SpaceX set to re-fly a Block 5 rocket for the first time tonight • Hacker News Board

Re: SpaceX set to re-fly a Block 5 rocket for the first time tonight

#41

Post by oh_sigh » Mon, Aug 06, 2018, 6:08 PM UTC

lorenzhs wrote: post #23

growlist wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. Could be that having a legacy rocket programme is if anything a hindrance in this new world of reusability - Ariane in particular seems to be in danger of becoming mainly an employment scheme that builds rockets on the side. For fairness I guess I should say SLS isn't looking too clever at this point either.

You're missing the point of Ariane. Its purpose is providing independent access to space for ESA member nations at a reasonable price, and as insurance against a launch monopoly (it upper-bounds what others can charge ESA). Ariane 5 is also extremely reliable, which is very important for some launches (NASA's James Webb telescope is going to launch on Ariane 5, for example). Ariane's goal is not to win the most comme…

What happens with the JWT if the rocket blows up on launch? How long(and how much $$$) would it take to build another one, having already built one?

Is this an instance where the government should follow the maxim from Contact: "Why build one, when you can build two for twice the cost?"

Re: SpaceX set to re-fly a Block 5 rocket for the first time tonight

#42

Post by fooker » Mon, Aug 06, 2018, 6:20 PM UTC

stetrain wrote: post #39

fooker wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if it is refueled in orbit? The BFS presentations hinted at that ability.

To get other BFSes up there with enough fuel to transfer a useful amount would require them to use the first stage booster instead of just being SSTO. Really there's no point to doing an SSTO launch in practice since the BFR first stage will in theory be just as reusable (if not more so) than the BFS second stage. Using the first stage booster greatly improves payload to orbit and has relatively low marginal cost onc…

For a single launch, sure. What happens if there are regular launches?

Logistically, to me it seems that it would be a great idea to have a refueling station in orbit which is supplied by BFR cargo ships ..say.. once a month.

Launching a BFR for each launch of BFS would require a lot of transportation and duplicated effort. Is this intuition wrong?

Re: SpaceX set to re-fly a Block 5 rocket for the first time tonight

#43

Post by JumpCrisscross » Mon, Aug 06, 2018, 6:23 PM UTC

InTheArena wrote: post #13

ashraymalhotra wrote: post #9

> It is worth recalling that SpaceX only flew a "used" booster for the first time in March 2017. It's amazing this happened just a little over a year ago.

It was a epoch defining change. It does feel like a ton of time ago, and everyone in the industry (most notably ULA, Arianespace and the Chinese) are trying to figure out what they do now that the SpaceX steamroller is in full force.

> It was a epoch defining change

Not yet. Costs haven't fallen. The epoch-defining change would be back-to-back commercial launches with the same booster in a short period of time with zero or little retrofitting.

Re: SpaceX set to re-fly a Block 5 rocket for the first time tonight

#44

Post by kanox » Mon, Aug 06, 2018, 6:25 PM UTC

lorenzhs wrote: post #23

growlist wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. Could be that having a legacy rocket programme is if anything a hindrance in this new world of reusability - Ariane in particular seems to be in danger of becoming mainly an employment scheme that builds rockets on the side. For fairness I guess I should say SLS isn't looking too clever at this point either.

You're missing the point of Ariane. Its purpose is providing independent access to space for ESA member nations at a reasonable price, and as insurance against a launch monopoly (it upper-bounds what others can charge ESA). Ariane 5 is also extremely reliable, which is very important for some launches (NASA's James Webb telescope is going to launch on Ariane 5, for example). Ariane's goal is not to win the most comme…

> Its purpose is providing independent access to space for ESA member nations at a reasonable price

> Ariane's goal is not to win the most commercial contracts or compete with SpaceX on price

Winning commercial contracts is how the price is kept reasonable. As you pointed out fixed costs are very large and launching GTO satellites helps spread them around.

If SpaceX kicks Ariane out of the commercial market then ESA governments will have to pay more for their own launches.

Re: SpaceX set to re-fly a Block 5 rocket for the first time tonight

#45

Post by TangoTrotFox » Mon, Aug 06, 2018, 6:41 PM UTC

wahern wrote: post #36

thekingofh wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From that link. Holy cow: "“Looking forward for reusability, we don’t believe it really, really counts unless you can turn it around rapidly, or almost as rapidly, as you turn around an aircraft,”. I had no idea they were aiming for this level. That is just mind boggling how drastic a change it's going to be.

Musk's Mars plan depends on reducing the marginal costs of launching so much that SpaceX could with minimal expenditure chuck dozens of rockets at Mars every year loaded with supplies and crew. This is important to keep in mind when wondering why a corporation would continue pushing its costs down after obtaining an effective monopoly. As long as Mars is the goal SpaceX won't turn into a ULA or Ariane. But if for som…

On the other hand, one might argue that SpaceX has already permanently changed the space game. If SpaceX fails to keep moving society forward, it would do little more than create a major vacuum that could be filled by companies such as Blue Origin, Virgin Galactic, or other new players.

I think this in particular is really the hugest benefit of privatizing space. When we had the government in charge of space, it living or dying was really subject to nothing more than the whims of a gaggle of politicians. As space has become a prominent part of the private industry with ever increasing competition, you remove that aspect of a single point of failure. I think the odds of us entering into another era of stagnation come regression are rapidly approaching 0, and that's incredibly exciting!

