Source
DanHeidelWildass Speculator•

It's worth mentioning that FH crewed launches are conditionally canceled. In yesterday's press conference, Elon said that if BFR takes longer than expected to develop, crewed FH may be put back on the table.

11
S-A-ROP•

Thanks for clarifying.

1
paul_wi11iams•

Had the free return project been maintained, there could have been cause for concern. A tragedy on that flight could have been a huge setback for BFR which is what we should be looking at. Remember the Virgin Galactic accident...

From your link, let's retain this quote:

The upper stage of BFR, known as the “spaceship,” could be ready for “short flights” next year, a timeline he acknowledged on the call was “aspirational.”

Many here had been expecting a mere Raptor version of Grasshopper and certainly not anything comparable with the finalized BFS, especially in terms of size. So yes, I'd prefer a boilerplate BFS flying in 2020 over a lunar free return in 2019. I'd call it a "happy disappointment", much like the suspension of RedDragon.

If 2019 is "aspirational", then 2020 becomes really possible. What's more, this gets credibility from the cash input represented by the new fortnightly launch rate now becoming a feasible average. A further indication is the 7000 employeeship figure. We get some corroboration from Gwynne talking about early testing from Boca Chica 2018/2019. We could even see both a Raptor Grasshopper and a boilerplate BFS flying within months of each other.

6
S-A-ROP•

I understand this is a smart business move for SpaceX. My reaction is more like a child being told Christmas is further away than they thought.

It makes sense. I understand it, but "Whaaaaaaa"!

2
paul_wi11iams•

Christmas is further away than they thought.

If Christmas is planetfall, then its no further away than we thought.

IMO, this isn't just a business move as such, but just sticking to his guns. He's avoiding letting intermediate objectives jeopardize the ultimate one. Its the countdown on SpacexStats that is the measure and it takes some strong-mindedness to avoid being drawn off towards secondary goals. Remember the Martian greenhouse ?

1
S-A-ROP•

This is disappointing, but business is business.

5
spammeLoop•

Propably for the better.

2
Glaucus_Blue•

A shame, but can't say I'm surprised. They seem to be throwing everything behind BFR, on top of that NASA is making it so hard to get human rated certification on rockets.

4
alternate-source-bot•

When I first saw this article from spacenews.com, its title was:

SpaceX no longer planning crewed missions on Falcon Heavy

Here are some other articles about this story:

I am a bot trying to encourage a balanced news diet.

These are all of the articles I think are about this story. I do not select or sort articles based on any opinions or perceived biases, and neither I nor my creator advocate for or against any of these sources or articles. It is your responsibility to determine what is factually correct.

1
DecronymAcronyms Explained•

### ###### ####

Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:

|Fewer Letters|More Letters| |-------|---------|---| |BFR|Big Falcon Rocket (2017 enshrinkened edition)| | |Yes, the F stands for something else; no, you're not the first to notice| |BFS|Big Falcon Spaceship (see BFR)| |ITS|Interplanetary Transport System (2016 oversized edition) (see MCT)| | |Integrated Truss Structure| |MCT|Mars Colonial Transporter (see ITS)|

|Jargon|Definition| |-------|---------|---| |Raptor|Methane-fueled rocket engine under development by SpaceX, see ITS|

^(Decronym is a community product of r/SpaceX, implemented )^by ^request
^(3 acronyms in this thread; )^the ^most ^compressed ^thread ^commented ^on ^today^( has 16 acronyms.)
^([Thread #729 for this sub, first seen 6th Feb 2018, 21:41]) ^[FAQ] ^[Full ^list] ^[Contact] ^[Source ^code]

1