Firefly News

Point out news stories, on the net or in mainstream media, related to polywell fusion.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

GIThruster
Posts: 4686
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm

Firefly News

Post by GIThruster »

I'm impressed. When I started to read all I could think was "how can anyone hope to compete with SpaceX?" Well, these people can. The only hope for a significantly more efficient engine than what SpaceX is using is really an aerospike. That's what these guys are planning on. The only structures that have higher strength to weight than the Lithium Aluminum friction stir welded tanks SpaceX uses, is filament wound composite, and this is what they plan to use. This same structure is ideal for deep space, as it protects best from radiation because of its high moisture content. And there are reasons to suppose these two stage rockets can be reusable same as the Falcons.

I wish these guys great success. Certainly they're worth keeping an eye on.

http://arstechnica.com/science/2014/11/ ... h-orbit/1/
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis

kurt9
Posts: 588
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 4:14 pm
Location: Portland, Oregon, USA

Re: Firefly News

Post by kurt9 »

Firefly has an interesting design. The cooling system is critical. The hurtle that has kept aerospikes from bring used in the materials issue with the plug getting too hot. If they can keep this cool and the self-pressurization (delivery of the fuel to the engine as the tank empties) works out, I think they will be successful. However, they will probably loose a few rockets in the development process. They will need enough financing to cover these losses.

GIThruster
Posts: 4686
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm

Re: Firefly News

Post by GIThruster »

I'd be really curious to learn what sort of margins he has on the basic design. Carbon composite is really light stuff. Much lighter than LiAl. If the tanks can take the pressure they need them to, and still be lighter than LiAl, then SpaceX has serious competition. And if they're strong enough to pressurize like this, they're strong enough to survive reentry, so my guess is he wants to reuse them too. If you can't reuse, Musk will put you right out of business.

Very exciting.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis

mvanwink5
Posts: 2143
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 5:07 am
Location: N.C. Mountains

Re: Firefly News

Post by mvanwink5 »

Nice article GT, thanks.
Building small rockets first should help keep the price down. Targeting two years to flight is aggressive for development, but these guys are gung-ho. Fun to follow all these entrepreneurs on the cutting edge... and to watch the old crony dinosaurs squirm.
Counting the days to commercial fusion. It is not that long now.

Maui
Posts: 586
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 12:10 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: Firefly News

Post by Maui »

kurt9 wrote:The cooling system is critical. The hurtle that has kept aerospikes from bring used in the materials issue with the plug getting too hot.
Thanks for this. I was a little annoyed that the article twice raised the question of why aerospikes are not the predominant technology, but both times pretty much glossed over the answer.

GIThruster
Posts: 4686
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm

Re: Firefly News

Post by GIThruster »

Maui wrote:
kurt9 wrote:The cooling system is critical. The hurtle that has kept aerospikes from bring used in the materials issue with the plug getting too hot.
Thanks for this. I was a little annoyed that the article twice raised the question of why aerospikes are not the predominant technology, but both times pretty much glossed over the answer.
Aerospike overheating was one of the two issues that killed X-33/Venturestar. The other was their composite tank delaminated because NASA hired someone who didn't know what they were doing. The engines were overheating badly in simulations, and the response of the engine team was to simply throw their hands up and say they needed some fantastically heavy copper heat sink. The propulsion team more than the tank team killed that project because they decided they just couldn't do the job. Private industry would have fired them but you can bet they still work at NASA.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis

hanelyp
Posts: 2261
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 8:50 pm

Re: Firefly News

Post by hanelyp »

Operating at the design expansion ratio the classic bell nozzle gives winning performance. The advantage of the aerospike and some other exotic concepts is performance doesn't degrade nearly as much operating off design parameters. This is particularly helpful for a SSTO system that uses the same engine from sea level to orbit. For a 2STO system it's not difficult to use one nozzle with decent sea level performance for the booster and a different nozzle with good vacuum performance for the upper stage.
The daylight is uncomfortably bright for eyes so long in the dark.

Diogenes
Posts: 6967
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 3:33 pm

Re: Firefly News

Post by Diogenes »

GIThruster wrote:I'd be really curious to learn what sort of margins he has on the basic design. Carbon composite is really light stuff. Much lighter than LiAl. If the tanks can take the pressure they need them to, and still be lighter than LiAl, then SpaceX has serious competition. And if they're strong enough to pressurize like this, they're strong enough to survive reentry, so my guess is he wants to reuse them too. If you can't reuse, Musk will put you right out of business.

