Elon got his rocket up ...

Tom Ligon · Post by **Tom Ligon** » Fri Jun 04, 2010 8:58 pm

Durn, it didn't blow up or anything! Nine engines on the bottom and it just worked, all the way to orbit. Nice going ... much as I dislike "siding with Obama," I've always wanted private enterprise to take over in space travel. High time. If private enterprise has a good enough business model, it does not matter what motivates governments.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20100604/ ... irstflight

93143 · Post by **93143** » Fri Jun 04, 2010 10:10 pm

I watched the launch on the SpaceX video feed. Very impressive. A little rolling during the second stage burn, but nothing severe, and they came very close to the target orbit. Too bad the first stage broke up...

The first attempt aborted a few seconds before launch, with a cloud of steam or smoke or something puffing out from under the rocket, and people yelling "abort!" and suchlike over the comm system. Created an interesting feeling in the pit of my stomach...

That article says a boat strayed into the exclusion zone. I was monitoring the live coverage thread on nasaspaceflight.com, and there were a number of boat alerts - people started to suggest sending Apaches, or calling in the Israeli military, or stuff like that...

Then there was that bug that attacked SpaceX's video camera just before launch...

It is also interesting to note that that article seems to lump Shuttle extension supporters in with PoR supporters. Now, I don't know if they're aware of this, but the PoR didn't include a Shuttle extension either. And this launch doesn't affect the argument for an extension anyway...

Skipjack · Post by **Skipjack** » Fri Jun 04, 2010 11:04 pm

This was an awesome launch. They made it a real thrill too with the delay. It is a testament to their incredibly flexible launch procedures that they were able to restart the count down so quickly though. Absolutely amazing show. It is not just building inexpensive rockets but also this kind of flexibility that will make space truly affordable and more practical.
They had a lot of political pressure too. It is good that they succeeded, because this will get commercial space some more support in congress. Of course there are always people that you have to wonder about.
With SpaceX being a Texan company, I cant understand how somone like Sen. Hutchison can be so stupid: http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/06/04 ... -9-launch/

But then, I guess it is not really that big a surprise after all....
I am already looking foreward to Sen Shelbys comment, if he even dares say anything anymore.
LOL
Today, life is good

Tom Ligon · Post by **Tom Ligon** » Sat Jun 05, 2010 12:09 am

My company did a launch at Wallops Island once. A boat failed to heed the Coast Guard notices on ours, too, and had to be pointed the way out of the range. You have no idea how slow a boat is until you watch one clear a range on radar, with your launch aircraft in the air and the clock running.

93143 · Post by **93143** » Sat Jun 05, 2010 3:56 am

Hutchison's reply is perfectly reasonable. She's just pointing out - correctly - that this launch doesn't affect the argument for a Shuttle extension. The "damning with faint praise" feel to the statement is most likely an attempt to damp the unwarranted enthusiasm of political opponents.

The only weird part was the remark at the end about Constellation; it seems completely beside the point, but I suppose there's more than one way to read it...

The Shuttle needs to be retired and make way for commercial services. But this is a dumb time to do it. Give it a couple of years...

...

It seems SpaceX responded to NASA's HLV RFI. I wonder if they still think they can duplicate the Saturn V for $2B?

I wonder if they actually can?

Tom Ligon · Post by **Tom Ligon** » Sat Jun 05, 2010 2:19 pm

One source I read says they've sunk $400 M into the project so far. I would call that pretty incredibly cheap considering the resulting rocket is up in range of the present generation of Big Boys, and can go heavy-lift by strapping on a pair of extra booster stages.

I expect they may have cheaped out on the second stage gyros and got a bit of roll drift as a result. If they would hire us we could probably fix that for them in software. Compared to the Saturn V, the guidance system should be vastly cheaper today.

The materials they are using are more costly than the Saturn V, with high-tech stuff like lithium-aluminum and composites, but the result is a bigger payload fraction. There is a reason they call that pay load.

They are using more engines, but evidently intend to produce a lot of them. They may achieve reusability of the first stage. The Saturn V never achieved economy of scale by mass production.

I liked a crack I read yesterday about the Ares test launch being essentially a fake. A dummy upper stage stuck on a STS SRB, with an unfueled fifth section bolted on. Wow, they managed to light off a solid rocket and get it to pop into the ocean! What a great demonstration of technology a millenium old!

Skipjack · Post by **Skipjack** » Sat Jun 05, 2010 2:30 pm

One source I read says they've sunk $400 M into the project so far.

