Author Topic: Gwynne Shotwell lecture at Stanford 11 Oct 2017 (Read 56891 times)

Helodriver · « **on:** 10/08/2017 06:14 pm »

I'll be attending Gwynne Shotwell's lecture this Wednesday at Stanford University on behalf of NSF. Questions for the event will be moderated and must be submitted in advance. I have done so already and the rules of the Q&A state that questions with the most upvotes will be given precedence in the asking. (I asked them under my real name Derrick Stamos, so don't look for "helodriver")

So vote early and often so the question about "Poop on Mars" (and there is one) doesn't torpedo the questions session into the crapper.

Anything specific you want asked, comment here and I'll try to add to the queue.

Link to questions.

https://app.sli.do/event/idqu1pqo/ask

Flying Beaver · « **Reply #1 on:** 10/08/2017 06:26 pm »

My Question. Upvotes grateful, i've been pondering this one recently.

Cameron Byers
Is SpaceX pursuing development of a lander system for delivering crew or payload to the surface of the Moon that could be beneficial to NASA's near term plans?

vaporcobra · « **Reply #2 on:** 10/08/2017 06:58 pm »

Great questions so far, Helodriver! Wish I could attend as well.

Shotwell has sure been busy with talks and presentations lately. I'm liking this talkative 2017 SpaceX

Robotbeat · « **Reply #3 on:** 10/08/2017 07:09 pm »

Most of the questions I've seen are boring. Try this:
Ask about ISRU:

Have they tested their own Sabatier and electrolysis equipment? What's the status of their mining droids, have any prototypes been tested? What about Mars surface solar arrays, what's the plan, and have any prototypes for that been tested?

vanoord · « **Reply #4 on:** 10/08/2017 07:29 pm »

The obvious one is:

Where will BFR be built; and how will it be transported to Florida?

or:

If BFR is to be built at Hawthorne, how will that impact on continued F9 production - and in particular Stage 2 production?

TaurusLittrow · « **Reply #5 on:** 10/08/2017 07:30 pm »

Upvoted. Pity it's not possible to vote the Chicago way (early and often).

Here's a potential question:

Architectures for Mars missions by NASA and SpaceX appear to be on parallel tracks with little overlap. Besides COTS-like resupply of the DSG by SpaceX, what areas of potential cooperation exist that could accelerate or facilitate human missions to Mars by either party?

Lars-J · « **Reply #6 on:** 10/08/2017 07:32 pm »

Quote from: Flying Beaver on 10/08/2017 06:26 pm

My Question. Upvotes grateful, i've been pondering this one recently.

Cameron Byers
Is SpaceX pursuing development of a lander system for delivering crew or payload to the surface of the Moon that could be beneficial to NASA's near term plans?

We already know this. BFR. (the moon base slide in the 2017 IAC presentation)

Helodriver · « **Reply #7 on:** 10/08/2017 07:37 pm »

Quote from: TaurusLittrow on 10/08/2017 07:30 pm

Upvoted. Pity it's not possible to vote the Chicago way (early and often).

Here's a potential question:

Architectures for Mars missions by NASA and SpaceX appear to be on parallel tracks with little overlap. Besides COTS-like resupply of the DSG by SpaceX, what areas of potential cooperation exist that could accelerate or facilitate human missions to Mars by either party?

Good one. Just submitted a reworded version of that. They have a character limit like twitter.

Semmel · « **Reply #8 on:** 10/08/2017 07:38 pm »

I think technical questions are not the most useful ones directed to Shotwell. She is certainly knowledgable of the technology but she is in charge of the economics. I would go with an economics question:

How many F9 and FH Rockets does SpaceX plan to stockpile to be able to shut down the production line? Also, what part of the production would you considering to shut down?

@edit: made my question an open question. Better quality answer guaranteed.

yokem55 · « **Reply #9 on:** 10/08/2017 07:45 pm »

One of the big drivers for closing the business case for BFR is going to be flight rate. With a commercial launch market currently in the neighborhood of 50-60 per year, how will SpaceX get enough flights to make the system worth while? Starlink and other constellations will help, but that will cannibalize other GTO business?

Robotbeat · « **Reply #10 on:** 10/08/2017 07:52 pm »

Quote from: vanoord on 10/08/2017 07:29 pm

The obvious one is:

Where will BFR be built; and how will it be transported to Florida?

or:

If BFR is to be built at Hawthorne, how will that impact on continued F9 production - and in particular Stage 2 production?

This counts as boring as we already know the answer if you've been paying attention, IMHO.

I know we have forum fights about exactly how sure we are on points like these, but IMHO we should try for NEW info instead of just confirming what we already have.

