TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker and becoming a Supporting Member. For more info: Support TMC
  1. TMC is currently READ ONLY.
    Click here for more info.

SLS - On the Scent of Inevitable Capitulation

Discussion in 'SpaceX' started by Nikxice, Nov 18, 2018.

  1. Electroman

    Electroman Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2012
    Messages:
    6,104
    Location:
    TX


    Great video with a lot of information..
     
    • Informative x 2
  2. Watts_Up

    Watts_Up Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2019
    Messages:
    3,092
    Location:
    In a galaxy far, far away
    #162 Watts_Up, Aug 9, 2020
    Last edited: Aug 9, 2020
  3. Electroman

    Electroman Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2012
    Messages:
    6,104
    Location:
    TX
    I learnt a lot of things in that video. Starship is too ambitious and quite complex, I now fully understand the reason why NASA is not running headlong towards Starship and hedging towards SLS too. I didn't know that for a Moon or Mars mission, Starship would need in-flight refueling in LEO or in Mars orbit. So for every mission we need two rockets with an in-flight refueling. Not saying it is not doable, but for a manned missions this would take a decade or two to perfect it.
     
    • Disagree x 1
  4. Grendal

    Grendal SpaceX Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2012
    Messages:
    5,661
    Location:
    Santa Fe, New Mexico
    More than two are needed to refuel a Starship: up to five.

    Not if Elon can help it. "Perfect", maybe so, but getting it to work is less than ten years.
     
  5. Electroman

    Electroman Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2012
    Messages:
    6,104
    Location:
    TX
    Upto five? now that is crazy. If we can get this technology working at Elon's speed in ten years for non-human flight, that would be an amazing feat. For humans that would need many flights back and forth to prove the technology. If I were Jim Bridenstine, I would look to SLS for my upcoming manned moon mission in this decade.

    Sure it doesn't push the technology far enough from Saturn V, but Starship taking humans anywhere outside of earth's gravity seems quite far away. I am guessing the first milestone for Starship should be point to point travel within earth, with 100% re-usability of all stages.
     
    • Like x 1
  6. ecarfan

    ecarfan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2013
    Messages:
    19,181
    Location:
    San Mateo, CA
    It’s not crazy when you understand that it is a fully reusable vehicle that can take over 100 tons to LEO, GTO, Moon, and Mars. See https://www.spacex.com/media/starship_users_guide_v1.pdf

    Sure it will take some number of flights to develop the vehicle and ensure it is sufficiently safe to take humans to space. So what? SLS has yet to launch a single test flight. It is years behind schedule and billions over budget. It will cost over ONE BILLION DOLLARS per launch and the entire rocket ends up in the ocean. How many test flights do you think will be required to certify SLS for human passengers and how many billions will that cost? Starship will cost far less and be more capable.
     
    • Like x 3
  7. ItsNotAboutTheMoney

    ItsNotAboutTheMoney Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2012
    Messages:
    10,212
    Location:
    Maine
    I don't want to come across as a pedant, but it is spelled ONE BEEELLION DOLLARS.
     
    • Funny x 5
  8. Electroman

    Electroman Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2012
    Messages:
    6,104
    Location:
    TX
    .. and so has Starship. SLS will fly one day with a ton of cost overruns, but the technology is not too far fetched. It is an evolution from Saturn V and Space Shuttle.

    On the other hand, Starship at this time is more of a science/technology project. It is a revolutionary design from FH or anything that mankind has seen so far. I am sure it will see the light of day, ONLY because it is Musk's project. But I clearly understand why NASA is clinging on to SLS. If I were the NASA decision making body, I would take the same approach at this time, even though I am a SpaceX fanboi.
     
    • Like x 1
  9. ecarfan

    ecarfan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2013
    Messages:
    19,181
    Location:
    San Mateo, CA
    Apparently you missed the Starhopper and SN5 test flights. Which by the way, landed intact. ;) SLS is over a year away from getting off the ground and when it does the rocket will be trashed. On purpose.

    Starship is certainly a “project” though I’m unclear as to what you mean by using that word. SLS is a “project”.

    The “revolutionary” part of Starship is the re-entry method, which is grounded in actual physics. This SpaceX video explain it.

    The Super Heavy booster is a logical evolution of the F9 booster, so it is not particularly revolutionary, just bigger and with more engines.

    The overall Starship vehicle is 100% reusable, as compared to the F9 being about 75% reusable. So in that sense Starship is the logical evolution of F9.

    Starship is not an Elon Musk fantasy/vanity project. It’s development is proceeding rapidly and at a pace that makes SLS look like the world’s slowest snail.
     
    • Like x 2
  10. Bobfitz1

    Bobfitz1 Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2012
    Messages:
    1,160
    Location:
    Ludlow, Vt
    Bridenstine seems a bright manager and he knows now that SpaceX can deliver. I think once the political life preserver for SLS is finally deflated it is going to sink like a billion dollar anchor and Bridenstine will switch to SpaceX for moon landings, while biting his lip to keep from grinning and breaking into his happy dance.

    I'm not trying to be unkind but I believe you don't yet get Elon's ambition or what the SpaceX teams under his direction can accomplish.
    It only took them a few years to design and build Raptor engine for a few tens of millions. How long would that have taken and cost if attempted by any of the old line rocket companies? They all act as if attempting a brand new engine would take them ten years and several billion tax payer dollars. Another example is solving booster reusability. Much faster in solving and making it very reliable than any of the established competitors would ever have believed.

    There will be plenty more Starship prototypes blowing up between now and safe manned Starship missions to Moon and Mars. That is why they are going to happen years before you expect.
     
