Author Topic: Interorbital Systems Flights  (Read 78464 times)

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Interorbital Systems Flights
« on: 03/31/2014 11:28 pm »
http://moonandback.com/2014/03/31/interorbital-systems-achieves-major-flight-milestone/

"Due to a center of pressure anomaly, the rocket reached 10,000 feet, which was half of its calculated altitude."

"The following commercial payloads were on-board:

National Cheng Kung University (Taiwan)
M2M2SKY/Boreal Space (Brazil/California)
Google Lunar XPRIZE Team SYNERGY MOON (California/International)
John Frusicante’s (Red Hot Chili Peppers) album ENCLOSURE (The Record Collection, Malibu)

All payloads were recovered still functioning and intact. The rocket sustained minimal damage and will be used re-used on the next test flight in which the CPM will be finless and guided.

Systems Tested:
Propulsion System in flight; Cable Launch Device (CLD) and Pyrotechnic Staging System (PSS);
Telemetry; Health and Recovery System; Wireless-encrypted CPM controller"

"A GoPro camera was mounted on the rocket and the video will be posted later."



Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline ChrisWilson68

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5266
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 4992
  • Likes Given: 6459
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #1 on: 04/01/2014 12:29 am »
Fun, but unfortunately they're nowhere close to even getting their smallest orbital rocket, with a 30 kg payload, to LEO.  It's hard to see any way they can get a payload to the moon in time to win the Lunar X-Prize.

It did kind of annoy me that their headline was "flawless" when in fact there was an anomaly that caused the rocket to only reach half the planned altitude.  They're not the only company to give misleading headlines (is there any areospace company that doesn't?), but I still get annoyed by it every time.
« Last Edit: 04/01/2014 12:30 am by ChrisWilson68 »

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #2 on: 04/01/2014 12:32 am »
Can't say I disagree, but as they're finally doing what I've been saying for years they need to do in order to build the credibility they so desperately desire, I'm happy to cheer for them and hope that they ramp up more quickly than has traditionally been the case.

Edit: also can't rule out the possibility that this is an April Fools joke ;)
« Last Edit: 04/01/2014 12:58 am by QuantumG »
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline ChrisWilson68

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5266
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 4992
  • Likes Given: 6459
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #3 on: 04/01/2014 01:02 am »
I certainly wish them luck.  It's always good to see things flying.

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #4 on: 04/01/2014 02:32 am »
Here's the video.


Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #5 on: 04/01/2014 03:54 am »
The "flawless" heading isn't in the original press release:

http://www.interorbital.com/interorbital_03302014_018.htm

or it's not anymore.
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline mheney

  • The Next Man on the Moon
  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 780
  • Silver Spring, MD
  • Liked: 398
  • Likes Given: 199
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #6 on: 04/01/2014 02:58 pm »
I agree with ChrisWilson86.  You learn by flying - congrats to IOS for a good test flight.

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10288
  • Liked: 699
  • Likes Given: 723
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #7 on: 04/01/2014 03:32 pm »
Congratulations to Interorbital for launching something!

Offline bad_astra

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1926
  • Liked: 316
  • Likes Given: 553
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #8 on: 04/01/2014 05:21 pm »
They could have bought an O class hobby motor and saved some time and money, but yeah, congrats I guess.
"Contact Light" -Buzz Aldrin

Offline JBF

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1459
  • Liked: 472
  • Likes Given: 914
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #9 on: 04/01/2014 08:45 pm »
They could have bought an O class hobby motor and saved some time and money, but yeah, congrats I guess.

Nice troll, it's obvious you didn't read any of the documentation.
"In principle, rocket engines are simple, but that’s the last place rocket engines are ever simple." Jeff Bezos

Online Steven Pietrobon

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39218
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 32738
  • Likes Given: 8192
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #10 on: 05/25/2015 07:58 am »
Here's a presentation given by Interorbital at the recent ACSER Cubesat conference. They are aiming for their first orbital launch at the end of this year. The first four launchers of their Neptune 5 vehicle are booked out. They have over 90 payloads waiting to launch, including Australia's iINSPIRE. I'm not sure how reliable their Neptune 36 vehicles will be with 36 cores!

Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #1:  Engineering is done with numbers.  Analysis without numbers is only an opinion.

Offline ChrisWilson68

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5266
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 4992
  • Likes Given: 6459
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #11 on: 05/25/2015 08:34 am »
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?


Offline The Amazing Catstronaut

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1065
  • Arsia Mons, Mars, Sol IV, Inner Solar Solar System, Sol system.
  • Liked: 759
  • Likes Given: 626
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #12 on: 05/25/2015 10:23 am »
That 36 core medium lift rocket looks even more Kerbal than Sea Dragon - there's no real precedent for rockets comprised out of double figure cores.

It goes without saying simply bolting on more cores isn't a particularly efficient way of launching something, as evidenced by "Cluster's last stand".  But hey, if it works and is cheap, it works and is cheap.

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.
« Last Edit: 05/25/2015 08:59 pm by The Amazing Catstronaut »
Resident feline spaceflight expert. Knows nothing of value about human spaceflight.

Offline douglas100

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2177
  • Liked: 227
  • Likes Given: 105
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #13 on: 05/25/2015 04:27 pm »
I was slightly amused to see WFNA described as "environmentally friendly." A leak of that stuff would require some cleaning up. But of course all oxidizers are potentially dangerous...

It's interesting seeing an attempt to implement the ORAG approach to low cost spaceflight. The devil is always in the details in this game, no matter how "simple" the technological approach seems to be. Good luck to them.
Douglas Clark

Offline Jarnis

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1313
  • Liked: 830
  • Likes Given: 201
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #14 on: 05/25/2015 05:38 pm »
This looks decisively Kerbal :) - Space is Hard, so I wish them luck...

Offline The Amazing Catstronaut

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1065
  • Arsia Mons, Mars, Sol IV, Inner Solar Solar System, Sol system.
  • Liked: 759
  • Likes Given: 626
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #15 on: 05/25/2015 09:03 pm »
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?

For all we know, they intend to bolt 36 36 core LVs together for whatever powerpoint lunar program they have tucked up their armpits, in an attempt to create a heavy version.


In all sobriety; they're likely to attempt to move onto bigger and better things (I.E. with less cores) once/if their entry level rocket makes them some moolah. Such has been the precedent for previous launch service providers and other emergent entities such as Firefly have indicated a similar desire.

Edit: 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.
« Last Edit: 05/25/2015 09:05 pm by The Amazing Catstronaut »
Resident feline spaceflight expert. Knows nothing of value about human spaceflight.

Offline ChrisWilson68

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5266
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 4992
  • Likes Given: 6459
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #16 on: 05/25/2015 10:01 pm »
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.

