Mach Effect progress

[AcesHigh]

(edit: I noticed I accidentaly replaced the USAF with ULA, is that what you were talking about?)

Yes that and.
The protest is about the fact that the USAF extended the block buy from ULA to 36 cores without ever opening any of them for competition. Originally, they were going to compete 14 missions and that has been cut down to as little as 1. SpaceX was excluded from launches scheduled way into 2018! That is more than 4 years from now. SpaceX has to demonstrate 3 successful launches of the current configuration of the LV in order to become certified by the USAF (ULA never had to do that). At the time of the USAF signing of the block buy, SpaceX had already had two of those and the 3rd was only days away.
There is no reasonable reason that the USAF could not have waited a few days with the signing of the block buy in order to give SpaceX a chance to fulfill the 3rd launch required (which they subsequently did). So SpaceX is not suing because they were rejected, but because they were never allowed to compete for launches as long as 4 years into the future. This could potentially cost the US taxpayer billions.

That's semantics in my opinion. I know all that and maybe I just did not explain it properly when I compressed it all in a small phrase (english is not my native language anyway, so that happens).

But anyway, you say they were not "rejected", they were just not allowed to compete. Well, imho it's the same thing (that´s why I said it´s semantics). SpaceX was not allowed to compete because it did not fit the criteria to compete. The criteria was that the rockets need to be tested/proved, whatever, x times. Carefully constructed bidding document so as to exclude SpaceX, and ridiculous, considering the Falcon 9 would fit the criteria VERY SOON and the bidding could wait since the launches are in the future.

The whole RD-180 matter is just a second angle that SpaceX is persuing to up the pressure on the USAF and ULA, it is not the actual reason for the lasuit, though.

yes, but I only mentioned it about it after you said I should read more on it.

[Skipjack]

(edit: I noticed I accidentaly replaced the USAF with ULA, is that what you were talking about?)

Yes that and.
The protest is about the fact that the USAF extended the block buy from ULA to 36 cores without ever opening any of them for competition. Originally, they were going to compete 14 missions and that has been cut down to as little as 1. SpaceX was excluded from launches scheduled way into 2018! That is more than 4 years from now. SpaceX has to demonstrate 3 successful launches of the current configuration of the LV in order to become certified by the USAF (ULA never had to do that). At the time of the USAF signing of the block buy, SpaceX had already had two of those and the 3rd was only days away.
There is no reasonable reason that the USAF could not have waited a few days with the signing of the block buy in order to give SpaceX a chance to fulfill the 3rd launch required (which they subsequently did). So SpaceX is not suing because they were rejected, but because they were never allowed to compete for launches as long as 4 years into the future. This could potentially cost the US taxpayer billions.

That's semantics in my opinion. I know all that and maybe I just did not explain it properly when I compressed it all in a small phrase (english is not my native language anyway, so that happens).

But anyway, you say they were not "rejected", they were just not allowed to compete. Well, imho it's the same thing (that´s why I said it´s semantics). SpaceX was not allowed to compete because it did not fit the criteria to compete. The criteria was that the rockets need to be tested/proved, whatever, x times. Carefully constructed bidding document so as to exclude SpaceX, and ridiculous, considering the Falcon 9 would fit the criteria VERY SOON and the bidding could wait since the launches are in the future.

The whole RD-180 matter is just a second angle that SpaceX is persuing to up the pressure on the USAF and ULA, it is not the actual reason for the lasuit, though.

yes, but I only mentioned it about it after you said I should read more on it.

No and that is the culprint that will make or break the case. If they were evaluated and rejected, then they have no case. If they were never allowed to compete in the first place, then they do.
SpaceX claims that they never even had a chance to compete and get evaluated. They did not even get to make an offer.

[AcesHigh]

I never said they were evaluated. They didn´t had the chance EXACTLY because they did not fit the criteria of the bidding process, therefore they could not enter the bidding process.

Analogy:

SpaceX sells Laptops with Windows 7.

USAF starts a bidding process where the description asks for Laptops with Windows 8. Only ULA sells Laptops with Windows 8.

SpaceX doesnt fit the criteria of the bidding process. They were not evaluated, they just did not fit the criteria to ENTER the bidding process.

What SpaceX claims is that USAF should NOT do the bidding process right now, because they want the laptops to 2018 only, and SpaceX is in the process of installing Windows 8 in their new line of Laptops.

SpaceX Laptops are CHEAPER and BETTER. SpaceX claims that USAF added the item of Windows 8 on purpose to avoid a fair bidding process, since ULA would be the sole laptop provider with Windows 8 right now.


Adding to that, ULA's laptops have motherboards made in Russia

[Skipjack]

I never said they were evaluated. They didn´t had the chance EXACTLY because they did not fit the criteria of the bidding process, therefore they could not enter the bidding process.

Analogy:

SpaceX sells Laptops with Windows 7.

USAF starts a bidding process where the description asks for Laptops with Windows 8. Only ULA sells Laptops with Windows 8.

SpaceX doesnt fit the criteria of the bidding process. They were not evaluated, they just did not fit the criteria to ENTER the bidding process.

What SpaceX claims is that USAF should NOT do the bidding process right now, because they want the laptops to 2018 only, and SpaceX is in the process of installing Windows 8 in their new line of Laptops.

SpaceX Laptops are CHEAPER and BETTER. SpaceX claims that USAF added the item of Windows 8 on purpose to avoid a fair bidding process, since ULA would be the sole laptop provider with Windows 8 right now.


Adding to that, ULA's laptops have motherboards made in Russia

Well, the "fitting the criteria" part is the other issue. IIRC SpaceX claims that they were never informed about all the criteria (which kept changing) and that that they fulfilled most of them. They were in progress on the 3rd flight, which would have been the last thing they needed to be certified. That flight was days away (and the airforce knew it). Either way, the USAF did not have to buy a block of launches that would block SpaceX until 2019. They could have bought less and then opened the others for bidding (which was what they originally were going to do).

