Making Life Multiplanetary

It is my pleasure, as President of the International Astronautical Federation, to welcome all of you today to the closing session of the global networking forum for this is C 2017, which has been a great success, in particular I want to thank Prime Minister who was a true minister and who means and Lord that our faith for the support and the presence now let me introduce our distinguished speaker today Elon Musk is the founding CEO and the designer of SpaceX founded SpaceX in 2002 with the aim of revolutionizing the space technology and ultimately enabling humans to become

multiplanetary

species today will provide an update on those plans first president at ISC 2016 in the climate of our final year SpaceX as the number of firsts, including the first private company to deliver cargo to and from the International Space Station, the first entity to land an orbital-class booster back to earth and on ships outside the sea and the first to fly an orbital-class booster besides SpaceX he is also the CEO of Tesla Motors and Sharmon from Solar City, please join me in welcoming the anonymous, yes, I'm fine, okay.

I'll walk on and talk more about what it takes to become

multiplanetary

species and just do a quick review of why this is important. I think fundamentally the future is much more exciting and interesting if you If you're a spacefaring civilization and a multi-planet species, whether we are or not, you want to be inspired by things, you want to wake up in the morning and think that the future is going to be great and that's what a space civilization brings. It's about believing in the future and thinking that we have accumulated the future in the past and I can't think of anything more exciting than going out and being among the stars, so as we ascend, we go into more detail. and as we become multi-client species, this is the updated design we're looking for the right name for, but the codename at least is bfr and probably the most important thing I want to convey in this presentation is that I think we've figured out how to pay for it, this is very important so last year's presentation you know we're really looking at what's the right way you know how we pay for this we went through several ideas about what kickstarter you know collect underpants these didn't work out but now We believe that we have a way to do it, which is to have a smaller vehicle, quite large, but that can serve that purpose. that can do everything that is needed in higher Earth orbit activity, so essentially we want to make our current vehicles redundant, we want to have a system, a ship, a booster and a ship that replaces the Falcon nine, Falcon Heavy and Dragon, so if we can do that. so all the resources that are used for Falcon 9 heavy and Dragon can be applied to this system, so that is really fundamental, so let's see what progress we have made in this direction, so in the last lesson you saw the giant tank that It is actually a 12. meter tank and you can see its relative scale, it has a thousand cubic meters of interior volume, which is actually a more pressurized volume than an A380.

Just to put that into perspective, we developed a new carbon fiber matrix that is much stronger and more capable at higher altitudes than anything else. before and it contains 1200 tons of liquid oxygen so we successfully tested it up to its design pressure and then we're a little further out so we want to see where it would break and we found out where we would break. it shot about 300 feet in the air and landed in the ocean, we are fishing it out and now we have a pretty good idea of ​​what it takes to create a huge carbon fiber tank that can hold cryogenic liquid which is actually extremely important To make a lightweight spacecraft, then the next key element is on the engine side.

We have to have an extremely efficient engine for the Raptor engine to be the highest thrust-to-weight ratio engine that we believe any engine of any type that we already have has ever had. now 1200 seconds of firing in 42 main engine tests, we fired it for 100 seconds, it could fire for much longer than a hundred seconds, that's just the size of the test tanks and then the duration of firing that you've seen now. It's 40 seconds and 40 seconds, which is the duration of the shot to land on Mars. The test engine currently operates at 200 atmospheres and 200 bars. The flight engine will be at 250 bar and then we think that over time we can probably get back to that level. a little over 300 bar, the next key element is the propulsive landing, so to land on the right side like the moon, where there is no atmosphere and certainly no runways, or to land on Mars with an Avenue atmosphere is too thin to land even if there were.

