Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

publiusr · 2005-12-21 15:04:21

Even Atlas V has some problems with its tank--according to recent tests. Not a problem to New Horizons.

SpaceNut · 2006-01-11 11:32:57

SpaceX trying for Feb. takeoff
The Falcon 1 and its payload -- a military satellite designed by cadets at the Air Force Academy -- are scheduled to take off Feb. 8 from an Omelek Island launch pad at the Army's Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site.
SpaceX is developing three rockets -- the Falcon 1, Falcon 5 and Falcon 9 -- that will compete with the Orbital Science Corp. Pegasus, the Boeing Delta 2, the Boeing Delta 4 and Lockheed Martin Atlas 5 rockets
The company is looking for a site at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station that could accommodate launches of all three of its rockets.

MikkelR · 2006-02-02 06:35:50

Six days till the third launch attempt. I really hope we get to see the Falcon I LV clear the pad this time..

As some might recall, Musk has previously stated that SpaceX will make the Merlin2 engine specifications public in the start of the year.. a succesfull launch will pretty much give him a great opportunity to do so.

My fingers remain crossed for a flawless launch.

PurduesUSAFguy · 2006-02-02 08:21:31

I seriously hope that the Falcon take off without a hitch this time, I want nothing more then to see Space-X actually compete in the comercial launch industry and force Boeing and Lockheed to actually act like companies in a market place. The United Launch Alliance is bad for the country and bad for the industry.

In a recent interveiw Musk said that the Merlin II would be the most powerful engine in production today, that makes me wonder what the next launcher after the Falcon 9 is, HLV class maybe? Or maybe they will just down load the engines on the Falcon 9 to one, an engine cluster of 9 makes me really nervous.

GCNRevenger · 2006-02-02 09:01:08

It better launch, for it being such a simplified vehicle and how long its been "almost ready."

I am not quite so anti-United-Launch, since frankly both Boeing and LockMart are in a pinch... they both designed rockets, factories, and launch pads for a market that doesn't exsist, so they have to do something.

By "HLV" Falcon-IX would be in the same ballpark as the Atlas-V 55X series. A large engine used one or two at a time would be ideal.

PurduesUSAFguy · 2006-02-02 09:10:18

It better launch, for it being such a simplified vehicle and how long its been "almost ready."
I am not quite so anti-United-Launch, since frankly both Boeing and LockMart are in a pinch... they both designed rockets, factories, and launch pads for a market that doesn't exsist, so they have to do something.
By "HLV" Falcon-IX would be in the same ballpark as the Atlas-V 55X series. A large engine used one or two at a time would be ideal.

It is unfortunate the bind the Boeing and Lockmart are in, but maybe they should try to lower the costs of the launchers to the point where they can actually attract the few comercial launches that there are.

Baring that I don't understand why the Atlas V is being chosen as ULAs launcher of choice, the Delta IV is built at a very modern and automated plant which, at least in theory, can be opperated much more inexpensivley then the Lockheed Plant. The Atlas does use a cheaper Russian engine, but because they had to foot the bill to have Rocketdyne spool up to produce it at a moments notice if the Russians faltered, it doesn't really offer the cost savings it seems to.

MikkelR · 2006-02-02 09:37:06

In a recent interveiw Musk said that the Merlin II would be the most powerful engine in production today, that makes me wonder what the next launcher after the Falcon 9 is, HLV class maybe? Or maybe they will just down load the engines on the Falcon 9 to one, an engine cluster of 9 makes me really nervous.

The development of Merlin 2 begs the question: what is SpaceX planning that requires such a powerful engine? In past talks Musk has hinted at the development of something called the “BFR” (where B stands for “big” and R for “rocket”), a heavy-lift vehicle far larger than the Falcon family of vehicles. At SpaceVision2005 Musk disclosed that the BFR, in its current iteration, would use “multiple” Merlin 2 engines. The BFR would be able to place 100 tons in low Earth orbit, putting it in competition with NASA’s planned shuttle-derived heavy-lift launcher. The BFR is so big, Musk said, that it’s too large for the BFTS at their Texas test site: even if they beefed up the stand, he said, the overpressure from the engine tests would break windows in a nearby town.

