|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Elon Musk's SpaceX to build 'Grasshopper' hover-rocket
"SpaceX, the upstart start-up rocket company founded
by famous techwealth kingpin Elon Musk, is to build and test-fly a "Grasshopper" hover rocket based on the massive first-stage fuel tank of the company's Falcon 9 vehicle, capable of carrying ten tonnes of cargo or seven people into orbit. As yet SpaceX is not discussing the Grasshopper publicly, but we learn some interesting details of the new craft from an environmental impact statement covering planned test flights filed with the Federal Aviation Administration (65-page PDF/1.4MB). According to the filing, the Grasshopper is seen as a "Reusable Launch Vehicle" (RLV). It will be 106ft tall, and built around the first-stage fuel tank of the existing Falcon 9 rocket stack:" See: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/09...hopper_spacex/ |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Elon Musk's SpaceX to build 'Grasshopper' hover-rocket
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Elon Musk's SpaceX to build 'Grasshopper' hover-rocket
Jeff Findley writes:
In article om, says... That's a bloody big lander they're developing! thinking I wonder what Musk has in mind..... thinking We all know he wants to reuse his launch vehicles. It's quite possible that he's using this as a testbed to gather data on the feasibility of recovering Falcon 9 first stages. Even easier ought to be Falcon Heavy boosters, which are similar but expend their fuel/oxidizer earlier due to cross-feeding of propellants to the core. It's still curious. Landing a first stage or a booster would mean having some ground to land it on, which would mean having to launch over land. Which SpaceX doesn't. Or they mean to land the thing on a ship or barge out there.... Jochem -- "A designer knows he has arrived at perfection not when there is no longer anything to add, but when there is no longer anything to take away." - Antoine de Saint-Exupery |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Elon Musk's SpaceX to build 'Grasshopper' hover-rocket
Jochem Huhmann wrote:
It's still curious. Landing a first stage or a booster would mean having some ground to land it on, which would mean having to launch over land. Which SpaceX doesn't. Or they mean to land the thing on a ship or barge out there.... Go straight up until first stage separation? You would have to transport the stage back otherwise. -- Mvh./Regards, Niels Jørgen Kruse, Vanløse, Denmark |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Elon Musk's SpaceX to build 'Grasshopper' hover-rocket
In article , nospam@ab-
katrinedal.dk says... Jochem Huhmann wrote: It's still curious. Landing a first stage or a booster would mean having some ground to land it on, which would mean having to launch over land. Which SpaceX doesn't. Or they mean to land the thing on a ship or barge out there.... Go straight up until first stage separation? You would have to transport the stage back otherwise. I've suggested this before. Launching straight up until booster separation would recovery easier if the chosen approach is a powered vertical landing. One of the criticisms of this approach is that's not an "optimal" trajectory, so the launch vehicle pays a payload penalty for this approach. The launch vehicle also pays a penalty for the increased mass of the recovery hardware and/or propellant. That said, throwing away your first stage on each an every launch doesn't strike me as "optimal". ;-) That's why I'm wondering about Falcon Heavy. Due to the cross-feeding of propellants to the core, those two outer boosters will burn out earlier than Falcon 9's first stage. Because of this, staging will happen at a lower altitude and speed. This means that recovering Falcon Heavy boosters ought to be easier than recovering a Falcon 9 first stage. Yes, reusability will cost some payload mass, but if any launcher can afford this sacrifice, you'd think that Falcon Heavy would be the one. If SpaceX goes this route with Falcon Heavy, at least they'll be recovering 1/2 of the stages used. To quiet the "performance uber alles" crowd, SpaceX could always offer the same launch vehicle with expendable boosters. For launches that can't sacrifice that payload, SpaceX would just charge the customer a higher price for expendable boosters. Jeff -- " Ares 1 is a prime example of the fact that NASA just can't get it up anymore... and when they can, it doesn't stay up long. " - tinker |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Elon Musk's SpaceX to build 'Grasshopper' hover-rocket
Jeff Findley writes:
