JF Mezei wrote on Tue, 27 Mar 2018
15:31:58 -0400:

On 2018-03-27 09:41, Fred J. McCall wrote:

Falcon Super Heavy would cost much less than that. They hit all the
big speed bumps with side boosters doing Falcon Heavy.

Why is there discussion about hypothetical Falcon Super Heavy when Musjk
made it clear development of Falcon has stopped and production will
cease once they have enough boock 5s built ?


Because Musk talked about it after the launch of Falcon Heavy.


Shouldn't BFR be used as basis to compare what SpaceX can do and at what
costs vs what SLS might be able to do and at what cost?


Only if you want to compare apples and aardvarks.


Or is there truly a chance that SpaceX might develop a Falcon with 4
boosters to make a Falcon-Heavy on steroids? Would such be ready before
BFR?


It's unlikely without some demand, but Musk has said it wouldn't be
hard to do.


If SpaceX were to announce Falcon-Super-Heavy now, it would be
tantamount to admitting that BFR won't materialize.


Hogwash. Falcon Super Heavy in expendable form would put around 125
tonnes in LEO and about half that in reusable trim. BFR would put
around 250 tonnes in LEO in expendable form and 150 tonnes in LEO in
reusable form. They aren't even in the same ballpark. For Mars work
Falcon Super Heavy would put around 35 tonnes or so to TMI in
expendable mode. BFR (reusable with on orbit refueling) will put 150
tonnes to TMI.


--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn