SpaceX to build a BFR

[josh_simonson]

>1. Launch the first rocket. <br /><br />Already paid for and ready to go. And they're getting 6.5M for their trouble..<br /><br /> />2. Make plans for the second rocket <br /><br />Which is already built and will receive another 6.5m payment...<br /><br /> />3. Get contracts in line to fund further development <br /><br />Which already exist, check their launch manifest. <br /><br /> />4. Rutan thinks that it will cost $400 million to develop a CXV. Rutan is smarter then Musk....when it comes to rockets...... <br /><br />Rutan's never designed a rocket in his life. He bought an off the shelf engine and stuck it in a small airplane with manual controls. That's it. He doesn't know anything about liquid rockets, hypersonic flight, or computer controlled avionics. Anyway, a CXV type vehicle is way down the line in SpaceX' plans, though a CXV by another supplier may ride on his rockets.<br />

 

[thecolonel]

<i>another promise and another delay.</i><br /><br />Fact is that everyone who sneers at NASA, cheers for the private sector and asks the question, "Why does the Shuttle need a standing army to operate?" are finally getting their definitive answer.<br /><br />Because this stuff is extremely intricate and difficult. It requires a large number of people specialilzing in many varying detailed disciplines to make it happen.<br /><br />Continue to expect budget limitations to adversely affect SpaceX's plans and schedule...

 

[thecolonel]

<i>another promise and another delay.</i><br /><br />Fact is that everyone who sneers at NASA, cheers for the private sector and asks the question, "Why does the Shuttle need a standing army to operate?" are finally getting their definitive answer.<br /><br />Because this stuff is extremely intricate and difficult. It requires a large number of people specialilzing in many varying detailed disciplines to make it happen.<br /><br />Continue to expect budget limitations to adversely affect SpaceX's plans and schedule...

 

[frodo1008]

In the first place I think when 1207 refers to the next rocket he isn't referring to the next Falcon 1, but the next rocket in the series of Falcon rockets.<br /><br />Next, the 6.5 million will not even come close to covering the development costs of the Falcon 1, it will take many such launches, assuming that spacex is going to make a reasonable profit on each launch, and further assuming that their will be no problems with the Falcon 1. These are very big assumptions in this industry!<br /><br />Now, what Musk is talking about is a rocket comparable to the EELV Heavies of Delta IV or Atlas V at the very least (I see where he has decided to skip the Delta II sized Falcon 5) even talking about matching the NASA design for a SHLV to place 100 tons into LEO. <br /><br />Let us now examine just the EELV program in itself! This program, which was NOT a NASA program for the information of some on these boards who seem to think that it was, it was an Air Force military program. The venerable and great Titan series of Heavy rockets had for some 25 years or more been the mainstay of the military when it came to placing very heavy spy satellite systems into GOE orbit. But it was almost, if not actually as expensive per pound to LEO as the STS (shuttle) system, as some $10,000 per pound to LEO was the cost of both the STS and Titan systems. What the Air Force wanted from the traditional contractors of Boeing and LM was a program to use basically current technology (no experimental and possibly very expensive development) and using more production like methods similar to aircraft production instead of the then current one of a kind type of production, bring the cost of a pound to LEO down to some $2,500 per pound to LEO. I believe that both companies (by the way the contracts were NOT cost plus, so both companies had to really hustle on these contracts to make any profit at all!) eventually will achieve this goal as long as the rate of manufacturing of the Delta IV and the A

 

[frodo1008]

