FXX could possible offer lower cost per mass to orbit. If they develop a reusable launcher then they might go with FX ( FXH ) or FXX.įX ( FXH ) would give them the option of liter or heaver mass to orbit payloads. If they get a high enough flight rate they might launch FH from 39A. Which one would SpaceX launch from pad 39A if they do end up using pad 39A? SpaceX is going to have a check written to them by someone for any vehicle they build, and that check is going to be written by someone other than Elon Musk. SpaceX, Telsa, and Solar City are all not charity cases. IMHO serious money is not going to get put into Falcon XX until it's use as part of the NASA exploration program is green lighted (Falcon XX to complement SLS's launch rate), or reusability is proven out in the Falcon 9 family to allow the Falcon XX to compete with FH/D4H/Atlas 5 in a reusable configuration. They did not start serious Falcon 1.1/Heavy Work until they knew DOD contracts for Falcon Heavy where possible, and they Needed the 1.1 for production reasons. SpaceX did not start serious work on Falcon 9 till they had NASA waiting. Production Falcon 9 1.1 (Necessitated because 1.0 was not scaleable/underperformed) Producing Falcon 9 1.0 (Paid for by NASA/ Other Customers) Producing Falcon 1 (paid for by DARPA/ORS/Customers) SpaceX tends to have 3 tracks they operate on, Production.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
January 2023
Categories |