As far as ways to land with the wing, you really have to put in a perfect pulp thrust landing, so that's what we've been practicing with Falcon 9, so this is just a series of landings, but I think it's pretty Fascinating, but now we have 16 successful landings. in a row and that's like that, it's six in a row and that's really without any redundancy, so Falcon nine lands with a single engine and the final landing is always done with a single engine, while the desire PFR will always have the ability to multi-engine output, so if you can achieve very high reliability even with a single engine and then you can land and then you can land with either engine, I think we can get to a landing reliability that is on par with the safest commercial airplanes, so you can essentially count on landing, not that you want a minimum pucker factor on landing, so you can land with also very high precision, in fact, you believe that the precision in This point is good enough for a propulsive landing. that we don't need legs for the next version, it will literally land so accurately that it will land back on its launch stands, so the C's launch speed is also increasing exponentially, particularly when you attack or reload. in orbit and get serious about establishing a self-sustaining base on Mars, the Moon or anywhere else, it takes thousands, ultimately thousands of spacecraft and tens of thousands of recovery, repositioning or reloading operations, which means that many launches are needed per day.

The key is that you really need to look in terms of how many landings are happening, you need to look at your schedule, so while we're talking about a pretty high launch rate, you know that by conventional standards, it's still a very high launch rate. small compared to what will ultimately be needed, but just for those who are favored, how many Ober launches occur each year is about 60 additional launches per year, which means that if SpaceX does something like 30 launches next year, they will be about half of all launches that occur on Earth and the next thing is that a key technology is automated rendezvous and docking, so to retain or refuel the spacecraft in orbit you have to be able to rendezvous and dock with the spacecraft with very high precision and propellant transfer, so that's one of the things that we have perfected with dragon dragon 1.

We will do an automated rendezvous and docking without any pilot control to the space station. dragon 1 currently uses the canadarm2 ahead of final placement on the space station dragon 2 launching next year will not need to use the caterpillar hump so dragon 2 will dock directly to the space station and will be able to do so without human intervention ; just press, press go and a dragon will dock. us to perfect heat shield technology, so when you go in at high speed you can bet you'll melt almost anything. The reason meteors don't reach Earth is that they disintegrate before reaching the ground, unless they are very large. you have to have sophisticated heat shield technology that can withstand incredibly high temperatures and that's what we've been perfecting with Dragon and also a key part of any colored planet colonizing system, so Falcon 1, this is where we start, you know ? a lot of people, but we actually only heard about SpaceX relatively recently, so let me think, let's say Falcon 9 and Dragon appeared instantly and that's how it was always, but if it didn't, we started with just a few people who didn't really know . how to make rockets and the reason I ended up being the chief engineer or the chief designer is not because I want it for you, it's because I couldn't hire anyone, but no one good joined, so I ended up being that by default and we ruined the first three launches the first three launches failed unfortunately the fourth launch, which was the last money we had for Falcon 1, the fourth launch worked or it would have been for SpaceX, but fate liked us that way. day, so the fourth launch worked and was interesting - today is the ninth anniversary of that launch.

I didn't realize that until I said that they told me that just today, but this is a very emotional day actually, but the point is. There's a pretty small rocket when we're doing Falcon. We're really trying to figure out what's the smallest payload we could put into orbit. Well, something about half a ton into orbit could be launched. that's an order for a decent size, small satellite to low Earth orbit and that's why we sized the Falcon one, but it's actually quite small compared to the Falcon 9, so the Falcon 9, especially if takes into account the payload, if the Falcon 9 is so many times larger, it is not on the order of 30 times more payload than Falcon 1 and Falcon 9 has the reuse of the primary propellant, which is the most expensive part of the rocket and, with luck, soon the fairing reefs, the big nose cone on the front, so I think we can probably get to something like 17 to 80% reusability with the Falcon 9 system and then, and hopefully, Towards the end of this year we will launch a big release, which is your Falcon.

Did it end up being a much more complex program than we thought? sounds easy electro falcon heavy actually sounds like it should be it should be easy because it's the first two stages of the Falcon 9 connected as thrusters it's not really like that, you have to read it, we have to redesign almost everything except the upper stage to be able to take there will be higher loads, so Falcon Heavy ended up being much more of a new vehicle than we realized, so it took us a lot longer to do it, but all the boosters have already been tested and are on their way to Cape Canaveral and now we are starting some serious VFR development so you can see the payload difference is quite dramatic.

VFR in its fully reusable configuration without any oval refueling, we expect to have a payload capacity of 150 tons in low earth orbit and as you know it compares to about thirty four four four four Falcon Heavy yes we are rich is partial partial are useful when this really makes a big difference is not a cost that all the subsequent slides refer to, so go to the next line and just by If so, with VFR you can get an idea of ​​the scale by looking at the little person there. It's actually a pretty big vehicle. The diameter of the main body of the vehicle is about nine meters or 30 feet and consists of the propeller rising thirty.

