SpaceX Updates (Thread 6)


Recommended Posts

Beittil

I still wonder what the purpose of that new engine (if ever made) will be. I mean, Atlas V is ULA property and if they do not want to roll with replacing the engines of it (since they rather see Vulcan developed)... then what is that new engine going to be good for?

So we have SpaceX, BO, OrbitalATK, Aerojet and ULA testifying at that hearing! SpaceX will never sell engines to 3rd parties, only sell launches on their own rocket(s). BO seems to be willing to sell theirs (to ULA at least) as well as use it for their own future rockets. Orbital... Lol, hey lets replace that Russian engine with another? What are they going to bring to the table? Aerojet just wants to soak up that government money for their AR-1 engine, which I believe ULA has no interrest in. And ULA is probably only going to be plugging their Vulcan! Should make for a very interresting hearing to watch indeed!

Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM

The funding is really for the AeroJet AR-1, which is promoted to be a drop-in replacement for RD-180 on Atlas V and ready by 2018-2019. Tony Bruno of ULA has been skeptical that AeroJet can make that date, so he went for BE-4 as the primary and AR-1 as Plan B.

Link to post
Share on other sites
FloatingFatMan

The funding is really for the AeroJet AR-1, which is promoted to be a drop-in replacement for RD-180 on Atlas V and ready by 2018-2019. Tony Bruno of ULA has been skeptical that AeroJet can make that date, so he went for BE-4 as the primary and AR-1 as Plan B.

 

Who've they got working in the design & build departments? Snails? :p

Link to post
Share on other sites
Beittil

I am not convinced that Bruno even wants the AR-1 as a drop in! He's on a cost lowering quest, and keeping his current rocket lines does not fit in that picture!

He has already axed D4M, said heavy would be maintained to cover its class (but very expensive) and pitched Vulcan as the ultimate replacement for both.

To add to that, he flipped off Aerojet amongst others when they went after the IP for Atlas V!

Seriously! That AR-1 is going to be just another very expensive paperweight!

Ps... FU iPhone and ur rediculous autocorrects all the time... I need 5 times as much time to even type this :x

Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM

Yup, and Vulcan can be built basically using the Delta IV 5 meter tanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
flyingskippy

How can the BE4 be a drop in replacement for the RD180 on Atlas V? A methane fueled rocket engine for a kerosene designed rocket? Unless ULA is planning on using it for its "dream" Vulcan.

Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM

How can the BE4 be a drop in replacement for the RD180 on Atlas V?

>

Me upthread

The funding is really for the AeroJet AR-1, which is promoted to be a drop-in replacement for RD-180 on Atlas V and ready by 2018-2019.

BE-4 would be used with parts of Delta IV (tanks etc.) to build Vulcan. Being 5 meters instead of Atlas V's 3.81 meters gives the Delta IV tanks the extra volume to make up for liquid methane's lower bulk density. Delta IV also has an insulated fuel tank for liquid hydrogen, which would also be necessary for Vulcan's liquid methane.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Draggendrop

Me upthread

BE-4 would be used with parts of Delta IV (tanks etc.) to build Vulcan. Being 5 meters instead of Atlas V's 3.81 meters gives the Delta IV tanks the extra volume to make up for liquid methane's lower bulk density. Delta IV also has an insulated fuel tank for liquid hydrogen, which would also be necessary for Vulcan's liquid methane.

Happy B Day......... :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM

Thanks :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
DieVlieg

Hi

 

I check this forum every day. For a long time now especially for DocM's news and insights.

 

So i had to register today to say to DocM...

 

Happy B-Day!! 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM

Thanks :)

Glad you enjoy them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM
(Y)
Link to post
Share on other sites
Draggendrop

Interesting article on NASA Spaceflight website......pertaining to world launch markets leaning towards reusability....

 

A couple of SpaceX  "goodies" quoted.......Check out full article below...

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/06/world-launch-markets-rocket-reusability/

 

 

 

That barge is in fact part of the long-range goal of proving to the United States Air Force (USAF) and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) that successful pinpoint landings can be achieved in routine fashion

post-546174-0-14790500-1435212769.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM

Photo Dump from Instagram

https://instagram.com/spacex

ASDS Of Course I Still Love You (west coast)

b5032728eea04b0e13458a61cf85728f.jpg

SpaceX wind tunnel testing legs. Perhaps Legs 2.0?

3da3adce88426e732203ed2a83bd46bb.jpg

Spin-forming a rocket nozzle.

fe9246e2ccb49491d6dbafc1712a3251.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM

CRS-6 landing tracking camera

http://youtu.be/NcTOTeoaafU

Article

http://www.spacex.com/news/2015/06/24/why-and-how-landing-rockets

crs6_landing4.3.jpg

>

That controlled descent was spectacular, but about 10 seconds before landing, a valve controlling the rockets engine power (thrust) temporarily stopped responding to commands as quickly as it should have. As a result, it throttled down a few seconds later than commanded, andwith the rocket weighing about 67,000 lbs and traveling nearly 200 mph at this pointa few seconds can be a very long time. With the throttle essentially stuck on high and the engine firing longer than it was supposed to, the vehicle temporarily lost control and was unable to recover in time for landing, eventually tipping over.