It's good to explore every option, but I doubt the lots-of-identical-cores approach is the best.  I'm sure it could be made to work, I just don't think it's the most cost-effective approach.  When you have 10,000 shipping containers to send from China to North America, you don't take 1,000 small, modular ships and lash them together.

There are two kinds of economies of scale in conflict here -- the economies of building lots of copies of something versus few copies, versus the economies of building bigger rather than smaller.  I think the launch market is already large enough to make Falcon 9-scale cores and Merlin 1D-scale engines have enough unit volume to be worth it.  I think Interorbital is too far on the small-cores end while SLS is too far on the big-cores end.

As I said, though, it's good to explore all the options.  I'm happy to see Interorbital give the small cores approach its best shot.  And I'm also glad it's not my money being invested in it. :-)

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #17 on: 05/25/2015 10:16 pm »
They haven't flown a guided rocket yet.. the last (and only) flight was last year and was fin stabilized.
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6809
  • California
  • Liked: 8485
  • Likes Given: 5384
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #18 on: 05/25/2015 10:18 pm »
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.

That might evaporate a significant part of the ocean!  ;D

Offline Vultur

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1919
  • Liked: 762
  • Likes Given: 184
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #19 on: 06/04/2015 02:50 am »
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.

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...

Offline R7

  • Propulsophile
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2725
    • Don't worry.. we can still be fans of OSC and SNC
  • Liked: 992
  • Likes Given: 668
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #20 on: 06/04/2015 09:47 am »
But the sound/vibration would probably kill everything in the ocean for hundreds of miles...

Unlikely. Several underwater nuke tests didn't nor even Castle Bravo.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underwater_explosion#List_of_underwater_nuclear_tests
AD·ASTRA·ASTRORVM·GRATIA

Offline Kryten

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 735
  • Liked: 426
  • Likes Given: 33
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #21 on: 06/10/2015 08:40 pm »
Quote
Jeff Foust ‏@jeff_foust  2m2 minutes ago
Randa Milliron says Interorbital will attempt a “space altitude” suborbital launch around January, depending on when it gets FAA license.
(Jeff is at the Small Payload Rideshare Symposium at APL)
« Last Edit: 06/10/2015 08:41 pm by Kryten »

Online TrevorMonty

Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #22 on: 06/10/2015 09:13 pm »
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.


Offline Kryten

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 735
  • Liked: 426
  • Likes Given: 33
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #23 on: 06/10/2015 10:17 pm »
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.
Previous date given was 'end of the year' in April. At least a three month slip in two months, seems to be business as usual for IO.
« Last Edit: 06/10/2015 10:26 pm by Kryten »

Online TrevorMonty

Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #24 on: 06/10/2015 10:25 pm »
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.
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.
Business as usual for most new LVs, their launch dates always slip. Still waiting for Electron to slip to 2016, they are still holding to late 2015.

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #25 on: 06/10/2015 10:36 pm »
When it comes to IOS I've found the best means to keep up with their progress is to ignore everything they say and encourage them to report everything they do. Let them know are appreciated.
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline Katana

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 378
  • Liked: 49
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #26 on: 06/12/2015 04:22 am »
Pressure fed engines, steel tank, 2 stage, 2% to LEO, possible?

It's hilarious both tiny OTRAG and huge Sea Dragon use pressure fed engines. Does pressure fed have such a orbit potential and total cost benefit over turbopump?

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.

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...

Offline Katana

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 378
  • Liked: 49
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #27 on: 06/12/2015 04:26 am »
Maybe better to have Armadillo tuberoc in cluster. Why Armadillo didn't have a orbit LV concept?
They haven't flown a guided rocket yet.. the last (and only) flight was last year and was fin stabilized.

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #28 on: 06/12/2015 04:27 am »
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.
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline Katana

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 378
  • Liked: 49
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #29 on: 06/12/2015 05:27 am »
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.

If it's the problem of cost and scalability, could a normal size LV have 2% payload to LEO with pressure fed?
Falcon9 v1.1 have 13t payload per 505t glow = 2.5%, with ultralight tanks.

Offline Vultur

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1919
  • Liked: 762
  • Likes Given: 184
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #30 on: 06/14/2015 09:11 pm »
I was just totally guessing on the 2% thing... I have no idea what payload fraction a Sea Dragon would really have.

Offline spacetech

  • Member
  • Posts: 29
  • San Francisco
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 6
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #31 on: 06/14/2015 09:47 pm »
They haven't flown a guided rocket yet.. the last (and only) flight was last year and was fin stabilized.
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.



Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #32 on: 06/14/2015 10:06 pm »
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.

Nope. I asked Randa on The Space Show. They've never done guidance before.

See this update: http://www.interorbital.com/interorbital_05022015_018.htm
« Last Edit: 06/15/2015 12:18 am by QuantumG »
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline R7

  • Propulsophile
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2725
    • Don't worry.. we can still be fans of OSC and SNC
  • Liked: 992
  • Likes Given: 668
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #33 on: 06/15/2015 08:22 am »
Maybe better to have Armadillo tuberoc in cluster. Why Armadillo didn't have a orbit LV concept?

They had.

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=7278.0

AD·ASTRA·ASTRORVM·GRATIA

Offline R7

  • Propulsophile
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2725
    • Don't worry.. we can still be fans of OSC and SNC
  • Liked: 992
  • Likes Given: 668
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #34 on: 06/15/2015 08:29 am »
I 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.
AD·ASTRA·ASTRORVM·GRATIA

Offline Katana

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 378
  • Liked: 49
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #35 on: 06/16/2015 01:24 am »
How could pressure fed rockets have performance come close to pump fed rockets?
I 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.

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #36 on: 06/16/2015 01:36 am »
How 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.
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Online TrevorMonty

Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #37 on: 06/16/2015 03:18 am »
How 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.
Firefly is pressure fed (autogenous). Lower performance but easier to develop and cheaper to build.
 Wouldn't be surprised if the go to electric turbo pump long term.
« Last Edit: 06/16/2015 03:22 am by TrevorMonty »

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #38 on: 06/16/2015 03:23 am »
I 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.
 
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Online TrevorMonty

Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #39 on: 06/16/2015 05:52 am »
I 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

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #40 on: 06/16/2015 06:41 am »
Pressure fed according to website.
http://www.fireflyspace.com/vehicles/firefly-a

No idea who I'm thinking about then :)
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline Katana

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 378
  • Liked: 49
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #41 on: 06/16/2015 08:49 am »
How 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.
Both built with modern carbon composites, much lighter and expensive than stainless steel Seadragon or OTRAG.

Anyway, none of fully pressure fed rockets have gone to orbit yet. 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.

