For F9 and FH, it is too far away. Landings will happen in the middle of the Gulf. Who knows with BFR. I expect it is still too far away for the booster. The BFS spaceship could do it, no problem, with a boost from the booster.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
For F9 and FH, it is too far away. Landings will happen in the middle of the Gulf. Who knows with BFR. I expect it is still too far away for the booster. The BFS spaceship could do it, no problem, with a boost from the booster.
Since BFS could reach orbit without booster (and cargo), it could reach Florida also. But would SpaceX get landing permissions? Usually rockets aim to equator 10 000 km east from launch site. Cuba is in better position than Florida.
With spaceflight101.com numbers F9 1. stage is 79 % of total.
With Wikipedia numbers BFR 1. stage is 70 % of total.
BFR 1. stage will not fly longer than F9 1. stage.
No updates recently? I was curious if any of the more dedicated SpaceX watchers had a recent timeline update.
I was in South Texas last week. I can personally report that as of Tuesday the 8th of May, 2018, the Boca Chica launch site is still a pile of dirt. The two radar dishes which Grendal mentioned earlier are down the road a mile or two.
I don't think we're going to see any launches from Boca Chica this year.
Also a bit curious about logistics. I'd been picturing in my head that when BFR happens Tesla might build the rockets in Texas and launch from Boca Chica to avoid any major long distance shipping challenges with the boosters. Now I'm not so sure. As of right now this site is at the end of a narrow two lane blacktop country road. There's going to need to be a lot of other infrastructure construction besides the pad itself before this site is usable.
I was in South Texas last week. I can personally report that as of Tuesday the 8th of May, 2018, the Boca Chica launch site is still a pile of dirt. The two radar dishes which Grendal mentioned earlier are down the road a mile or two.
I don't think we're going to see any launches from Boca Chica this year.
Also a bit curious about logistics. I'd been picturing in my head that when BFR happens Tesla might build the rockets in Texas and launch from Boca Chica to avoid any major long distance shipping challenges with the boosters. Now I'm not so sure. As of right now this site is at the end of a narrow two lane blacktop country road. There's going to need to be a lot of other infrastructure construction besides the pad itself before this site is usable.
Thanks. Yeah, I'd forgotten about the new property at Port of LA.
[edit] One other thought - right now with F9 they build in Hawthorne (CA), test fire in McGregor (TX), and launch from Vandenberg (CA) or Cape Canaveral (FL). Will BFR just be test fired at the launch pad? Or a new test stand nearby?
I think SpaceX is also sizing the BFR to be able to launch from Cape Canaveral (reduced dimensions/thrust a bit to fall within limits of the Pad-39 facilities). They may test subsystems at McGregor but they can't get the whole thing there. So Boca Chica may include test facilities as well as launch facilities eventually.
Mongo is correct. I expect that all the larger pieces of the body will be built at the Port of LA facility and the rocket will be assembled there as well. I expect smaller pieces will be built in the main Hawthorne factory such as the Raptor engines. The integrated rocket will be barged to the launch site.
I just had the thought that the Raptor engines will still need to be tested. So that will be very different from the current process. SpaceX will need to send the engines to the McGregor facility for testing. Then they will send them back to the Port of LA facility for integration. In the current process the rocket travels to McGregor, gets tested, then moves on to where it will be launched. With BFR/BFS, the integrated testing will happen at the static fire.
All we know for certain is that the testing of BFS will happen at the Boca Chica site. It's likely that BFR will launch from there but the current contract limits SpaceX to 12 launches per year from the site. SpaceX wants to do a lot more than 12 launches a year with BFR.
I just had the thought that the Raptor engines will still need to be tested. So that will be very different from the current process. SpaceX will need to send the engines to the McGregor facility for testing. Then they will send them back to the Port of LA facility for integration. In the current process the rocket travels to McGregor, gets tested, then moves on to where it will be launched. With BFR/BFS, the integrated testing will happen at the static fire.
All we know for certain is that the testing of BFS will happen at the Boca Chica site. It's likely that BFR will launch from there but the current contract limits SpaceX to 12 launches per year from the site. SpaceX wants to do a lot more than 12 launches a year with BFR.
Perhaps the engines get integrated in Boca Chica? It will need to have the facilities to change the engine, so they could be build in CA, dry fit at the port, tested in McGregor, and shipped to Boca Chica. Only talking 6 engines to mount
.What I am wondering is if they use all sea level engines for Earth hops.
