A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Policy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

SpaceX Destroys Tooling



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old March 21st 19, 09:38 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Fred J. McCall[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,018
Default SpaceX Destroys Tooling

I've seen from several sources that SpaceX has apparently junked all
their fabrication tools for composite structures (at a cost of tens of
millions of dollars). Apparently betting the ranch on the new steel
construction plan with no future path to switch to composites.


--
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore,
all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
--George Bernard Shaw
  #2  
Old March 22nd 19, 08:02 AM posted to sci.space.policy
William Elliot[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 86
Default SpaceX Destroys Tooling

On Thu, 21 Mar 2019, Fred J. McCall wrote:

I've seen from several sources that SpaceX has apparently junked all
their fabrication tools for composite structures (at a cost of tens of
millions of dollars). Apparently betting the ranch on the new steel
construction plan with no future path to switch to composites.


Why didn't they just mothball the composite tools?
  #5  
Old March 22nd 19, 02:40 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Fred J. McCall[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,018
Default SpaceX Destroys Tooling

William Elliot wrote on Fri, 22 Mar 2019 00:02:18
-0700:

On Thu, 21 Mar 2019, Fred J. McCall wrote:

I've seen from several sources that SpaceX has apparently junked all
their fabrication tools for composite structures (at a cost of tens of
millions of dollars). Apparently betting the ranch on the new steel
construction plan with no future path to switch to composites.


Why didn't they just mothball the composite tools?


Probably because they have no intention of ever using it and storing
things costs money. That's the whole thrust behind what is called
"Just In Time Manufacturing", which is pretty much how all
manufacturing works these days. Minimize parts storage and Work In
Progress (which also has storage costs). Same thing with tools you
never intend to use. If they had any commercial value to anyone but
SpaceX they would probably have sold them, but if you're not building
a composite BFR/BFS they're not useful.


--
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore,
all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
--George Bernard Shaw
  #6  
Old March 22nd 19, 02:54 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Fred J. McCall[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,018
Default SpaceX Destroys Tooling

Jeff Findley wrote on Fri, 22 Mar 2019
06:24:34 -0400:


There was some whining online about "why didn't they save that tooling
in case the stainless steel didn't work out". Um, because they've done
the analysis and testing on the hexagonal tiles needed for the new
design and they passed the tests.


Personally I'm still concerned about the transpiration heat shield.
Lots of people in the past have wanted to do similar things and none
of them could make it work. It's not a very fault tolerant approach.
I'd be a lot more comfortable if they'd build a subscale article and
loop it around the Moon so it returns at interplanetary reentry
speeds. Even more comfortable if they could somehow expose it to a
bunch of dust and crap (like by a lunar landing) and then bring it
back.


--
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore,
all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
--George Bernard Shaw
  #7  
Old March 22nd 19, 02:56 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Fred J. McCall[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,018
Default SpaceX Destroys Tooling

Jeff Findley wrote on Fri, 22 Mar 2019
06:25:55 -0400:

In article m,
says...

On Thu, 21 Mar 2019, Fred J. McCall wrote:

I've seen from several sources that SpaceX has apparently junked all
their fabrication tools for composite structures (at a cost of tens of
millions of dollars). Apparently betting the ranch on the new steel
construction plan with no future path to switch to composites.


Why didn't they just mothball the composite tools?


See my other post. No plans to use the tooling and storage costs are
non-zero. The entire Port of L.A. loction they were renting is being
abandoned. Starship and Super Booster will be built at Boca Chica and
KSC.


Part of the reason for building it at the Port was concern about
trying to move such large articles to the launch site. How have they
solved that? Any way they could get a license to let the things fly
from Texas to Florida under their own power?


--
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore,
all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
--George Bernard Shaw
  #9  
Old March 24th 19, 01:48 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Jeff Findley[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,307
Default SpaceX Destroys Tooling

In article ,
says...

Jeff Findley wrote on Fri, 22 Mar 2019
06:24:34 -0400:


There was some whining online about "why didn't they save that tooling
in case the stainless steel didn't work out". Um, because they've done
the analysis and testing on the hexagonal tiles needed for the new
design and they passed the tests.


Personally I'm still concerned about the transpiration heat shield.
Lots of people in the past have wanted to do similar things and none
of them could make it work. It's not a very fault tolerant approach.
I'd be a lot more comfortable if they'd build a subscale article and
loop it around the Moon so it returns at interplanetary reentry
speeds. Even more comfortable if they could somehow expose it to a
bunch of dust and crap (like by a lunar landing) and then bring it
back.


From what I've read, they plan on flying the first (prototype) Starship
without any transpiration cooling. Then they will find out which of the
hexagonal TPS tiles eroded and add transpiration cooling to only those
tiles which have eroded. This seems to imply that if transpiration
cooling did fail on a tile during a flight, it would erode some, but
still protect the Starship during reentry.

The goal is zero TPS maintenance between flights. But, it also sounds
like a failure in transpiration cooling would be more of a maintenance
issue than anything else. So, in the end, this sounds like a more
durable approach than the space shuttle TPS (low bar, I know).

Jeff
--
All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone.
These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends,
employer, or any organization that I am a member of.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
SpaceX and NASA Host Teleconference Today on SpaceX 2 Mission to Space Station Jeff Findley[_2_] Policy 5 March 4th 13 10:40 PM
SMITHSONIAN FINALLY DESTROYS ED CONRAD'S CREDIBILITY Intrepid[_2_] Astronomy Misc 3 January 10th 13 08:37 AM
HOW EINSTEINIANA DESTROYS HUMAN RATIONALITY Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 8 May 15th 10 11:20 AM
More On The Deliberate Destruction Of Saturn 5 Tooling [email protected] History 2 September 21st 05 03:57 PM
Hurricane Frances destroys VAB, shuttle? Richard Schumacher Policy 8 September 4th 04 04:53 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:05 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.