In Russia, Pressure fed Scud A (R-11) enter service but replaced by pump fed Scud B (R-17).
http://www.b14643.de/Spacerockets/Diverse/Scud/index.htm

For small turbopump, Russian Isayev S2.711 / V-750V for SAM-2 missile has 30.4kN thrust and T/W ratio of 72.09
http://www.astronautix.com/engines/isav750v.htm
http://www.b14643.de/Spacerockets/Diverse/KB-Isayev_engines/index.htm

Simple design like AK47,  thousands launched in the Vietnam war, tens of thousands produced. Should be dirt cheap compared to NK-33. May any private company get some retired ones from Russia and fly them again?
« Last Edit: 06/16/2015 08:53 am by Katana »

Offline R7

  • Propulsophile
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2725
    • Don't worry.. we can still be fans of OSC and SNC
  • Liked: 992
  • Likes Given: 668
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #42 on: 06/16/2015 09:54 am »
How could pressure fed rockets have performance come close to pump fed rockets?

All current pump fed LVs are microscopic compared to Sea Dragon. Payload fraction tends to grow with LV size, regardless of pump cycle. Need to compare vehicles of equal size.

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.

WW2 materials being suitable to pressure fed orbital LV is your own claim. Wartime Germany had to deal with shortage of precious resources so minimum drymass designs were preferred. Helium wasn't available as a light weight pressurant.


Quote
May any private company get some retired ones from Russia and fly them again?

Better, you can buy new Serbian clones.

http://www.edepro.com/?page_id=112
AD·ASTRA·ASTRORVM·GRATIA

Online TrevorMonty

Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #43 on: 06/17/2015 04:39 am »
Listen to Inter orbital owners Space show. Launch price to orbit ( 300km?) for 30kg is expected to be $1M. This is 5 core LV.
-
NB Electron is $4.9M for 120kg to SSO 500km.  4 times payload to higher energy orbit.

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #44 on: 06/17/2015 04:43 am »
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline R7

  • Propulsophile
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2725
    • Don't worry.. we can still be fans of OSC and SNC
  • Liked: 992
  • Likes Given: 668
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #45 on: 06/17/2015 05:10 am »
In the latest show Ron went on about spending the last year testing guidance hardware.

http://web.archive.org/web/20000623160615/http://www.interorbital.com/iosneptune1.htm

Quote
The Neptune launcher program is in its final design stage. Engine and guidance system tests are underway.

That was fourteen(14!) years ago.
AD·ASTRA·ASTRORVM·GRATIA

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #46 on: 06/17/2015 05:13 am »
Indeed. It's pretty obvious that they've only recently entered reality and discovered just how much work is ahead of them.
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline R7

  • Propulsophile
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2725
    • Don't worry.. we can still be fans of OSC and SNC
  • Liked: 992
  • Likes Given: 668
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #47 on: 06/17/2015 05:46 am »
they've only recently entered reality

That, or they just reset the cycle to cook up new batch of space snake oil. For the sake of the egyptian who prepaid $21k for 28 grams of lunar regolith from them I hope for the former.

edit: OK I got to the part with Randa annoucing corporate lunar base in 2021, so betting for the latter.

Hadn't heard that Charles Pooley has passed away. RIP  :-\
« Last Edit: 06/17/2015 05:58 am by R7 »
AD·ASTRA·ASTRORVM·GRATIA

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #48 on: 06/17/2015 06:01 am »
That, or they just reset the cycle to cook up new batch of space snake oil.

The only reason they're doing anything is they've got Synergy Moon giving them upfront cash.

Quote from: R7
Hadn't heard that Charles Pooley has passed away. RIP  :-\

Yeah :( Paul Breed is working on a suitable tribute to his legacy.
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline Kryten

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 735
  • Liked: 426
  • Likes Given: 33
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #49 on: 06/17/2015 07:28 pm »
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?
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.

Offline ChrisWilson68

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5266
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 4992
  • Likes Given: 6459
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #50 on: 06/24/2015 08:31 am »
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?
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.

Right, because those Mercury capsules were just so spacious, lets shrink it in size by a third and then stuff a second person in there!  What could possibly go wrong.

Maybe they're thinking of the children's market.  You must be under 36 inches to enter this ride.

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #51 on: 06/24/2015 09:59 am »
Pretty much true, but I wonder how much of Mercury was full of equipment that could be done much more compactly these days. In any case, Interorbital won't be doing anything like that.
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline R7

  • Propulsophile
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2725
    • Don't worry.. we can still be fans of OSC and SNC
  • Liked: 992
  • Likes Given: 668
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #52 on: 06/24/2015 10:40 am »
IOS capsule will be very safe because there's negligible risk of it actually going into outer space.
AD·ASTRA·ASTRORVM·GRATIA

Online TrevorMonty

Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #53 on: 06/24/2015 11:15 am »
Cool!! a few hours to enjoy floating around in zeroG in a capsule as roomy as a phone booth.
« Last Edit: 06/24/2015 11:16 am by TrevorMonty »

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #54 on: 06/24/2015 11:37 am »
A constricting cockpit is probably more enjoyable anyway. The important thing to remember is that everything we know about recreational spaceflight is that we know nothing.
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1002
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #55 on: 10/05/2015 05:36 pm »
IOS Randa Milliron at SPSRA conference, answering questions about their near term suborbital high apogee and orbital flight schedules and plans.

Short, they are talking about next few months, Black Rock site, December flights for orbital launch .. kind of confusing of what comes when exactly. Feb/March high apogee



The presentation here :
https://www.sprsa.org/sites/default/files/conference-presentation/Interorbital%20NEPTUNE.SPRSA_.6.11.14CalTech-Milliron_PR.ppt
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Online TrevorMonty


Offline jamesh9000

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 104
  • Liked: 165
  • Likes Given: 184
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #57 on: 11/08/2015 08:44 pm »

Offline Phil Stooke

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1354
  • Canada
  • Liked: 1424
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #58 on: 11/08/2015 08:50 pm »
Don't be so hard on them - it's only a few orders of magnitude different.  I'll count them - oops, I don't have enough fingers.

Online TrevorMonty

Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #59 on: 11/08/2015 09:23 pm »
I wish them all the best but I wouldn't put any money them.
« Last Edit: 11/09/2015 01:39 pm by TrevorMonty »

Offline Sam Ho

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 817
  • Liked: 580
  • Likes Given: 71
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #60 on: 02/25/2016 11:22 pm »
Interorbital plans a suborbital launch, primarily to test the guidance system, in March/April of 2016.  Payload is 11 smallsats.  Another suborbital launch is planned for mid-year and the first orbital launch in Q4.

http://www.milsatmagazine.com/story.php?number=1337072666

They earlier posted some photos of the Mobile Land-Launch System (sounding rocket launch trailer).

http://www.interorbital.com/interorbital_06222015_019.htm

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #61 on: 02/25/2016 11:27 pm »
That article is so confusing..

