SpaceX- all our eggs in one basket?

[mindlight]

The Dragon will be because it'll be first to the party and, as far as I know, has already received some funding from the U.S. government and/or its constituent agencies for its development as a means of less reliance on the Russian Soyuz.

Now that Falcon Heavy has had a successful debut, next stop will be continuing development of crewed Dragon.

They already have a contract with NASA and development funds for the Dragon2 for 6 crewed flights to the IIS

Dragon 2 - Wikipedia

If this capsule works then why not for Mars and Moon also.

Even if Blue Origin serve different purposes, it's still all positive progress in the right direction but I believe they're developing systems to go beyond the scope of simply tourism.

The leasing of pad 39a at Cape Canaveral (20 year lease) to SpaceX seems to have been a victory over Blue Origin regarding the crewed capsule. So Blue Origin will probably need to prove themselves as a private space transport company to get back in the game. I do not know how certification works in those circumstances. Do NASA approve company certificates for safety etc or is that some legal body

Blue Origin - Wikipedia

 

[High Fidelity]

If this capsule works then why not for Mars and Moon also.

It could be for several reasons, most obvious that docking it to the ISS and landing it on a foreign body are two different kettles of fish.

I'm sure they'll test it soon enough, but the wealth of experience lies with docking and that's a more achievable goal and pressing need.

 

[mindlight]

It could be for several reasons, most obvious that docking it to the ISS and landing it on a foreign body are two different kettles of fish.

I'm sure they'll test it soon enough, but the wealth of experience lies with docking and that's a more achievable goal and pressing need.

Of course you are right. Docking with the ISS is the next logical step. Also this has to be foolproof, safe indeed boring in its routine reliability.

Would this even need a falcon heavy though. Surely a Falcon9 could carry a Dragon2 to the low orbit ISS is in?

 

[mozo41]

Which is obviously a dishonest appraisal...do you want to be taken seriously or just reported? If the former then explain yourself if the latter I will handle it for you.

SpaceX and Tesla are both frauds and Elon Musk nothing more than a con man fronting a ponzi scheme ...

 

[High Fidelity]

SpaceX and Tesla are both frauds and Elon Musk nothing more than a con man fronting a ponzi scheme ...

Obvious troll is obvious.

 

[High Fidelity]

Of course you are right. Docking with the ISS is the next logical step. Also this has to be foolproof, safe indeed boring in its routine reliability.

Would this even need a falcon heavy though. Surely a Falcon9 could carry a Dragon2 to the low orbit ISS is in?

I doubt they'll entirely phase out Falcon 9. I haven't read anything to suggest that. Falcon Heavy is for heavier payloads to either LEO/GTO/Mars or multiple individual customer satellites or, for example, large numbers of satellites, to be delivered in one trip.

 

[mindlight]

SpaceX and Tesla are both frauds and Elon Musk nothing more than a con man fronting a ponzi scheme ...

SpaceX was probably profitable in 2017 with more than 16 successful launches and the perfection of reusability of launchers. With the success of the Falcon Heavy launch that profitability is likely to rise in 2018. Also since they get grants from NASA for Dragon2 and Falcon9 development for instance it is unlikely their bottom line is that unhealthy. Their prospects are great!!!

Tesla is a different story and has never made a profit. But it represents a future industry that will ultimately be where the profits are. The tariffs on foreign solar panels will help solar city this year.

A great many big startups like Facebook and Amazon for instance were slow coming to their first profits. Does that make them Ponzi schemes?

 

[mindlight]

I doubt they'll entirely phase out Falcon 9. I haven't read anything to suggest that. Falcon Heavy is for heavier payloads to either LEO/GTO/Mars or multiple individual customer satellites or, for example, large numbers of satellites, to be delivered in one trip.

I like the modular approach they take to the technology. A Falcon heavy is effectively 2 falcon9s and a strengthened core bound together. the dragon capsule can be latched on to whichever system combination is chosen. This gives them a lot of options for all levels of orbit and most weights of cargo now. If they can get that strengthened core to reliably land on the drone ship then they have a fully reusable and tested platform for different kinds of crewed and cargo trips. This is all quite exciting actually.

 

[mozo41]

SpaceX was probably profitable in 2017 with more than 16 successful launches and the perfection of reusability of launchers. With the success of the Falcon Heavy launch that profitability is likely to rise in 2018. Also since they get grants from NASA for Dragon2 and Falcon9 development for instance it is unlikely their bottom line is that unhealthy. Their prospects are great!!!

Tesla is a different story and has never made a profit. But it represents a future industry that will ultimately be where the profits are. The tariffs on foreign solar panels will help solar city this year.

A great many big startups like Facebook and Amazon for instance were slow coming to their first profits. Does that make them Ponzi schemes?

Spacex is nothing more than an elaborate hoax to steel money
( 4.9 billion) from the taxpayer .... it is all fake just like NASA with its fake moon landings and ISS ....

Tesla has lost millions in all of its nine years and only exists because it is propped up by new investors, which like it not is a Ponzi scheme ....