A Raptor engine that produces, throws approximately 5,400 tons lifting a forty to forty to four hundred ton vehicle upwards, so it's just the basics about the 48 meter Blanc Dry Master boat that is expected to weigh approximately 85 tons. Technically, the design says 75 tons, but inevitably. this massive growth and that ship will contain 1,100 tons of propellant with a design of 150 tons and a return mass of 50, so you can think of this as an essential combination of the rocket upper stage with the dragon, it's like your Falcon nine in one stage and dragon were combined so I'll go into each of these elements in detail but you have the engine section at the rear, the propellant tanks in the middle and then a large payload bay at the back forward and that payload bay is actually eight stories high, you can walk around, you can put a whole stack of felt and rockets in the payload bay and compared to the design I showed last time, you'll see that there is a small delta wing on the back of the rocket.

The reason for this is to expand the mission scope of the VFR spacecraft, depending on whether you are landing or coming, you are entering a planet or a moon that has no atmosphere, a thin atmosphere or a dense one. atmosphere and depending on whether you return with no payload in front, a small payload or a heavy payload, you have to balance the rocket as it enters and therefore the delta wing in the rear, which also includes a flap A divided flap for pitch and roll control allows us to control the angle ofpitch despite having a wide range of payloads in the nose and a wide range of atmospheric densities, so we tried to avoid having the, but it was necessary to generalize the capability of the spacecraft so that it can land anywhere in the solar system, just look at a couple of things in detail, so the cargo area has a pressurized volume of 825 cubic meters, this is also larger than the pressurized area of ​​an a380. so it really is capable of carrying a huge amount of payload in a mass transport configuration, because in a really good scenario it would take three months, but maybe up to six months, a number of months for just one of the wounded, you probably want a The cabin is not just one seat, so the Mars transit configuration consists of 40 cabins and depends somewhat.

You might have five or six people per booth if you really want to attract people, but I think generally we'd expect to see two or three. people per cabin and usually about a hundred people per flight to Mars and then there is a central storage area, kitchen and galley and an entertainment area for shelter from solar storms and I think you probably know a good situation for at least beer for version one and then go to the main body of the vehicle, the central area of ​​the body, this is where the propellant is located and this is subcooled methane and oxygen, so if you kill the methane and oxygen below their liquid point, you get a quite significant density increase, on the order of ten to twelve percent, which makes a fairly big difference for the propellant. cargo, so we were hoping that it would be possible to carry two or 40 tons of CH4 and in our 60 tons of oxygen, you know, in the fuel tank, our header tanks, so that when you come to land, your orientation can change quite a bit significantly, but you can't.

To have the propellant sloshing all over the place and the main tanks, you have to have header tanks that can feed the main engines accurately, so that's what you see most in the fuel tank and then in the engine section, for what the engine section of the boat consists of. of four Raptor forced referendums destroyed by Ford Vacuum and engines at sea level, so the six engines are capable of betting. Motors with a high expansion ratio have a relatively smaller gimbal area or range and a slower and slower gimbal speed, so the two center motors have a very high gimbal range and can run very quickly and You can land the ship with either of the two center engines, so when you come to land you will like both engines, but if one of the center engines fails at any time. point, you will be able to land successfully by repeating with the other engine and then within each engine this great redundancy tool, so we want the risk of landing to be as close to zero as possible and there are some basic statistics about the engines, the engines at sea ​​level. it's about 330 psco ice at sea level the alpha stage engine is 375 now this is version 1 so I think over time there is the possibility of increasing that specific impulse to 5 to 10 seconds and by measuring, also increase the chamber pressure by 50 bar o So to reload, we saw that the two ships would actually make the rear section use the same docking interface that they used to connect to the booster on takeoff, so we reused that interface docking and then we reuse the propellant flow lines which are used when the propeller is when the ship is on the propeller and then to transfer the propellant it becomes very simple, use the control thrusters to accelerate in the direction you want empty, so shoot, sorry, in this direction, the booster goes in that direction and transfers the booster goes in very easily from the tanker to the ship, so moving on to the rocket capacity gives you kind of a rough idea of rocket capacity, starting at the low end with the half ton Falcon and then going up to being well away from a hundred and fifty, so I think it's important to note that VFR is more careful than 75 even with full reusability, but here there's the really important fundamental point, let's look at the launch cost, the order, the order of versus I know at the beginning.

