Slashdot Mirror
SpaceX Announces Bigger Rocket
bullitB writes "SpaceX, a commercial developer of rocket systems, has announced a new Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) class rocket. Dubbed the Falcon 9, the rocket will be able to launch nearly 25 metric tons into low earth orbit for a mere $78 million. It looks like they have already signed up Bigelow Aerospace for a launch in 2008."
Here's to hoping. I've been following them for a while, and their launch prices per kilogram are mind boggling. Of course, so have the numbers of a dozen rocket startups whose rockets eventually ended up in the scrapheap. SpaceX has made it very far, however, and I think at least the Falcon I will make it (assuming the company's books are sound).
Santa Ana Winds: Like the Dustbowl, but with awards shows.
Not that simple. You don't get your 1 lb satellite up for $1500 - you get your satellite up for $6 million. Perhaps you can partner with some other organization who is going to a similar orbit and share costs, or even a few organizations, but you're not going to have a cheap launch vehicle maneuver to 2,000 different orbits and do 2,000 satellite deployments.
Santa Ana Winds: Like the Dustbowl, but with awards shows.
These big rockets have been Elon Musk's goal all along. That's why he didn't use air launch.
Air launching has many advantages: lower atmospheric pressure improves the efficiency of engines, reduces air drag losses, greatly reduces dynamic loads, allowing the use of lighter structures. Perhaps most importantly, air launching can be done over the ocean without expensive range fees - and range delays like SpaceX is currently experiencing.
But air launch does not easily scale to large sizes. For really large rockets you have to launch from the ground.
Elon eventually plans to build a Saturn-V class launcher for for manned missions to Mars. It may seem premature when they haven't launched Falcon 1 yet, but so far they seem to be doing the right things.
Stop worrying about the risks of nuclear power and start worrying about the risks of not using nuclear power.
Without really advertising it, when Musk is interviewed about a 'man-rated' version of his rocket, he merely smiles, saying it is in essence already man-rated. Engine-out safety etc.
Of course, there's no capsule designed, but I guess he doesn't (currently) see that as HIS job, he's just aiming towards cheap launchers for commercial market, and the $$$ are to be found in the satellite business, not in manned flights (yet)
But if a third party decides that, yes, lauching paying customers is a viable business-model, all that could change quickly.
20mil being the current price for spacetourists, compared to a rocket that can haul 25000kg to LEO... You can build a BIG manned capsule with that weight budget, so prices would go down markedly.
their problem has been an existing launch manifest at vandenberg. there is a atlas 5 or somesuch in the way. as it has a $bn payload on top, they cannot fly. hence the relocation to the (amusingly) named ronald reagan ABM test facility of kawaljein island.
spacex have done their development right. they are using intelligent designs. they have done an awful lot of testing and simulation. they look to have a chance.
it may seem odd to actually put a commercial payload on an untested rocket, but given that nearly every launch is on virgin equipment it makes sense (discounting ariane 501, for which parts of the payload were dug out of a rainforest and displayed - some instruments were nearly reusable)