What’s Next for SpaceX
Posted by Andrew on May 22nd, 2012
This morning the world woke up to find out what the rest of us stayed up and watched happen: SpaceX launched their second spacecraft into orbit on a first of its kind mission to the International Space Station. The next few days involve more technical challenges. In a procedure akin to shooting a missile going 22,000 MPH into a trajectory with the ISS; SpaceX will try to pull off a rare feat capable of only a couple nations.
Meanwhile, what’s next for SpaceX?
Things are only getting started. Elon Musk has proposed an incredibly ambitious program for his company which is barely ten years old.
FALCON HEAVY
While SpaceX continues cargo flights to the ISS and launching satellites, next up is the testing and launch of the Falcon Heavy. SpaceX isn’t content with just building a replacement system for getting into space, they want to push the envelope even further.
Falcon Heavy is a rocket with 27 Merlin rocket engines (versus the Falcon 9’s nine). Slated to start testing later this year, Falcon 9 will be the most powerful rocket since the Saturn V’s that took us to the moon.
That’s this year.
The most powerful rocket in the world.
It’s the kind of rocket you’d use to send people to Mars.
Let me repeat, THEY PLAN ON TESTING IT THIS YEAR.
Even if it takes another year or two to get this up, anybody wants to to see what a mission to Mars will look like can take a trip like Justin Young and I did last night and watch SpaceX light the candle. This time on 27 Merlins instead of nine.
Check out an animation of this bad boy.
DRAGON CREW CAPSULE
SpaceX is building a Mars capable spaceship today. The bird flying over our heads right now is a proof of concept of a lot of the technologies that will go into making that happen. The most important system is safety.
To make the Dragon spacecraft the safest crewed space vehicle in the world, they need to build an escape system – something the Space Shuttle never had.
The Dragon will have built-in thrusters that will allow the spaceship to separate from the second and third stage in an emergency and land via parachute or rocket power. This rocket-powered launch would even allow the Dragon to land from orbit back on the launch pad without a parachute.
That’s crazy Buck Rogers technology, but that’s the plan. In researching the feasibility of this, Elon Musk and the SpaceX team came up with the most crazy idea yet:
A FULLY REUSABLE SPACECRAFT
Instead of trying to pull your rockets out of the sea and rebuild them, why not have them land back on the launch pad. While companies like Blue Origin are trying to build a single-stage to orbit system, SpaceX is developing a far more fuel efficient system that would allow each stage to land by itself.
A fully reusable rocket would take off and separate into two stages and a spacecraft. Each one would then use rocket thrusters to land back on the launch pad where they’d be inspected and refueled.
This is the space age version of passenger jets. SpaceX is working on this right now. Not ‘someday’, not in ‘the future’. Engineers are trying to solve these problems as we speak. The systems that go into making the Dragon crew-capable lead into the systems that will allow you to let your primary stage land back on the platform.
The cost savings are incredible. The Shuttle cost from $10-20,000 per pound. Falcon 9 costs about $2,300. A reusable craft takes this below $100. From $10,000 per pound to $100 in a decade. It could even go lower. Cheaper than a space elevator. Now that’s crazy talk.
You can see SpaceX’s vision for this in the animation. You can go outside and look up at the first step towards this right now.
The future is happening.
Twitter this
May 22nd, 2012 at 9:39 pm
I do not like this site’s unadulterated love for one private space firm, SpaceX. Dont get me wrong, what they did this morning was a big step. I do not like that the Merlin engine is not entirely SpaceX’s design:
Spaceflight Now: “the Merlin engine was developed internally at SpaceX, but draws upon a long heritage of space proven engines.” That translates to me, some taxpayer funded science is in that engine.Reminds me that there is no better creator of space technology that our government (rocket science industry, turbines, GPS, the microchip). I bet on DARPA for enabling the tech to get us to the stars. Why should they be counted on? oh, just their past impact, like that soon-to-be 5 trillion dollar industry created from that thing we call the internet. Just read about Mae Jemison and “The Way.” They want to bring the public in. Private industry doesn’t like to share. cheers for Elon Musk. Will he open source some of your technology to others, so humans can really get to Mars? I get it, he has investors and needs to make a profit. To get where he wants to go, it will take immense cooperation among all the disciplines. Research that cant be locked behind corporate walls.cheers for Elon reducing the strain on NASA for supplying the ISS, well done. Wonder if he will do similar cargo transports for the upcoming CSS.go ahead, destroy me.
