News SPACEX Falcon Heavy Teaser

[Urwumpe]

Thus the key to "affordable" spaceflight is to lower the cost per kWh. SpaceX is poised to do exactly that.

We may not see orbital $200 orbital flights in our life times but if SpaceX can get the price down to $100,000 a person, I suspect there will be no shortage of customers.

I would say 50,000 would be possible as lower limit, but that would then mean a lot of work.

And SpaceX won't achieve it with their rather traditional approach - SpaceX is pretty much similar to the punks down in the city, who shout "Damn Country!" and then go applying for welfare. The show is again paid by the tax payer, and nobody can really tell, if it is cheaper or not - the numbers aren't yet known.

 

[Capt_hensley]

The show is again paid by the tax payer, and nobody can really tell, if it is cheaper or not - the numbers aren't yet known.

I can tell you for a fact there is nothing in the NASA budget for 2011, or 2012 that says "For Space X" the COTS contract has been let, Space X is a major stockholder only because they have prooven they mean business. Not because they are cheaper.

As for the tax payer footing the bill, who did you think would pay? Bigalow? Bush? Obama? get real... Elon Musk hawked his name, and bet big! He recruited some astronauts, and real scientists. Bought and paid for on the Space X dime, not NASA's.

The numbers are in black and white, they reflect a 20% loss in overall budget for NASA as a whole. They reflect no funding for Shuttle beyond draw down and retirement funding that was projected in 2009, and only about 1% of the total funds are set aside for R&D. Far less than the 15% normally allocated.

All this means is Space X is picking up where Obama wanted Commercial space ventures to pick up. By placing bets, and gaining seed money from NASA competitions. Orbital Sciences, is right behind them with Taurus II, and Sea Launch is closing the third place gap. Where's Bigalow? Where's Virgin Galactic? These guy's are to busy getting ready for tourists. Space X is just keeping pace with demand, and a heavy lift vehicle is the next logical step. Having a plan is the best thing any space company who wants a foothold in space can do, and having a clear path to get there is how it happens.

Pick a winning team, give the customer what he wants, eliminate the competition, race for the finish at a leisurely pace.

 

[Zachstar]

Thus the key to "affordable" spaceflight is to lower the cost per kWh. SpaceX is poised to do exactly that.

We may not see orbital $200 orbital flights in our life times but if SpaceX can get the price down to $100,000 a person, I suspect there will be no shortage of customers.

I could not fly to Atlanta for 200USD let alone fly in orbit for 2 even if the tooth fairy delivered a magic SSTO.

1-5 Thousand USD Any greater and it cant be a vacation but for many a life goal. Which is fine compared to cost today.

Who knows tho. To have a chance in hell it would need to be some kind of fusion based anyway. Otherwise 50k may indeed be the lowest limit.

 

[theflyingfish]

Who knows tho. To have a chance in hell it would need to be some kind of fusion based anyway. Otherwise 50k may indeed be the lowest limit.

Wouldn't a fusion-based SSTO be kind of overkill? I always thought that fusion-and-fission-based spacecraft were for inter-planetary or inter-galactic travel. And aren't nuclear powered ships designed for use in space, as they are very heavy, and have low thrust, but high ISP's? I don't think it would be practical to use as an Earth-to-LEO-to-Earth spaceplane.

Anyway, what is this rocket supposed to lift? I thought heavy-lift rockets were used to lift space station parts, or go to the moon, but the FHeavy seems to be stuck in the Dragon-lifter role...

 

[Capt_hensley]

If you check the dimensions of the fairing, you will see it can lift most of the smaller modules of the ISS. This makes it ideal for the smaller jobs of orbiting additional modules like an MPLM into LEO/GTO, The larger Falcon XX is best suited for getting larger and heavier objects into LEO/GTO. All these lift vehicles are aimed at getting the Moon or Mars ships/modules/habitats into orbit. One rocket could take drive segment to get out of orbit and on it's way to it's destination.

None of the rockets in the image above are nuclear. They use Merlin Engines with various liquid fuels.

 

[GoForPDI]

Any talk about nuclear is to do with in-space vehicles, the Falcon and Eagle (is that what they have been called by SpaceX?) Rockets would lift components of a Mars Vehicle into orbit, which would include nuclear powered stages, crew modules, tugs etc..

