SpaceX Falcon 9

[Александр Ч.]

Думаете зря говорят: Не имей сто рублей, а имей сто друзей ;-)
Но давайте обсуждать лучше РКН.

PS Сам грешен флудом, но надо же сдерживаться. :-)

[Valerij]

Commentary
The Difference Between Boeing And SpaceX[/size]

by michael belfiore

At a Southern California YPO meeting in February, I moderated a discussion between Virgin Galactic's Will Pomerantz and Boeing's John Schindler.

As Director of Program Integration for Boeing's Commercial Crew Program, Schindler is one of the managers in charge of Boeing's spaceship-in-development, the CST-100.
 .....
This is in contrast to the Boeing competitor that is farthest along in its development, SpaceX. SpaceX is operating on its own set of requirements, for which the NASA requirement for Space Station access is just a subset. SpaceX wants to get all the way to Mars. Boeing is focused on the one mission, and says Schindler, drawing on Boeing's 50-year heritage in space to get there.
 .....
What this boils down to is that Boeing, the big, established aerospace company with a lot to lose and shareholders to keep happy, isn't going to lead in the way in creating America's first commercial orbital spaceships. That's left to younger, hungrier companies like SpaceX—whose CEO, Elon Musk, is prepared to take the big financial risks required to really move the ball in the field of commercial space flight.

http://moonandback.com/2012/03/06/the-difference-between-boeing-and-spacex/

[instml]

http://www.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=904986#904986

[Salo]

http://www.spacenews.com/satellite_telecom/120313-abs-satmex-banding-together-buy-boeing-all-electric-satellites.html

Tue, 13 March, 2012
ABS, Satmex Banding Together To Buy 4 Boeing All-electric Satellites[/size]
By Peter B. de Selding

    WASHINGTON — Regional satellite operators Asia Broadcast Satellite (ABS) of Bermuda and Hong Kong and Satmex of Mexico are joining forces to purchase four Boeing-built telecommunications satellites using a revolutionary design in a $400 million partnership, industry officials said March 12.

    The four satellites will be launched two at a time aboard Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) Falcon 9 rockets, industry officials said.

    The agreement could catapult ABS — a company that just five years ago had no more than a few million dollars in annual revenue — into a position as a global satellite operator with strongholds in South America in addition to Asia.

    It could also help solidify Satmex, a company that exited Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings in mid-2011 with a $325 million loan, in its home region.

    Aside from the union of two regional satellite operators, apparently backed by the financial muscle of private-equity investor Permira Advisers LLC, the deal is remarkable for the technology it plans to employ.

    Industry officials said ABS and Satmex have agreed to purchase together four satellites from Boeing Space and Intelligence Systems that use electric propulsion not only to maintain the satellites' stably in orbit once at their designated orbital slots, but also for propelling the satellites into geostationary position from their transfer orbit.

    Industry officials have said for years that all-electric satellites could mean reducing a satellite's weight by 2,000 kilograms or more. This would allow owners to select a much smaller, and less expensive, rocket, or alternatively to equip the satellite with more revenue-generating transponders.

    The drawback is that unlike conventional chemical propulsion, electric power will mean waiting up to six months from the time the satellite is released into transfer orbit by its carrier rocket, and the time it arrives in geostationary orbit.

    Several major satellite operators, notably SES of Luxembourg, in recent months have said they are likely to order an all-electric satellite within the next year or two.

    Such technology has been used on occasion when a satellite's main propulsion system has failed, forcing it to rely on small thrusters to perform the orbit-raising function. It has never been used on a Western commercial satellite, according to industry officials queried about it here March 12 at the Satellite 2012 show and conference.

    ABS Chief Executive Thomas Choi made reference to his company's growth plans in a presentation here March 12 without naming Satmex and without specifying the revolutionary satellite design that the two operators had selected.

    Choi said the company would be making an announcement March 13.

    But in his remarks, Choi outlined his view of why it is imperative that ABS expand beyond its regional base to establish a near-global presence.