May 22nd, 2012 at 10:44 pm
LA Times says NASA has “…has poured nearly $400 million in seed money into SpaceX…”
May 22nd, 2012 at 11:04 pm
We might disagree on some things my Saucy friend, but I’d never want to destroy you. 🙂
Deep down, we both want to go to space as much as possible. For as long as we can. As safe as we can.
SpaceX has made no secret of how much NASA has been an integral part of their rise.
In my opinion, Musk deserves a lot of credit for his achievements so far. But I hope what happens next is all the proof we will need that his vision was a good one for America and the human race as a whole.
May 23rd, 2012 at 12:26 am
Let’s not forget the German scientists who made our space program possible…
Every program draws on its predecessors. We wouldn’t have got into space as quickly as we had without Wernher von Braun and others who worked on the V2 that bombed England.
SpaceX has been very clear in its praise for the work of NASA and the lessons they learned from them.
In the 50 years we’ve been going into space, just over 500 people have been able to make the trip.
50 years, 500 people.
That’s not a race, that’s an admission of defeat.
From SpaceX to Blue Origin, things get really interesting.
Side note: NASA rockets have always been built by private contractors. Almost none of those technologies were ever open-sourced.
May 23rd, 2012 at 12:27 am
The 400 million is for contracts to provide support for NASA programs.
It’s a great partnership.
NASA is thrilled with it. Why can’t you be?
May 23rd, 2012 at 8:50 pm
Personally, my love for SpaceX is not unadulterated. I’m excited by all sorts of potential space adultery.
The more the merrier. Whether it is non-profit government funded missions or commercial operations, I’m all for it.
As for Mr. Biscuits comment about SpaceX possibly delivering to a Chinese space station, why shouldn’t they? As long as we’re not at war with a country, trade with them should be encouraged.
I don’t believe that capitalism is the solution to all of life’s problems, but it does seem to be the case that you are less likely to wage war with someone when you rely on the exchange of goods and services with them.
May 24th, 2012 at 5:26 pm
sure you are right, because as the big boys come in this fall and the next few years, the competition will be immense. market share will decline, thus lower profit for each firm and less money to innovate that great engine you love of SpaceX. How long will SpaceX use that one. oh wait, there is a group that always has to kick the industry in the pants to innovate. I forget their name…hmm…NASA. Which of these space companies can withstand a failure? none, this is why taxpayers will always pay for it. I would like to see NASA coordinate it, but that Branson guy wants no part. Interesting to hear politicians, in the home places of these space agencies like California, say it is NASA’s job to push the science. Maybe we don’t get it, science should only be done if you can make money on it, right? There would be no space industry without one thing and companies took decades to come around to it. what is that?…the microchip. Watch as I get attacked for not expressing that I don’t believe the “free” market solves the big problems. When we have large scale flood damage, private insurance companies cover 10% of it, the US Govt pays the rest. sure, those companies will insure us when we leave Earth’s protective magnetosphere on the way to Mars. sure. But, this is a great way to run a space race. Starve NASA of money, so it has to use private firms. keep doing it, so for NASA to do any science in space, they have to rely on SpaceX and others. the libertarian way, love it. Now watch as I am called a communist or socialist. Like America should be giving a company $400 million to make a rocket. Imagine the important people Musk knows to get a $1.6 billion government contract and have no money in 2010. Low interest department of energy loans for SpaceX. love it, the “free” market. build a damn rocket without taxpayer money, please. why do I even post here?
May 24th, 2012 at 5:43 pm
I am willing to bet once SpaceX puts a human in low Earth orbit and return them safely, the money savings will not be that 1/4 number they like to tell the media. Ask NASA about that, oh wait, they are already working in your building. But the media tells us we should be happy the average age of SpaceX employees is 30. Imagine all the operation mistakes NASA had to learn from with the Apollo and shuttle programs. Private industry is about to relearn it.
May 24th, 2012 at 9:11 pm
Possibly, but what’s the fun in rooting for them to fail instead of succeed if success means NASA gets to do more science in space?
May 24th, 2012 at 9:21 pm
Go to hell – the both of you.
May 26th, 2012 at 6:02 pm
NewScientist asks Elon a question:
You claim to be getting away from the government-assisted model of spaceflight engineering and the lack of innovation that approach entails. Yet your website says your Falcon 9 rocket’s main Merlin engine design is inspired by the Apollo lunar module main engine. So you still depend on government-inspired inventions?
Elon Musk:
Heh (laughs). We should probably change that text, it’s probably not the best in the world. That’s a bit like saying a modern day car is based on what Daimler and Benz did. We’re in fact using something that’s far more advanced than they had on the Moon, which was a type of injector called a pintle, a large signal coaxial injector – and that was the basic architecture we used. We said that originally because it had to be super safe – it was a single point of failure – and it’s a type of engine architecture that is naturally stable and is not subject to combustion harmonics that can cause a combustion chamber to explode.
