Next year, SpaceX aims to average one launch every 2.5 daysThe rollout of Starlink-for-phones will add new demands to SpaceX’s launch schedule.by Stephen Clark - Oct 20, 2023 8:12pm GMTEarlier this week, SpaceX launched for the 75th time this year, continuing a flight cadence that should see the company come close to 100 missions by the end of December.
Quote from: launchwatcher on 10/20/2023 01:24 pmQuote from: steveleach on 10/19/2023 05:01 pmFor what it's worth, this is what those tonnage numbers look like, with an exponential trend fitted by Google Sheets.If anyone knows what the trend equation "3166e^0.395x" means, I'd love an explanation.I read it as:Y = 3166 * e0.395 * Xand eyeballing it, it looks like X = year-2008I get:2020: 362298.68252021: 537790.43672022: 798287.62232023: 1184965.526which looks consistent with the fitted curve on the graph.How the **** did you manage to figure that out?
Quote from: steveleach on 10/19/2023 05:01 pmFor what it's worth, this is what those tonnage numbers look like, with an exponential trend fitted by Google Sheets.If anyone knows what the trend equation "3166e^0.395x" means, I'd love an explanation.I read it as:Y = 3166 * e0.395 * Xand eyeballing it, it looks like X = year-2008I get:2020: 362298.68252021: 537790.43672022: 798287.62232023: 1184965.526which looks consistent with the fitted curve on the graph.
For what it's worth, this is what those tonnage numbers look like, with an exponential trend fitted by Google Sheets.If anyone knows what the trend equation "3166e^0.395x" means, I'd love an explanation.
The last two lines in the chart from the post above shout out to me: 10 in Sept and 9 in Oct.Atlas 5's two biggest years were 2014 and 2015, with 9 launches each.
Quote from: david1971 on 10/31/2023 02:55 amThe last two lines in the chart from the post above shout out to me: 10 in Sept and 9 in Oct.Atlas 5's two biggest years were 2014 and 2015, with 9 launches each.Atlas V has launched a total of 99 times starting in 2002, so F9/FH still has a chance to beat that 21-year record in one year.
Quote from: DanClemmensen on 10/31/2023 03:27 amQuote from: david1971 on 10/31/2023 02:55 amThe last two lines in the chart from the post above shout out to me: 10 in Sept and 9 in Oct.Atlas 5's two biggest years were 2014 and 2015, with 9 launches each.Atlas V has launched a total of 99 times starting in 2002, so F9/FH still has a chance to beat that 21-year record in one year.That’s roughly 4.7 launches a year for Atlas V, and I thought that was a lot back then. It’s mind-blowing what SpaceX has achieved in just one year with only three pads and a small fleet of portable landing barges. Scheduling these launches must be a handful for the SpaceX staff entrusted with that job.
The smoothed count of SpaceX launches per month so far in 2023:7 launches, December 20227 launches, January 20237 launches, February 20237 launches, March 20237 launches, April 20238 launches, May 20238 launches, June 20238 launches, July 20238 launches, August 20239 launches, September 20239 launches, October 2023And here's the unsmoothed count:7 launches, December 20227 launches, January 20236 launches, February 20238 launches, March 20237 launches, April 20239 launches, May 20237 launches, June 20238 launches, July 20238 launches, August 20239 launches, September 20239 launches, October 2023
@elonmusk's 100 launches plan as of Nov 4, 2023
Quote from: ZachF on 09/05/2023 01:48 pmQuote from: steveleach on 09/04/2023 05:37 pmQuote from: eeergo on 09/04/2023 05:14 pmQuote from: steveleach on 09/04/2023 04:58 pmFor what it's worth, I found a "show R2" button on the charts.For the exponential trend line it is 0.663 and for the linear trend it is 0.673 which (I think) means that the linear trend is a slightly better fit (?)I also tried going (yearly not monthly) back to 2012, and can get an exponential trend line with an annual growth of 34% out of it (significantly less than the 55% that best matches the current year) and an R2 of 0.949; the linear trend gives negative launch rates in 2012 & 2013, so I'm not sure it is valuable.That's it: the annual launch rate is compatible with a linear trend, within the noise, and has been so in recent years. An exponential trend is also compatible but slightly worse and with a very small exponent (i.e. approaching linear).Moreover, the fine-tuning necessary to avoid over/under-shooting of an exponential function is much stronger, while multi-year-fitting exponentials that cover a few years back don't predict close to 100 launches this year, plus require piecemeal treatment of certain periods or tampering with the slope in approximately-yearly periods to fit the data well enough and not explode toward unfeasible values (like the linear trend does too, but subject to more error in case of inaccuracies in the fit).The overall historical launch trend, while still noisy, is much more clearly exponential, as a simple visual inspection clearly tells you - although in reality it will taper off at some "saturation" value achieving something like a sigmoid, at least in the medium term.The thing is, it looks like the growth is accelerating, not tapering off. From 2012 to 2022 it was trending at 35% a year.From 2021 to 2023 it has been trending at 55% a year.Is it common to see exponential growth turn into linear growth at a higher rate than it was while exponential?Data can be noisy year to year.Here’s what SpaceX dV adjusted payload growth looks like:2008: 1792009: 2172010: 9,7342011: 02012: 14,8962013: 16,9382014: 47,0002015: 42,0242016: 69,3802017: 174,9652018: 184,8352019: 151,6742020: 333,1412021: 409,9222022: 778,7872023ytd: 887,136SpaceX is on pace for 1,300t+ adjusted payload mass this year, already ahead of