500 including Dragon, according to Elon. That is extremely cheap!
I think that using so many engines is perfectly reasonable. The econmics of scale kick in earlier and they can use them for a wider range of vehicles. They also have a higher chance of mission success, even with one or more engines failing.

I liked a crack I read yesterday about the Ares test launch being essentially a fake.

That is exactly what it was!

Josh Cryer · Post by **Josh Cryer** » Sat Jun 05, 2010 2:48 pm

The cost to taxpayers, though, for the entire SpaceX Falcon 9 program, and Cargo Resupply development, was less than the test flight of the Ares I-X.

Skipjack · Post by **Skipjack** » Sat Jun 05, 2010 4:19 pm

The cost to taxpayers, though, for the entire SpaceX Falcon 9 program, and Cargo Resupply development, was less than the test flight of the Ares I-X.

I think the total cost for Falcon 9 and Dragon together was less than the cost of the paper study for Constellation.

It is amazing what private companies can do.

Josh Cryer · Post by **Josh Cryer** » Sat Jun 05, 2010 5:19 pm

Skipjack wrote:It is amazing what private companies can do.

Hear hear!

SpaceX is already in talks with NASA about super heavy!

edit: I should say that this is super preliminary, but it does confirm that they're involved in the super heavy discussion process, and in 5 years I expect that we'll have ourselves a super heavy vehicle in the works. So great.

CaptainBeowulf · Post by **CaptainBeowulf** » Sat Jun 05, 2010 6:33 pm

Good news, like others I'm glad to hear this.

It should be very interesting what their super-heavy will look like, what materials it will use, whether/what kind of new engines they'll develop, etc. - if it gets built.

GIThruster · Post by **GIThruster** » Sat Jun 05, 2010 6:40 pm

Tom Ligon wrote:They are using more engines, but evidently intend to produce a lot of them. They may achieve reusability of the first stage. The Saturn V never achieved economy of scale by mass production.

There is also the fact that Merlin is the most efficient engine of it's type ever designed or built. Having started in just the right place to make an efficient rocket, it would have been effort off target to go and repeat it and try to design another engine. Better was to move on and do just as Musk has done--attack one part of the project at a time and keep forcing on.

It really is amazing not just what private industry can do, but what it can do when focused by the vision of one man. Musk reminds of Kelly and Skunkworks of the 60's and 70's. There's no way LockMart could pull off such a thing these days.

Skipjack · Post by **Skipjack** » Sat Jun 05, 2010 6:43 pm

SpaceX is already in talks with NASA about super heavy!

I read that, but at the time I assumed that it would be "just" the falcon 9 heavy version. Basically two identical booster stages mounted side by side with the core stage. Is the "super heavy" going to be even bigger?
Maybe they will have 4 booster stages and a third stage or a larger (2 or more engines) upper stage?
Sure sounds interesting. It does sound a bit ambitious though for now.

93143 · Post by **93143** » Sat Jun 05, 2010 7:12 pm

I'm pretty sure they plan to design a bigger engine. They've already stated that if they had known they were going to go all the way to Falcon 9 and Falcon 9 Heavy, they'd have designed Merlin-1 a bit bigger. Nine is fine, but 27 is pushing it...

IIRC they've licensed the technology from the RS-84 - but rumour has it the Merlin-2 might be more powerful than an F-1... now, if Raptor ends up in the J-2 class...

Also, them "being in talks" is probably hyperbole. As I noted above, I and others think that just means they responded to the RFI. But I've been wrong before...

zapkitty · Post by **zapkitty** » Sat Jun 05, 2010 7:21 pm

Skipjack wrote:
SpaceX is already in talks with NASA about super heavy!
I read that, but at the time I assumed that it would be "just" the falcon 9 heavy version. Basically two identical booster stages mounted side by side with the core stage. Is the "super heavy" going to be even bigger?

In the past Elon Musk has stated interest in a larger engine for developing newer launchers beyond the Falcon 1, 9 and 9H... last I heard not much else was known aside from the fact that it was to be a kerolox BFE for BFRs

The massive clustering of Merlins can work for bigger rockets but pushing on with only that particular engine can pay dividends only so far...

But as of right now SpaceX has launchers in the 1.5 ton class and the 10 ton class and has the 9H in the wings. For the price it's been very good work by SpaceX.

As for the 9H... bet that "Falcon 27" will be serious fun to watch take off