    Choi said ABS has grown from a company with just $4 million in revenue to one that next year expects to report revenue of $280 million. It has stitched together a fleet of four satellites that it purchased in orbit from former owners that no longer viewed satellite operators as a core business.

    ABS has raised more than $250 million in bank loans in 2011, and struck deals with broadcasters to sell space on ABS-owned satellites in what is known as a "condosat" arrangement.

    Choi has long said that the economics of satellite fleet operators argues in favor of scale, and that ABS would need to grow if it is to survive in what he said is likely to be several lean years for the satellite telecommunications industry in general as North America and Europe work through their government-debt crises.

    Choi also critiqued the satellite industry for not being imaginative enough.

    "I believe there is not enough creative destruction in our industry," Choi said, adding that the major satellite operators, both in fixed and mobile services, "are more or less doing the same thing" they have done for years.

    "Our objective is to become a global satellite operator," Choi said. He said one of the two satellites that ABS would own of the four to be ordered would be located at 3 degrees west and would replace the ABS-3 satellite stationed there now.

    In 2010, Permira acquired a majority stake in ABS. Permira has previously owned stakes in larger satellite fleet operators — Inmarsat of London and Intelsat of Washington and Luxembourg — before cashing out.

    ABS and Satmex both have large, conventionally designed satellites under construction with Space Systems/Loral of Palo Alto, Calif.

    Industry officials said El Segundo, Calif.-based Boeing Space and Intelligence Systems has been perhaps the most aggressive among the major satellite builders to develop the all-electric design.[/size]

[instml]

SpaceX | 10 Years in Review
March 14, 2012

Ten years ago today, SpaceX was founded with the goal of helping make the human race a multi-planetary species. We remain firmly committed to this goal and will do everything within our power to help make this happen.

Below we have collected some of our most memorable moments from the last ten years. As we look back, we would like to thank NASA, our customers, supporters, and those who believe in what we are working so hard to accomplish. We appreciate your continued support and look forward to an exciting future.



Elon Musk founds SpaceX in 2002 and opens our first manufacturing facility in El Segundo – at the center of Southern California's
aerospace industry.



In 2006, NASA awards SpaceX a contract under the Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) program to develop the
capability to carry cargo to and from the International Space Station as represented by the image shown here.



SpaceX's Falcon 1 rocket becomes the 1st liquid fueled rocket developed by a private company to reach Earth orbit. This picture
shows the nozzle of Falcon 1's upper stage engine just as it achieved orbit, nine and a half minutes after launch.



In 2008, NASA selects SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket and Dragon spacecraft to take over the job of transporting cargo to and from
the Space Station from the retiring space shuttle. While initial flights will focus on cargo, Falcon 9 and Dragon were designed
from the beginning to transport crew; every cargo flight to the Space Station gets us one step closer to this goal.



Falcon 1 delivers its first commercial payload to Earth orbit – the RazakSAT satellite for Malaysia. In this image, you see the two
halves of the faring that covered the satellite during launch fall back to Earth after separating.



In 2010, SpaceX launches the first flight of Falcon 9, one of the most advanced rockets in the world. The first launch achieved a
nearly perfect insertion of the second stage and Dragon spacecraft qualification unit into the targeted 250 km (155 mi) circular orbit.



Also in 2010, the second flight of Falcon 9 orbits the first operational Dragon spacecraft under the NASA COTS program, and
SpaceX becomes the first private company to recover a spacecraft from Earth orbit—a feat previously only accomplished by a few nations.


The last 10 years have been an incredible experience and the next 10 promise to be just as exciting. Stay tuned for more updates on our first upcoming mission to Station, Falcon Heavy and our progress in preparing Dragon to transport crew.

http://www.spacex.com/spacexat10.php

[Salo]

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=space&id=news/awst/2012/03/12/AW_03_12_2012_p49-431419.xml&headline=SpaceX%20Gleam%20Slips%20With%20Launch%20Plans

SpaceX Gleam Slips With Launch Plans[/size]
Mar 16, 2012
 
By Amy Svitak
Paris

For a brief moment in 2011, fledgling rocket maker SpaceX silenced critics with a deal to launch a commercial telecom satellite for one of the largest fleet operators in the world.