 

[High Fidelity]

Spacex is nothing more than an elaborate hoax to steel money
( 4.9 billion) from the taxpayer .... it is all fake just like NASA with its fake moon landings and ISS ....

Tesla has lost millions in all of its nine years and only exists because it is propped up by new investors, which like it not is a Ponzi scheme ....

This isn't the conspiracy forum. Please keep that nonsense out of here.

 

[rambot]

Alright, not all endeavors. Is it just ventures into space that should be shut down until all of humanity’s problems are solved or must other thing be stopped as well?

Oh theres just so many i cant decide.

 

[Desk trauma]

Oh theres just so many i cant decide.

Top five perhaps?

 

[rambot]

Top five perhaps?

Get food and clean water to Everyone and then have at er

 

[Desk trauma]

Get food and clean water to Everyone and then have at er

I was asking about endeavors that need to be halted until all of humanity’s problems are solved.

 

[MyOwnSockPuppet]

I don't think all of our eggs are that much in the same basket, admittedly SpaceX is quite a big chunk of the omlette but there are numerous others in development. My personal favourite of the innovative new vehicles is Skylon (which has a proposed first flight date of 2025) - HOTOL and (if their calculations are OK) able to put about as much as a Falcon 9 into GTO every couple of days for a year and a bit.

 

[Gene2memE]

1) What happens if he dies? Who would replace him as CEO of SpaceX
2) What happens if his companies go bust?
3) What happens if the stress and expectations loaded upon the man break him and he goes nuts.

There are - at a quick count - 20 major and minor space launch vehicles currently in development worldwide and at least 12 major active, in service space launch vehicle platforms.

Space X/Falcon Heavy just happens to be the biggest and most high profile of these - 63.8 tonnes to LEO, and 26.7 to geosynchronous transfer orbit. There are projects that are close to it in scale and ambition

Vulcan: 34 tonnes to LEO, 22.7 to geosynchronous transfer orbit;
Blue Origin: 45 tonnes to LEO, 13 tonnes to geosynchronous transfer orbit;
Long March: 25 tonnes to LEO, 13 tonnes to geosynchronous transfer orbit;
Ariane 6: 20 tonnes to LEO, 12 tonnes to geosynchronous transfer orbit;
Rus-M: 23.8 tonnes to LEO, 7 tonnes to geosync;
H3: 16 tonnes to LEO, 6.5 tonnes to geosync;
Unified Launch Vehicle: 15 tonnes to LEO, 6 tonnes to geosync

If Elon Musk dies and his company goes into bankruptcy, you end up with a slightly less efficient, slightly lower payload, slightly less ambitious future series of space launch vehicles.

 

[mindlight]

I don't think all of our eggs are that much in the same basket, admittedly SpaceX is quite a big chunk of the omlette but there are numerous others in development. My personal favourite of the innovative new vehicles is Skylon (which has a proposed first flight date of 2025) - HOTOL and (if their calculations are OK) able to put about as much as a Falcon 9 into GTO every couple of days for a year and a bit.

We have never really had an issue for near earth satellite services. The issue is manned missions beyond GTO.

Who else apart from Musk is planning to spend 10bn on a BFR type rocket

 

[mindlight]

There are - at a quick count - 20 major and minor space launch vehicles currently in development worldwide and at least 12 major active, in service space launch vehicle platforms.

Space X/Falcon Heavy just happens to be the biggest and most high profile of these - 63.8 tonnes to LEO, and 26.7 to geosynchronous transfer orbit. There are projects that are close to it in scale and ambition

Vulcan: 34 tonnes to LEO, 22.7 to geosynchronous transfer orbit;
Blue Origin: 45 tonnes to LEO, 13 tonnes to geosynchronous transfer orbit;
Long March: 25 tonnes to LEO, 13 tonnes to geosynchronous transfer orbit;
Ariane 6: 20 tonnes to LEO, 12 tonnes to geosynchronous transfer orbit;
Rus-M: 23.8 tonnes to LEO, 7 tonnes to geosync;
H3: 16 tonnes to LEO, 6.5 tonnes to geosync;
Unified Launch Vehicle: 15 tonnes to LEO, 6 tonnes to geosync

If Elon Musk dies and his company goes into bankruptcy, you end up with a slightly less efficient, slightly lower payload, slightly less ambitious future series of space launch vehicles.

We need lift capability greater than a Saturn V for Mars. None of the rockets on your list have that capability. Only Musk is developing a BFR. Without SpaceX it seems Mars does not happen for decades

 

[MyOwnSockPuppet]

We have never really had an issue for near earth satellite services. The issue is manned missions beyond GTO

Building any interplanetary ship in orbit would seem to be the obvious way to do it from my limited point of view, especially if you can reduce the cost to orbit by a couple of orders of magnitude.

 

[mindlight]

Building any interplanetary ship in orbit would seem to be the obvious way to do it from my limited point of view, especially if you can reduce the cost to orbit by a couple of orders of magnitude.

Musks answer when asked this question implied that some kind of cycler ship was a possibility. But that SpaceX had ruled it out in terms of costs. With reusable technologies and refuelling on mars the extra infrastruture worked out more costly