SpaceX costs , and some remote observations…

Elon Musk in this update post is very publicly making the point that while his wealth enabled him to ‘launch’ SpaceX the prices they are charging are ‘real’ and sustainable over the long run not subsidized.  Seems that he is proving that when you are talking about certain classes of product America is still the leader, you just can’t carry old infrastructure, including old thinking, along for the ride. 

Had a look at Blue Origin’s website and their factory, the thing that strikes me about all of the eSpace companies is that they are quite modest in size, set up for clean, smooth, flexible manufacturing and have a modest work force. I assume that they have developed a significant network of supporting suppliers, small and large and do only key operations in house.   

They are using modern tools and techniques, informed by a huge legacy of knowledge and the tools that the legacy has created.  This is the sort of thing that America is very good at, it requires motivated people working in trust based teams, with accountability, bull headedness, hard headedness, willingness to fail and a refusal to let the risk of, or even the actuality of failure, to get in the way of progress.  Small entrepreneurial companies are infinitely better at this that big ones. Especially big ones with any ties to the gov’t/mil world and its utter aversion to risk or failure.

Minor Planets (all the stuff that isn’t one of the eight (no longer nine since Pluto got dissed)

The Minor Planet Center web site, a Smithsonian Operation, so pretty serious stuff, lots of info, just a scan of the lists could alter your view of the local environs we live in.  1200 plus potential dangerous asteroids….known and in the inner system today, tens of thousands of other bodies out there, ready to play interplanetary billiards if something really hairy this way came.  But mainly a very good resource for serious thought, serious business like eSpace objectives for mining, and for not so serious ventures such as SciFi.

Combo view from the fly by

A combo shows a sequence of images of the Lutetia asteroid at various distances before the closest approach of the Rosetta spacecraft in 2010. A rare opportunity to observe an asteroid at close quarters has unveiled a remarkable rock that seems to be a precursor of a planet, astronomers reported on Thursday.

So I found the article with the above picture (click through) fascinating,  dealing with an asteroid that got a fly by last year by Rosetta (ESA Spacecraft.)  “The astronomers calculate Lutetia to be 121 kilometres (75 miles) long, 101 kms (63 miles) tall and 75 kilometres (47 miles) wide.”  “Lutetia’s high density, at 3,400 kilos per cubic metre (212 pounds per cubic foot), its large size and its ancient surface make it different from any other asteroid studied so far, the studies said.”

This is Eros the first asteroid to be visited, “34.4×11.2×11.2 km in size 34.4×11.2×11.2 km in size” “Mean density 2.67±0.03 g/cm³ ”  or about 2670 kilos per cubic meter.

Eros Montage from Wikipedia...approximatly real color

 Below is Temple,  a comet visited by two spacecraft.  “Mean density 0.62 g/cm³ ”  or 620 kilos per meter.

Annotated images of Tempel 1 from two spacecraft.

Comparison of From Wikipedia: Deep Impact and Stardust photos of a smooth elevated feature on the surface of the nucleus showing recession of icy cliffs at the margins

 With this information it becomes obvious that the make up of the minor worlds is much more diverse than had begun to be thought.   Eros is pretty dense but still probably filled with voids, obviously Temple is pretty much a rubble pile, which astronomers think is true of other bodies. 

So Lutetia is too dense to be a rock pile or even void filled, it has to be as solid as a planet, they think it’s a left over planetesimal from the early creation of the solar system.   The only way it can be as dense as it is, is if it went through a molten phase. Given that a shell even a ‘few’ miles thick of rock provide a good insulator it is apparently possible that Lutetia has a molten core. 

Does that mean there could be differentiated materials in that crunchy coating?  It seems to be an obvious target for mining, where there is pretty much zero risk of cave ins.  What are the odds of a good distribution of useful materials for the space industrial infrastructure?   This may or may not be a valid mining target, but it points out some things to think about.

 

 

Reuse, respin, start-from, even salvage: how is this bad?

20111017-171748.jpg

A concept to boost parts of the ISS either into Lunar orbit or to one of the Lagrange points. One negative comment pointed out the ISS requires a lot of support. Well there is no reason you can’t resupply and crew as needed instead of full time. The point here would be reuse of a facility that is already in orbit ( $aving in the tens of millions to billions in the process) and by that point would have fulfilled it’s original purpose (however vague that was.)

20111017-171804.jpg

Boeing is getting crap for suggesting the X-37 could be used as is, scaled up, or scaled and crewed. How can it be a bad idea to take a successful aerospace-craft as the basis of future growth. The original X-37 was intended for just this sort of scaling. O.K. it being Boeing does worry me, a little, but they have the scale, resources, focus (maybe) and balls (probably) to do this. My main concern is the crowding out of smaller eSpace players. But the eSpace crowd appear to have gotten their climbing claws dug in and seem to be on a flight path of their own. As long as BigB is climbing as well as, not instead of, I think we’re good.