SpaceX announces Heavy Lift rockets

[DocM]

Sums it up rather well - from the government end. OTOH SpaceX's Elon Musk is a visionary who wants to use commercial launch to pay for his dream of going to Mars.

That is why SpaceX has the Falcon X and Falcon XX super-heavy and Merlin 2 engine concepts, and also why Dragon was designed for beyond Earth orbit from the get-go; why else use a heat shield capable of re-entering at almost 40,000 mph? Not at all necessary if low orbit was the ultimate goal.

[neoadorable]

good signs, but how long till we get to Mars on Musk's funding? No, as sad as that is, this calls for government intervention on a global scale. it's time to pool efforts across space agencies. Private industry can help and contribute, they can take over LEO for sure and even further, but going to Moon/Mars/Asteroids etc should be a public concern, not something left to corporations. Especially since none of these enterprises are big enough to sustain such massive undertakings. if you told me GE or Wal-Mart or Foxxcon are going into space exploration then yeah sure, but SpaceX...i'm not convinced, those guys need government funding to literally get off the ground.

[DocM]

GE is in aerospace. Not as a launcher, but certainly as a satellite component manufacturer including solar panels. WalMart is a retailer, not a manufacturer of technologies.

The best way forward is exemplifed by NAUTILUS-X; NASA etc integrating commercial technologies like Bigelow's into beyond Earth orbit (BEO) missions. An evolved Dragon could be the return vehicle and stripped down provide the basis for a lander using their vertical landing thrusters, and Ad Astra could supply VASIMR plasma propulsion modules. Poof.

On the other hand, SpaceX and Carnegie-Mellon university have sheduled the launch of a lunar rover on a Falcon 9 in a couple of years. Like most big Earth telescopes, the funding will be private. If had been around a block 2 Falcon 9 could have flown both Mars rovers in a single launch.

[DocM]

UPDATE:

Falcon 9 Heavy has been renamed to Falcon Heavy. By the time it flies in 2012 Falcon Heavy will have the largest mass to orbit of any launcher in the world.

Falcon Heavy Demo Flight: 2012

Location: Vandenberg Space Launch Complex 4-East (former Titan IV pad)

Dimensions -

Height: 56.4 meters (180 feet)

Width: 11.5 meters (38 feet)

Depth: 3.6 meters (12 feet)

Fairing: 5.2 x 13.9 meters (17.06 x 45.6 feet)

Engines - (all but Raptor use kerosene/LOX)

1st stage: 27 Merlin 1's (9 per core)

2nd stage: 1 MVac (Merlin 1 vacuum, re-startable)

Future 2nd stage: 1 Raptor hydrogen/LOX (higher performance)

Performance -

Thrust: 15 million Newtons (3.375 million lb/ft)

Mass to LEO: 32,000 kg (70,548 lbs)

Mass to GTO: 19,500 kg (42,990 lbs)

LEO = Low Earth Orbit

GTO = Geostationary Transfer Orbit

Falcon Heavy

Fairing (1/4 section)

[neoadorable]

used Wal-Mart as an example...they have far greater resources than all space organizations and companies in the world combined. plus don't forget they buy Weyland-Yutani by the events of Alien Resurrection...

thanks for the Space X update. looks nice but i've already made it clear i'm disappointed with this tech. i know there's forward movement and i understand what you describe as the way ahead is likely the best we're going to get in the near future, but still....i feel all of this should have been done decades ago. well, no crying over spilled milk, must be positive...i'm hoping Curiosity will be a big one for NASA and that by this time next year we'll be clearer on the details of an upcoming manned Mars mission...one can hope like i often say.

[DocM]

Interesting quote from NASA administrator (former astronaut & USAF General) Charles Bolden in Aviation Week -

>

?NASA does not need a 130-metric-ton vehicle, probably before the next decade,? Bolden says. ?We know we?re going to need it if we?re going to an asteroid, and we?re definitely going to need it if we?re talking about going to Mars. But we will take a lesser capability in an earlier heavy-lift system so that we can get the job done. . . It means some of the traditional rocket companies (read:Lockheed & Boeing) that want to sell me a 130-metric-ton vehicle but don?t want to evolve it, they may lose because there is some other company that wants to give me the capability that I need right now that can be evolved to what I need down the road.?

>

That sure sounds like he's talking about SpaceX's evolvable Falcon X/Falcon X Heavy/FalconXX archetecture. The first need for a 130+ metric ton launcher would boil down to the NAUTILUS-X deep space exploration ship. That is what we need to go to Mars'and beyond.

[neoadorable]

Bolden living up to his name...he's bold. I like the guy, he seems like the kind of person that can move things, and has done a lot himself. i just hope he doesn't alienate any backers talking like this.

[DocM]

He has alienated people, largely those into the status quo and using a shuttle-derived archetecture - the latter being what got Constellation in cost troubles.

[neoadorable]

if he can help get us to Mars this decade, he will be my idol. even the Moon i'll take.

[HawkMan]

The moon is a dead end, we've been there and there isn't any need to keep going there. only as part of a long term space expansion project where a moon base with deep space launching as an inbetween. right now where we need to go is Mars, a moon base would potentially come long after that as the need arises. it if does.

[neoadorable]

the moon's not a dead end, but i agree Mars is the priority. if i had to choose, i take Barsoom any day of the week. however, the moon has lots of promise. ideally we can start settling both at about the same time.

[DocM]

The moon is a dead end, we've been there and there isn't any need to keep going there.....