Anyway, it'll be good to see some active guidance on an Interorbital flight. If they actually reach 100 km this year I'll be (pleasantly) surprised.
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline Darren_Hensley

  • System Software Engineer, MCTP, NGC, Ft Leavenworth Ks
  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 206
  • Captian(ret) USS Pabilli, Timefleet, UFP-TIC
  • Alamogordo NM
    • H-10-K Enterprises
  • Liked: 12
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #62 on: 02/26/2016 11:15 pm »
I welcome any flight after years of empty promises. I used to e-mail Randa, but now I just let the chips fall where they may.

I'd rather see advancements to the CPM variants we were watching. Don't get me wrong small and micro sat launches are great, but what about Lunar X-Prize stuff?
BSNCM Devry, MAITM Webster, MSSS & MSAP SFA
H-10-K Enterprises Gateway Station

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #63 on: 02/26/2016 11:47 pm »
Indeed. It's pretty obvious that they've only recently entered reality and discovered just how much work is ahead of them.

Two years to develop a guidance system, for example.
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10288
  • Liked: 699
  • Likes Given: 723
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #64 on: 02/28/2016 11:12 am »
If they launch from their normal site, the allowed ceiling is 25,000 feet.

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1002
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #65 on: 04/10/2016 06:48 am »
So according to this latest update:
http://www.milsatmagazine.com/story.php?number=1337072666
Quote
the March/April launch will carry 11 commercial smallsat units

It did not launch in March i believe, so that leaves us with about 20 days
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1002
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #66 on: 04/23/2016 06:20 am »
Milliron will be speaking at AIAA LA-LV Section Enterprise Program Event on Apr 26

Quote
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.
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline Darren_Hensley

  • System Software Engineer, MCTP, NGC, Ft Leavenworth Ks
  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 206
  • Captian(ret) USS Pabilli, Timefleet, UFP-TIC
  • Alamogordo NM
    • H-10-K Enterprises
  • Liked: 12
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #67 on: 04/25/2016 02:16 am »
OK so Randa is going to speak, more "Talk" and less "Walk" Again I'd rather see some real progress. Still nothing new and ground breaking in nearly three years. If the altitude max is only 25000 ft, what good is that? Certainly they need to launch into orbit, and then on to the moon with Neptune rocket variants. I say less talk and more backing for a properly funded, manned and forward moving X-Prize shot. No one else seems to be participating anymore. IOS was looking very good, but now more like not-so-good... Just my two cents.
BSNCM Devry, MAITM Webster, MSSS & MSAP SFA
H-10-K Enterprises Gateway Station

Offline GraniteHound92

  • Member
  • Posts: 67
  • Liked: 33
  • Likes Given: 63
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #68 on: 08/31/2016 03:51 am »
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.

Offline jongoff

  • Recovering Rocket Plumber/Space Entrepreneur
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6807
  • Lafayette/Broomfield, CO
  • Liked: 3987
  • Likes Given: 1684
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #69 on: 09/01/2016 03:55 am »
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.

I'm glad you included that last sentence. I was worried for a second that you had drunk their koolaid. It's not impossible that IOS could eventually accomplish something, but they've been making grand claims for about half my lifetime now with almost nothing to show for it (other than a bunch of depositors who've been separated from their money).

~Jon

Offline ChrisWilson68

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5266
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 4992
  • Likes Given: 6459
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #70 on: 09/01/2016 05:20 am »
From the GLXP update:

Quote
SYNERGY MOON has blazed their own path and demonstrated that there is more than one way to get to the Moon

The folks running the GLXP are confused about the meaning of the word "demonstrated".

Offline russianhalo117

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8755
  • Liked: 4673
  • Likes Given: 768
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #71 on: 09/01/2016 05:42 am »
From the GLXP update:

Quote
SYNERGY MOON has blazed their own path and demonstrated that there is more than one way to get to the Moon

The 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.

Offline ChrisWilson68

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5266
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 4992
  • Likes Given: 6459
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #72 on: 09/01/2016 06:13 am »
From the GLXP update:
Quote
SYNERGY MOON has blazed their own path and demonstrated that there is more than one way to get to the Moon
The 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.

The only exceptions I can think of would be in math or logic, where it means give a proof, since there isn't a physical way to show something.  But in engineering of all sorts, the general understanding of the word "demonstrate" is to show by example, in all my experience.

Online Steven Pietrobon

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39218
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 32738
  • Likes Given: 8192
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #73 on: 09/01/2016 06:19 am »
Interobital Systems has demonstrated a suborbital launch of their Neptune CPM TV (Common Propulsion Module Test Vehicle) on 29 March 2014 which reached the grand height of 3 km. They have a long way to go before they can reach the Moon.
Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #1:  Engineering is done with numbers.  Analysis without numbers is only an opinion.

Offline NaN

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 248
  • Liked: 248
  • Likes Given: 232
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #74 on: 09/01/2016 06:22 am »
That is more than synergy moon has demonstrated, judging by their website. All I could find is this video of their lunar rover concept:


Offline CameronD

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2374
  • Melbourne, Australia
    • Norton Consultants
  • Liked: 868
  • Likes Given: 548
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #75 on: 09/01/2016 06:25 am »
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.

If that's your thinking, then they won't bother asking you for investment capital anytime soon. :)
With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine - however, this is not necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are
going to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly overhead.

Offline CameronD

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2374
  • Melbourne, Australia
    • Norton Consultants
  • Liked: 868
  • Likes Given: 548
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #76 on: 09/01/2016 06:29 am »
That is more than synergy moon has demonstrated, judging by their website. All I could find is this video of their lunar rover concept:

"Tesla Surveyor".. Now which company do you suppose they might be hoping will bank-roll this little project?  ::)
With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine - however, this is not necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are
going to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly overhead.

Offline ChrisWilson68

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5266
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 4992
  • Likes Given: 6459
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #77 on: 09/01/2016 06:52 am »
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.

If that's your thinking, then they won't bother asking you for investment capital anytime soon. :)

You do realize I'm talking about the use of a word, right?  I never said things shouldn't be funded if they haven't been demonstrated.  I just dislike hype, and using the word "demonstrated" in this context is hype.  If you go to a venture capitalist and say you want money for an idea you have that will take time and money to produce a demo, they will listen and they might fund you if they are convinced.  But if you say you've demonstrated it and you don't actually have a demo, you're unlikely to get funding.

