Space X to build reusable launch vehicle

Betruger · Post by **Betruger** » Fri Apr 27, 2012 8:20 pm

Forget the recession! We're going to space

williatw · Post by **williatw** » Mon Apr 30, 2012 11:55 pm

SpaceX Test Fires Private Rocket Bound for Space Station

http://www.space.com/15475-spacex-falco ... -test.html

DeltaV · Post by **DeltaV** » Thu May 03, 2012 3:56 pm

SpaceX Says May 7 Dragon Launch Unlikely

Skipjack · Post by **Skipjack** » Fri May 04, 2012 12:53 am

Yeah, they are certainly making things extra, extra, extra save.
Lets just hope that all that pays off in the end.

krenshala · Post by **krenshala** » Fri May 04, 2012 8:23 pm

Myself, I think it will. This could end up showing their ability to turn around and setup another bird for launch on a comparatively short timeframe if this delay does not push back later launches as well. IIRC there are supposed to be at least one or two other launches from SpaceX this year.

Skipjack · Post by **Skipjack** » Fri May 04, 2012 10:53 pm

They have now requested a May 19th launch date with May 22nd for backup.
The problem is that the dear congressmen Wolf, Hall, Hutchinson, Shelby, Nelson and the other "good" people will happily use a failure to cut funding for commercial crew. This is why this mission is so important. It must not fail!

Skipjack · Post by **Skipjack** » Sat May 12, 2012 2:51 am

"Grasshopper" is taking shape

http://img.ly/i5JQ

williatw · Post by **williatw** » Sat May 12, 2012 4:01 am

SpaceX, Bigelow announce private space station alliance
SpaceX will carry passengers to Bigelow's inflatable habitats

http://arstechnica.com/science/2012/05/ ... -stations/

Not unexpected but still cool to see them say so

Skipjack · Post by **Skipjack** » Sat May 12, 2012 8:24 pm

Yepp, Will!
That was long overdue

Betruger · Post by **Betruger** » Sat May 12, 2012 10:05 pm

Last I heard, Bigelow had laid off most of the workforce and wasn't going anywhere. Is this another MOU?

williatw · Post by **williatw** » Sat May 12, 2012 11:02 pm

Betruger wrote:Last I heard, Bigelow had laid off most of the workforce and wasn't going anywhere. Is this another MOU?

http://www.spacenews.com/venture_space/ ... sizes.html

From the link: ...said the layoffs “were caused by a perfect storm of events.”

“We had hoped that by 2014 or 2015 that America would again be able to fly its own astronauts. Unfortunately, the prospect of domestic crew transportation of any kind is apparently going to occur years after the first BA 330 could be ready,” Gold wrote. “For both business and technical reasons, we cannot deploy a BA 330 without a means of transporting crew to and from our station, and the adjustment to our employment levels was necessary to reflect this reality.

“If anything, Bigelow Aerospace has been suffering from its own early success, and we’re years ahead of where the rest of the industry is.”

In other words they were ready to go ahead but had no launch service available to send crews/customers to their station once it was up there. They obviously hope the partnership with Space X will correct this problem. Lets face it how hard is it really to build a space station/hotel? Compare the engineering tolerances of say the privately built submersible that enabled Cameron to descend to the depths of the Marianes Trench 36K feet down in the Pacific, to an inflatable space station that has to at best deal with 1atm pressure differential. We are conditioned/brainwashed by NASA into thinking anything associated with space must be insanely difficult and therefore insanely expensive. Hopefully Bigelow Aerospace and Space X will change that.

williatw · Post by **williatw** » Thu May 17, 2012 9:24 pm

After This Weekend's Launch, Here's What's Next For SpaceX

http://www.forbes.com/sites/alexknapp/2 ... or-spacex/

From the link: When completed, the Falcon Heavy will be able to carry a payload of about 53 metric tons – almost twice the payload capabilities of the now-defunct space shuttle. Its first launch is scheduled for 2013 from Vandenberg Air Force Base. If that launch is successful, the Falcon Heavy will be the most powerful rocket on Earth since the Saturn V rocket that took Apollo capsules to the Moon. The price for a launch? A modest $80 million to $125 million

Wowzeers that works out to be about $1000 per pound or less, from an expendable rocket no less.

Betruger · Post by **Betruger** » Thu May 17, 2012 10:00 pm

Hard not to find NSF's Jim's POV most convincing: That price will be credible when their flight rate is established.

kunkmiester · Post by **kunkmiester** » Fri May 18, 2012 12:12 am

While I can't remember who did it or how to google it, the story I'd put out is that of trans-Atlantic shipping. Originally, it was somewhat like this--ship waits until it's full, then heads out. The revolution came around the turn of the 20th IIRC, someone started regular, scheduled runs which everyone ridiculed because they thought the ships would be empty. They weren't.

SpaceX needs to announce a launch on a regular basis. They have the payloads to start doing this really, they just need to lay down set dates. Once they start launching once a quarter or twice a year or whatever, they'll never have trouble getting customers.

Nydoc · Post by **Nydoc** » Fri May 18, 2012 5:28 pm

kunkmiester wrote:While I can't remember who did it or how to google it, the story I'd put out is that of trans-Atlantic shipping. Originally, it was somewhat like this--ship waits until it's full, then heads out. The revolution came around the turn of the 20th IIRC, someone started regular, scheduled runs which everyone ridiculed because they thought the ships would be empty. They weren't.

SpaceX needs to announce a launch on a regular basis. They have the payloads to start doing this really, they just need to lay down set dates. Once they start launching once a quarter or twice a year or whatever, they'll never have trouble getting customers.

Well they certainly have the build-rate to support it. Last year they built about 100 engines. SpaceX President, Gwynne Shotwell stated that the eventual “plan is to build up to 400 engines per year, that's our target.”
http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.asp ... 86.xml&p=1
I'm not exactly convinced it's economically viable for the current market. According to the Office of Commercial Space Transportation, there were 23 commercial launches worldwide in 2010 (51 non-commercial).
http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/hea ... about/faq/