At first glance this may seem ridiculous, but it is not the same, it is true for airplanes, if you like, if you buy, say, a small single-engine turboprop airplane, it would cost between one and a half and two million dollars to rent a 747 from California. to Australia costs half a million dollars round trip, the single-engine turboprop can't even get to Australia, so a fully reusable system like this, a giant plane like the 747, costs a third more than a small expendable plane and in one In case you have to build an attack plane, in that case you just have to refuel something, so it's really crazy that we are sophisticated rockets and then crash them every time we fly.

It says how deep this is and how important it really is, you know this and I'm often told this, but you could get more payload if you made it expendable. I said yes, you could also get more payload out of a plane by upgrading the landing gear and flaps and parachuting it in when you get to your destination, but that would be crazy and you wouldn't sell any planes. Surrey's ability is absolutely critical. No, no one talks about the value of orbital recharging. This is also extremely important, so if you only fly VFR. to orbit and not reload, it's pretty good, you'll get a hundred and fifty tons in slow orbit and you won't even have fuel to go anywhere else, however if you send tankers and reload into orbit you can refill the tanks. to the top and carry 150 tons to Mars and if the tanker is road capable, then you're only paying for the cost of the propellant and the cost of oxygen is extremely low and the cost of methane is extremely low. so if that's all you're dealing with the retail cost of refueling your spacecraft in orbit, it's small and can carry 150 tons to Mars, so automated rendezvous, docking and filling is absolutely critical, so then let's get back to the question. of how we pay for this system, this was really, I said, a pretty profound breakthrough, I don't call it a breakthrough, but the realization that if we can build a system that cannibalizes our own products, makes our own products redundant, then all the resources that quite It is huge that a useful Falcon 9 heavy and dragon can be applied to a system.

You know some of our customers are conservative and want to see the PFR fly several times before they feel comfortable launching units, so what do we plan to do? is to build ahead and have a stock of Falcon 9 and Dragon vehicles so that customers can feel comfortable if they want to use the old rocket, the old spaceship, they can do that because we will have a bunch in stock, but all. of our resources will then go into the construction of VFR and we believe that we can do this with the income that we receive with the representative with the income that we receive from the launch of satellites and from the maintenance of the space station, so go to the portion of satellites The size of this vehicle, being a 9 meter diameter vehicle, is a great facilitator for new satellites.

In fact, we can send something into orbit that is almost nine meters in diameter, so, for example, before, if you want a new Hubble, you could send a mirror that has ten times the surface area of ​​the current Hubble as a single unit not it doesn't have to deploy or anything and you can send out a bunch of small satellites, you do what it is, you can actually go around too and if you want to collect old satellites or clean up space debris you just use some sort of helicopter there and go around and collect satellites or collect space degrees if you want, that may be something we have to do in the future, but that fairing would open and retract. and then come back down to allow for the launch of Earth satellites that are significantly larger than anything we've ever done before or a significantly larger number of satellites at once than anything that's ever been done before, it's also intended to be able to give service to the space station.

I know it seems like a little big rose for the space station, but the shuttle seemed big too, so it will work. It looks a little big, but it will work, so it will be able to do what Dragon does today in terms of cargo transportation. and what dragon will do in terms of transporting crew and cargo, a space station servicing the space station can also go much further than that, for example, according to the calculations we have done, we can actually carry out missions to the lunar surface without propellant. production on the surface of the Moon, so if we make a high elliptical parking orbit for the spacecraft and keep it in a high elliptical orbit, we can go to the Moon and back without local thrust reduction on the Moon, so I think that that that that allowed that that would allow the creation of an alpha moon base or some kind of moon base, you know, it's quite captivating, so the Eagles see, for example, how cargo is transferred from the cargo bay to the floor, it is a very complicated crane and yes, but but. since this will allow the creation of a lunar base and in 2017, I mean, we should already have a lunar base, what the hell is happening?