And it's worth pointing out that the "they" we're talking about is the GLXP organization, not Interorbital Systems.  It wasn't Interorbital that claimed it had been demonstrated, it was someone from GLXP.

Offline josespeck

  • Member
  • Posts: 60
  • Liked: 10
  • Likes Given: 13
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #78 on: 10/11/2016 05:45 pm »
What is the gas pressurizing the propellant tanks?.

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1002
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #79 on: 10/12/2016 02:35 am »
Lets post an actual Interorbital update ( or rather, non-update as these things usually are )

www.satnews.com/story.php?number=60112970
Quote
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.

The first flight date was early 2016 six months ago or so.
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline ringsider

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 714
  • Liked: 506
  • Likes Given: 97
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #80 on: 10/12/2016 03:07 pm »
Lets post an actual Interorbital update ( or rather, non-update as these things usually are )

www.satnews.com/story.php?number=60112970
Quote
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.

The first flight date was early 2016 six months ago or so.

I honestly don't know whether to laugh or just sit here with my mouth gaping open wondering what the hell it is I just read.

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1002
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #81 on: 10/18/2016 12:17 am »
http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-18/aerospace-company-interorbital-systems-eyes-rockhampton-site/7926296
US aerospace company Interorbital Systems eyes Rockhampton as place to set up launch pad
Quote
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 needed

Member 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]
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline CameronD

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2374
  • Melbourne, Australia
    • Norton Consultants
  • Liked: 868
  • Likes Given: 548
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #82 on: 10/18/2016 03:10 am »
http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-18/aerospace-company-interorbital-systems-eyes-rockhampton-site/7926296
US aerospace company Interorbital Systems eyes Rockhampton as place to set up launch pad

Interesting find!!! Rockhampton.. Seriously!?!! April Fool's day is next year!  :o

Although I wish them all success, personally, I think they've been standing in the sun too long:
Quote
Mr Moody said his Moody Space Centre proposal was in its infancy and required $25 million in government funding..
« Last Edit: 10/18/2016 03:12 am by CameronD »
With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine - however, this is not necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are
going to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly overhead.

Offline ringsider

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 714
  • Liked: 506
  • Likes Given: 97
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #83 on: 10/18/2016 07:38 am »
Government support needed

Not a hope in hell.

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1002
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #84 on: 10/18/2016 04:02 pm »
Government support needed

Not a hope in hell.

You are telling me there is a chance ?
Quote
"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.

If that doesn't work out, there is always Tonga
« Last Edit: 10/18/2016 04:04 pm by savuporo »
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1002
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #85 on: 10/18/2016 04:08 pm »
Just to be sure, i'm not pulling anyone's legs.

http://spacenews.com/californias-interorbital-has-big-plans-small-satellites/
Feb, 2010

Quote
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.”
« Last Edit: 10/18/2016 04:08 pm by savuporo »
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline CameronD

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2374
  • Melbourne, Australia
    • Norton Consultants
  • Liked: 868
  • Likes Given: 548
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #86 on: 10/20/2016 12:25 am »
Just to be sure, i'm not pulling anyone's legs.

http://spacenews.com/californias-interorbital-has-big-plans-small-satellites/
Feb, 2010

Quote
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.”

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.

« Last Edit: 10/20/2016 12:26 am by CameronD »
With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine - however, this is not necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are
going to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly overhead.

Offline Sam Ho

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 817
  • Liked: 580
  • Likes Given: 71
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #87 on: 10/20/2016 09:24 am »
Just to be sure, i'm not pulling anyone's legs.

http://spacenews.com/californias-interorbital-has-big-plans-small-satellites/
Feb, 2010

Quote
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.”

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.

Nothing stopping them... for the last five years.  That pad in Tonga was supposed to support a launch in December 2010. Interorbital has been about a year from launch for over a decade now.

Actually, selling extremely low priced launches that are then indefinitely delayed may not be all bad for educational satellites. The students still get experience building hardware, and by the time the launch date passes, they're likely to have already graduated and gone on to get a job somewhere.

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1002
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #88 on: 01/04/2017 03:49 am »
http://www.planetary.org/multimedia/planetary-radio/show/2017/0102-randa-milliron-interorbital.html

CEO Randa Milliron introduces us to Interorbital Systems, which wants to put your payload in orbit for as little as $8,000. Can they do it?


Betteridge's law of headlines ..
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1002
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #89 on: 03/11/2017 05:30 pm »
http://triblive.com/local/allegheny/11950213-74/milliron-moon-launch

Quote
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."

Quote
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.
« Last Edit: 03/11/2017 05:33 pm by savuporo »
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1002
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #90 on: 04/18/2017 05:37 am »
And yet again, Randa Milliron will present at another conference. Interplanetary Smallsat conf, May 1-2, San Jose.

http://www.intersmallsatconference.com/ISSC2017-booklet.pdf

Quote
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
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1002
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #91 on: 04/18/2017 05:43 am »
Oh there's also an update on the website

http://interorbital.com/interorbital_06222015_018.htm
Quote
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.
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline Darren_Hensley

  • System Software Engineer, MCTP, NGC, Ft Leavenworth Ks
  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 206
  • Captian(ret) USS Pabilli, Timefleet, UFP-TIC
  • Alamogordo NM
    • H-10-K Enterprises
  • Liked: 12
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #92 on: 04/19/2017 05:06 pm »
Not holding my breath, but at least I see new hardware coming together in the garage...
BSNCM Devry, MAITM Webster, MSSS & MSAP SFA
H-10-K Enterprises Gateway Station

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 48177
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 81682
  • Likes Given: 36941
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #93 on: 07/25/2017 10:09 pm »
Quote
NEPTUNE 1 Guidance Test Vehicle (N1 GTV) Nearing Completion

MOJAVE 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.

http://www.interorbital.com/interorbital_06222015_019.htm
« Last Edit: 07/25/2017 10:11 pm by FutureSpaceTourist »

Offline jamesh9000

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 104
  • Liked: 165
  • Likes Given: 184
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #94 on: 10/18/2017 01:25 am »
Guys! Interorbital are actually doing something!

https://twitter.com/interorbital/status/920437338282475520

Quote
Randa Milliron‏ @interorbital  2h2 hours ago

Interorbital Rolls out NEPTUNE CPM 2.0 Test Rocket!
Successfully conducts water-flow test 10/16/17


Online Steven Pietrobon

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39218
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 32738
  • Likes Given: 8192
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #95 on: 10/18/2017 06:30 am »
More info at link below. Will be carrying 11 smallsat payloads. Scheduled for fourth quarter 2017.

http://satmagazine.com/story.php?number=1600200139
Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #1:  Engineering is done with numbers.  Analysis without numbers is only an opinion.