Very exciting.


Haven't kept up with the details of spaceX's design, but why couldn't they adapt to composite tanks too?
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —

Carl White
Posts: 476
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 10:44 pm

Re: Firefly News

Post by Carl White »

Was there something wrong with the thread I started a few days ago? Days without comments, then someone else posts the same article and off the discussion goes?

If people are ignoring what I post, just let me know and I'll stop.

AcesHigh
Posts: 655
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 3:59 am

Re: Firefly News

Post by AcesHigh »

actually, you posted it one day before this thread was posted. Don´t be pissed. Sometimes this kind of thing happens and not even we can explain WHY we only saw this thread but not yours.

I mean... I saw this thread and read it yesterday, but for some reason I missed yours. Why? Wish I knew, however, since I did NOT see it, I don´t know why that happened.

I know however that I entered this thread thinking it was news about the Firefly sci-fi show :lol:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JY3u7bB7dZk

AcesHigh
Posts: 655
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 3:59 am

Re: Firefly News

Post by AcesHigh »

Diogenes wrote:
GIThruster wrote:I'd be really curious to learn what sort of margins he has on the basic design. Carbon composite is really light stuff. Much lighter than LiAl. If the tanks can take the pressure they need them to, and still be lighter than LiAl, then SpaceX has serious competition. And if they're strong enough to pressurize like this, they're strong enough to survive reentry, so my guess is he wants to reuse them too. If you can't reuse, Musk will put you right out of business.

Very exciting.


Haven't kept up with the details of spaceX's design, but why couldn't they adapt to composite tanks too?

does he need to?

the composite tanks were listed as a requirement to the possibility of aerospike engines and the reason the X-33 never became a reality.

so Firefly needs aerospike engines. But I don´t see why Musk would need them unless he decides to pursue aerospike engines too.


However, it seems to me Musk has always gone for the "beautifully and precisely simple designs". Cheap, efficient and safe.

Wouldn´t aerospike engines add complexity and make the whole rocket more expensive? Of course, the price of the rocket stops being such an important issue AFTER you have reusable stages. Just then the price of fuel starts being a factor to consider.

SpaceX right now in theory will only be able to land first stage (stages, in the case of Falcon Heavy).

How to make an aerospike engine competitive with a cheaper design that can land it´s first stages? I guess only solution would be to be SSTO (like X33 itself was suppose to be right?).

And lets not forget SpaceX is pursuing that methane engine that will be quite more powerful than the Merlin and they want it to be powerful and economical enough to be used on the 2nd stage too.

GIThruster
Posts: 4686
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm

Re: Firefly News

Post by GIThruster »

hanelyp wrote:Operating at the design expansion ratio the classic bell nozzle gives winning performance. The advantage of the aerospike and some other exotic concepts is performance doesn't degrade nearly as much operating off design parameters. This is particularly helpful for a SSTO system that uses the same engine from sea level to orbit. For a 2STO system it's not difficult to use one nozzle with decent sea level performance for the booster and a different nozzle with good vacuum performance for the upper stage.
I think this is one of the trade studies Gary Hudson did before he started AirLaunch, and what he found was that just the first 30,000 feet makes a huge difference. If you start your engines at 30,000 feet, you start with a very different nozzle.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis

GIThruster
Posts: 4686
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm

Re: Firefly News

Post by GIThruster »

Carl White wrote:Was there something wrong with the thread I started a few days ago? Days without comments, then someone else posts the same article and off the discussion goes?

If people are ignoring what I post, just let me know and I'll stop.
I missed your post too. I want to believe tough, that I am just way kewl and people like me so they posted in my thread. Please if you find this is not true, don't tell me. :-)
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis

paperburn1
Posts: 2484
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 5:53 am
Location: Third rock from the sun.

Re: Firefly News

Post by paperburn1 »

Whatever happened to that jet engine that was under development by the British that used liquid cooling with helium for hypersonic speeds
I am not a nuclear physicist, but play one on the internet.

RERT
Posts: 271
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2014 9:10 pm

Re: Firefly News

Post by RERT »

The last material news was in January when they announced an R&D relationship with the US Air Force Research Laboratory's Aerospace Systems Directorate. The EU have given them a 1M Euro contract for study into next gen space systems. Finally the UK government have announced an investment of £60M/around $100M, much to the delight of people like me who didn't think the UK government could even spell foresight or strategy.

They do appear to have convinced at least some people that they have something worth pursuing.

The website for Reaction Engines Limited has more details.

Post Reply