I disagree. The moon could be very valuable. A lot of work has gone into ISRU, in situ resource utilization, and much of this work has been done for the moon and Mars.

* a staging area with just enough gravity for long term crew health but low enough for easy departure to an L2 space dock.

* imagery shows lots of water in polar craters, which can be broken diwn into hydrogen & oxygen using solar power. This would be far easier than launching it from Earth for deep space missions originating at L2.

Basically, using ISRU all you'd need to launch from Earth is a bit of CO2 instead of much larger volumes both both fuel and oxidizer - which would likely be a toxic mix of hydrazine and nitrogen tetroxide.

The hydrogen would partly be fuel for VASIMR, the oxygen for the crews, and the rest as missiin resources; the CO2 would be added with the remaining hydrogen & processed using solar power to provude methane and oxygen fuel for landers and pods. XCOR has done a lit of work for NASA on the methane engines for this.

[HawkMan]

Even the astronauts agree the moon is a dead end, going there again doesn't bring us anywhere further, it just repeats what we did 50 years ago.

yeah it could be usefull for a deep space stagign area, as I said, but before that's even an issue, we need to do exploration missions to mars to see if we even need it. and for those, we don't need a moon base.

All the moon talk the agencies and government is doing, it's simply to placate the people who are telling the government to get back into space, since the moon is cheaper than Mars, but ultimately the money they spend going there woudl be wasted for the missions they would be doing. and the money would be far better spent on going somewhere useful, i.e. Mars.

[DocM]

SOME astronauts think Mars first, and some say a more complete exploration of the Moon is in order. Besides, most are not geologists or planetary scientists but "mission specialists" or engineers and in no position to judge science goals. It's like asking a NYC taxi driver or automotive engineer about the geopogy or archaeology of Manhattan.

All we've been to id the equitorial latitudes on the lit side - and even then only ONE geologist made the trip and ZERO planetary scientists. That's hardly a complete analysis.

[neoadorable]

it should be moon and Mars more or less concurrently. the moon is priceless as a mining outpost, tourism destination, research/proving grounds and even storage. like i said, forced to choose one i'd go with Mars obviously, but i would never insult Luna by referring to her as a dead end...Doc said it, what we've done there so far is like Columbus sighting Florida from Cuba and deciding to go back cause North America was a dead end. it doesn't make sense. i see your point regarding placating the pro-space crowd with cheaper missions, but it doesn't change what the moon has to offer.

[HawkMan]

Well the moon missions they are plannign are just redoing what has already been done. mining and all that isn't even in the plans.

[DocM]

Promo time -

On 4-5-2011 something big, and heavy, is coming

[wahoospa]

In the first post by DocM is that rocket on the left side the Saturn that carred men to the moon? It looks like it. That was one huge rocket itself.

[DocM]

The far left rocket is the 360' tall Saturn V moon rocket.

The rest are SpaceX's proposed roadmap. The expected announcement would be for Falcon Heavy, previously the Falcon 9 Heavy.

FH would itself be able to orbit the largest payload of any post-shuttle launcher - previous estimates were 32 metric tons in standard form & more with a hydrogen 2nd stage.

NASA's administrator has made statements that hint he's interested in Falcon X & Falcon X Heavy.

[Crisp]

How much HP would the Falcon XX kick out?

[DocM]

Without knowing details beyond the raw thrust that's hard to calculate. First we's have to know the stage masses (can guesstimate that) and the speed at which main engine cutoff occurs (not so easy.)

Just running a raw lb/f/sec to Imperial HP through the number cruncher gives ~19,000, but that sounds low.

[DocM]

Regarding the announcements - there are already rumors beyond the obvious Falcon Heavy data -

Construction at Vamdenberg

A multi-launch customer (CONAE? [Argentina])

Raptor LH2 stage info

Multi-large satellite bus

We'll see on the 5th, but Gwynne Shotwell's also appearing at Space Access on tbe 7th, so info may come over 2 days.

[neoadorable]

heh heh i have a feeling something's afoot...the success of both MESSENGER and Starbust seems to have reinvigorated NASA. i think we're going back to the moon this decade!

HawkMan, i hear you, but i'm so desperate for something i'll take gimped moon missions. besides, they're not talking about the same old, read the NASA materials, same for ESA, China, Russia, and JAXA...all talking about moon bases and permanent habitation. remember the technology is a lot better and cheaper now. even your run of the mill space program can get a moon base up and running now with ease, it's just a matter of getting the politicos to fork over the funding.

plus, let me quote Contact: little steps Ellie, little steps...we have to get back up to running speed before we go flying, our space programs have stagnated long enough. i think the realization that space exploration is basically one endless growth industry for the whole world is starting to sink in. or it could just be this beer i'm drinking.

[DocM]

*** MEDIA ADVISORY ***

SpaceX: Something Big Is Coming

Elon Musk to Hold Press Conference in Washington Tuesday

WASHINGTON ? Elon Musk, CEO and Chief Technology Officer of Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), will hold a press conference on Tuesday, April 5th at the National Press Club in Washington to discuss his company?s latest venture.

EVENT:? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?SpaceX CEO Elon Musk to Talk About the Next Big Thing

TIME:? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 11:20 AM

DATE:? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Tuesday, April 5th, 2011

LOCATION:? ? ? ? ?National Press Club, Zenger Room

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 529 14th St. NW, 13th Floor, Washington, DC 20045

Can?t make it in person?

The press conference will be webcast live at:

http://www.visualwebcaster.com/spacex

[neoadorable]

muhahahaha let's see what he has to say...hoping for some big news!