The Astronomy Thread

Abefroman · Mar 30, 2017

Pretty amazing that not to long ago we had arguments in this very thread with people saying it was stupid to try and land it on a barge in the middle of the ocean. Now they are reusing those rockets and landing them again. Meanwhile Blue Origin is creating CGI of what SpaceX is doing over and over again.

Khalan · Mar 30, 2017

super cool

1987 · Mar 31, 2017

Fuck yea, science!

1987 · Mar 31, 2017

Also the ability to relaunch a falcon 9 gives spacex complete competence advantage over all competition correct!

Or the second one of those rockets becomes reusable the cost comparison is just gone right....?

meStevo · Mar 31, 2017

The blue center of Saturn's North polar vortex.

There’s a Cerulean Storm Swirling on Saturn’s North Pole

Ukerric · Mar 31, 2017

1987 said:
Also the ability to relaunch a falcon 9 gives spacex complete competence advantage over all competition correct!

They already had low costs, but this will drive their costs down further. SES-10 already had a 30% discount.

They also recovered the satellite fairing (the protection cap for the launch), which costs 6M$ on its own, so they're going to shave a couple additional millions soon if they can reliably recover it.

As Musk & Shotwell said, the fuel cost of a launch is less than half a percent of the launch cost. You have also incompressible costs like the launchpad, and some costs that can't be reduced overmuch (staff), but if they can reuse a Falcon9 just 10 times average, they're probably going to reduce 80% of the current price.

ULA is going to have a hard time competing. They can't even compete at today's prices.

Tuco · Mar 31, 2017

Abefroman said:
Pretty amazing that not to long ago we had arguments in this very thread with people saying it was stupid to try and land it on a barge in the middle of the ocean. Now they are reusing those rockets and landing them again. Meanwhile Blue Origin is creating CGI of what SpaceX is doing over and over again.

I'll step up to the plate and say I remember saying the idea sounded dumb. I didn't realize how little energy it consumed when the space vehicle had no cargo / fuel.

Tuco · Mar 31, 2017

Ukerric said:
They already had low costs, but this will drive their costs down further. SES-10 already had a 30% discount.

They also recovered the satellite fairing (the protection cap for the launch), which costs 6M$ on its own, so they're going to shave a couple additional millions soon if they can reliably recover it.

As Musk & Shotwell said, the fuel cost of a launch is less than half a percent of the launch cost. You have also incompressible costs like the launchpad, and some costs that can't be reduced overmuch (staff), but if they can reuse a Falcon9 just 10 times average, they're probably going to reduce 80% of the current price.

ULA is going to have a hard time competing. They can't even compete at today's prices.

I can't help but think that as they keep reusing rockets they'll find a way to make that 10-use per rocket figure become 100 uses and beyond.

Abefroman · Mar 31, 2017

Tuco said:
I'll step up to the plate and say I remember saying the idea sounded dumb. I didn't realize how little energy it consumed when the space vehicle had no cargo / fuel.

I didn't really mention that as really digging at people but more for the fact that it went from theory and us arguing about it to we expect it to stick landings now. Amazing stuff.

khorum · Mar 31, 2017

Tuco said:
I can't help but think that as they keep reusing rockets they'll find a way to make that 10-use per rocket figure become 100 uses and beyond.

I've read somewhere that the 9 Merlin rocket motors are designed for just about indefinite reuse, the 10+ reusability estimate for comes from the structural fatigue on the pressurized hull of the rocket itself. They're looking at new material down the line that will have longer life under the thermic stress.

We missed the launch again too.. we're down in Florida visiting our son but we didn't have the time do drive down.

Oldbased · Mar 31, 2017

SpaceX launched and retrieved the first recycled rocket yesterday as planned. Meaning it has launched twice and will see a 3rd time. After seeing the size of the thing it has got to be saving some dough.

Edit- I see Abe already picked up on it. I didn't go back to the previous page.