Offline john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10351
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 2431
  • Likes Given: 13606
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #96 on: 10/18/2017 12:39 pm »
More info at link below. Will be carrying 11 smallsat payloads. Scheduled for fourth quarter 2017.

http://satmagazine.com/story.php?number=1600200139
Damm. It looks like they are actually going to launch something.

It's been a long time coming. Let's see how well it performs against their expectations.
MCT ITS BFR SS. The worlds first Methane fueled FFSC engined CFRP SS structure A380 sized aerospaceplane tail sitter capable of Earth & Mars atmospheric flight.First flight to Mars by end of 2022 TBC. T&C apply. Trust nothing. Run your own #s "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" R. Simberg."Competitve" means cheaper ¬cheap SCramjet proposed 1956. First +ve thrust 2004. US R&D spend to date > $10Bn. #deployed designs. Zero.

Offline William Graham

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4183
  • Liked: 236
  • Likes Given: 109
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #97 on: 10/21/2017 09:22 am »
More info at link below. Will be carrying 11 smallsat payloads. Scheduled for fourth quarter 2017.

http://satmagazine.com/story.php?number=1600200139

Suborbital. But will still be a big step forwards for them if they actually launch it.

Offline Bart J

  • Member
  • Posts: 18
  • Liked: 7
  • Likes Given: 6
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #98 on: 11/01/2017 01:18 pm »
I'm really excited to see how this goes. Randa and Roderick have some pretty wild dreams (floating cities on Venus), and I admire them for getting this far without being millionaires or billionaires. It's easy to start a space program when you're Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, Richard Branson, or Robert Bigelow. But the fact that these two ordinary people are close to putting satellites in orbit by themselves is truly inspiring.

While this won't be an orbital launch just yet as they don't have the licensing, it will be orbital-capable hardware. Depending on how long it takes them to build another one, I could see orbital launches beginning in the second half of 2018. They won't be getting anywhere near the moon in time of the X Prize, though. It'll probably be 3-5 years before they can do that.

But the light at the end of the tunnel is now visible.

Offline Darren_Hensley

  • System Software Engineer, MCTP, NGC, Ft Leavenworth Ks
  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 206
  • Captian(ret) USS Pabilli, Timefleet, UFP-TIC
  • Alamogordo NM
    • H-10-K Enterprises
  • Liked: 12
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #99 on: 11/02/2017 05:45 am »
It's been 10 plus years since I started following them, I really want them to succeed. Gave up holding my breath. They just don't have the money right now to keep me watching, until something really happens. They have less than two months to get it done this year.
BSNCM Devry, MAITM Webster, MSSS & MSAP SFA
H-10-K Enterprises Gateway Station

Offline Bart J

  • Member
  • Posts: 18
  • Liked: 7
  • Likes Given: 6
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #100 on: 11/02/2017 06:33 am »
Interorbital are a lot like Virgin Galactic: they've been a few months away from launching satellites/passengers since 2008.

However, progress is slowly being made, and eventually both SpaceShipTwo and Neptune will go ahead, hopefully.

Offline billh

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 778
  • Houston
  • Liked: 1098
  • Likes Given: 792
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #101 on: 11/28/2017 01:24 pm »
Someone on Facebook posted a link to this video of an Interorbital machine winding carbon fiber overwrap on a pressure vessel. It was stated that the machine was entirely developed (hardware and software) by Interorbital.

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 48177
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 81682
  • Likes Given: 36941
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #102 on: 02/25/2018 11:22 pm »


Quote
Liquid Upper Stage Static Test 5.16.2018
« Last Edit: 07/09/2018 06:30 am by FutureSpaceTourist »

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 48177
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 81682
  • Likes Given: 36941
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #103 on: 07/09/2018 06:25 am »

Online Steven Pietrobon

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39218
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 32738
  • Likes Given: 8192
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #104 on: 07/10/2018 06:27 am »
Press release that went with that.

http://www.interorbital.com/News%20Stories/NEPTUNE%20Liquid%20Upper-Stage%20Engine%20Flight%20Test%20063018

"NEPTUNE Liquid Upper-Stage Engine Flight Test 1
June 30, 201

The IOS rocket team successfully completed a low-altitude flight-test of its orbital vehicle's liquid upper-stage rocket engine (GPRE 0.75KNTA). The engine was integrated into an IOS NEUTRINO sounding rocket. An improved main valve unit was installed that increased the propellant flow, boosting the engine performance higher than was achieved during static ground tests. The rocket generated 10 Gs on takeoff with a thrust of 900-lbs (4003.4-newtons) and a specific impulse of 248-sec.

The ablatively-cooled rocket engine is powered by the hypergolic combination of White Fuming Nitric Acid (WFNA) and Turpentine/Furfuryl Alcohol. These high-density storable auto-igniting propellants power all IOS liquid rocket engines. This propellant combination generates a distinctive bright hydrocarbon plume similar to LOX/Kerosene. Interorbital's N1 and N2 orbital launch vehicles employ two GPRE 0.75KNTA engines for their second stage and a single GPRE 0.75KNTA engine for their third stage.

The test launch carried three commercial payloads: All were recovered with the rocket by parachute and came back alive and functioning. Boreal Space of NASA Ames Research Center flew its Wayfinder hosted payload technology that contained experiments from Stanford University's Extreme Environments Lab, as well as a Graphene experiment from the University of Singapore.

During the flight the NEUTRINO rocket achieved its expected altitude and the recovery system worked as designed. The rocket was successfully recovered and is being readied for a high-altitude test launch scheduled for sometime in the next few weeks."
Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #1:  Engineering is done with numbers.  Analysis without numbers is only an opinion.

Offline billh

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 778
  • Houston
  • Liked: 1098
  • Likes Given: 792
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #105 on: 07/10/2018 11:35 pm »
In the video it looked like the parachute didn't open completely, but the press release suggests otherwise. Perhaps it wasn't a conventional parachute?

Offline ringsider

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 714
  • Liked: 506
  • Likes Given: 97
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #106 on: 07/12/2018 06:04 am »
That was actually a much better launch / recovery than anything Vector has done to date, and it looked like the engine was a similar size/power.

On the other hand, Interorbital doesn't have a sponsored Porsche racing team for their CEO to play with.

 

Offline Olaf

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3124
  • Germany
  • Liked: 1481
  • Likes Given: 455

Offline Tywin

The knowledge is power...Everything is connected...
The Turtle continues at a steady pace ...

Online Steven Pietrobon

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39218
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 32738
  • Likes Given: 8192
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #109 on: 07/16/2019 08:37 am »
Something move!!!

twitter.com/interorbital/status/1150812623685861376

Maybe not. That's the same vehicle from their 29 March 2014 launch, which was only a partial success.

http://www.interorbital.com/News%20Stories/CPM%20TV%20Launch
« Last Edit: 07/16/2019 08:37 am by Steven Pietrobon »
Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #1:  Engineering is done with numbers.  Analysis without numbers is only an opinion.