And of course Mars is becoming a multi-planet species, it's hell to be a single plant species, so Yes, then we would start by setting up the Commission on Mars, where it would obviously land on rocky or dusty soil and it's the same approach I mentioned before, which is to send the spaceship to yuri orbit, tank it or refill it. until you have full tanks and travel to Mars, land on Mars, for Mars you will need local propellant production, but Mars has a CO2 atmosphere and abundant water ice that provides it with CO2 and H2O, so it can produce CH4 no. 2 using the Sabatier process and also the Voice Patia process and I should mention that in the long term this can also be done on Earth, so as soon as I get any kind of criticism about why you use combustion and rockets and have cars electrical.

Well, it's not a way to make an electric rocket, I wish there was, but in the long term you can use solar energy to extract CO2 from the atmosphere, combine it with water and produce fuel and oxygen for the rocket, so the same as We're on Mars, we could do it on Earth long term, but that's essentially what happens similar to when you land on the Moon, you land on Mars, the tricky thing with Mars is we need to build a propellant tank to reload. tanks and return to Earth, but since Mars has lower gravity than Earth, you don't need a booster, so you can go from the surface of Mars to the surface of Earth simply by using the ship.

I'll be eight, you need to go for two Macs with a payload number of about twenty to twenty to fifty tons for the trip back to work, but it's one chair, just one leg, all the way back to earth. So I will show you that this is the real physics simulation. the last one about a minute, so you go in, you're going in very quickly, going seven and a half kilometers per second towards Mars, there will be some ablation of the heat shield, so it's kind of like a brake pad that wears out, it's multiple uses. heat shield, but unlike operations on Earth, it gets hot enough that you'll actually see it, you'll see somewhere the heat shield, but because Mars has an atmosphere, although not particularly dense, you can remove almost all of it. energy or aerodynamically and we have shown performs supersonic retropropulsion many times without the nine, so if you are very careful, this is because it's like you can see a kind of mesh system, not that it's particularly pretty because it's just her .

Simulate physics, but the size of the current gives you a rough approximation of how much thrust the inlet is producing. That's not a typo, although it is aspirational, so we've already started building the system, the tooling for the main tanks. The facility has been ordered to be built, we will begin construction of the first ship around the second quarter of next year, so in approximately six to nine months we should begin building the first ship. I'm pretty sure we can complete the ship and be ready for launch in about five years, five years seems like a long time to me and I think the area under the resource curve over that time period should allow for this time period that you served. , but if it's not this period of time, I think pretty soon after, but that's it.

Our goal is to try to achieve the Maas encounter in 2022. The synchronization between Earth and Mars occurs approximately every two years, so every two years there is an opportunity to fly to Mars, so in 2024 we want to try to fly toships two of which would be crude and to cover and occur the objective of these initial missions is to find the best source of water, that is what the first mission and then the second mission the objective is to build the propellant plant so that In particular , with six ships we should have enough landed mass to build the propellant depot which will consist of a large array of solar panels and then everything needed to extract and refine water and then extract the CO2 from the atmosphere and then create and store the ch4 fryer and then build the base starting with one ship, then several ships, then start building the city and then make it bigger and even bigger and yes over time the terraforming went and made it a really nice place to be Thanks , I really think it's quite a beautiful image and on another slide above, seriously note that on the donor desk of Mars or blue and it's the sky, the sky is blue or dusk and red during the day is the opposite to Earth and, but there is something else, if you build a ship that is capable of going to Mars, what happens if you take that same ship and go from one place to another on Earth?

So we analyzed that and the results are quite interesting. Take a look we are traveling with 27,000 ponies now at about 80,000 miles per hour, this is where propulsive landing becomes very important to go, so most of what people consider long distance trips would be completed in less than half a century. time, which yes, the best thing about going to space is that there is no friction, so once you leave the atmosphere, you will go, it will be smooth as silk, no turbulence, nothing, no weather, no, sir. atmosphere and they can show you most of the long distance places as said in less than half an hour and if we are building this to go to the Moon and Mars, then why not go to other places on Earth too?

Fine, thanks.