PurduesUSAFguy · 2006-02-02 09:40:18

In a recent interveiw Musk said that the Merlin II would be the most powerful engine in production today, that makes me wonder what the next launcher after the Falcon 9 is, HLV class maybe? Or maybe they will just down load the engines on the Falcon 9 to one, an engine cluster of 9 makes me really nervous.
The development of Merlin 2 begs the question: what is SpaceX planning that requires such a powerful engine? In past talks Musk has hinted at the development of something called the “BFR” (where B stands for “big” and R for “rocket”), a heavy-lift vehicle far larger than the Falcon family of vehicles. At SpaceVision2005 Musk disclosed that the BFR, in its current iteration, would use “multiple” Merlin 2 engines. The BFR would be able to place 100 tons in low Earth orbit, putting it in competition with NASA’s planned shuttle-derived heavy-lift launcher. The BFR is so big, Musk said, that it’s too large for the BFTS at their Texas test site: even if they beefed up the stand, he said, the overpressure from the engine tests would break windows in a nearby town.

Now wouldn't that be a headtrip if NASA had the option of buying and HLV on a true commercial basis! I wonder if you could use Falcon 5s as strap on boosters and up the payload on that thing to comperable with the currently planned NASA built HLV?

cIclops · 2006-02-02 10:13:18

Reserves all comment until February 9

GCNRevenger · 2006-02-02 10:20:27

In a recent interveiw Musk said that the Merlin II would be the most powerful engine in production today, that makes me wonder what the next launcher after the Falcon 9 is, HLV class maybe? Or maybe they will just down load the engines on the Falcon 9 to one, an engine cluster of 9 makes me really nervous.
The development of Merlin 2 begs the question: what is SpaceX planning that requires such a powerful engine? In past talks Musk has hinted at the development of something called the “BFR” (where B stands for “big” and R for “rocket”), a heavy-lift vehicle far larger than the Falcon family of vehicles. At SpaceVision2005 Musk disclosed that the BFR, in its current iteration, would use “multiple” Merlin 2 engines. The BFR would be able to place 100 tons in low Earth orbit, putting it in competition with NASA’s planned shuttle-derived heavy-lift launcher. The BFR is so big, Musk said, that it’s too large for the BFTS at their Texas test site: even if they beefed up the stand, he said, the overpressure from the engine tests would break windows in a nearby town.
Now wouldn't that be a headtrip if NASA had the option of buying and HLV on a true commercial basis! I wonder if you could use Falcon 5s as strap on boosters and up the payload on that thing to comperable with the currently planned NASA built HLV?

That would be an awfully big leap from the dinky Falcon-I to a Saturn-V class vehicle... maybe for Mars bases some day.

Rxke · 2006-02-02 11:20:57

My fingers remain crossed for a flawless launch.

I sprayed coffee all over my keyboard, monitor and papers when I read this. Because of your avatar. :oops: Never mind me...

GCNRevenger:

maybe for Mars bases some day.

That was Musk's 'vision' to start with. He wanted stuff launched to Mars a biological lab of sorts, but didn't find a cheap enough launcher, so he decided to build one himself... But it's a giant step for sure...

MikkelR · 2006-02-10 09:18:27

I sprayed coffee all over my keyboard, monitor and papers when I read this. Because of your avatar. :oops: Never mind me...

Hahahaha, i know exactly what youre talking about

Looks like tonight is a no show, SpaceX have delayed the launch two to four weeks... :cry:

publiusr · 2006-02-17 15:52:15

I wonder if it will ever launch.

