Comments

Um...great. Can anyone explain why Musks rockets are so inexpensive? What about the technology allows him to offer flights so cheaply? Is what he's charging related to actual costs?

Ralphie, those are great questions. From what I've seen and heard from Musk and SpaceX, it comes down to several key factors: 1) simple design -- incremental improvements on proven technology, such as using a single hypogolic engine -- the Merlin 1-C -- for all stages and in clusters for the larger Falcon 9 and state of the art materials 2) anticipated savings through partially reusable first stages 3) relatively very low overhead to build a lot of rockets. 470 employees is not very many--the big prime space contractors carry 10s of thousands of employees. 4) Most processes brought in house and not subcontracted out. For example, I've seen them building their own machine tools (such as a giant stir friction welder) 5) efficiencies in production using IT and other technology well to go from design to fabrication 6) Finally, volume. 14 launches with paying customers will make the numbers work--if the launches are successful. After all the price of those launches are still not trivial--up to $100 million for the Falcon 9H to LEO. So far his stated development costs--well over $100 million--laid against the construction of a handful of rockets ready to launch would bear out those numbers. Remember, he's setting out at first to halve the cost of launches and of getting a pound of hardware or crew to LEO or GTO. It's a reasonable goal and Musk is making a concerted effort. --GL

Geoff, The Merlin is not Hypergolic (oxidiser and fuel combust spontaneously when mixed). It runs on kerosene and liquid oxygen. It is also not used on the F1 upper stage. That stage uses the Kestral, a pressure fed Kerosene-LOX engine.

Tom, thanks for the corrections. I posted in haste and should have fact checked my comment.

Historically, most rockets designs attempted to optimize performance, not cost. SpaceX is focused on cost. From what I've seen, the key to their cost-sensitive approach is simplicity and automation. As Geoffrey pointed out, 470 employees is a very low number for what they are doing. You will never get to space cheaply if you need an army of thousands to build, test and launch your spacecraft.

Geofrries post pretty much sums up spacex. First, they have minimal RD costs because NASA and industry has actually done that work. In addition, rather than try to do it all, they are doing 1 thing, VERY WELL. By repeating it over and over, they make it extermely profitable. But according to Musk, they have automated just about everything. The shuttle, Constellation, etc had just about everything being manual. As such, just to launch a vehicle requires 2000+ of ppl. OTH, spaceX will requires less than 100 for a man launch. Even the recycling of the falcons is high compared to what anything in the industry does. No doubt about it. Musk will change the space industry once he succeeds. In particular, the dragon will change things. It will allow 6-7 ppl into space at a fraction of the price what we currently pay. What will be interesting is if Musk will pursue the BFR (either Big Falcon Rocket or Big F*&^ing Rocket; take your pick :) ). It is designed to take on Ares V. If Obama really slows Ares V down, I think that he will build it. It will almost certainly cost a fraction of the ares V and will gaurentee that private enterprise dominates the moon, not the feds. I would be surprised if the private enterprise industry does not pull together in the next 4 years. In particular, SpaceX, Bigelow, and (blue origin|armadillo) will most likely shoot for the moon in about 6-7 years. Bigelow has some major work to do on their infrastructure. In particular, they are showing major issues with their management. If they solve that, then they will easily occupy leo space, transportation to/from the moon, and obviously the moon habitat. What is left is getting down and up from the moon surface. Blue origin & armadillo are both working on rockets that are designed for up/down (dark horse approach). If it works, then these companies will own the moon within 10 years.

I wish them the best of luck. From what I've seen of SpaceX it will be a success.

Post a Comment


Name: (required)

Email: (required)

Comment: