Posts: 53629 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 09-22-2016 01:14 PM
On Tuesday, Sept. 27, 2016 at 1:30 p.m. CDT (1830 GMT), SpaceX CEO Elon Musk will deliver a talk at the 67th International Astronautical Congress (IAC) in Guadalajara, Mexico, where he is expected to reveal his planned architecture for sending humans to Mars and destinations beyond.
On the second day of the IAC, during a special keynote entitled "Making Humans a Multiplanetary Species," Elon Musk will discuss the long-term technical challenges that need to be solved to support the creation of a permanent, self-sustaining human presence on Mars. The technical presentation will focus on potential architectures for colonizing the Red Planet that industry, government and the scientific community can collaborate on in the years ahead.
The talk will be streamed live by both the IAC and SpaceX.
SpaceAholic Member
Posts: 5414 From: Sierra Vista, Arizona Registered: Nov 1999
posted 09-22-2016 01:15 PM
Elon Musk is looking past Mars with SpaceX's Interplanetary Transport System, reports Universe Today.
...a recent Tweet from Musk has us wondering if Mars will just be a stepping stone to more distant destinations in our Solar System. On Sept. 16th, Musk tweeted:
Turns out MCT can go well beyond Mars, so will need a new name...
And the new name is Interplanetary Transport System (ITS).
So, is SpaceX developing plans to go beyond Mars? Is the plan to establish cargo flights to Mars still central to the whole endeavour? Does the name change from Mars Cargo Transporter (MCT) to Interplanetary Transport System (ITS) signal a change in focus? These questions may be answered soon, on September 27th, when Musk will speak at the International Astronautical Congress (IAC), in Guadalajara, Mexico.
SkyMan1958 Member
Posts: 1400 From: CA. Registered: Jan 2011
posted 09-22-2016 10:19 PM
Much as I wish Elon well, I think at the top of his to do list is to make the Falcon 9 a reliable transport system. He is going to need money to build his new designs, and to do that, his bread and butter rocket needs to be not only cheaper than the competition, but also quite reliable. Two booms in a little over 12 months is not the way to get and keep customers...
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 53629 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 09-27-2016 12:52 PM
SpaceX video
Presenting the SpaceX Interplanetary Transport System.
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 53629 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 09-27-2016 01:14 PM
Details will be coming soon, but some initial impressions:
If I am counting correctly, the first stage booster has 42 (!) engines.
The color palette and style of animation has a Disney's Man In Space (Tomorrowland) feel to it.
It says something about his vision that turning Pad 39A into a launch *and* landing pad is one of the least audacious ideas presented in this video.
This is either one of the most striking sci-fi animations ever produced or a vision of the coming future...
dom Member
Posts: 1103 From: Registered: Aug 2001
posted 09-27-2016 01:42 PM
Yes, my first impression was also of Disney's Man in Space. Maybe reality is about to catch-up with von Braun's grand vision 80 years later!
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 53629 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 09-27-2016 01:55 PM
From Elon Musk on Twitter:
12 meter [39 foot] rocket booster diameter, 17 meter [56 foot] spaceship diameter, 122 meter [400 foot] stack height
cspg Member
Posts: 6376 From: Geneva, Switzerland Registered: May 2006
posted 09-27-2016 02:22 PM
It seems that it's a one-way trip...
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 53629 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 09-27-2016 03:18 PM
Elon Musk said it is important to him to offer the option for people to return.
The spaceship needs to come back to Earth to be reused, so it the choice of those who go if they stay or return.
issman1 Member
Posts: 1144 From: UK Registered: Apr 2005
posted 09-27-2016 04:25 PM
From skepticism to optimism is my feeling, but it depends on whether SpaceX can fly out its ambitious manifest of commercial and NASA contracted missions.
SkyMan1958 Member
Posts: 1400 From: CA. Registered: Jan 2011
posted 09-27-2016 04:54 PM
I wish SpaceX all the best, and hope they are successful.
I just wonder where that most basic of fuels, e.g. money, is coming from.
posted 09-27-2016 04:55 PM
How do people feel about ITS launching from historic pad 39A?
Apollo 11 launched from this pad and due to the size of the Interplanetary Transport System the pad would likely need to be completely redesigned and rebuilt. Also there is some question as to whether the pad and surrounding area is large enough and remote enough to launch this monster booster in terms of causing damage to area homes, buildings and perhaps even issues regarding human health.
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 53629 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 09-27-2016 05:18 PM
quote:Originally posted by SkyMan1958: I just wonder where that most basic of fuels, e.g. money, is coming from.
