expensively? As for Mars missions which exceed Dragon's capabilities, what would those immediately be? By the time NASA puts together such a bigger mission, MCT would probably be ready.

[Oli]

NASA has a need to save $$$, so by Red Dragon meeting their needs for less $$$, then why would NASA pass that over to do another SkyCrane more expensively?

Whether Dragon could provide the same capability for less $$$ is pure speculation, as this entire thread.

[Lee Jay]

I jut woke up to this thread, and I feel like I've happened on a SpaceX fan club party, at which most people have been drinking.

[The Amazing Catstronaut]

We're already in a bubble of space investment, especially in launchers of any size, but also satellites, unmanned, suborbital, habs, etc.

It may now be less of how much money will be pumped in, but rather when and how big the pull back will be when the bubble bursts.

We don't yet know if the investment is disproportional over a long  term to the ability to make a return.

I jut woke up to this thread, and I feel like I've happened on a SpaceX fan club party, at which most people have been drinking.

Don't worry, the non-alcoholic beverages are on the table to the right. 

[Coastal Ron]

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?

Yes.

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.

Sure, why not?  Company logos are plastered on the sides of payload fairing already.

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.

If a country or company came to SpaceX and offered to pay for a trip to Mars, what do you think SpaceX would do?  I think they would take the money and say "When do you want to go?"

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.

Don't be so sure that Musk is not courting potential customers already.  This Red Dragon mission has been in the works for two years now, and now that it's plastered across the web and looking like it could be a reality I think Musk's efforts will be able to be ramped up in his private conversations with people.

I'd be surprised if someone else offered to partner with SpaceX on a second mission before the first one succeeds, but once the first one succeeds then I would expect to hear about other partnerships for missions to Mars.

[TomH]

Back to the OP:

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?

I will not be surprised to see a bunch of whining and frivolous lawsuits-like Bezos' claiming only he had the right to land a rocket at sea. I remember when USPS demanded there be a tax on every email, of which the funds would be given to them.....to compensate for the loss of snail mail letters. As if written communication was a purview-domain owned solely by themselves. I don't doubt that all kinds of superfluous grenades will be lobbed into courtrooms and congress alike, solely to protect economic fiefdoms. Hopefully these anti-competive manouvers will all be tossed out.

[sanman]

Whether Dragon could provide the same capability for less $$$ is pure speculation, as this entire thread.

Alright, but given SpaceX's track record so far of low-balling on other launch offerings, and given how their whole operation is always pushing the envelope on cost and capability, and on getting the most bang-for-buck, it seems like a private enterprise like theirs has earned a lot confidence that they'll do more for less.

Sure, why not?  Company logos are plastered on the sides of payload fairing already.

Well, SpaceX's own logo is one thing, but could Coca-Cola, McDonalds, DuPont, Apple, etc be convinced to sponsor particular flights? It would certainly be great, and it would be a civic-minded statement by big businesses of their forward-looking vision for humanity.

Actually, I dunno if the big X-logo on the barge landing pad has to be repainted each time due to the exhaust flames, but they should offer that space up for a new corporate bidder to place their logo on for each new flight.

"And today's landing is sponsored by Crest toothpaste! Crest - Of Course I Still Love You!"

If a country or company came to SpaceX and offered to pay for a trip to Mars, what do you think SpaceX would do?  I think they would take the money and say "When do you want to go?"

That's the thing - who's just got all this cash lying around to throw at SpaceX to buy a trip to Mars? I thought countries do these things to show off their own accomplishments for national prestige. How are you going to summon up national pride just for having written a big fat cheque, as opposed to having done it yourself? That's like hiring athletes from other countries to represent you at the Olympics. What bragging rights do you get?

Don't be so sure that Musk is not courting potential customers already.  This Red Dragon mission has been in the works for two years now, and now that it's plastered across the web and looking like it could be a reality I think Musk's efforts will be able to be ramped up in his private conversations with people.

I'd be surprised if someone else offered to partner with SpaceX on a second mission before the first one succeeds, but once the first one succeeds then I would expect to hear about other partnerships for missions to Mars.

I think it would be cool if Google were to sponsor a mission to Mars. They keep touting their own forward-looking vision for the world, and they've sponsored stuff like X-Prize, etc. Amazon is already sponsoring Blue Origin, in a sense. If Google goes with SpaceX, then Apple will be under pressure to pair up with someone - Orbital ATK? Heh, and Microsoft can eventually join the party by tying with Stratolaunch.