Offline meberbs

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3096
  • Liked: 3379
  • Likes Given: 777
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #110 on: 07/17/2019 12:10 am »
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&=
"Interorbital Systems" is the name of a company with aspirations to launch small satellites, and is the topic of this thread.

The solicitation you linked has nothing to do with this company or point-to-point transportation, it is about commercial habitats in space as a potential follow on to the ISS. It either belongs in its own thread, or can continue being discussed in the existing thread on ISS commercialization which includes both that solicitation and other related activities.

Edit: found that other thread
« Last Edit: 07/17/2019 01:19 am by meberbs »

Online Steven Pietrobon

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39218
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 32738
  • Likes Given: 8192
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #111 on: 10/30/2019 02:48 am »
"NEWS FLASH: Interorbital Systems invest $1.5 million into Moody Space Centre in the form of a rocket and systems support. This is a huge step forward for both of us and promises to bear fruit. #moodyspacecentre #space #interorbitalsystems"

https://www.facebook.com/moodyspacecentre/photos/a.286063101582026/1264016207120039/?type=3&theater

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
« Last Edit: 10/30/2019 02:50 am by Steven Pietrobon »
Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #1:  Engineering is done with numbers.  Analysis without numbers is only an opinion.

Offline CameronD

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2374
  • Melbourne, Australia
    • Norton Consultants
  • Liked: 868
  • Likes Given: 548
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #112 on: 10/30/2019 11:18 pm »
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

Fuel: WFNA and Turpentine! - what are the chances they'll actually get this off the ground?!?  Surely GBRMPA (and other powers that be) wouldn't be too pleased about toxic rocket parts impacting the Great Barrier Reef.. not to mention the rather busy shipping lanes.

Are they still aiming to launch from Rockhampton next year?

« Last Edit: 10/31/2019 01:20 am by CameronD »
With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine - however, this is not necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are
going to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly overhead.

Online Steven Pietrobon

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39218
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 32738
  • Likes Given: 8192
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #113 on: 10/31/2019 03:03 am »
From the Moody Space Centre Facebook thread, the rocket is arriving by late 2020 by ship.

Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #1:  Engineering is done with numbers.  Analysis without numbers is only an opinion.

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #114 on: 10/31/2019 04:08 am »
what are the chances they'll actually get this off the ground?!?

See thread title.
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Online Steven Pietrobon

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39218
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 32738
  • Likes Given: 8192
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #115 on: 12/16/2019 04:27 am »
Interview with John Moody announcing $1.5M investment from Interorbital Systems to the Moody Space Centre in Queensland. This includes a rocket, ground system, guidance system and launch system. Its a full setup to launch rockets. They are looking for additional investors. Launch site is in Rockhampton. Also had interest from STAR Industries from New Zealand, founded by an ex-Rocketlab employee, and Paragon Space Development Corporation from the US.

« Last Edit: 12/16/2019 04:38 am by Steven Pietrobon »
Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #1:  Engineering is done with numbers.  Analysis without numbers is only an opinion.

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #116 on: 12/16/2019 05:52 am »
 :-X
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline Svetoslav

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1667
  • Bulgaria
  • Liked: 1184
  • Likes Given: 114
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #117 on: 01/27/2020 03:37 pm »
Greetings,

I never imagined I'll write in this thread, but... here I am :) Last year a British startup company launched on KickStarter the ambitious project AmbaSat. The project is very similar to the KickSat initiative which was launched on KickStarter in 2011... and eventually succeeded in 2019. The concept is the same : a dispenser in the shape of 3U CubeSat is about to send to space hundreds of personal Chipsats.

The KickStarter initiative was very successful, it met the funding goal. Now, a lot of us - myself included - have ordered our own ChipSat satellite, and we have reserved a rocket launch slot.

The launch partner of AmbaSat is Interorbital system. According to the latest blogpost, the project is already on the flight manifest of Interorbital (link here: https://ambasat.com/happy-new-year-and-official-launch-manifest-listing/ )

According to the official description, Interorbital was chosen because it is the "world's lowest-cost access to space". That's why the project was affordable to everybody.

I'm quite excited to be part of this project, and I am hoping for eventual success!

Online TrevorMonty

Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #118 on: 01/27/2020 04:13 pm »
Good luck with launch, just don't expect one anytime soon. IOS have been at it for very long time and still no orbital launch. On plus side they are flying some suborbital hardware, which is better than lot of their competitors.

Your chipsat should have charged bit more and gone with existing launch provider, plenty rideshare options for 3U.

Offline Svetoslav

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1667
  • Bulgaria
  • Liked: 1184
  • Likes Given: 114
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #119 on: 01/27/2020 04:42 pm »
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.

Offline ChrisWilson68

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5266
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 4992
  • Likes Given: 6459
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #120 on: 01/27/2020 05:02 pm »
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.

While I sympathize with the sentiment, unfortunately, I think you've made the wrong choice.  Interorbital is not a step on the path toward making space more affordable in the future.

Wanting something doesn't make it happen.  Interorbital represents wanting and trying something without a reality check.

What will make space more affordable in the future is paying attention to reality.

There are options for people with limited budgets to fund things that can actually help.  They can participate in funding smallsats to ride SpaceX rideshare missions.  They can fund propulsion companies developing propulsion and other components for smallsats and in-space transportation.  They can fund technologies for ISRU on Mars, the Moon, and elsewhere.

There are many opportunities for funding at all levels to help improve the prospects for our future in space.  So it saddens me to see it instead wasted on the likes of Interorbital, who are simply doing a less-good version of what many others have already done.

Offline Svetoslav

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1667
  • Bulgaria
  • Liked: 1184
  • Likes Given: 114
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #121 on: 01/27/2020 05:48 pm »
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.

Offline ChrisWilson68

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5266
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 4992
  • Likes Given: 6459
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #122 on: 01/27/2020 05:57 pm »
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.

It's an idea people have been trying for decades.  It's still an expendable chemical engine.  That's obsolete technology in an age of stages being reused.

Offline Kryten

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 735
  • Liked: 426
  • Likes Given: 33
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #123 on: 01/27/2020 07:41 pm »
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.
Even if they have great ideas, there's little evidence of implementation of any ideas. They've done two flights in the past six years, both low-altitude. After the second, they promised a high altitude flight within 'a few weeks'- as i'm writing this, that was 80 weeks ago. Look through this whole thread, look at their past promises, and look at how much they've actually done in all that time. I don't see how they can get anywhere unless somebody turns up with a giant bag of money sometime soon.

