They could have bought an O class hobby motor and saved some time and money, but yeah, congrats I guess.
It will be interesting to see if they can actually get to orbit with their massive number of cores.I didn't really understand the slide entitled "N36 Medium-Lift Rocket", though. The subtitle is "Manned Orbital and Lunar Missions", and below that they detail the 36 common cores and so on. And on the same slide it says Neptune 36 can take 1 metric ton to orbit. Are they suggesting a manned orbital mission with a spacecraft that is only 1 ton, including passenger?
I love the idea that some company is actually trying to create a "lego rocket" - something that you can just throw together whenever you need extra capacity, or yank a core off when you don't. Granted, it's a wee bit more complex than that, but the idea is interesting and needs to be explored.
Edit: Just to be clear on my sentence structuring, I realise that it's not a Sea Dragon class LV. A 36 core sea dragon class LV would be hilarious however.
But the sound/vibration would probably kill everything in the ocean for hundreds of miles...
Jeff Foust @jeff_foust 2m2 minutes agoRanda Milliron says Interorbital will attempt a “space altitude” suborbital launch around January, depending on when it gets FAA license.
Jeff Foust (@jeff_foust) tweeted at 9:06 AM on Thu, Jun 11, 2015:Milliron: kicking off FAA licensing process for Neptune orbital vehicle tomorrow, planning for 1st launch 2Q 2016.
Quote from: TrevorMonty on 06/10/2015 09:13 pmJeff Foust (@jeff_foust) tweeted at 9:06 AM on Thu, Jun 11, 2015:Milliron: kicking off FAA licensing process for Neptune orbital vehicle tomorrow, planning for 1st launch 2Q 2016. Previous date given was 'end of the year' in April. At least a three month slip in two months, seems to business as usual for IO.
Quote from: The Amazing Catstronaut on 05/25/2015 10:23 amEdit: Just to be clear on my sentence structuring, I realise that it's not a Sea Dragon class LV. A 36 core sea dragon class LV would be hilarious however.Oh, wow, it would. 80 million lbs thrust per core * 36 = 2.88 billion lbs thrust.With 2% payload fraction to LEO, that would be... 57.6 million lbs or over 26000 metric tons to orbit! But the sound/vibration would probably kill everything in the ocean for hundreds of miles...
They haven't flown a guided rocket yet.. the last (and only) flight was last year and was fin stabilized.
Pressure fed has the cost and simplicity advantage.. yes, it's ironic that it's at small scales and large scales that it makes the most sense - but this is more about the scalability of pumps than of tanks.
I thought they have launched sounding rockets before on a suborbital trajectory, that are presumably guided. The sounding rockets were solid fueled, not pressure-fed liquid fueled.
Maybe better to have Armadillo tuberoc in cluster. Why Armadillo didn't have a orbit LV concept?
I was just totally guessing on the 2% thing... I have no idea what payload fraction a Sea Dragon would really have.
Quote from: Vultur on 06/14/2015 09:11 pmI was just totally guessing on the 2% thing... I have no idea what payload fraction a Sea Dragon would really have.1.1Mlbs payload / 40Mlbs GLOW = 2.75%IIRC that was for plain hydrogen payload which benefited a bit from not needing a fairing.
How could pressure fed rockets have performance come close to pump fed rockets?
Quote from: Katana on 06/16/2015 01:24 amHow could pressure fed rockets have performance come close to pump fed rockets?It's easier to see it for small scales - imagine a turbopump that is lighter than the pressure vessel, it's not easy to do. Rocketlab and Firefly think they've cracked it, but both of those rockets are pretty big. The very big scale is harder for a different reason - just making turbopumps that big is hard.By the way, the Millirons were on The Space Show today. I didn't listen live - I was asleep - and the mp3 hasn't been posted yet, but it should go up today.
I think Firefly is pressure fed.
Quote from: TrevorMonty on 06/16/2015 03:18 amI think Firefly is pressure fed.No, they're a turbopump powered aerospike for the first stage. There's a video of the CEO talking about the difficulties of miniaturizing them.
Pressure fed according to website.http://www.fireflyspace.com/vehicles/firefly-a
Why Von Brawn choose to invent the first turbopump if pressure fed rockets with WWII material show premise to orbit? V2 have a VERY heavy pump.
May any private company get some retired ones from Russia and fly them again?
The Neptune launcher program is in its final design stage. Engine and guidance system tests are underway.
they've only recently entered reality
That, or they just reset the cycle to cook up new batch of space snake oil.