Announced in March 2011, the agreement with Luxembourg-based SES to loft the SES-8 satellite to geostationary orbit atop the twice-flown Falcon 9 rocket was widely viewed as a vote of confidence in the Hawthorne, Calif.-based startup, despite its running years late in demonstrating the ability to boost cargo to the International Space Station (ISS) for its primary government backer, NASA.

But during the past two years, as SpaceX secured contracts in major Asian markets, announced plans to introduce a heavy-lift variant of the Falcon and started construction of a new launch pad at Vandenberg AFB, Calif., the company has fallen further behind schedule.

"They're running up against the reality of rocket engineering—getting these systems to work is hard," says John Logsdon, a space policy expert and professor emeritus at George Washington University. "This is the teething pain of an emerging firm that doesn't match the rhetoric, doesn't match their optimism, but matches the reality of the situation."

Earlier this year SpaceX pushed its first cargo demonstrator to the ISS under NASA's Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) program to the end of April from February. It also slipped the schedule on a midsummer debut of an upgrade to the Falcon 9 main-stage engine, which SpaceX is obligated to fly before it can loft SES-8 next year.

Now slated to lift off no earlier than October from the new Vandenberg site, the overhaul of Falcon 9's Merlin 1C engine aims to add enough power to boost payloads to geostationary transfer orbit. In addition to lofting SES-8, the more robust rocket positions SpaceX to deliver on commercial launch agreements with Hong Kong-based AsiaSat and Thaicom of Thailand beginning as early as next year.

"Commercial launches now represent over 60 percent of our upcoming missions," SpaceX ­founder and CEO Elon Musk said in February after announcing the agreement to launch AsiaSat-6 and AsiaSat-8 atop the Falcon 9 in early 2014.

With plans to debut the new Merlin 1D before year-end, SpaceX has been test-firing the motor "four or five times a week" at the company's development facility in McGregor, Texas, says SpaceX spokeswoman Kirstin Grantham. The new Falcon 9 also will feature an extended propellant tank and wider payload fairing.

At Vandenberg, Grantham says SpaceX has completed demolition of the old launch site, including removal of a tower, and recently started construction of a new hangar. The upcoming launch is expected to deliver a small, scientific spacecraft built by MDA Corp. of Canada to a near-polar orbit. Delivery of hardware to the launch site, including the new rocket and satellite, dubbed Cassiope, is expected later this year.

Although SpaceX has secured commercial launch agreements with a handful of satellite operators, including a $500 million contract to loft Iridium's 72 next-generation satellites to low Earth orbit in 2015-17, SES-8 marks the company's first commercial mission to geostationary orbit. But with four flights on the SpaceX manifest in 2012 alone—Cassiope, the COTS demo and two commercial resupply services (CRS) missions scheduled under a separate, fixed-price contract with NASA—SES may need to consider other options.

"As an alternative, we always have a backup in place for all SES launches," says Yves Feltes, a spokesman for SES, which has existing multi-launch agreements with Arianespace and ILS, in addition to a framework understanding with Sea Launch. "The same is true for SES-8."

SpaceX is also expected to launch at least one mission for Orbcomm Inc. this year. After pulling a prototype of the operator's second-generation data-relay satellite from the upcoming COTS demo, the two companies rescheduled the mission for mid-2012 as a piggyback on the first CRS mission.

SpaceX says it completed a dress rehearsal of the Falcon 9 at Cape Canaveral on March 1 in preparation for the upcoming COTS mission, loading the rocket with fuel and simulating a countdown to T-5 sec. But the company still has a roster of work to complete before the flight, which will be no earlier than April 20.