May 26th, 2012 at 6:02 pm
NewScientist asks Elon a question:
You claim to be getting away from the government-assisted model of spaceflight engineering and the lack of innovation that approach entails. Yet your website says your Falcon 9 rocket’s main Merlin engine design is inspired by the Apollo lunar module main engine. So you still depend on government-inspired inventions?
Elon Musk:
Heh (laughs). We should probably change that text, it’s probably not the best in the world. That’s a bit like saying a modern day car is based on what Daimler and Benz did. We’re in fact using something that’s far more advanced than they had on the Moon, which was a type of injector called a pintle, a large signal coaxial injector – and that was the basic architecture we used. We said that originally because it had to be super safe – it was a single point of failure – and it’s a type of engine architecture that is naturally stable and is not subject to combustion harmonics that can cause a combustion chamber to explode.
May 26th, 2012 at 6:02 pm
NewScientist asks Elon a question:
You claim to be getting away from the government-assisted model of spaceflight engineering and the lack of innovation that approach entails. Yet your website says your Falcon 9 rocket’s main Merlin engine design is inspired by the Apollo lunar module main engine. So you still depend on government-inspired inventions?
Elon Musk:
Heh (laughs). We should probably change that text, it’s probably not the best in the world. That’s a bit like saying a modern day car is based on what Daimler and Benz did. We’re in fact using something that’s far more advanced than they had on the Moon, which was a type of injector called a pintle, a large signal coaxial injector – and that was the basic architecture we used. We said that originally because it had to be super safe – it was a single point of failure – and it’s a type of engine architecture that is naturally stable and is not subject to combustion harmonics that can cause a combustion chamber to explode.
May 27th, 2012 at 1:05 am
“Imagine all the operation mistakes NASA had to learn from with the Apollo and shuttle programs. Private industry is about to relearn it. ”
What? Why? What’s stopping private industries from taking what NASA has learned and applying it to their own space programs? Is Space X recruiting their people from the 1940’s, and so they don’t have access to any information on what NASA has done?
Car manufacturers don’t have to reinvent the wheel for every new model of car that they produce. Why should a private space program have to reinvent rocket science?
May 27th, 2012 at 6:32 am
54 countries are involved with the International Space Station (15 of them built it). I doubt one private firm could build one. Seven different space agencies got together on April 28th and vowed to work together. I remember when Bush was President, China wanted to work together to finally find a new energy source. Of course, he declined because he had no sense of the future and wanted China as the boogeyman. I bet China solves some problems really soon, like teleportation (oops they just set the distance record). I put my money on governments to solve the big problems. Heck, they are the only ones willing to educate people.
May 27th, 2012 at 6:54 am
seems people are questioning the numbers used for calculating the cost/IB for the full Dragon supply mission. The ISS requires a pressurized payload and a launch to the ISS also requires a steep inclination. Some say the price per Ib for the shuttle payload changed a lot over the years. Guess, we will have to wait and see what the Dragon does.
May 29th, 2012 at 4:35 pm
Up until a week ago they were saying one company couldn’t build a spaceship capable of reaching the ISS…
And the Europeans just beat the Chinese teleportation record…
Have you been to China? I have.
Ever used Facebook, Twitter, YouTube or Wikipedia there? You can’t.
The young people there are amazing. Their government, which you hold up to some kind of idealistic paragon, routinely imprisons and executes people for speaking their minds.
That’s not my idea of progress.
May 29th, 2012 at 5:09 pm
Dvorak and Laporte have been. They said at hotels, there were given servers to connect to to bypass those restrictions. We seem to imprison people at the drop of the hat now.
No, I don’t think China has a great history of human rights. But, I see a country beginning the slow conversion to a more open market. Xi Jinping is the next president-in-waiting and he has a history of caring for the sick and disabled. I will not demonize a whole country. I see a country realizing its problems and willing to put all their energy towards solving them. The Wukan village was allowed to have elections in March. That is a start. Now Guangdong has been given a taste of democracy. Call me naive for seeing some progress.
May 29th, 2012 at 6:33 pm
I think there’s progress there. Heck, my visit there was because I was asked by the Chinese government to lecture on creativity.
The biggest problem they face beyond human rights is the intense amount of corruption. It’s colossal and has the weight of the state behind it. Most of the “mass incidents”, Chinese government code for “protest” are over government corruption.
Every company has a government bureaucrat sitting on the board. The richest people in China are family members of politicians. Not some like the US, almost all of them.