That's why I'm wondering about Falcon Heavy. Due to the cross-feeding of propellants to the core, those two outer boosters will burn out earlier than Falcon 9's first stage. Because of this, staging will happen at a lower altitude and speed. This means that recovering Falcon Heavy boosters ought to be easier than recovering a Falcon 9 first stage. Yes, for the Heavy boosters this could make sense. For the normal Falcon 9, not so much. You'd need the second stage then to provide all the delta-v to orbital speed which is a bit too much for the poor thing. If they indeed can manage to land the boosters at the launch site after burn-out this could mean major cost savings. Jochem -- "A designer knows he has arrived at perfection not when there is no longer anything to add, but when there is no longer anything to take away." - Antoine de Saint-Exupery |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Elon Musk's SpaceX to build 'Grasshopper' hover-rocket
On 28/09/2011 11:12 PM, Jeff Findley wrote:
In gpond.com, says... That's a bloody big lander they're developing! thinking I wonder what Musk has in mind.....thinking We all know he wants to reuse his launch vehicles. It's quite possible that he's using this as a testbed to gather data on the feasibility of recovering Falcon 9 first stages. Even easier ought to be Falcon Heavy boosters, which are similar but expend their fuel/oxidizer earlier due to cross-feeding of propellants to the core. Jeff I don't think this is about a booster recovery system. I think it's more 'planetary' than Earth-based. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Elon Musk's SpaceX to build 'Grasshopper' hover-rocket
In article om,
says... On 28/09/2011 11:12 PM, Jeff Findley wrote: In gpond.com, says... That's a bloody big lander they're developing! thinking I wonder what Musk has in mind.....thinking We all know he wants to reuse his launch vehicles. It's quite possible that he's using this as a testbed to gather data on the feasibility of recovering Falcon 9 first stages. Even easier ought to be Falcon Heavy boosters, which are similar but expend their fuel/oxidizer earlier due to cross-feeding of propellants to the core. I don't think this is about a booster recovery system. I think it's more 'planetary' than Earth-based. Possibly, but the technology could also be applied to landing Dragon under rocket power, which I'd consider "Earth-based". Splashing down in the ocean isn't such a great idea for a capsule you want to reuse. Dunking aluminum and electronics in salt water isn't a good thing. For disposable capsules, this really doesn't matter, except to museum curators who are interested in preserving history. Jeff -- " Ares 1 is a prime example of the fact that NASA just can't get it up anymore... and when they can, it doesn't stay up long. " - tinker |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Elon Musk's SpaceX to build 'Grasshopper' hover-rocket
In sci.space.policy message , Wed, 28 Sep
2011 15:46:37, Jochem Huhmann posted: Jeff Findley writes: In article om, says... That's a bloody big lander they're developing! thinking I wonder what Musk has in mind..... thinking We all know he wants to reuse his launch vehicles. It's quite possible that he's using this as a testbed to gather data on the feasibility of recovering Falcon 9 first stages. Even easier ought to be Falcon Heavy boosters, which are similar but expend their fuel/oxidizer earlier due to cross-feeding of propellants to the core. It's still curious. Landing a first stage or a booster would mean having some ground to land it on, which would mean having to launch over land. Which SpaceX doesn't. Or they mean to land the thing on a ship or barge out there.... Get the first stage range right, launch from south Texas, over the Gulf of Mexico to Florida. Refuel, and, with no second stage or payload, fly it back to Texas. -- (c) John Stockton, nr London, UK. Turnpike v6.05. Website http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/ - w. FAQish topics, links, acronyms PAS EXE etc. : http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/programs/ - see in 00index.htm Dates - miscdate.htm estrdate.htm js-dates.htm pas-time.htm critdate.htm etc. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Let's Build Rocket Ships! | Pat Flannery | History | 0 | June 21st 11 08:47 PM |
SpaceX goes to court as US rocket wars begin | [email protected] | Policy | 0 | June 20th 11 04:38 PM |
SpaceX: It IS Rocket Science. | Michael Gallagher | Policy | 2 | September 26th 08 01:20 AM |
Elon Musk's Killer App for Space | Space Cadet | Policy | 4 | August 16th 06 03:45 AM |
SpaceX rocket fails | nightbat | Misc | 2 | March 30th 06 12:53 AM |