Hadn't heard that Charles Pooley has passed away. RIP
Quote from: ChrisWilson68 on 05/25/2015 08:34 amIt will be interesting to see if they can actually get to orbit with their massive number of cores.I didn't really understand the slide entitled "N36 Medium-Lift Rocket", though. The subtitle is "Manned Orbital and Lunar Missions", and below that they detail the 36 common cores and so on. And on the same slide it says Neptune 36 can take 1 metric ton to orbit. Are they suggesting a manned orbital mission with a spacecraft that is only 1 ton, including passenger? In the Space Show interview (at about the 35 minute mark) they mention that they intend to produce a two person one metric ton capsule, with about half a day of endurance.
Interorbital to deliver an Prize contestant to Moon. http://lunar.xprize.org/teams/synergy-moon/blog/team-synergy-moon-interorbital-announce-20162017-launch-plans
Indeed. It's pretty obvious that they've only recently entered reality and discovered just how much work is ahead of them.
the March/April launch will carry 11 commercial smallsat units
The popularity of this new service is evidenced by Interorbtial’s current orbital launch manifest of 128 picosats for upcoming sold-out LEO Missions I-V. Flight-testing continues through 2016 with first orbital launches beginning first quarter Q1 2017.
http://www.parabolicarc.com/2016/08/30/glxp-update-xprize-verifies-launch-agreement-team-synergy-moon/Parabolic Arc is reporting that the GLXP team SYNERGY MOON is booking a flight to the moon on an Interorbital Neptune 8. They are aiming to launch in the second half of 2017 from a floating launch pad off the coast of California.This is clearly absurd.
SYNERGY MOON has blazed their own path and demonstrated that there is more than one way to get to the Moon
From the GLXP update:QuoteSYNERGY MOON has blazed their own path and demonstrated that there is more than one way to get to the MoonThe folks running the GLXP are confused about the meaning of the word "demonstrated".
Quote from: ChrisWilson68 on 09/01/2016 05:20 amFrom the GLXP update:QuoteSYNERGY MOON has blazed their own path and demonstrated that there is more than one way to get to the MoonThe folks running the GLXP are confused about the meaning of the word "demonstrated".Demonstrated via research and computer models, but that would sound uninteresting to the public.
To me, "demonstrate" doesn't mean research and computer models. To me, demonstrating something is doing the thing you're claiming. A demonstration might not be fully-featured or production-ready, but it means showing something is possible by actually doing an example of it. That's pretty much the whole point of a demonstration.
That is more than synergy moon has demonstrated, judging by their website. All I could find is this video of their lunar rover concept:
Quote from: ChrisWilson68 on 09/01/2016 06:13 amTo me, "demonstrate" doesn't mean research and computer models. To me, demonstrating something is doing the thing you're claiming. A demonstration might not be fully-featured or production-ready, but it means showing something is possible by actually doing an example of it. That's pretty much the whole point of a demonstration.If that's your thinking, then they won't bother asking you for investment capital anytime soon. :)
According to IOS, by mid-2017/early 2018, the firm will initiate launch services for smallsats to a circular, polar orbit at 310 km altitude. Their current manifest numbers 135 smallsats awaiting launch.
Lets post an actual Interorbital update ( or rather, non-update as these things usually are )www.satnews.com/story.php?number=60112970QuoteAccording to IOS, by mid-2017/early 2018, the firm will initiate launch services for smallsats to a circular, polar orbit at 310 km altitude. Their current manifest numbers 135 smallsats awaiting launch.The first flight date was early 2016 six months ago or so.
The company's first commercial flight is scheduled for next year."We're going through licensing now and we should be fully operational for orbital launches sometime in the second quarter of 2017," Ms Milliron said....Government support neededMember for Capricornia Michelle Landry met with Mr Moody in Rockhampton recently and said she would discuss the proposal with Minister for Innovation Greg Hunt in Canberra in the coming week."It's a very exciting idea and I was really interested to hear about it," she said.But Ms Landry admitted she was concerned about the viability of the proposal."On paper it sounds excellent, but I'm not an expert in these things, so I do need to seek advice on it," she said.[/b]
http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-18/aerospace-company-interorbital-systems-eyes-rockhampton-site/7926296US aerospace company Interorbital Systems eyes Rockhampton as place to set up launch pad
Mr Moody said his Moody Space Centre proposal was in its infancy and required $25 million in government funding..
Government support needed
Quote from: savuporo on 10/18/2016 12:17 amGovernment support neededNot a hope in hell.
"It's a very exciting idea and I was really interested to hear about it," she said.But Ms Landry admitted she was concerned about the viability of the proposal."On paper it sounds excellent, but I'm not an expert in these things, so I do need to seek advice on it," she said.
To further limit launch costs, Interorbital Systems plans to operate its own spaceport in the South Pacific nation of Tonga. In January, Tonga’s King George Tupou V approved plans for the spaceport, according to the Tongan national news magazine Matangi Tonga. Now, Interorbital Systems and Tongan government officials are working with the Federal Aviation Administration’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation to obtain a U.S. license for the Neptune 30 launch, Randa Milliron said.In late summer, Interorbital Systems plans to begin building the launch pad for the Neptune 30, which is scheduled to be completed in time to support an orbital launch in December. “We are creating a very minimal infrastructure,” Randa Milliron said. “A lot of the equipment is portable.”