Perhaps the engines get integrated in Boca Chica? It will need to have the facilities to change the engine, so they could be build in CA, dry fit at the port, tested in McGregor, and shipped to Boca Chica. Only talking 6 engines to mount
What I am wondering is if they use all sea level engines for Earth hops.
I had that same thought, then dismissed it for simplicity. SpaceX wouldn't want to double up on their facilities. Integrating at Boca would add extra manufacturing duties. SpaceX will want these rockets to arrive at their launch sites as ready to go as possible. The launch sites will be all over the place. It's best to set up the system you intend to use long term immediately.
Another good thought on the sea level engines but SpaceX would want to test an integrated system.
But I could see it happening in this case. They wouldn't want to use them but they'd need the engines in place for weight and balance purposes. Merlins are supposed to be about the same size. Maybe put in some old Merlins as dummy engines. SpaceX has a bunch of those lying around. So maybe.
Though my bet would be that SpaceX builds a full blown BFS including all the official hardware.
Yeah, per-integration and shrink wrap makes the most sense. Plus, the engine should never need swapped out. That lends itself to using 4 Vac and 2 SL.
And, by applying a small effort, I found the thing I was remembering wrong:
From the Reddit AMA:
Yes. The only alternative would be a westward trip around the world. Not cost effective.
Could go around the south side of South America...
What will be cool (down the road) is the combo transport and launch barge... go 20 miles off shore and take off.
I think BFR Raptor engine will be tested at McGregor and then integrated in LA as @Grendal described. Then ship BFR to Boca for static fire, “hop”testing, and ultimately launching. I don’t see how a BFR could be brought to McGregor for static firing and hop testing. Too big to be moved very far on public highways I would think. And since construction of the Boca Chica launch pad hasn’t started, beyond a big mound of dirt, I don’t understand how they will start doing BFR hop test flights in 2019 which is the date Elon and Gwynne gave early this year.
For sure. But my guess is we are a decade away from exceeding that BFR annual launch number.
Rewatched the old Falcon test flights. Need a concrete pad, water tower, storage tanks and such. Most of that is outsourced parts that get integrated onsite.
Initial cadence will be slow due to post flight tear down/ inspection. However, after that I can see fast turn around, esp with the number of launches needed for Starlink. (unless that is a large part of the 300 F9 launches)
Looking at how the number of F9 launches have increased over the past four years and Elon's motivation to fund future Mars missions,
I can't imagine ten years before BFR is flying far more than a dozen times per year.
Maybe. But BFR isn’t just a bigger Falcon rocket with more engines; it includes the largest crew compartment space ever contstructed in any spacecraft, and to make that project even more difficult, it is the first ever crewed ship designed to go to Mars and return.
Neither SpaceX nor any other organization on Earth has ever attempted to build a vehicle like that. SpaceX does not have essentially unlimited resources like Blue Origin does. It’s going to be incredibly difficult, and there are going to be numerous unforeseen problems and delays.
So while I believe it likely that SpaceX will get a BFR with a few people on it to LEO and return it safely to Earth by 2022, I do not believe it likely at all that by 2028 BFRs will be launching “far more than a dozen times a year”. If there are two BFR launches a year by then I will consider that a real success!
Of course I could be wrong about what will happen in the future.
Maybe. But BFR isn’t just a bigger Falcon rocket with more engines; it includes the largest crew compartment space ever contstructed in any spacecraft, and to make that project even more difficult, it is the first ever crewed ship designed to go to Mars and return.
Neither SpaceX nor any other organization on Earth has ever attempted to build a vehicle like that. SpaceX does not have essentially unlimited resources like Blue Origin does. It’s going to be incredibly difficult, and there are going to be numerous unforeseen problems and delays.
So while I believe it likely that SpaceX will get a BFR with a few people on it to LEO and return it safely to Earth by 2022, I do not believe it likely at all that by 2028 BFRs will be launching “far more than a dozen times a year”. If there are two BFR launches a year by then I will consider that a real success!
Of course I could be wrong about what will happen in the future.
If BFR hits the fully reusable benchmark, there is no advantage to using the F9 instead. If they get the turn around time low like F9, two BFR could do 24 mission a year.
Similar threads
