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Big F-ing Rocket – which will allegedly be so huge and powerful that it will make the company’s previous rocket lines outdated in just a few short years.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.
He is doing better than Edison with SpaceX
Edison was a charlatan, that ripped off ideas
In addition to the intentional misstatements
Musk is the reincarnation of P.T. Barnum. Everything he has accomplished has come at the expense of taxpayers. He knows how to work the system.
So right you are, what an idiot Musk is.
Next thing you know someone will be suggesting Arthur C. Clarke's space elevator is a possibility.
really? So somehow all that taxpayer plunder that that went into Musk's coffers don't count then. The turd's administration picked corporate winners and losers and lavishly bestowed taxpayer pelf on the winners of which Musk is one. Not all that different from Soylandra except he didn't go broke
Never thought to use the ejection charge for something..,ugh
Now you know. LOL
PS self striking matches fit in the barrel of a .177 pellet gun and will slpode and ignite on reaching the target if you give the old Benjamin a dozen pumps :)
Edison was a charlatan, that ripped off ideas
—
And ended up powering 12 volt DC batteries, and a light bulb. While the real genius, N. Tesla powered homes and cities and Edison’s light bulb with AC. One is celebrated, the other mostly forgotten.
Next thing you know someone will be suggesting Arthur C. Clarke’s space elevator is a possibility.
—
I’d suggest that Arthur C. Clarke’s satellites are a possibility ...
I’ll take the late 40s and 50s thanks; you can have the 80s. And no g-d will not send us back, but if Musk keeps going, perhaps in 20-30 years he’ll be into time machines ...
Any previous effort to catch rocket engines with a helicopter, such as ULA Vulcan operation proposes?
Just retool the Saturn V already!
Tesla was a genius, with no Business sense
Tesla’s stuff still works
Better than f’in’ NASA. Maybe he’ll provide vacations to Venus for the political class (see “The Marching Morons,” Cyril Kornbluth). That would be f’in’ swell. But Mars will do.
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.
There's a national defense priority to launchers, and not merely ICBMs, also surveillance of our foes and battlefields.
The only thing that concerns me about SpaceX is that Elon should be concentrating on the feasible -- complete takeover of the commercial launch business -- instead of trying to get suborbital BFR service between Earth's Pacific Rim cities.
Just in the past week or so the Russians realized they have to abandon their own development plans which were being claimed in the first place to compete with SpaceX. "We can't do it," something everyone already knew.
Everything Musk has done was built with private money, or as a contractor selling a product or service to gov't (which as we all know, builds and makes nothing) -- he's not some welfare case sitting on his ass cashing a monthly gov't check, so knock off the stupid and groundless accusations, they just make you look like idiots.
Unless that's what you're going for -- "Musk, you didn't build that."
He does have that huckster marketing vibe like Barnum, but he's also delivering each and every step of the way, regardless of whether he misses his original timetables -- a problem that has in impact on him and his companies, not on taxpayers.
SpaceX will be on Mars before NASA returns to the Moon -- but unless the fed gubmint gets smart, funding on the SLS, a rewarmed STS being built by everyone BUT SpaceX, will still be going out, with NASA having nothing to show for it.
The pro-Musk arguments seem to boil down to “Space X is much better than NASA” - but the upcoming bankruptcy and collapse of Tesla is going to deflate his cult of personality.
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.