Re: SpaceX set to re-fly a Block 5 rocket for the first time tonight

#46

Post by njarboe » Mon, Aug 06, 2018, 6:42 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #43

InTheArena wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was a epoch defining change. It does feel like a ton of time ago, and everyone in the industry (most notably ULA, Arianespace and the Chinese) are trying to figure out what they do now that the SpaceX steamroller is in full force.

> It was a epoch defining change Not yet. Costs haven't fallen. The epoch-defining change would be back-to-back commercial launches with the same booster in a short period of time with zero or little retrofitting.

If this current revival of spacecraft innovation goes on to create rapid, fully reusable spacecraft(BFR, New Glen, etc.), I think the epoch changing moment will be seen as the first landing of the first stage Falcon 9 on December 21, 2015. Similar to the first flight at Kitty Hawk. But if we fail to take to the stars, it will soon be forgotten and only remembered as a nostalgic touchstone for a few dreamers. Sort of like how I imagine how people will think of the first moon landing if, in a thousand years, humans have still not made it back.

Re: SpaceX set to re-fly a Block 5 rocket for the first time tonight

#47

Post by jlmorton » Mon, Aug 06, 2018, 6:43 PM UTC

lorenzhs wrote: post #23

growlist wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. Could be that having a legacy rocket programme is if anything a hindrance in this new world of reusability - Ariane in particular seems to be in danger of becoming mainly an employment scheme that builds rockets on the side. For fairness I guess I should say SLS isn't looking too clever at this point either.

You're missing the point of Ariane. Its purpose is providing independent access to space for ESA member nations at a reasonable price, and as insurance against a launch monopoly (it upper-bounds what others can charge ESA). Ariane 5 is also extremely reliable, which is very important for some launches (NASA's James Webb telescope is going to launch on Ariane 5, for example). Ariane's goal is not to win the most comme…

> Ariane 5 is also extremely reliable

It certainly is reliable, but it's not extremely reliable. It's had 2 total failures and 3 partial failures out of 99 launch attempts, including a partial failure this year on SES-14 that left the satellite in-orbit, but inclined 20 degrees to the equator, which will significantly shorten the satellite's lifespan.

Re: SpaceX set to re-fly a Block 5 rocket for the first time tonight

#48

Post by Lanzaa » Mon, Aug 06, 2018, 6:43 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #43

InTheArena wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was a epoch defining change. It does feel like a ton of time ago, and everyone in the industry (most notably ULA, Arianespace and the Chinese) are trying to figure out what they do now that the SpaceX steamroller is in full force.

> It was a epoch defining change Not yet. Costs haven't fallen. The epoch-defining change would be back-to-back commercial launches with the same booster in a short period of time with zero or little retrofitting.

> Costs haven't fallen.

I disagree. I highly doubt reusing a booster has been more expensive to SpaceX than building new boosters. It is also speculated that at least the first few customers of reused boosters were given a discount.

If you are saying customer cost has not fallen, you may be correct. I would counter with the fact that SpaceX is already a low cost provider, lowering their price more may not increase their overall profits.

> The epoch-defining change would be back-to-back commercial launches with the same booster in a short period of time with zero or little retrofitting.

The booster SpaceX plans to reuse today is a "block 5" booster. This is basically the design that SpaceX hopes will enable that zero or little retrofitting reuse.

Re: SpaceX set to re-fly a Block 5 rocket for the first time tonight

#49

Post by InclinedPlane » Mon, Aug 06, 2018, 6:51 PM UTC

lorenzhs wrote: post #23

growlist wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. Could be that having a legacy rocket programme is if anything a hindrance in this new world of reusability - Ariane in particular seems to be in danger of becoming mainly an employment scheme that builds rockets on the side. For fairness I guess I should say SLS isn't looking too clever at this point either.

You're missing the point of Ariane. Its purpose is providing independent access to space for ESA member nations at a reasonable price, and as insurance against a launch monopoly (it upper-bounds what others can charge ESA). Ariane 5 is also extremely reliable, which is very important for some launches (NASA's James Webb telescope is going to launch on Ariane 5, for example). Ariane's goal is not to win the most comme…

It's purpose has always been to be a globally competitive commercial launch provider. A purpose they excelled at for decades. While it's purpose is now shrinking to being Europe's government launcher it should be noted that this is an event that is happening, not merely a continuation of the status quo.

Re: SpaceX set to re-fly a Block 5 rocket for the first time tonight

#50

Post by InclinedPlane » Mon, Aug 06, 2018, 6:54 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #43

InTheArena wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was a epoch defining change. It does feel like a ton of time ago, and everyone in the industry (most notably ULA, Arianespace and the Chinese) are trying to figure out what they do now that the SpaceX steamroller is in full force.

> It was a epoch defining change Not yet. Costs haven't fallen. The epoch-defining change would be back-to-back commercial launches with the same booster in a short period of time with zero or little retrofitting.

Costs have already fallen. Iridium paid far less to launch their next generation fleet despite it being the same number of satellites, each of which are individually quite heavier than the previous generation (meaning, they purchased much greater launch capability but at a strictly lower cost). And several customers have taken advantage of the extreme low costs of reused launchers. Sure, right now it's only maybe $10 million cheaper, but $10 million is still $10 million, and for some that makes the difference between feasibility and infeasability.