 

[Urwumpe]

I can tell you for a fact there is nothing in the NASA budget for 2011, or 2012 that says "For Space X" the COTS contract has been let, Space X is a major stockholder only because they have prooven they mean business. Not because they are cheaper.

The same also applies to Boeing, Lockheed Martin or ATK - nobody of them has their own name in the NASA budget, but all won't move a finger without taxpayers money and all have their reliable income from the NASA budget.

SpaceX has currently not a single customer that is not US Gov, either directly (Airforce) or with the US Gov hiding behind it (Iridium).

And this is all not what commercial spaceflight operation should be about - you should reduce the costs also by having other private companies taking your services, so you don't depend on government money alone.

 

[Wood]

SpaceX has currently not a single customer that is not US Gov, either directly (Airforce) or with the US Gov hiding behind it (Iridium).

That's simply not true. A look at their launch manifest shows several international and non-governmental customers.

 

[RisingFury]

And this is all not what commercial spaceflight operation should be about - you should reduce the costs also by having other private companies taking your services, so you don't depend on government money alone.

More will come when confidence SpaceX rises. They did have 3 failures and F9's only had one flight...

 

[DaveS]

F9's only had one flight...

Actually, it flown two successful flights. The first one carried a inert dummy boilerplate Dragon, while the second flight carried a fully functional Dragon.

 

[Urwumpe]

That's simply not true. A look at their launch manifest shows several international and non-governmental customers.

Lets look closer - you have actually just two point five customers without a government behind it:

SES, Orbcomm and Bigelow (0.5, since Bigelow is also hoping hard for government contracts).

The rest are spaceflight agencies, government contractors or even just SpaceX test flights.

 

[Wood]

Press conference to start soon.

 

[GoForPDI]

Around twice the payload to LEO of a Delta IV Heavy and Space Shuttle. Cross-feeding across the three Falcon 9 cores, central core almost full at time of strap-on core sep.

Elon noting that a manned flyby of the moon is possible with one launch, and a manned Moon mission could be done with two FH's.

He also hints at research being done on a vehicle larger than the Saturn V..

 

[Axertan]

Spotted a promotional animation of Falcon Heavy

http://spacex.com/multimedia/videos.php?id=59

 

[GoForPDI]

http://www.spacex.com/falcon_heavy.php

 

[orb]

Here's the embedded promotional video from SpaceX YouTube channel:

Falcon Heavy

​

 

[orb]

SPACE.com: SpaceX Unveils Plan for Bigger, Better Private Rocket

SpaceRef: SpaceX Announces Launch Date for the World's Most Powerful Rocket

Orlando Sentinel: SpaceX unveils plans for new ‘heavy’ rocket

Florida Today - The Flame Trench: SpaceX Unveils Plans For Falcon Heavy Rocket

 

[GoForPDI]

Most powerful rocket? STS is a few tons below the Saturn V in terms of mass to LEO, but if you take away the dead mass of the Orbiter, then it is much less. STS is still far more powerful. Some mis-advertising there!

 

[Urwumpe]

Most powerful rocket? STS is a few tons below the Saturn V in terms of mass to LEO, but if you take away the dead mass of the Orbiter, then it is much less. STS is still far more powerful. Some mis-advertising there!

he also ignores the Energia there. :lol:

I think he means "existing launchers".

 

[Zachstar]

Wouldn't a fusion-based SSTO be kind of overkill? I always thought that fusion-and-fission-based spacecraft were for inter-planetary or inter-galactic travel. And aren't nuclear powered ships designed for use in space, as they are very heavy, and have low thrust, but high ISP's? I don't think it would be practical to use as an Earth-to-LEO-to-Earth spaceplane.

Anyway, what is this rocket supposed to lift? I thought heavy-lift rockets were used to lift space station parts, or go to the moon, but the FHeavy seems to be stuck in the Dragon-lifter role...

There are a number of proposals for using Pb11 fusion for air transport. It might not be the fastest ride to orbit but it wont suffer much from the thinning atmosphere. If I remember reading right what you are talking about is fusion product drives which have exhaust plumes that are very VERY hot (energetic). Not something you would want to launch with regardless but are for very fast departures to the outer planets.

As for what it can lift. Why not extremely heavy and or bulky cargo?