Musk said the funding is initially coming from SpaceX's launch contracts, and that he intends to devote all of his personal assets to the goal of establishing humanity as a multiplanetary species.
He said he has no expectation for a government contract (though one could come in the future).
Musk said SpaceX is presently devoting about five percent of its operating budget to the development of the ITS, and that would increase after Falcon and Dragon 2 are complete.
Ultimately, he estimated that development of the ITS would cost (on edit: an upfront investment of) $10 billion (see below).
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 53629 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 09-27-2016 05:23 PM
quote:Originally posted by alcyone: ...the pad would likely need to be completely redesigned and rebuilt.
Pad 39A was rebuilt for the space shuttle and is now in the process of being rebuilt again for Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy.
As Kennedy Space Center director Bob Cabana put it a few years ago, "I'd rather be making history than studying history."
328KF Member
Posts: 1391 From: Registered: Apr 2008
posted 09-27-2016 06:45 PM
I'm not a pessimist but I'm pessimistic about this! Musk has done some amazing things, and is to be commended for them, but all of it has come at a much higher cost and after much more time than he ever promises.
I don't think the timing of his announcement was well considered either, given the recent failure.
No doubt people will call him "bold" and "brave" and throw around a bunch of cliches about somebody having to do it, but this concept is far beyond both his finances and his lifetime.
Only $10 billion? ISS cost 10 times that to build (or so they say... could be more) and its in LEO! Get real, Musk.
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 53629 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 09-27-2016 07:54 PM
quote:Originally posted by 328KF: Only $10 billion?
I need to amend that, as it was my misquoting Musk. What he said:
In order to make this whole thing work and work reliably before it starts generating some kind of positive cash flow, it is probably an investment on the order of $10 billion.
So it's not an overall cost of $10 billion, but an upfront investment of $10 billion.
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 53629 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
Posts: 1484 From: Perth, Western Australia Registered: Apr 2015
posted 09-28-2016 01:40 AM
I believe that this is a great presentation and has some interesting ideas. There is no harm in trying to get people excited about such ideas and if it gets people talking or wanting to be involved then all the better.
We are entering the time when the second generation of people are born since the last lunar landing and while there have been talks about future missions since the Apollo 17 we are still in LEO.
I do not see that this announcement is poorly timed. The failure of the Falcon 9 during live fire prep is so far proving to be an anomaly that will add to the learning curve and to the safety systems for any future flight and there is far less SpaceX wreckage piled up than NASA or USAF and others had at the same time in their early stages.
teopze Member
Posts: 192 From: Ithaca, NY Registered: May 2008
posted 09-28-2016 03:57 AM
I too was hoping for something more realistic. Something that can be done within 10 years or so. Perhaps I simply think 'too small'?
Keep in mind that it's more of a vision not a plan. For instance, it relies on technologies that as still being developed/tested (carbon fibre tanks, precise landings on land) or not yet implemented at all (the big ship altogether).
I think the booster part is so far the best part of it; in my opinion it's absolutely doable within a few years and I do hope they will make it even just for the sake of doing it.
Since it's a vision I like it very much because — thanks to Mr. Musk's appeal — it seem much more realistic than the technically sound and doable Orion/SLS. Even if it's going to take 20 years at least (!) I think Mr. Musk will stay consistent and refine the vision to the point of becoming a real-life plan.
On a sidenote, it was the first time I watched Mr. Musk live and I can't get rid of the idea that either he is very humble and shy or he is plain autistic...
issman1 Member
Posts: 1144 From: UK Registered: Apr 2005
posted 09-28-2016 06:05 AM
quote:Originally posted by teopze: I too was hoping for something more realistic. Something that can be done within 10 years or so.
If you want something "within 10 years" you may recall Dennis Tito's Inspiration Mars.
Like Mr. Tito, Mr. Musk seems to feel that government space agencies have timelines for human missions beyond earth orbit so spread out — over decades — that they are themselves not "realistic".
noroxine Member
Posts: 126 From: Registered: Mar 2009
posted 09-28-2016 10:44 AM
Really interesting ideas but:
Two vehicles on the same pad look like very dangerous (especially when the second is full of "fuel"). Very interesting to know how you can land a rocket on same pad you have a vehicle with full "kero" like inside!
Solar panel are great idea but what if there is a problem during deploy or meteorite on them.
Avionics is really different from near space to solar system large exploration... nothing on this.
Really and again, many greats ideas but there is really a lot of work to achieve at least going back to the... moon!
Jim Behling Member
Posts: 1953 From: Cape Canaveral, FL Registered: Mar 2010
posted 09-28-2016 10:46 AM
quote:Originally posted by oly: ...far less SpaceX wreckage piled up than NASA or USAF and others had at the same time in their early stages.
