SpaceX is doing it again
Moderator: Moderators for English X Forum
Re: Europe is starting to freak out about the launch dominance of SpaceX
Literally no knowledge when it comes to rockets, like I allready mentioned plenty of times, but I would assume a big company like Airbus Defence and Space might have an easier time breaking into the market than smaller start ups.
Last edited by clakclak on Tue, 23. Mar 21, 13:47, edited 1 time in total.
"The problem with gender is that it prescribes how we should be rather than recognizing how we are. Imagine how much happier we would be, how much freer to be our true individual selves, if we didn't have the weight of gender expectations." - Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie
-
- Posts: 1404
- Joined: Sat, 1. Dec 18, 14:26
Re: Europe is starting to freak out about the launch dominance of SpaceX
Airbus, Alenia, Avio are the first ones coming to my mind possibly having the know how to attempt something like this. But they're just the "famous" ones, so I'm sure a miss a lot of valid companies.
And I wouldn't exclude some engineering division from automotive.
And I wouldn't exclude some engineering division from automotive.
Re: Europe is starting to freak out about the launch dominance of SpaceX
If you still count the UK as part of Europe then Richard Branson (Virgin Galactic) would be a future candidate.
Cheers Euclid
Cheers Euclid
"In any special doctrine of nature there can be only as much proper science as there is mathematics therein.”
- Immanuel Kant (1724-1804), Metaphysical Foundations of the Science of Nature, 4:470, 1786
- Immanuel Kant (1724-1804), Metaphysical Foundations of the Science of Nature, 4:470, 1786
Re: Europe is starting to freak out about the launch dominance of SpaceX
Arianespace is already there and has an excellent reputation as far as launch vehicles go, so it's really up to them to lead this competition.
- red assassin
- Posts: 4613
- Joined: Sun, 15. Feb 04, 15:11
Re: Europe is starting to freak out about the launch dominance of SpaceX
SpaceX now has years of lead-time in the development of reusable rockets. Existing established players now have a lot of catching up to do after decades of relative stagnation in the launch industry, while other startups are a long way behind SpaceX's position. Established players have some reputation and reliability positives, but as Boeing has demonstrated, being a long-established, respected company doesn't necessarily mean freedom from stupid errors. And SpaceX's launch cadence means their lifetime reliability stats are rapidly ticking upwards. There's some space (ahem) in the market for, say, small satellite launchers like Rocket Lab's Electron, and big enough government agencies and companies obviously have an interest in preserving some competition in the launch market and/or indigenous capability even if that means paying for more expensive rockets sometimes. But that aside... why would you not fly with SpaceX at this point? And more to the point, how long is it going to take to get to the point that there is realistic competition again? I'm not convinced the legacy launch industry is capable of catching up at all at this point, and it's difficult to see many startups making it until one comes along that figures out how to significantly one-up SpaceX like they have the existing industry.
A still more glorious dawn awaits, not a sunrise, but a galaxy rise, a morning filled with 400 billion suns - the rising of the Milky Way
-
- Posts: 4350
- Joined: Wed, 10. Mar 04, 05:11
Re: Europe is starting to freak out about the launch dominance of SpaceX
The thing with Boeing is after its original scions died out and with the management took over after a merge (long story about that), the company basically made a culture shift that changed how the company operate, and it still took decades for Airbus to catch up while being heavily subsidized. I think SpaceX will remain far above the rest for a long time, in part of what you had already said, and in part because for all the flaws he has as a human, Elon is a visionist. He reminds me a lot of how the old Boeing family used to be, as long as he's at the helm I don't think SpaceX will stray very far from what their core purpose is. And the guy is still relatively young with many years ahead of him.red assassin wrote: ↑Tue, 23. Mar 21, 21:15Established players have some reputation and reliability positives, but as Boeing has demonstrated, being a long-established, respected company doesn't necessarily mean freedom from stupid errors.
Reading comprehension is hard.
Reading with prejudice makes comprehension harder.
Reading with prejudice makes comprehension harder.
Re: SpaceX is doing it again
For playing Kerbal Space Program with real rockets?RegisterMe wrote: ↑Thu, 4. Mar 21, 00:53SpaceX is the living embodiment of try, fail, learn, try again, repeat.
