For those wondering why these two Colorado representatives care about SpaceX:
A Denver Post blog entry makes the connection.
Wikipedia said:
A Denver Post blog entry makes the connection.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
chickensevil
Active Member
The Blue Owl
Endangerous Herbivore
So embarrassing. we suck? Viva la SpaceX
Spaceflight Now Russian RD-180 rocket engines delivered to ULA
Spaceflight Now Russian RD-180 rocket engines delivered to ULA
chickensevil
Active Member
We suck indeed...
I find it interesting that they are working toward having an alternative engine that will be US made in 5 years. At the very least all of this has forced the ULA to consider a real alternative to sourcing Russian made parts and making our country reliant on these parts... which likely affects our relationship with them.
I find it interesting that they are working toward having an alternative engine that will be US made in 5 years. At the very least all of this has forced the ULA to consider a real alternative to sourcing Russian made parts and making our country reliant on these parts... which likely affects our relationship with them.
Military Space Quarterly | SpaceX Closing in on Certification for Military Launches | SpaceNews.com
SpaceX is getting closer to certification. Wow is that a lot of hoops they have to jump through.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/19/us-usa-space-engine-idUSKCN0J323W20141119
More on this.
And from Krugerand:
Special Report: In Pentagon deal with Russians, big profit for tiny Florida firm
The problem is getting even more attention.
SpaceX is getting closer to certification. Wow is that a lot of hoops they have to jump through.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/19/us-usa-space-engine-idUSKCN0J323W20141119
And from Krugerand:
Special Report: In Pentagon deal with Russians, big profit for tiny Florida firm
The problem is getting even more attention.
Last edited:
ULA says not yet on reusable rockets
"United Launch Alliance CEO Tory Bruno said firing engines to control a rocket's flight back to Earth, as SpaceX is now trying to do with its Falcon 9 booster, wastes fuel that could help deliver payloads to orbit.
That's how rocket engineers see the world," he said. "That's all energy you could have used to put a bigger payload in the same orbit, or the same payload further up."
Space Notebook: ULA says not yet on reusable rockets
This certainly contradicts Elon Musk's contention that since the actual cost of rocket fuel used represents such a very small percentage of the rocket's stage 1 boosters total cost that paying for the fuel is insignificant in the long run when compared to the overall cost to launch. Any bets on who will turn out to be right?
"United Launch Alliance CEO Tory Bruno said firing engines to control a rocket's flight back to Earth, as SpaceX is now trying to do with its Falcon 9 booster, wastes fuel that could help deliver payloads to orbit.
That's how rocket engineers see the world," he said. "That's all energy you could have used to put a bigger payload in the same orbit, or the same payload further up."
Space Notebook: ULA says not yet on reusable rockets
This certainly contradicts Elon Musk's contention that since the actual cost of rocket fuel used represents such a very small percentage of the rocket's stage 1 boosters total cost that paying for the fuel is insignificant in the long run when compared to the overall cost to launch. Any bets on who will turn out to be right?
That's a pretty dumb quote from ULA. Fuel is not the expensive part, the rocket is, by far. Also, the rocket isn't coming down to earth at some screaming hypersonic speed. Air resistance slows it down to a manageable terminal velocity.
Who knew that a rocket scientist (or rather their freaking CEO) was so dumb?
Who knew that a rocket scientist (or rather their freaking CEO) was so dumb?
Well, it would intuitively seem that it's not rocket science, and that if you have a cheap stage, then as long as you can add more copies of that stage, you'd have more lift at low cost. But, maybe it's rocket science and it's more complicated than that.
(Aside: Brain Surgeon - That Mitchell Webb Look , Series 3 - BBC Two - YouTube )
Krugerrand
Meow
Johan
Ex got M3 in the divorce, waiting for EU Model Y!
@ULA engineer: Or you could just use the money you saved by not crashing the rocket to refuel it... Like 100 times!
It's amazing how Elon's companies achievements gets his competitors to say idiotic things like this. We still see it all the time with Tesla and there are now over 50K cars on the road. With a genius like Tony Bruno at the head of ULA I'm sure they will keep underestimating SpaceX until it is just too late.
Johan
Ex got M3 in the divorce, waiting for EU Model Y!
Politics aside (this talk by ULA CEO is all politics) I would honestly think that most of the best talent of the ULA firms (Boeing and Lockheed Martin) in the field of spacecraft design etc. have aldreay made plans or deals with SpaceX to come work there. I would go the there future is happening, not where history is.
Playing devils advocate a bit, I could see the quote interpreted other ways. We seem fixated on the fuel costs, but you could look at it like how much revenue you could get for being able to launch a larger satellite on the same sized rocket. Say the biggest rocket you can make is a certain size, but you want it reusable so you make it less able to carry cargo so that it can land itself. Then you are forced to launch less valuable cargo. There could be other factors, like going to a larger rocket starts limiting the launch sites that can handle it, etc. So, perhaps not as dumb as some are saying, but still there could be some "bury head in the sand" going on here.
Johan
Ex got M3 in the divorce, waiting for EU Model Y!
You have some very valid points. But the problem is you're looking at it at a certain point in time, where this might be true, but does really anyone not think Elon will succeed and then quickly be able to scale the tech to rocket/motor sizes where you comfortably can leave the earts gravitational field??? He talks about SpaceX as having the ultimate goal of going to Mars, you'd have to be able to leave the earths gravitational field for that right?
So unless you believe that it will never be possible to build a reusable rocket able to go as high as it wants, there's no merit to the initial argument.You have some very valid points. But the problem is you're looking at it at a certain point in time, where this might be true, but does really anyone not think Elon will succeed and then quickly be able to scale the tech to rocket/motor sizes where you comfortably can leave the earts gravitational field??? He talks about SpaceX as having the ultimate goal of going to Mars, you'd have to be able to leave the earths gravitational field for that right?
Well, Elon seems to think bigger and bolder and wants to go beyond the status quo, so it wouldn't surprise me to see someday SpaceX building the biggest rocket ever, capable of carrying the biggest needed cargo, and also have re-usability. If it turns out to need a bigger launch pad then currently available, then they might build that too. "Giga-pad" coming soon to a space port near you. In the short term, ULA might be right, but they might not embrace the bigger long term vision.
Similar threads
- Article