Offline Svetoslav

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1667
  • Bulgaria
  • Liked: 1184
  • Likes Given: 114
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #124 on: 01/27/2020 07:54 pm »
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?

Offline ChrisWilson68

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5266
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 4992
  • Likes Given: 6459
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #125 on: 01/27/2020 09:39 pm »
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.

Yes, SpaceX has been late on their promises.  But not anywhere near as late as IOS.  SpaceX eventually proved themselves.  IOS still hasn't.


Online Steven Pietrobon

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39218
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 32738
  • Likes Given: 8192
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #126 on: 01/28/2020 06:26 am »
I have to agree with the others. Interorbital doesn't even have a launch date for any of their vehicles!
Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #1:  Engineering is done with numbers.  Analysis without numbers is only an opinion.

Offline vaporcobra

Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #127 on: 01/28/2020 07:16 am »
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.

To be clear, that was almost entirely the fault of Congress and its incredibly parochial, zero-sum-gaming SLS supporters. 99% sure that NASA wanted things to move much more quickly and had reasonable budget requests that Congress then ignored. This is getting very off topic for an Interorbital thread but just wanted to correct the record.

Offline Svetoslav

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1667
  • Bulgaria
  • Liked: 1184
  • Likes Given: 114
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #128 on: 01/28/2020 12:59 pm »
While we're discussing this, some updates. Last year the AmbaSat team visited the Interorbital team in Mojave and there are photos on the Facebook page of AmbaSat:

https://www.facebook.com/pg/ambasat/photos/?ref=page_internal

Also... some kind of joint press release between Amba and Interorbital is supposed to happen soon:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/ambasat/ambasat-1-an-educational-space-satellite-kit/posts/2723187

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #129 on: 01/28/2020 10:11 pm »
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.

They're a "everyone get out and push" outfit.

Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline ringsider

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 714
  • Liked: 506
  • Likes Given: 97
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #130 on: 01/28/2020 11:14 pm »
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.

With this funding model Vector would have raised about $1500.00 ...
« Last Edit: 01/28/2020 11:15 pm by ringsider »

Offline Svetoslav

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1667
  • Bulgaria
  • Liked: 1184
  • Likes Given: 114
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #131 on: 06/02/2020 11:38 am »
Short update:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/ambasat/ambasat-1-an-educational-space-satellite-kit/posts/2845229

"When will the rocket launch take place?
Well, this is, of course, the million-dollar question for us all. In our meeting with Randa at Interorbital (IOS) last month, she said that they were planning on rocket engine testing within 30-40 days. They will then have a schedule for the next steps - which I guess will depend on the test outcome. We will find out more at our next meeting. However, we are well down the launch manifest and will NOT be on the first IOS launch, so I would not be too concerned about the amount of time you have for assembly/development/programming/etc. We will go deeper into this topic with a new blog article once we have information from IOS at the next meeting. Personally I think our further timeline for development could well be extended by at least 6 months."


So... since the latest update we got was about a month ago, we can expect IOS engine test ... soonish.

Offline Svetoslav

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1667
  • Bulgaria
  • Liked: 1184
  • Likes Given: 114
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #132 on: 07/02/2020 09:53 pm »
An update:

Martin from AmbaSat and Randa from Interorbital Systems (IOS) had an online meeting earlier this week.

Randa reported that:

Interorbital is currently testing the Neptune rocket guidance system. This includes both hardware & software elements

There is an upcoming large engine test for N2

Shutdown due to Covid has affected licence dates so any launch will probably not happen until the end of this year (2020) or beginning of next year, at the earliest

AmbaSat will be launched onboard the Neptune 2 rocket (N2)

There is room for the AmbaSat payload on the first flight

The N2 rocket payload capacity has increased from 30kg to 45kg

We should have a further update around the end of July

Martin asked for Interorbital expertise in completing the build of the AmbaSat launch container and will liaise with Silvan and IOS on this.

Randa also mentioned that IOS are currently in the middle of a multi-million dollar capital raise.

Comment from Martin:

Good and bad news from our meeting. Unfortunately, it looks like we may well not get to launch with IOS this year. However, the good news is that a 2021 launch looks good and there is the chance that we may also be on the first Neptune 2 rocket launch. For a 2021 launch it also gives everyone more time to complete their satellite assembly and coding tasks & testing.



https://ambasat.com/june-meeting-with-interorbital-systems-launch-date-update/

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 48177
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 81682
  • Likes Given: 36941

Online Steven Pietrobon

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39218
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 32738
  • Likes Given: 8192
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #134 on: 08/18/2020 07:30 am »
The vehicle is the Neptune 2. The first stage has two tanks of oxidiser (white fuming nitric acid) and two tanks of fuel (turpentine). Hopefully the "big news" is a launch date for their vehicle.

https://www.interorbital.com/Launch%20Vehicles
Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #1:  Engineering is done with numbers.  Analysis without numbers is only an opinion.

Online trimeta

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1685
  • Kansas City, MO
  • Liked: 2147
  • Likes Given: 57
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #135 on: 01/09/2022 12:24 am »
It seems like Interorbital Systems have completely changed the design of their Neptune vehicle. Based on the Wayback Machine, some time between August 12th and November 4th of 2021 they updated their webpage, and now Neptune is a LOX/densified propane rocket, with a conventional "fuel and oxidizer tanks stacked on top of each other" design, rather than having four long-and-skinny tanks (two for fuel, two for oxidizer) arranged in a square. They also seem to have abandoned the OTRAG-like concept of building more powerful vehicles by putting lots and lots of "common propulsion modules" together: now the Neptune is just their 80 kg to 500 km SSO vehicle, while Triton is a 3-ton class vehicle with a much larger (but still monolithic, not ganged together) core, and Triton Heavy is a 9-ton class three-core version of Triton.

As for propulsion, Neptune now uses four stationary pressure-fed ablative engines on the first stage (there's a hilarious bit where they call regenerative cooling "primitive nineteenth-century steam-engine technology," as though ablative is somehow more advanced), using differential throttle for steering, while the second stage uses a single stationary pressure-fed ablative engine with cold gas thrusters for steering. They claim to be using a "proprietary pressurant system" that somehow lets them use pressure-fed engines without high-pressure propellent tanks, leading to tanks with no more extra weight than the extra mass turbopumps would weigh anyway, but I'm quite skeptical of that. They also want to launch exclusively from an ocean-going barge/launch complex, but that's the least of my concerns here -- at least that justifies their nautical-themed vehicle naming!

I've linked/attached some of their infographics below, including their vehicle design for Neptune (which includes hot staging), Neptune's performance plot, and the specs they list for Neptune, Triton, and Triton Heavy.






Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1