They deserve a lot of respect for that.
Re: Europe is starting to freak out about the launch dominance of SpaceX
I would say that there is competition. But in the small satellite launch market. There are so many companies around the world that I do not have time to follow their new products. Everyone has good ideas.
I think it would be a good advantage to reduce environmental damage at the next launch. (Airplanes have more emissions, but new fuel could come from the space sphere)
I think it would be a good advantage to reduce environmental damage at the next launch. (Airplanes have more emissions, but new fuel could come from the space sphere)
Re: Europe is starting to freak out about the launch dominance of SpaceX
As someone actually working in the Space Industry, all I can say is: it's good that SpaceX exists, they actually do something to get everything forward.
... what is a drop of rain, compared to the storm? ... what is a thought, compared to the mind? ... our unity is full of wonder which your tiny individualism cannot even conceive ... I've heard it all before ... you're saying nothing new ... I thought I saw a rainbow ... but I guess it wasn't true ... you cannot make me listen ... I cannot make you hear ... you find your way to heaven ... I'll meet you when you're there ...
Re: Europe is starting to freak out about the launch dominance of SpaceX
If you burn pure hydrogen with Oxygen, there is little to none enviromental dammage. Planes or Cars produce much more pollution than rockets.
Re: Europe is starting to freak out about the launch dominance of SpaceX
Surprisingly few rockets use hydrox in their first stages. SpaceX engines use RP-1 (slightly modified kerosene aka paraffin) and oxygen, for example, as did the Saturn V. Space shuttle main engines used hydrox, but the solid rocket boosters obviously did not. The only rocket I can think of offhand that definitely has a pure hydrogen/oxygen first stage is the Ariane 5.
Re: Europe is starting to freak out about the launch dominance of SpaceX
Interesting - then it means we actually have a development potential to make rockets more-ECOpjknibbs wrote: ↑Thu, 25. Mar 21, 12:11Surprisingly few rockets use hydrox in their first stages. SpaceX engines use RP-1 (slightly modified kerosene aka paraffin) and oxygen, for example, as did the Saturn V. Space shuttle main engines used hydrox, but the solid rocket boosters obviously did not. The only rocket I can think of offhand that definitely has a pure hydrogen/oxygen first stage is the Ariane 5.
Especially if Elon want's to launch 1'000 Starships to colonize Mars.
I read somewhere that hydrox is the most efficient weight-thrust ratio, but logistic, maitenance and safety is more complex than kerosene (which makes kerosene cheaper and better for inital stages - aparently you don't want hydrox to blow up in your launch pad).
Re: Europe is starting to freak out about the launch dominance of SpaceX
The biggest problem with liquid hydrogen is its density, or lack thereof. You need enormous fuel tanks for the stuff. Even though RP-1 is somewhat less efficient you can use a much smaller tank for it, which makes the rocket smaller and lighter and means you need less fuel to get into space.
Re: Europe is starting to freak out about the launch dominance of SpaceX
Nuclear engines may be the most environmentally friendly. Fuel takes up little space. There are no emissions.
What about a plasma thruster?
What about a plasma thruster?
Re: SpaceX is doing it again
I think he has the conditions for that. Perhaps he will allow his children to do this, but only with proper preparation and upon reaching the age of 21.mr.WHO wrote: ↑Tue, 23. Mar 21, 13:03I recall his said he won't be moving to Mars even if he could, but he will allow his kids if they will want to (which I doubt - as a child of billionare I wouldn't want to go to cold desert wasteland of Mars).Redvers Ganderpoke wrote: ↑Sat, 6. Mar 21, 13:00I'm still waiting for Elon to go to Mars. I can think of a few other people who could accompany him.
-
- Posts: 477
- Joined: Wed, 16. Dec 20, 21:26
Re: Europe is starting to freak out about the launch dominance of SpaceX
Nope. Nuclear thermal propulsion has a high specific impulse ISP (roughly double that of the best chemical rockets driven by hydrogen/oxygen) but a low thrust, too low to get off the pad. They must be launched by chemical rockets and would then propel a spacecraft on its transfer to Mars. There is no environmental gain unfortunately for the atmospheric part.