Besides stuff that might be known in L2 (I'm not sure if there is any, but if you have a subscription, check it out) we have this:

https://mobile.twitter.com/elonmusk/status/888813713800785923

Quote

Elon Musk
Elon Musk @elonmusk
Replying to @VoltzCoreAudio @andygen21 and @Teslarati
A 9m diameter vehicle fits in our existing factories ...
1:31 PM · Jul 22, 2017

Bynaus · « **Reply #11 on:** 10/08/2017 07:57 pm »

Some of these questions are great, I upvoted many of them. But please don't ask the "airliner" question again. We know the answer to that one. SpaceX will never sell vehicles for others to run.

Robotbeat · « **Reply #12 on:** 10/08/2017 07:59 pm »

Quote from: yokem55 on 10/08/2017 07:45 pm

One of the big drivers for closing the business case for BFR is going to be flight rate. With a commercial launch market currently in the neighborhood of 50-60 per year, how will SpaceX get enough flights to make the system worth while? Starlink and other constellations will help, but that will cannibalize other GTO business?

Might not be a good idea to ask questions which, if answered, would significantly undermine SpaceX's business... They're likely to be ignored.

yokem55 · « **Reply #13 on:** 10/08/2017 08:08 pm »

Quote from: Robotbeat on 10/08/2017 07:59 pm

Quote from: yokem55 on 10/08/2017 07:45 pm
One of the big drivers for closing the business case for BFR is going to be flight rate. With a commercial launch market currently in the neighborhood of 50-60 per year, how will SpaceX get enough flights to make the system worth while? Starlink and other constellations will help, but that will cannibalize other GTO business?
Might not be a good idea to ask questions which, if answered, would significantly undermine SpaceX's business... They're likely to be ignored.

Perhaps it might be better to ask 'What kind of annual flight rate for BFR is required to get the per flight price to be cheaper than Falcon 1? How do you get the launch market to grow to meet that supply?'

vanoord · « **Reply #14 on:** 10/08/2017 08:31 pm »

Quote from: Robotbeat on 10/08/2017 07:52 pm

Quote from: vanoord on 10/08/2017 07:29 pm
The obvious one is:

Where will BFR be built; and how will it be transported to Florida?

or:

If BFR is to be built at Hawthorne, how will that impact on continued F9 production - and in particular Stage 2 production?
This counts as boring as we already know the answer if you've been paying attention, IMHO.

I know we have forum fights about exactly how sure we are on points like these, but IMHO we should try for NEW info instead of just confirming what we already have.

Besides stuff that might be known in L2 (I'm not sure if there is any, but if you have a subscription, check it out) we have this:

https://mobile.twitter.com/elonmusk/status/888813713800785923
Quote
Elon Musk
Elon Musk @elonmusk
Replying to @VoltzCoreAudio @andygen21 and @Teslarati
A 9m diameter vehicle fits in our existing factories ...
1:31 PM · Jul 22, 2017

Yes / no.

There's sometimes a difference between what Elon says and what his companies do...

There's also an issue in that F9 S2 isn't recoverable at the moment; and Gwynne Shotwell has (iirc) suggested it may not be. I'm therefore failing to see an option where the S2 production line can be shut down until BFR is flying regularly - in which case either either BFR has to be built elsewhere; or S2 production moved.

I'm not, I'm afraid, going to take one tweet from Elon Musk as gospel!

Robotbeat · « **Reply #15 on:** 10/08/2017 08:47 pm »

The stage 2 question is better, IMO. Shotwell didn't imply they weren't going to recover it, she said they would try.

dror · « **Reply #16 on:** 10/08/2017 08:59 pm »

I haven't read all the list but here are my suggestions

1.
BFR which was recently presented as targeting near future payloads, is seemingly ovesized for most.
Should we expect a smaller version (or a set of sizes) to be anounced in the future?

2.
Gwynne, you have mentioned interstellar propulsion in the past.
Does your company actively develop any technology in that context?
(Based on: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=38356.msg1421453#msg1421453
A simple yey/ney will be good enogh for me, especially a yey

)

I would appreciate corrections, spelling and rewording, thanks !

cartman · « **Reply #17 on:** 10/08/2017 10:27 pm »

Is the current Raptor being tested at McGregor the same size/thrust that will be used for the BFR?
When will you decide on a proper name for the rocket?

philw1776 · « **Reply #18 on:** 10/08/2017 10:52 pm »

Gwynne Shotwell you mentioned SpaceX interest in nuclear previously. In flight or planetary surface? Could you elaborate on that?

Is SpaceX considering any long range working interest in fusion propulsion systems such as Princeton Satellite Systems, Inc. Direct Fusion Drive?

We know that engineering resources at SpaceX have assisted Tesla in problem areas. Any details about Tesla/Solar City synergy on Mars surface transport, solar power and storage systems?

winkhomewinkhome · « **Reply #19 on:** 10/08/2017 11:28 pm »

Quote from: philw1776 on 10/08/2017 10:52 pm

We know that engineering resources at SpaceX have assisted Tesla in problem areas. Any details about Tesla/Solar City synergy on Mars surface transport, solar power and storage systems?

What about a Tesla Rover? Is any of Tesla "Semi-Truck" development applicable?