-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
SpaceX |OT| Reusable Rockets - To Mars!
- Thread starter Crispy75
- Start date
First time a full flow staged combustion engine has ever flown - even if only 20m. An engine that was considered all but impossible - thank god for spacex pushing the industry forward.
The fire is man's spread throughout the stars and will be seen for light-years.
Or something.
Pretty cool though - impressive to see a prototype perform so well, especially considering how low-rent it looks.
*bing bong*
The 8:30 flight to Space will be departing in 30 minutes from Launch Complex 4-E, please proceed to boarding gate 7
OP
OP
And no choice of orbit...
Sun synchronous is popular for small satellites, but it's not everything
I'm guessing they'll do different orbits for different requirements.
If I have a small sat, I can either be cheap and wait for a SpaceX launch, or if I want it up earlier, pay more for a Rocketlab launch.
Space X has made reusable rockets VERY fashionable...
But that is not the only factor in their low prices, they have focused very heavily on cost reductions for their rocket components. I wonder if re-usability will be a panacea for the other companies / agencies trying to copy it now?
But that is not the only factor in their low prices, they have focused very heavily on cost reductions for their rocket components. I wonder if re-usability will be a panacea for the other companies / agencies trying to copy it now?
It's funny you say that - Rocketlabs announced they were going reusable for Electron in between last night's launches..
Q&A with Rocket Lab CEO about their reusability plans for Electron and thoughts on SpaceX
Still, it's hard for a small launcher to compete with a larger one in terms of price per kg. So much of the cost of a rocket is determined by part count, complexity, and precision engineering that doesn't change much between a big and small rocket.
Their rocket has some good cost-effective design choices, like the way the first and second stages share the same engine (just like Falcon 9) and the electric pumps that are simpler than traditional turbopumps. The other thing that will help them a lot is to scale up production numbers. They built a new factory, and are expecting to quadruple production over the next couple of years.
Still, it's hard for a small launcher to compete with a larger one in terms of price per kg. So much of the cost of a rocket is determined by part count, complexity, and precision engineering that doesn't change much between a big and small rocket.
To be honest, I'm not so concerned about Rocket Lab - I suspect that if they don't already have their costs under control, they have the organizational agility to get them under control. The Rocket Lab announcement just put it in my mind.
ULA and Arianespace have to watch it, however. Cost - plus contracts and viewing their rockets as job programs has left an evil legacy of disregard for expenses in these organisations. They may be making noise now about looking into re-usable craft, but that alone will be totally insufficient to save them from the newer space companies. They need to get their costs under control, and that requires re-structuring the basic way they approach the business. Will they do it? I wonder.
OP
OP
...which is not the only way to judge a launcher. For payloads in Electron's class, you can get a cheaper price if you get a rideshare, but you don't get to control the launch date or the orbital parameters.
Smallsat launchers may one day be made obsolete by regular mass launch (10 Starships a day sort of thing). They used to send a single plane with an important or time-critical payload in the early days of air freight. But today you can get anything to anywhere, quickly, even if your payload has to go via a freight hub. In space, that would mean mass launch to a parking orbit where refuelable tugs are waiting to take your payload to its specific orbit.
OP
OP
It's a test mini rig with one of the brand new Raptor engines. Final Starship will have few of them, and BFR will have 30+ of them.
All previous Falcon9/Falcon Heavy launches have used Merlin engines.
This was a full-fat Raptor, Serial Number 6.
Current plan is to have 35 of them on the first stage "Super Heavy" booster.
Bloody hell - that'll be more like the Russian rockets. How will that compare in thrust to Saturn V first stage?
IIRC a fully fuelled Starship would weigh about 30% more than a Saturn V. So thrust is going to be bigger too.
Teslarati posted this on their website, but I have no idea how accurate they might be, and I'm fairly sure they have their head buried a little too far.
One thing is for sure, its going to be one hell of a show when one goes up.
Last edited:
Musk initialy said that BFR can transport 100 tons to Mars, but that was with the original carbn-body plan. They switched to steel now.
There is due to be an update on BFR/Starship/Super Heavy in mid-September (though there was also due to be one in mid-August, so, y'know).
These updates have historically resulted in a downgrading of performance and ambition (mostly because the original ITS plans were fucking crazily overambitious), but who knows?
These updates have historically resulted in a downgrading of performance and ambition (mostly because the original ITS plans were fucking crazily overambitious), but who knows?