You can't make that comparison. NASA and the USAF were learning and developing rocket science back then. This isn't an issue where SpaceX was pushing the envelope. The rocket blew before the engines even started. Nobody had done that before. This happened because of a design or manufacturing flaw. Either way, some basic practices were not followed.
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 53629 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 10-24-2016 01:05 AM
Elon Musk took part in a Reddit AMA (Ask Me Anything) on Sunday (Oct. 23), answering more than a dozen questions out of hundreds submitted. The Q&A was focused on expanding on his Interplanetary Transport System talk in September.
Among the questions he answered was one about how the initial ITS flights would establish the infrastructure needed on Mars.
We are still far from figuring this out in detail, but the current plan is:
Send Dragon scouting missions, initially just to make sure we know how to land without adding a crater and then to figure out the best way to get water for the CH4/O2 Sabatier Reaction.
Heart of Gold spaceship flies to Mars loaded only with equipment to build the propellant plant.
First crewed mission with equipment to build rudimentary base and complete the propellant plant.
Try to double the number of flights with each Earth-Mars orbital rendezvous, which is every 26 months, until the city can grow by itself.
In response to a related question Musk added:
Early missions will be heavily weighted towards cargo. First crewed mission would have about a dozen people, as the goal will be to build out and troubleshoot the propellant plant and Mars Base Alpha power system.
cspg Member
Posts: 6376 From: Geneva, Switzerland Registered: May 2006
posted 10-24-2016 01:16 PM
Answer to question 1 was not aimed at ESA, was it?
SpaceAholic Member
Posts: 5414 From: Sierra Vista, Arizona Registered: Nov 1999
posted 10-25-2016 10:07 AM
During that Q&A session, Musk shared news of an important test that SpaceX has planned "in the coming weeks."
The [carbon fiber] flight tank will actually be slightly longer than the development tank shown, but the same diameter.
That was built with latest and greatest carbon fiber prepreg. In theory, it should hold cryogenic propellant without leaking and without a sealing linker. Early tests are promising.
Will take it up to 2/3 of burst pressure on an ocean barge in the coming weeks.
cspg Member
Posts: 6376 From: Geneva, Switzerland Registered: May 2006
posted 10-25-2016 10:57 AM
Will take it up to 2/3 of burst pressure on an ocean barge in the coming weeks.
So that if it blows up it won't be as damaging!
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 53629 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 11-16-2016 11:12 AM
From SpaceX on Twitter:
Successfully tested the prototype Mars tank last week. Hit both of our pressure targets – next up will be full cryo testing.
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 53629 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 02-17-2017 12:12 PM
quote:Originally posted by cspg: So that if it blows up it won't be as damaging!
Apparently, the tank did indeed blow up. From Reddit:
Supposedly when it went, it blew about 50 feet into the air and off the barge. Divers had to retrieve it.
Posts: 53629 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 09-28-2017 08:54 AM
SpaceX live webcast
This week at the International Astronautical Congress (IAC) in Adelaide, Australia, SpaceX CEO and Lead Designer Elon Musk will provide an update to his 2016 presentation regarding the long-term technical challenges that need to be solved to support the creation of a permanent, self-sustaining human presence on Mars.
You can watch the talk live on Thursday, Sept. 28, 2017 at 9:30 p.m. PDT, or Friday, Sept. 29 at 2:00 p.m. ACST [0430 GMT].
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 53629 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 09-28-2017 09:59 PM
Elon Musk on Instagram:
Moon Base Alpha
Mars City.
Opposite of Earth. Dawn and dusk sky are blue on Mars and day sky is red.
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 53629 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 09-29-2017 12:39 AM
You can (re-)watch Elon Musk's presentation above. Here were the main points:
By consolidating Falcon 9, Falcon Heavy and Dragon into a single reusable architecture (code name: BFR), SpaceX can underwrite Mars plans using profits from low Earth orbit launches.
Redesigned BFR uses 31 Raptor engines, producing 5,400 tons of thrust to launch 4,400-ton vehicle into orbit. Delta wing on upper stage is used to balance vehicle for re-entry depending on type of payload being returned.
Payload capability is 150 tons to orbit (50 ton return). On-orbit refueling enables lunar landing missions without the need for refueling on the moon, or delivering 150 tons to Mars.
Upper stage can also be configured to service International Space Station, deploy satellites (with 9 meter diameter) and retrieve satellites and space debris to return to Earth.
Production of the first BFR to begin second-quarter 2018. Tooling is already ordered and facility is under construction.