[ncb1397]

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?"

How is it untethered to government control? If the government cancels commercial crew, doesn't allow free access to the DSN and stops being SpaceX's number 1 customer, Red Dragon is probably not happening. If the ISS market doesn't support dragon production for cargo and crew launches, then the capability of SpaceX to support the continuation of the product line, including the Red Dragon variant, is questionable at best.

[vaporcobra]

Your cost comparison is muddy. Comparing a static lander with a rover is not fair for both.
[/quote]

I'd say maybe it is imperfect, but far from muddy. A static lander can't achieve the breadth of science that a rover can, but both can accomplish meaningful (albeit somewhat different) scientific goals. A solid example can be especially found with the Mars 2020 rover, which is intended to store samples (albeit without any concrete plan whatsoever to return those samples). It might end up being $1.5b on the low end. For the same price, you could utilize something like 5 Red Dragons, all of which would be able to expediently return samples. While the issues of cross contamination are very real and worrisome, the ability to simply transport samples back to Earth almost makes the rover unnecessary, as it is essentially a necessarily-compromised roving science laboratory.

I personal am enamored with the concept of a beautifully complex machine roving about on Mars, but the utility of movement can be vastly outweighed by the ability to utilize the scientific capabilities present on Earth. A probe dedicated solely to photography would be vastly different and the combination of several Red Dragon sample returns and a dedicated imaging rover (possibly small enough to be delivered by Red Dragon) would accomplish far more than rovers for the same cost or less. Of course my speculation runs rampant in the cost estimates, but I think they are fair, particularly if SpaceX plays a major role in the non-instrumentation engineering.

[eric_astro]

Red Dragon is noteworthy because it will test martian EDL for something that could be manned. Musk/SpaceX is interested in human spaceflight to Mars- IMO they will find a way.

[oldAtlas_Eguy]

If the 2018 Red Dragon is successful, since it is a capabilities demonstrator, the next flight or flights in 2020 would be for paying customers like everything else SpaceX has done in the past. By teaming with someone like Spaceflight Industries a Red Dragon with 75 experiments at a average price per flight for each of $2M would probably have a waiting list such that in 2022 they could launch a Red Dragon flight every 2 weeks over a period of nearly three months.

If NASA wants or someone else wants a MSR that would use nearly all the landing payload of the RD (2mt for MAV). So for a MSR those would be dedicated designs like a CC version of D2 would be vs a Cargo D2.

Also do not forget that a GLX rover would easily fit in a RD and would not need a large opening. I am sure that Astobotics would be happy to include one of their rovers on the RD. It may prove even easier getting to the surface of Mars than trying to get one to the surface of the Moon on their own. A Mars Rover X prize?

[meberbs]

How is it untethered to government control? If the government cancels commercial crew, doesn't allow free access to the DSN and stops being SpaceX's number 1 customer, Red Dragon is probably not happening. If the ISS market doesn't support dragon production for cargo and crew launches, then the capability of SpaceX to support the continuation of the product line, including the Red Dragon variant, is questionable at best.

If the government cancels commercial crew, SpaceX will make Dragon 2 anyway, because it is part of their path to Mars, and it can be used for transport to future commercial space stations (Bigelow). Dragon lab is still on the manifest as well. Reduced demand for Dragons would probably up the per unit cost, but SpaceX still could fund occasional Dragon missions from its own profit.

Without free access to the DSN, SpaceX would pay for access, or build their own relays depending on how the cost works out.

SpaceX doesn't need NASA or the government in general as an anchor customer at this point. Take a look at the manifest for the rest of the year, out of 14 planned flights, there are 2 Dragon missions, the falcon heavy demo, 2 foreign government missions, and 9 commercial. The government is NOT SpaceX's number one customer anymore. (this doesn't mean that government contracts aren't lucrative, since gov't pays more to impose special requirements, which in turn means more profit, plus gov't will partially support development)

I am not saying that SpaceX losing all of its NASA support and government missions wouldn't slow down SpaceX's plans, but they would still be making plenty of profit which they would then reinvest into the Mars missions. (SpaceX's balance sheet has always been effectively 0, since they redirect any profit directly into R&D and capital, that plus being a private company makes it hard to tell how much they really net on a single launch, but they clearly get enough based on the amount of side projects they have)