Posted on 04/21/2018 9:13:50 AM PDT by Kaslin
For years now, the Pentagon has been in the market for new heavy-lift launch vehicles – rockets that can lift between 44,000 to 110,000 pounds. Currently, the only market options available are either too costly or too reliant on Russian-made parts.
To that end, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk announced that he will begin devoting most of his company’s efforts on developing the “BFR” – short for Big F-ing Rocket – which will allegedly be so huge and powerful that it will make the company’s previous rocket lines outdated in just a few short years. Musk stated at the South by Southwest conference that it is expected to be ready for short flights next year. This week, he announced that production will soon occur in Los Angeles.
Although already receiving over $70 million in government funding for the BFR, SpaceX announced it wants more appropriations to help it power through to the finish line. But given the company’s rocky history, as well as the steady influx of competition in the aerospace realm, perhaps the Pentagon should not extend Musk’s funding marker until the company demonstrates the ability to fix the security issues in its other rocket lines.
If Musk’s BFR’s script seems oddly familiar, that’s because it is. Previously, SpaceX said it would change the heavy-lift rocket game with its Falcon Heavy – a rocket that launched for the first time in February – but this Disney-esque storyline may not pan out as imagined. Not only did the Falcon Heavy’s core rocket booster crash into the ocean on its inaugural launch, but its for-show Tesla Roadster payload also overshot Mars’ orbit and could collide with something in space years down the road.
While these lift-off issues can be rectified for future missions, there may be more reliability concerns than meet the eye. Things seem far from stable. Both NASA and the Air Force reportedly declined Musk’s offer to put a payload on the launch. Even Musk himself seemed to believe a launch explosion was likely. The third booster and payload trajectory went off course this time, but there may very well be different, independent issues in subsequent launches. And yet, instead of devoting its time to fixing these errors – or the 33 major security issues associated with its other rocket line, for that matter – SpaceX has vowed to spend the bulk of its efforts on developing a new rocket that it wants more taxpayer money for.
Which begs the question: is a lack of faith in the Falcon Heavy’s ability the reason Musk plans to already make it “obsolete” in just a few short years with the ‘bigger and better’ BFR?
The steady stream of outside competition is likely adding to Musk’s uncertainty of the Falcon Heavy’s future and desire to build something new. For example, the Vulcan, a heavy-lift rocket in development by the United Launch Alliance (ULA), is expected to debut by mid-2020. Like SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy, it will also be reusable and very cost-competitive at “sub-$100 million.” Unlike the Falcon Heavy, it will use cryogenic oxygen and hydrogen to prevent it from freezing in space after a short period of time – a well-thought out touch that may give it an edge over its competitor.
At the same time, Jeff Bezos’s Blue Origin is targeting a 2020 debut for its privately-funded New Glenn rocket system. Bezos’s creation will have an entirely reusable first stage and stand at 270-313 feet tall, hence towering over Musk’s heavy-lift rocket. Per DGIT Daily, Blue Origin will unquestionably outrank Musk’s company once the New Glenn takes the skies “unless SpaceX has something else up its sleeve.” Increased competition in the aerospace industry is also expected to soon come from companies like ArianeGroup, Paul Allen’s Stratolaunch Systems, and Orbital ATK, so NASA is under no circumstances beholden to SpaceX.
The problem here appears to be that Musk, who once said that it should be “game over” for all other heavy-lift rockets, may be paranoid about this competition and compelled to assert his dominance.
One of Musk’s most outlandish proclamations came when he stated that he’d “eat his hat with a side of mustard if [the Vulcan] flies a national security spacecraft before 2023.” This was an odd statement for the SpaceX CEO to make given that Falcon Heavy’s February test firing came only after the company promised a maiden lift-off by 2013-2014, Spring 2016, late 2016, and November 2017 – not to mention the numerous broken promises it has made with the Falcon 9, including a fourth straight flight deadline missed just last month due to nose cone problems. If reliability is truly a national spaceflight concern, it’s not due to the company with 125 straight successful launches – it’s because of issues spurred by Musk himself.
While cutthroat competition is a valid reason for any entrepreneur to desire building something more sustainable, it should be done on the company’s own dime. SpaceX has already received over $70 million from the government to develop its BFR rocket. Giving any more than this amount to a company that already has some unresolved security issues when its list of competitors is increasing by the day would be incredibly stupid.
Taxpayers are supposed to finance security assets, not corporate bandages. Washington withholding funding for the BFR until much-needed rectifications are made will increase, not decrease, SpaceX’s output quality. The government’s “do or die” ultimatum has produced favorable results when dealing with past government contractors, and I would suspect equally positive outcomes would occur in the case of SpaceX. The time is now to do what’s right for our national security by demanding accountability.
Why should the US taxpayer allow any more of our hard earned money to prop up musk’s enterprises? How much money has Uncle Sam already poured into musk’s companies to save them from folding? Remember he wasted how much money buying out his relatives failing Solar City business? If we throw more money his way will any of it go be diverted to cover loses else where? His businesses are black holes with no end to their need for an infusion of government largesse.