"It's easy to expect success along the way," Logsdon says. "But it's still up to them to deliver on what they've promised."[/size]

[Ярослав]

не помню, была ли эта картинка у нас

[SFN]

не помню, была ли эта картинка у нас

Картика, положенная на бок с сайта Эда Кайла (на НСФ была в 2008г), после этого он еще много рисовал, но летает все еще этот Блок1 :roll:

[Salo]

http://www.spaceflightnow.com/news/n1203/22legall/index.html

Question: What are your thoughts on the commercial launch marketplace, with the return of Sea Launch and recent contract wins by SpaceX?

Le Gall: What we see is some difficulties with our competitors. As for SpaceX, we will see what they do this year, but last year we expected a launch which never came. With Proton, there are a number of issues. Last year, they had a failure, and within the past six years, they have had a total of five failures. This year, I understand that some launches are delayed. Sea Launch is exiting from Chapter 11, but what they announced recently are not new contracts. These are contracts which are already on their order book, and in fact, which are announced now. We are almost the only ones to launch new contracts with new satellites. And we think this year the market will be quite robust because we see many projects in Asia - the area going from Arabian Gulf to California over Asia and the Pacific.[/size]

http://www.spaceflightnow.com/news/n1203/22legall/index2.html

Question: On the medium end of that scale, in the 3.2-tonne range, do you see much growth in that mass?

Le Gall: Not so much. There were some ideas to grow because of SpaceX proposing a capacity of 4 tonnes or something like that. But now SpaceX is not very credible.

Question: What's your feeling about SpaceX? You said it's not credible.

Le Gall: I think that, to be credible, SpaceX will have to perform a number of successful launches, and after that, we will see. But today, we don't see so many launches.

Question: How many would they have to do?

Le Gall: I don't know, but let's say five or six, or something like that.

Question: How is the business going? Is it a good profitable business now in the launch industry, or is the pricing so competitive that it's hard for anybody to make a profit?

Le Gall: Everywhere in the world, this industry is subsidized. Even companies who say they are completely private, they receive hidden subsidies. These are the rules of the game, and I think today the commercial guarantors are lucky because they have launch prices which are, in one way or another, subsidized by the government, either in Europe, in the U.S., in Asia, in China, and so on. If tomorrow, we had a real private company who would have to pay everything since the beginning of development through in-orbit delivery, the prices of launchers would be much higher.

Question: Do you see SpaceX as totally private?

Le Gall: SpaceX is a completely private company, but they receive huge contracts from the U.S. government.[/size]

[instml]

Delta 2 Seen as Front-runner for 3-Launch NASA Contract

WASHINGTON — NASA expects to order launches for three Earth science missions by the end of the summer, and United Launch Alliance (ULA) looks like the strongest contender for the job with its medium-lift Delta 2 rocket, an agency official said.

NASA sent a request for proposals to its current stable of approved launch services providers — ULA, Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (SpaceX), Orbital Sciences Corp. and Lockheed Martin Corp. — in early February seeking bids for three missions: Soil Moisture Active-Passive, Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2 and the Joint Polar Satellite System-1. Proposals are due April 8, with the launches taking place from 2014-2017.

Steve Volz, associate director of flight programs in NASA's Earth Science Division, said only two of the approved NASA Launch Services 2 vendors, ULA and SpaceX, currently have rockets that meet the agency's criteria. But he said the limited flight heritage of SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket — two successes in two launches, with a third slated for April 30 — puts it at a disadvantage.

"Right now, the two possible proposals ... are the Delta 2 from ULA and the SpaceX Falcon 9," Volz told the NASA Advisory Council during a March 21 meeting here. "Delta 2 can bid, and they're certified; it's easy. Falcon 9, they may bid, but they haven't been certified, so there's a risk on those."

The Delta 2, which for years was the most reliable vehicle in the U.S. fleet, is out of production, but ULA has five of the vehicles remaining for sale. ULA spokeswoman Jessica Rye confirmed March 22 that the company will be bidding the Delta 2 for the NASA contract.

SpaceX spokeswoman Kirstin Grantham said March 22 that her company will bid for at least a share of the work. "We are submitting a certification plan with our proposal," she said.