Additional edit- I wonder what the thought process on reuse will become.
Is it safer to use a rocket that already functioned once but was rebuilt or is it safer to use a rocket for the first time, or does it even matter.
A question people riding in one will no doubt wonder and ask.

khorum · Mar 31, 2017

I thought I heard that it ended up being only 10% cheaper and not 30% since it was the first refurbished flight. They mustve gotten a coupon tho.

ToeMissile · Mar 31, 2017

Ukerric said:
They already had low costs, but this will drive their costs down further. SES-10 already had a 30% discount.

They also recovered the satellite fairing (the protection cap for the launch), which costs 6M$ on its own, so they're going to shave a couple additional millions soon if they can reliably recover it.

As Musk & Shotwell said, the fuel cost of a launch is less than half a percent of the launch cost. You have also incompressible costs like the launchpad, and some costs that can't be reduced overmuch (staff), but if they can reuse a Falcon9 just 10 times average, they're probably going to reduce 80% of the current price.

ULA is going to have a hard time competing. They can't even compete at today's prices.

I read a while ago about the insurance policies they put on these launches are pretty pricey too, of course that's going to be across the board though.

Even 10% savings is a good chunk of change. I would imagine turn around time is improved as well?

Tuco · Mar 31, 2017

khorum said:
I thought I heard that it ended up being only 10% cheaper and not 30% since it was the first refurbished flight. They mustve gotten a coupon tho.

Yeah the savings of the first reuse are kind of irrelevant (though 10% isn't anything to sneer at). I'm sure they'll be doing a bunch of tests on these first few refurbishes that won't be done later, along with improving their refurbishing process.

I mean, when your goal is to have a 24 hour turnaround time, your process has dramatically improved and has to be cheaper.

Dandain · Mar 31, 2017

The company that was part of this reuse was the first company that launched with SpaceX in 2013 I think. They requested their payload fly on the first reflight booster. They actually wanted to be the client.

khorum · Mar 31, 2017

They got six more in storage so...

come to think of it, I'd prolly take the SES-10 booster and try to relaunch it a third time for the refurbishment company if they're willing to take the costs. For science.

Kiroy · Mar 31, 2017

Dandain said:
The company that was part of this reuse was the first company that launched with SpaceX in 2013 I think. They requested their payload fly on the first reflight booster. They actually wanted to be the client.

It's a pretty cool little claim to fame. What was the company?

Abefroman · Mar 31, 2017

Blue Origins better start making a CGI of this too.

Kiroy · Mar 31, 2017

Abefroman said:
Blue Origins better start making a CGI of this too.

Blue Origins confirmed Star Citizen of the IRL space industry.

Dandain · Mar 31, 2017

Kiroy said:
It's a pretty cool little claim to fame. What was the company?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SES_S.A.

SES-8 was the first geostationary satellite to be launched (in 2013) by privately funded company, SpaceX, which has revolutionised the costs of satellite launches.[18][19] The SES-10 satellite, was due to be launched in October 2016 on a Falcon 9 rocket, to be the first SpaceX launch with a 'flight-proven' (reused) Falcon first stage, recovered from a previous launch.[20] Unfortunately, due to a pad explosion and subsequent loss of a Falcon 9 booster in September 2016, the earliest possible launch date for SES-10 is 22 February 2017.[21] The SES-12, SES-14 and SES-15 satellites (due for launch in 2017) are being constructed with an electric plasma propulsion system for orbit raising and in-orbit manoeuvres[22] to save weight and enable a larger communications payload to be included. SES reckons that SES-12 would weigh some 4700 kg more with a conventional chemical propulsion system.[19]

The Astronomy Thread

Naxxramas 1.0 Raider

Trakanon Raider

Ahn'Qiraj Raider

Ahn'Qiraj Raider

I think your wife's a bigfoot gus.

Bearded Ape

I got Tuco'd!

I got Tuco'd!

Naxxramas 1.0 Raider

Murder Apologist

> Than U

Murder Apologist

Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer

I got Tuco'd!

Trakanon Raider

Murder Apologist

Marine Biologist

Naxxramas 1.0 Raider

Marine Biologist

Trakanon Raider