[zapkitty]

... back to the subject.

At this time how small could an independent test unit be built ?

Nothing fancy... just one that could provide definitive proof that something's going on.

Obviously it'd be larger than a cube sat.... and add in as well an independent free-floating measurement unit to provide a baseline and a POV.

Both launched in the same package to LEO.

[GIThruster]

At this time how small could an independent test unit be built ?

The thrusters themselves can be built very small. The problem is miniaturizing the power system. They can also be built very small, but this would take about $1.2M investment. Failing those funds, I'm afraid I don't see a better way forward than putting the thruster on the type balance Jim already has. All the objections to such testing are easy to dispense with using the methods and protocols Jim has had in place for years, so there is no doubt about the results from such a setup.

IMHO, the best way forward for Jim is to produce so much thrust on his balance that people can no longer afford to turn a blind eye to the issue. ~100 mN continuous would be more than enough and that is easily within grasp of a properly designed VHF thruster that is small enough to maneuver a nano from ISS to equatorial, then through the VAB (given adequate rad hardening), then cislunar, then to Mars. So you can get 4 mission parts for the price of one if you can do the rad hardening cheaply--and I think we can.

[hanelyp]

The thrusters themselves can be built very small. The problem is miniaturizing the power system. They can also be built very small, but this would take about $1.2M investment. ...

IMHO, the best way forward for Jim is to produce so much thrust on his balance that people can no longer afford to turn a blind eye to the issue. ~100 mN continuous would be more than enough and that is easily within grasp of a properly designed VHF thruster....

A couple PLL ICs, a microcontroller, a handful of transistors and passive components, a piezo driver, and a high energy density ceramic capacitor for the "active mass" element ... How's that add to $1.2M? Are you including launch to test in orbit?

I have to agree that a thruster well outside any plausible noise will be necessary to convince skeptics, including myself.

[GIThruster]

A couple PLL ICs, a microcontroller, a handful of transistors and passive components, a piezo driver, and a high energy density ceramic capacitor for the "active mass" element ... How's that add to $1.2M? Are you including launch to test in orbit?

No, that is the figure I was handed for just miniaturizing the power system. I have not even begun to research the task yet but it sounds high to me too.

Thruster development is on top of that, and the ceramic for that development could be very expensive since we're looking at a frequency range above where PZT maintains its k value. Probably we're looking at a proprietary ceramic--one of two options I have in mind--that with all the prior lab work for pre-prototype and prototype, could cost many thousands of dollars. Obviously stuff like that is cheaper once you lay in your own ceramics lab, but that is not practical to build a pre-prototype.

Right now I can only guess, but I think to fly from ISS to equatorial orbit in a nano with no proprietary rad hardening is somewhere around $2M, with almost all of that going to lab salaries and power system miniaturization, and that starts the CEO and CFO making less than the engineers--which is just as it should be, IMHO.

Keep in mind, the quality of engineer we need for the power system work, makes $250k/year.

[Carl White]

3D print shop to do the ceramics inexpensively?

[GIThruster]

Of the two ceramics that would best serve, one needs to be plasma sintered, which is relatively inexpensive, and the other is single crystal which is always very expensive. There are other options but one would need access to a plasma sintering machine at the least.

SpaceX does have a 3D printer that melts Inconel, so that could sinter ceramics; but it would be all unexplored territory to do such designer ceramics. The up side is one could print an entire thruster in one go. the down side is there is no preexisting data on the kind of ceramics you would thus create. Worth a shot if you have access to such a machine, but unless Elon suddenly takes an interest in my VAB plasma rad hardening, here's me thinking he won't just give us the loan of his machine.

[Betruger]

And the chance that something goes wrong is negligible enough? Cause once it's up there in orbit, that's one expensive mere technical fix to address. Can't just open the vacuum chamber to fiddle with it like with a unit down here on the ground.

[GIThruster]

Well before you luanch anything, there are a battery of tests one needs to do. One thing that could be problematic is duration testing of ceramics that are not polarized, since unlike PZT, they can't depolarize and could go of very long periods of time before a failure. This is one reason I'm interested in the Mars aspect of a TRL7 demo. If you can maneuver from ISS to equatorial and the thruster is still going, you want to do more. If you can make it through the VAB in one piece, cislunar makes sense because you have lots of tracking you can use. If after you swing around the backside you still have thrust, there's little reason to come back as you fly right back into the VAB. NASA has the first gen Elektra Radio operating aboard MRO, so you could say hello if you made it that far. That's pretty long duration reporting for a TRL7 toy, and proof of concept for 10,000 nano-explorer's launched to the asteroid belt by a single Falcon 9. That would change the deep space industry over night.

But yeah, there are many things that could go wrong. That's why you want to use a nano. They're considered disposable. The thruster is not, but it has to go to space for TRL7 regardless.

[Betruger]

That's right. What I should've asked was whether TRL 7 in micro/zero grav is cheaper (total, e.g. cost of a failure in orbit) than demonstration on an air hockey table or actually levitating in public down here at the bottom of the gravity well. Not expecting an actual quantitative answer this early, just curious if launching it is really definitely the more affordable alternative.

[GIThruster]

I think if you have a miniaturized system, there's some reason to put it on an air hockey table, but its TRL7 that is the big door so lofting to space is a key item. You can pay to loft an unminiaturized power system and get useful results but your thrust/mass is very low compared to if you miniaturize. Since NASA does loft nanos for free, seems to me going that route minimizes risk and maximizes benefit.

[Betruger]

NASA does loft nanos for free

Wow.. Didn't know that.