While Volz was skeptical that Falcon 9 could achieve NASA certification in time to launch any of the three upcoming missions, the vehicle is "likely to be a viable contender" for Earth science missions "that launch in 2018, 2019, 2020."

Jim Norman, director of the NASA Launch Services Program, said in a March 22 email that the launch solicitation is open to rockets that "will meet (at minimum) Category 2 certification" requirements. Those requirements call for one to three successful flights and a raft of NASA reviews.

NASA previously had given the Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2 launch contract to Orbital, but rescinded the award after an Orbital-built Taurus XL failure destroyed NASA's Glory climate-monitoring satellite last March. An earlier Taurus XL failure destroyed the original Orbiting Carbon Observatory craft.

"The Taurus XL isn't available until it's recertified," Volz said. "We're not going to be the next ones on that launch vehicle."

NASA has looked at using the U.S. Air Force Minotaur 4 rocket, assembled by Orbital using excess missile stages, but Volz said the agency is unlikely to go that route.

"If we get only proposals that are extremely expensive or extremely high risk, we have the avenue to continue to pursue the Minotaur 4," Volz said. "The likelihood is small. ... I don't expect it to happen."

NASA announced in 2007 that it would phase out the Delta 2 by the end of the decade because the rocket would be unaffordable in the absence of Air Force support. The Air Force had been the primary customer for the Delta 2 but stopped using the vehicle in 2009.

The Delta 2 last launched in October, when it delivered the Suomi NPP climate and weather satellite to orbit.

http://www.spacenews.com/launch/120323-delta2-frontrunnerlaunch-contract.html

[instml]

Orbcomm Touts Recovery of Ship Identification Business
http://www.spacenews.com/satellite_telecom/120321-orbcomm-sat-wont-fly-falcon.html

[Salo]

Aviation Week: Promising Technologies[/size]
Posted by Nelson Bridwell at 3/29/2012 2:48 PM CDT

Editor's Note: On Space welcomes our newest contributor.

There have been notable instances in the past where NASA has promised much more than it has delivered.  The X-30 National Aerospace Plane and X-33/VentureStar never got off the ground.  The ISS has yet to provide the revolutionary breakthroughs in medicine and materials that NASA Administrator Daniel Goldin promised before Congress.  And the Shuttle, although it has proven to be an effective workhorse, never came close to the $100 per pound to LEO, even adjusted for inflation, promised as its primary justification.

Some of these casualties have been the results of politics:  Clinton cancelled Reagan's X-30.  Bush cancelled Clinton's X-33.  And Obama continues trying to cancel Bush's Constellation.  However, the main drivers of this disconnect have been the astronomical development costs of space hardware, the fundamental uncertainties of all new technologies, and the tenuous, meager financial returns resulting from most new space capabilities. Unrealistic promises have been made simply because in an honest evaluation the value of some of these programs would not have been obvious.

In recent years, a "NewSpace" movement has taken hold and made genuine efforts to advance space largely outside of NASA.  By necessity, significant work has gone into reductions in development and operational costs, such as using simpler, less expensive components and materials, employing a much smaller workforce, vertical in-house manufacturing to eliminate middlemen, and the very beginning of attempts to achieve economical reuse of major spacecraft components.

However, not having direct, guaranteed access to the multi-billion dollar budgets accorded to NASA, some of these NewSpace pioneers have been even more egregious in making unrealistic promises and personal guarantees in attempts to snag private and taxpayer funding.

For instance, the 2005 SpaceX announcement of the Falcon 9 promised a "FULLY REUSABLE HEAVY LIFT LAUNCH VEHICLE".  It advertised an initial price of $27M per flight, including all range fees and insurance, with future, dramatic reductions in price resulting from reuse.  It also claimed its use of 9 small rocket motors provided enhanced reliability.  Using this logic, the 31-engine Soviet N-1 Moon rocket should not have blown up so many times.