In the first place I think when 1207 refers to the next rocket he isn't referring to the next Falcon 1, but the next rocket in the series of Falcon rockets.<br /><br />Next, the 6.5 million will not even come close to covering the development costs of the Falcon 1, it will take many such launches, assuming that spacex is going to make a reasonable profit on each launch, and further assuming that their will be no problems with the Falcon 1. These are very big assumptions in this industry!<br /><br />Now, what Musk is talking about is a rocket comparable to the EELV Heavies of Delta IV or Atlas V at the very least (I see where he has decided to skip the Delta II sized Falcon 5) even talking about matching the NASA design for a SHLV to place 100 tons into LEO. <br /><br />Let us now examine just the EELV program in itself! This program, which was NOT a NASA program for the information of some on these boards who seem to think that it was, it was an Air Force military program. The venerable and great Titan series of Heavy rockets had for some 25 years or more been the mainstay of the military when it came to placing very heavy spy satellite systems into GOE orbit. But it was almost, if not actually as expensive per pound to LEO as the STS (shuttle) system, as some $10,000 per pound to LEO was the cost of both the STS and Titan systems. What the Air Force wanted from the traditional contractors of Boeing and LM was a program to use basically current technology (no experimental and possibly very expensive development) and using more production like methods similar to aircraft production instead of the then current one of a kind type of production, bring the cost of a pound to LEO down to some $2,500 per pound to LEO. I believe that both companies (by the way the contracts were NOT cost plus, so both companies had to really hustle on these contracts to make any profit at all!) eventually will achieve this goal as long as the rate of manufacturing of the Delta IV and the A

 

[ragnorak]

This is an old story. It was reported back in September.<br /><br />http://62.189.48.33/Articles/2005/09/12/201533/SpaceX+unveils+new+launch+vehicle.html<br /><br />Spacex has major engine problems and keeps delaying its Falcon 1 launch.

 

[ragnorak]

This is an old story. It was reported back in September.<br /><br />http://62.189.48.33/Articles/2005/09/12/201533/SpaceX+unveils+new+launch+vehicle.html<br /><br />Spacex has major engine problems and keeps delaying its Falcon 1 launch.

 

[barrykirk]

As far as I know, the first launch is scheduled for late November early December. About a month from now. If he holds to that schedule and gets that bird up there. A lot of the naysayers will shut up.

 

[barrykirk]

As far as I know, the first launch is scheduled for late November early December. About a month from now. If he holds to that schedule and gets that bird up there. A lot of the naysayers will shut up.

 

[n_kitson]

I find it a little frustrating that he has played a bit of the "blame game" this year. At the beginning of this year it was the military delaying the launch because of the Titan IV. In fact, he wrote quite a little crusading opinion piece about how the military was making the Vandenburg investment unfeasible by forcing him to delay. Well, now it turns out that the Titan merely made a convenient scapegoat for bigger problems at SpaceX. The Falcon is still not ready to fly.

 

[n_kitson]

I find it a little frustrating that he has played a bit of the "blame game" this year. At the beginning of this year it was the military delaying the launch because of the Titan IV. In fact, he wrote quite a little crusading opinion piece about how the military was making the Vandenburg investment unfeasible by forcing him to delay. Well, now it turns out that the Titan merely made a convenient scapegoat for bigger problems at SpaceX. The Falcon is still not ready to fly.

 

[robotical]

Unfortunately, it now looks like it will be February at the earliest.<br /><br /><i>A Falcon One rocket was to lift the ashes of Doohan, who played engineer Montgomery "Scotty" Scott aboard the fictional Starship Enterprise, into space next month but the launch has been delayed at least until February, organizers said Tuesday.</i><br /><br />http://www.spacedaily.com/news/launchers-05zzzy.html <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[robotical]

Unfortunately, it now looks like it will be February at the earliest.<br /><br /><i>A Falcon One rocket was to lift the ashes of Doohan, who played engineer Montgomery "Scotty" Scott aboard the fictional Starship Enterprise, into space next month but the launch has been delayed at least until February, organizers said Tuesday.</i><br /><br />http://www.spacedaily.com/news/launchers-05zzzy.html <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[tap_sa]

http://www.rlvnews.com<br /><br /><i>"So to recap, the various articles on Wednesday about a Falcon I launch delay were basically correct except that they were two months late. An engine problem back in September did result in a delay in both the Kwajalein and Vanderberg launches so that additional engine testing could be carried out. Now with the final test of the Merlin 1 successfully completed, the Kwajalein launch is scheduled for the weekend of November 26-27th. If that goes well, the Vandenberg flight would be sometime in early 2006."</i><br /><br /><i>"Update - Elon Musk says, "The engine test went perfectly, development is 100% complete on F1 and launch is scheduled for Thanksgiving weekend. Chafer is talking about the second launch of F1"</i>

