Boeing slams the Falcon Heavy rocket as 'too small'


 Share

Recommended Posts

branfont

Recently, Boeing created a website called "Watch US Fly" to promote its aerospace industry—a grab bag of everything from Chinese tariffs to President Trump's visit to the company's facilities in St. Louis. Among the most intriguing sections is one that promotes the company's Space Launch System rocket and argues that SpaceX's Falcon Heavy booster is "too small" for NASA's deep exploration program.

 

"The Falcon Heavy launch turned heads in February, but SpaceX's rocket is a smaller type of rocket that can't meet NASA's deep-space needs," the website states. "Once the Boeing-built SLS is operational, it will be the most powerful rocket ever built."

 

The Boeing site backs up this claim by quoting NASA's Bill Gerstenmaier, who talked about the differences between the SLS rocket and Falcon Heavy at a meeting of the NASA Advisory Council meeting in March. Gerstenmaier, the chief of NASA's human spaceflight program, said the SLS had "unique capabilities" that the Falcon Heavy rocket does not have. However, as Ars reported at the time, Gerstenmaier actually struggled to explain why NASA needed the SLS rocket because the space agency has not yet built anything that will take advantage of those capabilities.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Full article @ Ars Technica

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jim K

I chuckled when I saw that article yesterday. 

1) SLS isn't flying yet. 

2) When it does, the Big Falcon Rocket will have flown or be close to flying.  BFR will be more powerful than the SLS.

3) SLS is expensive...chucking away the entire assembly

 

I could go on...but on the phone at work so I'll be brief.

 

Boeing is jealous...me thinks. 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

DocM

Boeing is jealous and frightened. They see the new direction NASA Admin Jim Bridenstine is charting, heavily NewSpace, and realize they have a swayback mare entered in the Kentucky Derby.

Edited by DocM
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Unobscured Vision

"too small" ....

 

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAA ... 

 

Lifting capacity over D4H by a factor of two is "too small"?! BFS as a Reusable SSTO being able to tote 50 mT and/or passengers anywhere in the world or to LEO, then land, refuel in a couple of hours, then do it again for nearly nothing cost-wise? BFR/BFS as a combination being able to tote 60~400 mT literally anywhere?! And BOTH are completely reusable too?!

 

Boeing's got their priorities completely screwed up. Their ways are the PAST. Their methodologies are the PAST. So are their thought processes.

 

And if they don't evolve, they're going to find themselves relegated in the history books as yet another example of greatness that became folly and met a bad end, like the Roman Empire.

 

NewSpace is the future. The evolution of humanity in a neat little microcosm that has taken the very best and improved upon it.

 

OldSpace are like the Neanderthals, doomed to a genetic dead-end because they could not evolve. And what's most unfortunate about this particular scenario is that OldSpace does have it within themselves, collectively, to evolve if they choose to do so -- they simply refuse to.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

CrashG

Just that old dog barking on the porch, nothing to be worried about.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Unobscured Vision

Hey @CrashGordon, I had occasion to drive through Atlanta just shy of two months ago. Some serious highway construction you folks have going on down there. Gonna be neat when it's done.

 

Back on-topic, I'm still chuckling about this an hour+ later. Dunno why it's so laughable to me other than it's sheer comedy. "Falcon Heavy is too small" ... heh ...

 

What really sticks in my craw is that the guy was comparing FH to SLS. Totally different weight classes of rocket on the launch pad. Completely different companies doing things in different ways.

 

Oh, and perhaps it's the fact that it's the most efficient, most powerful-for-its'-size-ever rocket engine working cooperatively with twenty-six of its' siblings at launch time that can be reused versus complete overkill + inefficiency-on-two-sticks that gets thrown away each time they are used. Gee, wonder which I'd choose first.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

branfont
2 hours ago, Unobscured Vision said:

What really sticks in my craw

 

I think you meant to say "what really grind my gears!" ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unobscured Vision

No, not really lol ... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unobscured Vision

Up here in Michigan we use that to mean "what stands out most in my brain". Not sure how it's perceived anywhere else.

Link to post
Share on other sites

DocM

Gotta be careful about which part of Michigan you're quoting since we have regional dialects, plus run together, squished & contracted phrases. 

 

real-a-terr = realtor

pop = soda

ki-nuh = kind of

yoosta' = used to

wuds =  woods

go-tuh = go to

Tie-ota = Toyota

er / ur = or

townie  = not from Michigan

fudgies = tourists to the Upper Peninsula

yoopers = Upper Peninsula natives

 etc.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Unobscured Vision

Southern MI for me, bit of the Canadian from relatives in Windsor Ontario. I refuse to call soft drinks "soda pop" though. Never heard the terms "fudgie" or "townie"; and I've never ever called a Toyota a "Tie-ota" lmao ... guess that's the Virginia influence. Everyone says I have a Northern Chesapeake + Canadian accent. Weird.

Link to post
Share on other sites

DocM

Yoopers call them fudgies because there's a fudge stand in every other town  along the northbound highways, and almost every tourist or hunter hits them.

 

 

Edited by DocM
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

branfont
5 hours ago, Unobscured Vision said:

No, not really lol ... 

 

5 hours ago, Unobscured Vision said:

Up here in Michigan we use that to mean "what stands out most in my brain". Not sure how it's perceived anywhere else.

 

Well, it went over your head, because clearly you didn't get the reference.

Link to post
Share on other sites

DocM

Falcon Heavy is too small 'eh?

 

ESPRIT was formerly know as LCUB (Logistics Communication and Utilization Bay), and was split off from the Power and Propulsion Element (PPE) when launching both combined on SLS EM-2 proved infeasible. This is due to the developmental delay of SLS's Exploration Upper Stage. PPE will also be launched on a commercial vehicle (Falcon Heavy, Vulcan, New Glenn....)

 

 

RussianSpaceWeb....

 

Quote

 

2018: Partners refine ESPRIT design, eye Falcon Heavy

 

By April 2018, the brand new Falcon Heavy rocket became another potential carrier for delivering the ESPRIT module to the near-lunar station in 2024, at the earliest. Launching ESPRIT on the SpaceX' rocket would enable the module to carry more propellant, with the module reaching a total mass of between five and six tons. In addition to supporting its host station, European engineers also considered the available propellant cache aboard ESPRIT for refueling visiting lunar lander or its reusable ascent stage.

 

 

Edited by DocM
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Unobscured Vision
4 hours ago, branfont said:

 

 

Well, it went over your head, because clearly you didn't get the reference.

Guess so. *shrug*

Link to post
Share on other sites

branfont
6 hours ago, Unobscured Vision said:

Guess so. *shrug*

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unobscured Vision

image.thumb.png.80022e10aabac145e0a6448f9564b451.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

DocM
Edited by DocM
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Unobscured Vision

Multiverse forbid that anyone lay reality in their path. Nice one @DocM.

Link to post
Share on other sites

DocM

 

 

 

IMG_20180507_185247.thumb.jpg.02c7778939c3f35f3a4a2f4773e4bf59.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unobscured Vision

I'd say yes, there has to be. Any chance to slam Musk & Co. they'll take it -- and WaPo isn't exactly known for their integrity anymore.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.