Just to be sure, i'm not pulling anyone's legs.http://spacenews.com/californias-interorbital-has-big-plans-small-satellites/Feb, 2010QuoteTo further limit launch costs, Interorbital Systems plans to operate its own spaceport in the South Pacific nation of Tonga. In January, Tonga’s King George Tupou V approved plans for the spaceport, according to the Tongan national news magazine Matangi Tonga. Now, Interorbital Systems and Tongan government officials are working with the Federal Aviation Administration’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation to obtain a U.S. license for the Neptune 30 launch, Randa Milliron said.In late summer, Interorbital Systems plans to begin building the launch pad for the Neptune 30, which is scheduled to be completed in time to support an orbital launch in December. “We are creating a very minimal infrastructure,” Randa Milliron said. “A lot of the equipment is portable.”
Quote from: savuporo on 10/18/2016 04:08 pmJust to be sure, i'm not pulling anyone's legs.http://spacenews.com/californias-interorbital-has-big-plans-small-satellites/Feb, 2010QuoteTo further limit launch costs, Interorbital Systems plans to operate its own spaceport in the South Pacific nation of Tonga. In January, Tonga’s King George Tupou V approved plans for the spaceport, according to the Tongan national news magazine Matangi Tonga. Now, Interorbital Systems and Tongan government officials are working with the Federal Aviation Administration’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation to obtain a U.S. license for the Neptune 30 launch, Randa Milliron said.In late summer, Interorbital Systems plans to begin building the launch pad for the Neptune 30, which is scheduled to be completed in time to support an orbital launch in December. “We are creating a very minimal infrastructure,” Randa Milliron said. “A lot of the equipment is portable.”Tonga makes more sense than Queensland (unfortunately) but of course, being in the center of approximately nowhere, will suffer from the same remoteness issues that Kwajalein Atoll does although Kwajalein at least had some form of launch pad and radar range before SpaceX moved in.Still and all, the remoteness didn't stop SpaceX.. so no reason it should stop these guys.
Astrobotic, a Carnegie Mellon University spinoff company headquartered in the Strip District, bowed out of the competition in December when CEO John Thornton said the company would not be ready for a 2017 launch. Thornton doubted any team would land on the moon in 2017."He's a dropout," Randa Milliron said of Thornton quitting the competition and criticized him for disparaging the work of the other teams. "He knows nothing about how we're doing."
Interorbital has four high-profile launches. The company will test its guidance system this spring with a suborbital launch that will carry 11 small satellites payloads. The Millirons hope their first orbital flight will be in late summer. In the third quarter of this year, Interorbital will launch its Lunar Bullet mission, a rocket shot directly at the moon and aimed to slam into the lunar surface. The company's XPRIZE launch will happen by the end of the year, Milliron hopes. A NEPTUNE 8 rocket will fly to the moon, launch a lander that will deploy a rover to roll across the surface, snap a few photos and maybe some video, and win the $20 million Google Lunar XPRIZE in the process.But even that, Milliron said, is a test."Everything we're doing is a test launch for the next phase," she said.The company has two more moon missions planned for 2018, one that will return samples from the moon to Earth.
Interorbital Systems NEPTUNE modular rocket series: N3; N5; and N8 LUNA; and IOS Personal Satellite Kits will fill those needs. For example, the N5 is designed to launch 24 picosats at a time, for as little as $8,000 each, or from $1.5 million for a single dedicated 30-kg payload capacity. The popularity of this new service is evidenced by Interorbital’s current orbital launch manifest of 137 picosats for upcom-ing sold-out LEO Missions I-V. Flight-testing continues with orbital launches beginning summer of 2017, plus two Q4 Moon missions: Lunar Bullet and Google Lunar X PRIZE
In addition, the analysis and simulation for the three-stage NEPTUNE 1 (N1) has been completed. The N1 is composed of a single CPM 2.0 and two liquid upper-stages. It will be capable of placing a 10 pound (4.5 kg) payload into a 192 mi (310 km) polar orbit---perfect for the dedicated launch of the new 3U-CubeSat plus 1U-propulsion system assemblies now trending in the small satellite industry. Since the N1 launch vehicle is 36 ft (11 m) in length and weighs only 5,400 lbs (2,449 kg), it will be the smallest orbital launch vehicle in the world. The NEPTUNE 1 will also be the world's lowest-cost orbital launch vehicle, with a base price of $250,000 per launch to a circular polar orbit at 310km.