>

Post-launch analysis has confirmed the throttle valve as the sole cause of this hard landing. The team has made changes to help prevent, and be able to rapidly recover from, similar issues for the next attempt, which will be on our next launchthe eighth Falcon 9 and Dragon cargo mission to the space station, currently scheduled for this Sunday.

Even given everything weve learned, the odds of succeeding on our third attempt to land on a drone ship (a new one named Of Course I Still Love You) are uncertain, but tune in here this Sunday as we try to get one step closer toward a fully and rapidly reusable rocket.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Draggendrop

Although SpaceX had a setback....things can still turn around for commercial as well as crewed launches.....

 

 

 

"You want a really, really reliable rocket before you put people on it," says Jonathan McDowell of Harvard University. Now that SpaceX has lost its perfect launch record with this rocket, it will need to quickly convince people that the rocket can be trusted, he says. "Yesterday [the Falcon 9] was 18 for 18 and looking pretty good. Now it is 18 for 19. That's a 5 percent failure rate."

But if another 10 launches of Falcon 9 proceed without incident, that will bring the failure rate to 3.5 per cent, which could be acceptable, he says.

Among almost two tonnes of supplies and equipment in the Dragon capsule atop the rocket were two docking stations, intended for Space X to dock its crewed Dragon capsule to the International Space Station (ISS). It was also carrying several plant and animal experiments.

The failure shouldn't force a delay in plans to launch the first crewed space mission on US soil since 2011, said William Gerstenmaier, NASA's associate administrator for human exploration, at a press conference. "It could help us to nail down designs and move forward," he said.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn27794-spacex-rocket-explosion-is-setback-for-us-crewed-space-missions.html

 

 

McDowell says there are probably no safety procedures that SpaceX would undertake during a crewed flight that could have prevented this explosion. "But Crew Dragon would have an escape system that would save the capsule, so you wouldn't have killed the crew."

 

 

Watching from on board the ISS, US astronaut Scott Kelly summed up the sentiment in a tweet: "Space is hard."

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn27794-spacex-rocket-explosion-is-setback-for-us-crewed-space-missions.html

Link to post
Share on other sites
FloatingFatMan


Now that SpaceX has lost its perfect launch record with this rocket, it will need to quickly convince people that the rocket can be trusted, he says. "Yesterday [the Falcon 9] was 18 for 18 and looking pretty good. Now it is 18 for 19. That's a 5 percent failure rate."

 

IF it should turn out that the failure was due to the IDA breaking loose from its mounts, wouldn't that restore SpaceX percentages? :p  After all, that would mean it wasn't the rocket itself that failed! 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Draggendrop

IF it should turn out that the failure was due to the IDA breaking loose from its mounts, wouldn't that restore SpaceX percentages? :p  After all, that would mean it wasn't the rocket itself that failed! 

If that would be the case...I see another problem of reporting.........LAWYERS..........the bane of society. I would assume all members in the investigation would have to come to a consensus of the cause, if a cause can be determined. Was it primary design of the launch vehicle, was it a "sloppy" install of cargo, is it a vendor quality issue. All scenarios would have a requirement of "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof"...which honestly, I can't see being available...anything outright obvious would be out by now. My hunch would be an undetermined probable cause of load shift with corrective measures to be taken and the Falcon itself, partially absolved but more stringent checking of future loads and possibly a load barricade design of some form for future "trunk" use. This is probably wishful thinking on my part, being a huge SpaceX fan.....but at the end of the day...can't see anyone external being tagged....will probably go down to procedural due to it being inconclusive...and safeguards to be implemented and possibly an (*) placed by the launch to improve reliability numbers. SpaceX will take the hit, but confidence will be improved and back to work with all eyes on all launches for a while.....and like Doc mentioned...put the damn code in for the chutes on Dragon 1 abort to save the load......... If only the code was there or used if there.........no cargo loss then.....

 

Okay.......it's laugh at me time....teflon suit on........... :(

Link to post
Share on other sites
ks8877

There is lot of talking here... but there are some good ideas also.

 

It would be good if somebody could forward something to SpaceX.

 

DocM, may be you have some ways to communicate to someone in SpaceX...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Unobscured Vision

No laughing, DD, it's actually a great idea. No need for the asbestos-lined suit, buddy. *highfive*

 

Abort + "Save the shipment" procedures would have really been handy for CRS-7. I'm sure it's been brought to SpaceX's attention already.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM

SpaceX is already planning the transition to a Cargo Dragon 2 with SuperDraco abort capability. Gwynne Shotwell mentioned it in an Aviation Week interview some time ago.

Also,

Javascript is not enabled or refresh the page to view.

Click here to view the Tweet
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Draggendrop

SpaceX is already planning the transition to a Cargo Dragon 2 with SuperDraco abort capability. Gwynne Shotwell mentioned it in an Aviation Week interview some time ago.

Also,

Excellent news on the certification......was hoping it wouldn't take a hit.......

Link to post
Share on other sites
Draggendrop

US Sen. John McCain shows confidence in SpaceX

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.