|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Future of Falcon Heavy
JF Mezei wrote:
On 2018-02-10 08:16, Jeff Findley wrote: No. SpaceX found that it is much harder to do parallel loading, parallel ignition, parallel aerodynamics, and parallel staging than it was to do a "single stick" vehicle. Was this a necessary "growing up" step needed for SpaceX to realize this and reset it plans, going for the single bigger stick *BFR) ? In other words, had they not had the difficulties with Falcon Heavy, would BFR have been conceived ? BFR was 'conceived' long before Falcon Heavy had any difficulties. The actual timeline answers your question. How in the hell is it ever going to make back that R&D investment with those numbers? My guess is that it simply won't. It's a technological dead end, just like Falcon 9. Didn't SpaceX develop many skills in terms of structures, load handling etc that would have value for future projects such as BFR? Not really, no. And even that first flight, the data from the (attempted) landings of the stages is bound to be of use in terms of comparing performance of the heavy "tubes" with the 9 "tubes". (Musk mentioned that the cone atop boosters made a big difference in terms of aerodynamic authority of paddles, greatly increasing difficulty). All data is of use, even if it's data that tells you something can't work. BFR/BFS, a fully reusable TSTO, is planned to eventually replace them both. I have my doubts that BFR will replace Falcon 9. I get the impression that the 9 is the right size for vast majority of payloads and BFR is overblown. But when you look at costs BFR is *A LOT* cheaper. Just as there are complaints about the shuttle being too heavy for what it carried, I suspect BFR will be way too heavy if it only goes to ISS to carry 3 or 4 crewmembers. Like a 747 being used to carry just a handful of people. So why would you even have that mission? You'd bring 3 astronauts plus however many tons of cargo you might want to launch. Fewer bigger resupply missions. Again, BFR is *MUCH CHEAPER* than Falcon 9 launches to do even an approximately equivalent mission. Musk thinks BFR Spaceship can compete at the high end of high speed air transport. -- "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar territory." --G. Behn |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Future of Falcon Heavy
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Future of Falcon Heavy
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Could Delta IV Heavy use the same technique as Falcon Heavy | Alan Erskine[_3_] | Space Shuttle | 1 | May 20th 11 07:56 AM |
Falcon Heavy | David Spain | Policy | 8 | April 12th 11 08:49 PM |
Falcon Heavy | Snidely | Space Shuttle | 2 | April 12th 11 08:49 PM |