 

[tap_sa]

http://www.rlvnews.com<br /><br /><i>"So to recap, the various articles on Wednesday about a Falcon I launch delay were basically correct except that they were two months late. An engine problem back in September did result in a delay in both the Kwajalein and Vanderberg launches so that additional engine testing could be carried out. Now with the final test of the Merlin 1 successfully completed, the Kwajalein launch is scheduled for the weekend of November 26-27th. If that goes well, the Vandenberg flight would be sometime in early 2006."</i><br /><br /><i>"Update - Elon Musk says, "The engine test went perfectly, development is 100% complete on F1 and launch is scheduled for Thanksgiving weekend. Chafer is talking about the second launch of F1"</i>

 

[spacester]

Yesssssssssssssssss!<br /><br />I would just note that, for the record, and correct me if I'm wrong; this is the first time Elon has said they're ready to fly. Every other announcement has been about when they *expected* to fly, based on ongoing work.<br /><br />He has been accused of over-promising, but I think that if you interpret the announcements and not the spin, you see that he has not. He tells it like it is. So I’ll over-promise for him, lol.<br /><br />If he says they're ready to fly, they're going to fly.<br /><br />And it will be successful, mark my words. They will put their first payload in orbit, maybe not flawlessly, but they will deliver the goods for the space cadets.<br /><br />In fact, I predict SpaceX will have ZERO catastrophic launch failures ever!<br /><br />They might not get high enough in a few cases over the years, but other than that, these guys will be the reliability kings.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[spacester]

Yesssssssssssssssss!<br /><br />I would just note that, for the record, and correct me if I'm wrong; this is the first time Elon has said they're ready to fly. Every other announcement has been about when they *expected* to fly, based on ongoing work.<br /><br />He has been accused of over-promising, but I think that if you interpret the announcements and not the spin, you see that he has not. He tells it like it is. So I’ll over-promise for him, lol.<br /><br />If he says they're ready to fly, they're going to fly.<br /><br />And it will be successful, mark my words. They will put their first payload in orbit, maybe not flawlessly, but they will deliver the goods for the space cadets.<br /><br />In fact, I predict SpaceX will have ZERO catastrophic launch failures ever!<br /><br />They might not get high enough in a few cases over the years, but other than that, these guys will be the reliability kings.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[j05h]

Go Elon Go! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[j05h]

Go Elon Go! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[henryhallam]

I don't really know how you can justify such optimism. Getting into orbit is a hard problem. Of course I wish them the best of success but you have to expect a few failures every now and then.

 

[henryhallam]

I don't really know how you can justify such optimism. Getting into orbit is a hard problem. Of course I wish them the best of success but you have to expect a few failures every now and then.

 

[barrykirk]

I was disappointed until I saw that post you made Tap_Sa. Thank you for pointing that out. I will be watching the web cast and cheering for SpaceX.<br /><br />I would really like to see a successful launch of the Falcon 1. It would certainly put everything they've been saying in a totally different perspective.

 

[tap_sa]

<font color="yellow">"Getting into orbit is a hard problem."</font><br /><br />Flying was a hard problem hundred years ago. Getting to orbit was a hard problem about fifty years ago. The physics remain the same but steady advances in various sciences (materials & computing being among the most prominent) will inevitably make it easier to overcome these problems. You know time has progressed when John Q. Anybody can order titanium via web.

 

[barrykirk]

I was disappointed until I saw that post you made Tap_Sa. Thank you for pointing that out. I will be watching the web cast and cheering for SpaceX.<br /><br />I would really like to see a successful launch of the Falcon 1. It would certainly put everything they've been saying in a totally different perspective.

 

[tap_sa]

<font color="yellow">"Getting into orbit is a hard problem."</font><br /><br />Flying was a hard problem hundred years ago. Getting to orbit was a hard problem about fifty years ago. The physics remain the same but steady advances in various sciences (materials & computing being among the most prominent) will inevitably make it easier to overcome these problems. You know time has progressed when John Q. Anybody can order titanium via web.