    • Like x 3
  11. Bobfitz1

    Bobfitz1 Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2012
    Messages:
    1,160
    Location:
    Ludlow, Vt
    Thanks for link to this video. It is two years old but still fascinating. Has SpaceX put out anything similar after changing the design and materials for Starship? When they do I hope they do one for Mars and a second for Earth deorbit, so those can be compared and contrasted. I would imagine quite different landing phases would be necessary given one is a landing from orbit while other is trying to bleed off even more velocity so no fuel need be expended to place ship into Mars orbit.
     
    • Like x 1
  12. jbcarioca

    jbcarioca Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2015
    Messages:
    5,061
    Wiil be?
     
    • Funny x 2
  13. jbcarioca

    jbcarioca Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2015
    Messages:
    5,061
    He knows SpaceX delivers but he is also a Trumpista ex Congressman. Thus his primary focus is politics ratehr than rational decisions. Still I am confident he'd rather have SLS. Just look at his video congratulating the new Astronaut arrives at ISA. He had only Republicans there and they ignored the Russian who provide ULA their motive force.
    This is not intended to be political commentary but rather recognizing that SLS has gigantic political power whether it ever flies or not.
     
    • Informative x 1
  14. ItsNotAboutTheMoney

    ItsNotAboutTheMoney Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2012
    Messages:
    10,212
    Location:
    Maine
    Well, Starship is _intended_ to be fully re-usable. SpaceX hasn't built it yet. It's just in development and as Musk tweeted, they're just going to keep doing more hops for a while before they can go high.

    But, SpaceX has one advantage in the process: it's its own customer due to Starlink.
    As soon as SpaceX is confident in Starship, it can begin to launch Starlink satellites, and those launches will help prove the rocket to other customers.
     
    • Like x 1
  15. ecarfan

    ecarfan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2013
    Messages:
    19,181
    Location:
    San Mateo, CA
    If you want to make a wager and take the position that Starship will not be fully reusable — FH booster and entire Starship upper section — within 3 years...I will be happy to take your money.

    Elon is determined that the entire Starship vehicle will be fully reusable. That is the design and the goal. It will happen, and soon.
     
    • Like x 3
  16. Nikxice

    Nikxice Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2014
    Messages:
    1,054
    Location:
    Hudson, NH
    Yup, Jim will take care of Jimbo first, along with the agenda of the hands that feed him. I think he supports both SLS and Starship, although he's unlikely to be Administrator if or when SLS/Orion ever successfully achieves a crewed Moon landing. He's still relatively young (45), so I could see him eventually running for a Oklahoma U.S. Senate seat, probably to replace the aging, raging, climate change denier James Inhofe (Be interesting to see how Bridenstine's views have evolved on that issue). Bridenstine should have plenty of support. In 2012 he beat a Republican incumbent and then ran unopposed in 2014. Therein lies a clue as to why I believe Bridenstine's suppressed persona might be a stronger supporter of Starship than many might imagine. He won his first race by running further right of his opponent, as a candidate on the fringe of the Tea Party (He gladly accepted those supporters, but didn't want to attach his name to that label).
    A major focus of the Tea Party is their belief in smaller government coupled with decreased spending. Which clearly contradicts Jim's public support for funding the SLS black hole. I think he does so by biting his tongue and holding his nose. If Biden wins in November, having Bridenstine around for a couple more years could unmuzzle him. His stinging line last year to Elon and SpaceX, “It’s time to deliver", might get aimed at Boeing multiplied by 10.
     
    • Like x 2
    • Informative x 1
  17. e-FTW

    e-FTW New electron smell

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2015
    Messages:
    3,216
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    I think it is important to all remember how radically different these two systems are/will be. Yes, one will be reusable, but that is only the beginning of the impact that choice makes.
    Case in point: it takes 5 re-fuellings? Yep and all 5 could technically be done by a single Starship and Super Heavy combo. Maybe the same Super Heavy that launched the Starship waiting to be refuelled.
    SH+Starship are built through an iterative process: which means they expect most to fail until they reach the design that works reliably.
    The other is built though a process (that I assume has a name) that involves individually testing each component before assembling a complete rocket and flying it (yes, they are doing a green run test in the end, but that is not the full stack). This approach is costly.
     
    • Like x 1
  18. bxr140

    bxr140 Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2014
    Messages:
    2,607
    Location:
    Bay Area
    That's exactly right. 'Fail-fast-and-iterate' vs 'it has to work perfectly the first time'.
    There are a few legitimate reasons the latter may have been appropriate in the past, but clearly we've moved on.
     
    • Like x 3
  19. Cosmacelf

    Cosmacelf Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2013
    Messages:
    8,229
    Location:
    San Diego
    • Informative x 2
  20. Nikxice

    Nikxice Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2014
    Messages:
    1,054
    Location:
    Hudson, NH
    In the past when Eric would write one these SLS to nowhere articles, a handfull of backers would show up in its defense. I just scanned the first 100 comments and didn't see one. Negativity prevailed. Unlikely, but a few individuals openly discussed (wishing) that if the "Green Run hot fire test" scheduled for late autumn resulted in a RUD, the program would be in serious jeopardy. Ten years ago such talk would have been universally condemned. Boy, has the world ever changed.
     
    • Like x 2
    • Informative x 1

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Formed in 2006, Tesla Motors Club (TMC) was the first independent online Tesla community. Today it remains the largest and most dynamic community of Tesla enthusiasts. Learn more.
  • Do you value your experience at TMC? Consider becoming a Supporting Member of Tesla Motors Club. As a thank you for your contribution, you'll get nearly no ads in the Community and Groups sections. Additional perks are available depending on the level of contribution. Please visit the Account Upgrades page for more details.


    SUPPORT TMC