Seven years later, although SpaceX has racked up an impressive number of commercial launch orders, the Falcon 9 is several years behind schedule, with only two test flights, and prices in excess of $54M. With the exception of the Dragon capsule, the only things that have been recoverable, post-launch, have been small bits of scrap metal.

More recently, Elon Musk, at a National Press Club announcement, and in a BBC Interview, has promised that SpaceX will provide round-trip transport to Mars and back, at a cost of $500,000 per person, within 10 years.  All of this is based upon theoretical, untested designs and calculations, and assuming that there will be a thriving market demand for the several hundred flights per year needed to support the development and operational cost of such a system and the massive infrastructure in place on Mars required to support such a large population.

In his appendix to the Report of the PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSION on the Space Shuttle Challenger Accident, physicist Richard Feynman concluded:

    NASA owes it to the citizens from whom it asks support to be frank, honest, and informative, so that these citizens can make the wisest decisions for the use of their limited resources.

    For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled.[/size]

[SFN]

Из темы "Союз-1 ! Союз-2-1В"

Ну и потом посмотрите, кто закладывает материал и снимает изделие со знаменитых гибочных машин в SpaceX? Рабочий, конечно. Элон жаловался, что ответственную рабочую силу непросто нанять, автомат или нет. Машина в основном нужна, чтобы выдержать нужные тысячные дюйма при гибке и обрезке, и чтобы делать постадийную гибку толстостенных труб. А работает человек все равно.

Раскрой листов на Спейсексе. На заднем плане гибочная машина
Готовые секции ждут сварки
 

[Петр Зайцев]

Не, это не та, что для труб. Про ту была статья в отраслевом журнале станкостроителей.

[SFN]

Не, это не та, что для труб. Про ту была статья в отраслевом журнале станкостроителей.

В 2008 была статья Rocket science, entrepreneur-style SpaceX takes a fresh approach to rocket fabrication
трубогибочная машина

в статье есть еще упоминание про FSW

The new FSW system ultrasonically inspects the welds concurrently with the weld process, following several feet behind the welding head.

Ультразвуковой контроль качества шва в нескольких футах вслед за шпинделем.

[Lamort]

The new FSW system ultrasonically inspects the welds concurrently with the weld process, following several feet behind the welding head.

Ультразвуковой контроль качества шва в нескольких футах вслед за шпинделем.

Интересно, а почему используется шовная труба?

[SFN]

Интересно, а почему используется шовная труба?

я так понял, FSW используется для баков. Ультразвук вместо рентгена.
Пишут, что продольные швы получаются без дырок благодаря жертвенным вкладкам.

[instml]

Маску не хватает космодромов...

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=28585.0

The FAA is preparing an EIS to analyze the potential environmental impacts of SpaceX's proposal to launch orbital and suborbital launch vehicles from a private site in Cameron County in southern Texas. The EIS will consider the potential environmental impacts of the Proposed Action and reasonable alternatives, including the No Action Alternative. The successful completion of the environmental review process does not guarantee that the FAA would issue launch licenses and/or experimental permits to SpaceX. The project must also meet all FAA safety, risk, and indemnification requirements.

https://s3.amazonaws.com/public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2012-08556.pdf

As part of the Proposed Action, SpaceX proposes to construct a vertical launch area and a control center area. The proposed vertical launch area site is currently undeveloped and is located directly adjacent to the eastern terminus of Texas State Highway 4 (Boca Chica Boulevard) and approximately 3 miles north of the Mexican border on the Gulf Coast. It is located approximately 5 miles south of Port Isabel and South Padre Island. At the vertical launch area, the new facilities required would include: an integration- and processing-hangar, a launch pad and stand with its associated flame duct, propellant storage and handling areas, a workshop and office area, and a warehouse for parts storage.

Approximate location:

[LRV_75]

И кто за всё это будет платить? Это же сотни миллионов долларов

[Петр Зайцев]

И кто за всё это будет платить? Это же сотни миллионов долларов

Ну пару сотен всегда можно найти. Мой штат заплатил примерно столько за космодром для Сэра Ричарда, а ведь мы в 20 раз беднее Техаса.