Target is to launch two cargo missions to Mars in 2022, or shortly thereafter. First (two) crewed missions targeted for 2024 (with two cargo missions).
Oh, one more thing: If we can send people to the moon and Mars, why not other places on Earth, too. Point-to-point travel would reduce time between all locations on Earth to less than an hour.
issman1 Member
Posts: 1144 From: UK Registered: Apr 2005
posted 09-29-2017 03:25 AM
Glad that Mr. Musk only mentioned aspirational goals and timelines.
I doubt I shall live long enough to see his city on Mars but he's right that in 2017 we only have six people living in low Earth orbit but no moon base or village, nor any immediate prospect of that.
Headshot Member
Posts: 1356 From: Vancouver, WA, USA Registered: Feb 2012
posted 09-29-2017 10:34 AM
Wow! Musk's presentation gave me an eerie flashback to the late 1950s when I watched the Disney Tomorrow Land segments "Man in Space," "Man and the Moon," along with "Mars and Beyond."
Age and experience (mostly age) tells me that Musk's presentation predicts future reality as accurately as "Man and the Moon" predicted the reality of Project Apollo.
...but what the hell, go for it Elon!
cspg Member
Posts: 6376 From: Geneva, Switzerland Registered: May 2006
posted 09-29-2017 10:36 AM
Did Mr. Musk provide any financial figures, cost and source of financing?
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 53629 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 09-29-2017 11:07 AM
No numbers, but Musk said that accounting for reusability, the BFR will have a lower per launch cost than all other launch vehicles, including Falcon 1. After the talk, on Instagram, he also noted about point-to-point travel...
Cost per seat should be about the same as full fare economy in an aircraft.
With regards to financing, he said that by making Falcon 9, Falcon Heavy and Dragon redundant, then the funds already being raised by those vehicles would be sufficient enough to support going to Mars. In other words, by using a "one size fits all" approach, the vehicle's low Earth orbit and lunar activities will pay for Mars colonization.
fredtrav Member
Posts: 1799 From: Birmingham AL Registered: Aug 2010
posted 09-29-2017 11:57 AM
Get to it man. I am 66 and am willing to pay full fare economy. I want to go. Make it happen for me (and the many others that want it).
Headshot Member
Posts: 1356 From: Vancouver, WA, USA Registered: Feb 2012
posted 09-29-2017 03:12 PM
Something does not add up.
Both Bezos and Branson are charging a helluva lot more than full fare economy for their sub-orbital flights and both of their vehicles are fully reusable. Why the difference between them and Musk?
From an economic standpoint, the mach 3 Concorde could not drum up enough flyers to stay in business. Why was that? Also, just because a future trip from, say, Chicago to Bangkok might take 42 minutes (instead of roughly 24 hours) does not mean that you still won't suffer from jet lag. Regardless of travel time there is still a 12 hour time difference between ORD and BKK. Of course you have saved two days of traveling, but your body will still have to pay the circadian price just as it does now. Getting anywhere on Earth in under 42 minutes sounds good, though, until you think about the details.
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 53629 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 09-29-2017 03:39 PM
The BFR, as described by Musk, can carry 100 people per flight (at least, for short hops, perhaps a couple of hundred). SpaceShipTwo and New Shepard are limited to four to six passengers.
The latter two craft are limited to only flying passengers and small science experiments. The BFR (again, as described by Musk) can be used to launch and retrieve satellites, service the space station and fly beyond-Earth missions. The costs for the vehicle are therefore spread over more lucrative flights, lowering the overhead for the launch vehicle itself.
Point-to-point is apparently not critical to SpaceX's primary focus. Musk's point seemed to be that the BFR consolidated design opens a number of possibilities, in addition to flying to Mars.
oly Member
Posts: 1484 From: Perth, Western Australia Registered: Apr 2015
posted 09-29-2017 11:42 PM
I watched the SpaceX presentation and was impressed by their willingness to adapt. There were some interesting points made including the landing accuracy has improved so much that it is plausible to remove the landing gear from Falcon 9 and land back on the launch pad. Musk also made reference to the importance of getting space transportation as reliable and reusable as commercial flight and SpaceX has done more toward this in the past nine years than anyone else (because they have flown commercial operations).
I don't believe that there has ever been a reference made to reducing jetlag.
To put a little perspective regarding what has been achieved so far, SpaceX has a reusable first stage and is working on more of the rocket being reusable while the SLS is still working towards taking the huge first stage with shuttle engines and dropping it into the ocean. The infrastructure and equipment being developed and the cost associated must be huge and still results in the hardware loss.
It is good to see that Musk has a vision and tries to follow up on it.
posted 06-13-2022 01:30 PM
advertisement