last year with ~four months to go. To provide more context with this, the cumulative total for the entire European space industry since its first launch is 3,224t, and the Chinese total is 2,241t (SpaceX is now 3,121t). The previous record tonnage in a year was 608t by the USSR in 1988.Tonnage will be a better barometer than launches as the switch to Starship happens… as impressive as projected SpaceX’s massive 1,300t total for 2023 is, that’s only like a dozen Starship launches. We may be soon coming to a point where SpaceX is lifting as much quarterly as the entire combined launch histories of Chinese or European space industries… Where do these tonnage numbers come from? Is there some site/database where one can view them? Because if there is, then you are my best friend and whoever compiled this data and made it available is my new deity of choice (meritocratic theology)! Please say "YES!".
Quote from: steveleach on 09/04/2023 05:37 pmQuote from: eeergo on 09/04/2023 05:14 pmQuote from: steveleach on 09/04/2023 04:58 pmFor what it's worth, I found a "show R2" button on the charts.For the exponential trend line it is 0.663 and for the linear trend it is 0.673 which (I think) means that the linear trend is a slightly better fit (?)I also tried going (yearly not monthly) back to 2012, and can get an exponential trend line with an annual growth of 34% out of it (significantly less than the 55% that best matches the current year) and an R2 of 0.949; the linear trend gives negative launch rates in 2012 & 2013, so I'm not sure it is valuable.That's it: the annual launch rate is compatible with a linear trend, within the noise, and has been so in recent years. An exponential trend is also compatible but slightly worse and with a very small exponent (i.e. approaching linear).Moreover, the fine-tuning necessary to avoid over/under-shooting of an exponential function is much stronger, while multi-year-fitting exponentials that cover a few years back don't predict close to 100 launches this year, plus require piecemeal treatment of certain periods or tampering with the slope in approximately-yearly periods to fit the data well enough and not explode toward unfeasible values (like the linear trend does too, but subject to more error in case of inaccuracies in the fit).The overall historical launch trend, while still noisy, is much more clearly exponential, as a simple visual inspection clearly tells you - although in reality it will taper off at some "saturation" value achieving something like a sigmoid, at least in the medium term.The thing is, it looks like the growth is accelerating, not tapering off. From 2012 to 2022 it was trending at 35% a year.From 2021 to 2023 it has been trending at 55% a year.Is it common to see exponential growth turn into linear growth at a higher rate than it was while exponential?Data can be noisy year to year.Here’s what SpaceX dV adjusted payload growth looks like:2008: 1792009: 2172010: 9,7342011: 02012: 14,8962013: 16,9382014: 47,0002015: 42,0242016: 69,3802017: 174,9652018: 184,8352019: 151,6742020: 333,1412021: 409,9222022: 778,7872023ytd: 887,136SpaceX is on pace for 1,300t+ adjusted payload mass this year, already ahead of last year with ~four months to go. To provide more context with this, the cumulative total for the entire European space industry since its first launch is 3,224t, and the Chinese total is 2,241t (SpaceX is now 3,121t). The previous record tonnage in a year was 608t by the USSR in 1988.Tonnage will be a better barometer than launches as the switch to Starship happens… as impressive as projected SpaceX’s massive 1,300t total for 2023 is, that’s only like a dozen Starship launches. We may be soon coming to a point where SpaceX is lifting as much quarterly as the entire combined launch histories of Chinese or European space industries…
Quote from: eeergo on 09/04/2023 05:14 pmQuote from: steveleach on 09/04/2023 04:58 pmFor what it's worth, I found a "show R2" button on the charts.For the exponential trend line it is 0.663 and for the linear trend it is 0.673 which (I think) means that the linear trend is a slightly better fit (?)I also tried going (yearly not monthly) back to 2012, and can get an exponential trend line with an annual growth of 34% out of it (significantly less than the 55% that best matches the current year) and an R2 of 0.949; the linear trend gives negative launch rates in 2012 & 2013, so I'm not sure it is valuable.That's it: the annual launch rate is compatible with a linear trend, within the noise, and has been so in recent years. An exponential trend is also compatible but slightly worse and with a very small exponent (i.e. approaching linear).Moreover, the fine-tuning necessary to avoid over/under-shooting of an exponential function is much stronger, while multi-year-fitting exponentials that cover a few years back don't predict close to 100 launches this year, plus require piecemeal treatment of certain periods or tampering with the slope in approximately-yearly periods to fit the data well enough and not explode toward unfeasible values (like the linear trend does too, but subject to more error in case of inaccuracies in the fit).The overall historical launch trend, while still noisy, is much more clearly exponential, as a simple visual inspection clearly tells you - although in reality it will taper off at some "saturation" value achieving something like a sigmoid, at least in the medium term.The thing is, it looks like the growth is accelerating, not tapering off. From 2012 to 2022 it was trending at 35% a year.From 2021 to 2023 it has been trending at 55% a year.Is it common to see exponential growth turn into linear growth at a higher rate than it was while exponential?