MikkelR · 2006-02-18 05:18:53

I am pretty confident that the next attempt will be succesfull. Musk & co did complete a full countdown on the last attempt and fired the Merlin engine briefly, this concludes their first long time effort to go to T - zero and surely improves their chances of a flawless launch.

PurduesUSAFguy · 2006-02-18 20:38:56

I am pretty confident that the next attempt will be succesfull. Musk & co did complete a full countdown on the last attempt and fired the Merlin engine briefly, this concludes their first long time effort to go to T - zero and surely improves their chances of a flawless launch.

I hope your right! I'm pulling for Space X, especially now that this BLoMart launch merger is going through.

publiusr · 2006-02-24 16:54:52

BloMart. That's a good one! Best one I heard all day LOL!

clark · 2006-03-06 09:01:47

SpaceX and manned flight:

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewnews.html?id=1095

enjoy.

Rxke · 2006-03-07 02:19:04

Weird no-one has any ccomments on this?

I bet SpaceX had hoped they'd have launched FalconI before being forced to come into the open with these plans... *then* they'd be all over the popular press...

Gawd, I so hope F1 is successful.

Grypd · 2006-03-07 04:44:55

I always assumed that Musk and space X had plans for a manned vehicle.

Still what really interests me is the talk of the BFR which would need a new much larger engine.

Rxke · 2006-03-07 04:54:10

Yeah, years ago he let slip his rockets were man-rated by default. But never wanted to come back to that statement later...

Amazing what you can keep under wraps for so long these days...

clark · 2006-03-07 06:22:09

It will be launched on the Falcon 9.

If Falcon 1 goes according to plan, then new funding will allow spacex to develop the Merlin 2.

Bigelow needs a ride for his space station anyway, so not much surprise here.

PurduesUSAFguy · 2006-03-07 11:58:47

Okay, I know I'm getting way ahead of the game here but:

Space X is developing a manned crew and cargo taxi

Space X is developing a 100 ton class to orbit booster

Add those things together and I'm begining to see Musk making good on his initial goal for Mars...

Between SpaceX and Rocketplane LTD buying Kistler with the intentions of building the K-1 for Space Station service is it at all possible that by the time 2010 rolls around and the space shuttle happily goes the way of the dinosaurs we won't even need the CEV for station servicing?

clark · 2006-03-07 14:37:52

We won't have a station to service after 2016...

GCNRevenger · 2006-03-07 14:47:35

I think this is all a little bit premature...

"Space X is developing a 100 ton class to orbit booster"

...they haven't even flown a 1.00MT booster, and they are already talking 100MT?

This is the first I have heard about them buying Kistler though, have they really inked a deal?

Rxke · 2006-03-07 15:21:06

Rocketplane, not SpaceX bought Kistler. (I an alt.Space thread somewhere around here...)

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#176 2005-12-21 15:04:21

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#177 2006-01-11 11:32:57

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#178 2006-02-02 06:35:50

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#179 2006-02-02 08:21:31

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#180 2006-02-02 09:01:08

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#181 2006-02-02 09:10:18

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#182 2006-02-02 09:37:06

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#183 2006-02-02 09:40:18

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#184 2006-02-02 10:13:18

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#185 2006-02-02 10:20:27

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#186 2006-02-02 11:20:57

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#187 2006-02-10 09:18:27

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#188 2006-02-17 15:52:15

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#189 2006-02-18 05:18:53

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#190 2006-02-18 20:38:56

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#191 2006-02-24 16:54:52

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#192 2006-03-06 09:01:47

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#193 2006-03-07 02:19:04

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#194 2006-03-07 04:44:55

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#195 2006-03-07 04:54:10

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#196 2006-03-07 06:22:09

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#197 2006-03-07 11:58:47

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#198 2006-03-07 14:37:52

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#199 2006-03-07 14:47:35

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

#200 2006-03-07 15:21:06

Re: Falcon 1 & Falcon 9

Board footer