When something goes wrong at launch with an NTR motor on bord and the reactor breaks open on impact that'll be more or less bad, depending on how the nuclear fuel is stored and who finds it first and does what with it. For a taste of a bad case search Kosmos 954, though there are techniques to avoid such a scenario. Nasa has studies for the risks involved with a launch of the probes that have radioisotopic generators on bord. It is not super bad, but not exactly in the comfort zone either.
Plasma thrusters, like the ion thrusters belong to the family of electric propulsion, have a too low thrust for a manned spacecraft. They are among the most effective propulsion methods (2-40 times the ISP even of an NTR) that exist with current tech, and used for spacecarft who have years to decades time, use multiple gravity assists, etc. They need, though a lot of electric energy, making them almost useless beyond Jupiter if driven by solar panels.
For the significance of the ISP let me point to Tsiolkovski's rocket equation.
Code: Select all
/l、
゙(゚、 。 7
l、゙ ~ヽ /
じしf_, )ノ
SpaceX rocket debris creates a fantastic light show in the Pacific Northwest sky
SpaceX rocket debris creates a fantastic light show in the Pacific Northwest sky
https://www.theverge.com/2021/3/26/2235 ... ket-debris
Is the space debris problem becoming more and more urgent?
Many devices are already being created to combat space debris in orbit.
What are we going to do with such things as described in this article?
https://www.theverge.com/2021/3/26/2235 ... ket-debris
Is the space debris problem becoming more and more urgent?
Many devices are already being created to combat space debris in orbit.
What are we going to do with such things as described in this article?
Re: SpaceX is doing it again
I've merged several SpaceX threads together. I know there are plenty of space enthusiasts here, for obvious reasons, but we don't need a new thread every time they do something.
-
- Posts: 477
- Joined: Wed, 16. Dec 20, 21:26
Re: SpaceX rocket debris creates a fantastic light show in the Pacific Northwest sky
If I understand that correctly those were the remains of the second stage of a Falcon 9. When it has delivered its payload, it deliberately de-orbits to get out of the way. I think that's 'best practice' these days (but better check that if you want to be sure, not everybody may stick to it).
But generally, yes, it is becoming more and more of a problem, ISS performing evasive maneouvers, etc. I Think ESA and JAXA have some proposals, but overall it seems to me as if noone really takes it serious. There are catalogues of the bigger parts that float around in earth orbit, but smaller mm things go 'through'. There were already collisions, also multiple examples of damage so satellites as well as spacecraft returning from orbit, done by sub-mm parts, and even unexplained failures may have their cause already in debris hits.
The problem is known by the name 'Kessler syndrome'. When it starts it might kick loose a cascade in low earth orbit.
Code: Select all
/l、
゙(゚、 。 7
l、゙ ~ヽ /
じしf_, )ノ
Re: SpaceX rocket debris creates a fantastic light show in the Pacific Northwest sky
Japanese experts have proposed creating wooden satellites to solve this problem. They can greatly reduce the design of satellites. (But it sounds very strange somehow. Wooden structures in the harsh conditions of space.)BaronVerde wrote: ↑Sat, 27. Mar 21, 20:33If I understand that correctly those were the remains of the second stage of a Falcon 9. When it has delivered its payload, it deliberately de-orbits to get out of the way. I think that's 'best practice' these days (but better check that if you want to be sure, not everybody may stick to it).
But generally, yes, it is becoming more and more of a problem, ISS performing evasive maneouvers, etc. I Think ESA and JAXA have some proposals, but overall it seems to me as if noone really takes it serious. There are catalogues of the bigger parts that float around in earth orbit, but smaller mm things go 'through'. There were already collisions, also multiple examples of damage so satellites as well as spacecraft returning from orbit, done by sub-mm parts, and even unexplained failures may have their cause already in debris hits.
The problem is known by the name 'Kessler syndrome'. When it starts it might kick loose a cascade in low earth orbit.
I like the offer of skyrora.com. Their space tug has already been tested. The company recently received additional funding from ESA, which will allow them to speed up the development process. Perhaps this will be an effective solution to some of the problems in orbit.