Quote from: steveleach on 09/04/2023 04:58 pmFor what it's worth, I found a "show R2" button on the charts.For the exponential trend line it is 0.663 and for the linear trend it is 0.673 which (I think) means that the linear trend is a slightly better fit (?)I also tried going (yearly not monthly) back to 2012, and can get an exponential trend line with an annual growth of 34% out of it (significantly less than the 55% that best matches the current year) and an R2 of 0.949; the linear trend gives negative launch rates in 2012 & 2013, so I'm not sure it is valuable.That's it: the annual launch rate is compatible with a linear trend, within the noise, and has been so in recent years. An exponential trend is also compatible but slightly worse and with a very small exponent (i.e. approaching linear).Moreover, the fine-tuning necessary to avoid over/under-shooting of an exponential function is much stronger, while multi-year-fitting exponentials that cover a few years back don't predict close to 100 launches this year, plus require piecemeal treatment of certain periods or tampering with the slope in approximately-yearly periods to fit the data well enough and not explode toward unfeasible values (like the linear trend does too, but subject to more error in case of inaccuracies in the fit).The overall historical launch trend, while still noisy, is much more clearly exponential, as a simple visual inspection clearly tells you - although in reality it will taper off at some "saturation" value achieving something like a sigmoid, at least in the medium term.
For what it's worth, I found a "show R2" button on the charts.For the exponential trend line it is 0.663 and for the linear trend it is 0.673 which (I think) means that the linear trend is a slightly better fit (?)I also tried going (yearly not monthly) back to 2012, and can get an exponential trend line with an annual growth of 34% out of it (significantly less than the 55% that best matches the current year) and an R2 of 0.949; the linear trend gives negative launch rates in 2012 & 2013, so I'm not sure it is valuable.
Yeah, my model is now back up to 100 launches (immediately before this launch, it would’ve been 99 launches estimate… so as expected, the model isn’t particularly sensitive to a single launch like it was earlier in the year).
Quote from: Robotbeat on 10/22/2023 05:44 amYeah, my model is now back up to 100 launches (immediately before this launch, it would’ve been 99 launches estimate… so as expected, the model isn’t particularly sensitive to a single launch like it was earlier in the year).When does SLC-6 come online? As I understand it, this will be a rapid turnaround pad like SLC-40/LC39. Unlike 4E.They will need another West Coast ASDSWith 4 pads and needing 12 per month on average. Not really sharp on math, but I think that is 3 launches per pad per month, not including Boca. Seems as though at some point they will need to start another second-stage production line to Texas for a one-stop shop. They are building a lot of manufacturing capacity at Boca???
Instead of building second stages in Texas (or Florida for that matter), I can see SpaceX relocating their Raptor production from Hawthorne, CA to the factory they have built in McGregor TX and then expanding their Merlin and F9 production lines into that space.
Quote from: AmigaClone on 11/07/2023 07:23 amInstead of building second stages in Texas (or Florida for that matter), I can see SpaceX relocating their Raptor production from Hawthorne, CA to the factory they have built in McGregor TX and then expanding their Merlin and F9 production lines into that space.In my experience you often don't need extra space to ramp up production. The processes gets better, smoother and more boring, vastly increasing output in the same space.