Yea they were a bit....loud....think i still have a few scars on my fingers lol.
i got a 10 yr old nephew downstairs addicted to playstation, i should hit up ebay and see what they got to divert him a bit this summer.
If Musk’s BFR’s script seems oddly familiar, that’s because it is. Previously, SpaceX said it would change the heavy-lift rocket game with its Falcon Heavy – a rocket that launched for the first time in February – but this Disney-esque storyline may not pan out as imagined. Not only did the Falcon Heavy’s core rocket booster crash into the ocean on its inaugural launch, but its for-show Tesla Roadster payload also overshot Mars’ orbit and could collide with something in space years down the road.
...
The author is an ignorant asshole with Musk Derangement Syndrome.
The second stage purposely depleted its propellant to see how far out it could go. It was more successful than planned.
Are you kidding me? Since when do freedom lovers advocate subsidizing billionaires and then fuss when someone pays shrillary a taxpayer quarter mill for a public university speech. Just wow.
Might I suggest a durn wall instead.. our impotent leadership displays its corruptocratic priority spending. .
Ah the good old days.
back then we would glue the fins right onto the engine....forget the costly rocket.
...
That reminds me that the BFR will have the heat shields (outer skin) bolted directly to the fuel tanks. In other words, no box in a box as Musk puts it. It will save a lot of weight.
Cox has been gone for nearly 20 years.
Norvel engines from Russia were used by the airplanes guys for a while. Beautifully machined little jewels. It looks like that company only makes bigger units now. A shame.
It’s not a subsidy. The government is paying for a product or service it wants, and getting a great value in return.
Maybe you should bitch about the money that the big contractors like Boeing have received over the years while still charging a fortune for launches.
Musk is also a business man.
When you got a dbag like hussein and the rest of the dem party promising to put petroleum and carbon out of business you jump on the next available thing wouldn’t you?
yea, solar sucks, he knows it too but just like Ford with the Model T he wanted to be just like him....having leftists hand you globs of money to do it helps...would you not take the cash?
Thing is Musk is the kind of guy given time to make a solar panel far more efficient.
I have a feeling that the main prob with Musk is that a LOT of people are seriously JEALOUS and envious of the guy...
The author of this article is an idiot. A spacecraft traveling into the outer reaches of the solar system has ZERO chance of “colliding with something else in space years down the road.” Even the chances of it encountering space dust is nil. Does the author realize how vast space is?
He seems to have a hot poker up his butt about Musk and he should be honest as to why.
Whether he's a scammer or not will be quickly discovered. First off, government should get OUT of the satellite launch business, and let private companies sort it out among themselves.
Musk is RICH, young, good looking and gets hot chicks.
THAT is the writers beef..
Interesting about Norvel, read up on it a bit Thank you.
these kids today, playstation and their phone and nothing else.
my 10 yr old nephew doesn’t even bother with his bicycle..
i’d trade 1980 over any tech available today....please god send me back..
Musk showed up in Canada with a high school diploma and a phone number for a distant relative. He got a job cleaning a boiler because it paid the most money. He initially paid for his college education by running a nightclub on the weekends in the house he rented. He then earned a scholarship to UPenn and got a degree in physics and a degree in business from Wharton (the same school as president Trump).
Musk then dropped out of Stanford after a couple of days to start his first company. He slept on a bean bag chair in the office. He sold the company and earned $22 million. He then started on online bank (Paypal) and earned over $200 million when he sold that. He started SpaceX from scratch after the Russians tried to rip him off when he tried to buy a rocket from them. He eventually put all of his Paypal money into SpaceX and Tesla (at first as an investment and then to avoid bankruptcy).
Musk doesn’t receive a salary (like President Trump) except for minimum wage he must receive by law (he doesn’t cash the checks).
Should Musk’s companies have turned down money that the government was throwing at his companies, his competitor’s companies, and their customers? I guarantee his shareholders wouldn’t have allowed it. He started these companies because he dreamed about rockets and electric cars since he was a kid, not because he wanted subsidies.
So unless you’ve accomplished one one thousandth of what Musk has accomplished you’re just being a deranged idiot who doesn’t know what she’s talking about.
Space X has already proven that their designs work.
ULA has yet to begin a ‘recoverable’ first stage test.
Bezos is a monopolist, and cannot be anything else in any endeavor of his.
The engines of the Space X BFR are just more of what already works. Simple. Easy.
Of course, NASA is whining about getting back into the business, after an 8 year or more hiatus. Which to me means that they have to be designing for a while longer, while Space X marches on.
Agreed, I think Tesla is a joke, but Space X is a remarkable company.
Never wrap your Testes in Duct tape! NEVER!
You glue the fins to the engine, glue on a bit of drinking straw for launch control, Then.... you cut down the fuse on a Cherrybomb an glue that fuse end to the ejection charge as a payload.
Great wholesome fun!
Genius? Excuse while I get up off the floor laughing.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/aug/12/elon-musk-unveils-hyperloop-transport
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.