NEPTUNE 1 Guidance Test Vehicle (N1 GTV) Nearing CompletionMOJAVE 07.25.2017---The Interorbital team is nearing the completion of its N1 GTV launch vehicle which incorporates IOS' new high-efficiency CPM 2.0 filament-wound tank assembly, its new rocket engine gimballing system, its new CPM controller, and its new in-house developed guidance system. This finless, single CPM launch vehicle will be used in an upcoming low-altitude test flight. Eleven commercial and educational CubeSat and TubeSat payloads are manifested on this flight.CPM 2.0 is composed of four identical tanks containing the rocket's storable propellants and pressurant gas. This regulated pressure-fed configuration was chosen to increase engine performance while at the same time reducing cost and manufacturing time.During the test flight, the rocket will simulate an orbital launch trajectory by using the main rocket engine's throttling capability to vary the thrust-to-weight ratio, thus simulating the actual conditions that will be experienced during an orbital launch. After the rocket passes through the transonic phase and Max Q, the engine will gradually throttle down, slowing the rocket until it begins to hover. At this point, the rocket engine will be shut down and the rocket will be allowed to fall. At a safe altitude, a parachute will be deployed for vehicle and payload recovery.Following the test of the N1 GTV launch vehicle, the IOS team will construct an orbital version of the N1 launch vehicle. The N1 consists of a single CPM 2.0 and two liquid upper-stages. It will be capable of placing a 14 pound (6.4 kg) payload into a 192 mi (310 km) polar orbit---perfect for the dedicated launch of the new 3U-CubeSat plus 1U-propulsion system assemblies now trending in the small satellite industry. Since the N1 launch vehicle is 36 ft (11 m) in length and weighs only 5,400 lbs (2,449 kg), it will be the smallest orbital launch vehicle in the world. The NEPTUNE 1 will also be the world's lowest-cost orbital launch vehicle, with a base price of $250,000 (academic only) per launch to a circular polar orbit at 310km.
Randa Milliron @interorbital 2h2 hours agoInterorbital Rolls out NEPTUNE CPM 2.0 Test Rocket!Successfully conducts water-flow test 10/16/17
More info at link below. Will be carrying 11 smallsat payloads. Scheduled for fourth quarter 2017.http://satmagazine.com/story.php?number=1600200139
Liquid Upper Stage Static Test 5.16.2018
Something move!!!twitter.com/interorbital/status/1150812623685861376
Is this NASA announcement (16 July) the same as an "Interorbital" system? Or is this a new category for NASA point-to-point commercial passenger flights via LEO?https://www.fbo.gov/index.php?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=f9769ca109ec1326e29364f6bb1b5b79&tab=core&tabmode=list&=
Moody Space Centre website. They are planning on setting up a launch site at Rockhampton, Queensland.https://sites.google.com/view/moodyspaceccentre-infopage/home?authuser=0
what are the chances they'll actually get this off the ground?!?
Thanks! I am personally prepared for a long wait, and have supported AmbaSat regardless of when they will launch. But I can speak only for myself. I'm willing to be patient. Space is hard, but it's also slow :) You are right that it would have been possible for them to choose a more expensive launch option aboard an operational rocket. But then it would have been beyond the ability of at least some of us to pay for it. It is good that initiatives like these exist. They give us hope that space would soon be affordable to those of us who aren't millionaires. I am thinking about ChipSats as the Poor Man's Space Program. To me (but again, I am speaking only about myself), I'd be happy if I just have a satellite that reaches the launch pad and then lifts off - even if it later doesn't make it to orbit. It would be very inspirational to me and I guess to some people around me who will be inspired by what I am doing. We have to start from somewhere - and my hope is that space will become even more affordable in the future.
Well... Interorbital does have a good idea behind its Neptune rocket. It's based on a common propulsion module. The same idea, I think, is applied to the Russian Angara rocket. However in this case we have a small company.
While I agree that delays are disappointing... aren't they a norm in spaceflight? I remember Blue Origin promising human flights in 2017. Virgin Galactic was supposed to be operational 10 years ago. And even when test human crewed spaceflight started in late 2018, we're approaching a full year without any test flights for VSS unity. While SpaceX is certainly the most successful company ever and they're doing great with reusable rocket stage, I remember soon after the first Dragon flight in 2010 that they promised us that there won't be a post-shuttle gap.What makes the IOS case different?
Interorbital Systems was founded in 1996. SpaceX was founded in 2002.As to the claim by SpaceX that there would not be a post-shuttle gap, that was predicated on NASA putting up the money for COTS-C. NASA only provided the money years later and more slowly than SpaceX had asked, and NASA put up far more bureaucratic requirements than with COTS.
If ya want IOS to fly sooner, raise money for a 100km flight and don't give it all to them upfront.$500 / km altitude perhaps.
"Big news coming soon!"https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6699484417859051520/