NASASpaceFlight.com Forum
Commercial and US Government Launch Vehicles => Other US Launchers => Topic started by: Skyrocket on 01/04/2012 11:48 am
-
Hi,
i've just stumbled about the SPARK (Spaceborne Payload Assist Rocket Kauai) three-stage solid propellant launch vehicle, which is apparently planned to fly in 2013 from Kauai to lift payloads upt o 200 kg into low orbit. It appears to be an upgraded Strypi sounding rocket.
The project is conducted by the University of Hawaii, Sandia National Labs and Aerojet.
The rocket itself consists of three solid rocket motors and is spin stabilzed.
http://www.hawaii.edu/offices/op/innovation/taylor.pdf
http://events.eoportal.org/get_announce.php?an_id=10003879
Has anyone more info on this?
Which solid rocket motors are planned to be used?
And is this indeed a project with a chance to fly?
-
http://hsfl.hawaii.edu/HSFL_Overview_071910.pdf
-
Aerojet has apparently test-fired the second stage of this under-the-radar rocket (the Orbus-7S) in late August: http://www.aerojet.com/news2.php?action=fullnews&id=335 (http://www.aerojet.com/news2.php?action=fullnews&id=335)
I hope Aerojet or UHA offers a webcast for the launches starting from fall 2013: there hasn't been a rail-launched orbital launcher from the US since a long time ago! (Apparently it will even make use of a left-over rail launcher for the Scout rocket that last flew almost 20 years ago!) And Kauai island offers probably one of the best scenes for a launch site around the world. I wonder why this project went completely under the radar: this project was first proposed by a Sandia National Laboratories team back in 2000, but at that time there was no funding. Did DARPA fund it? (the second flight will launch the ORS-4 payloads for them)
Some information here:
https://www.hawaii.edu/offices/op/innovation/taylor.pdf (https://www.hawaii.edu/offices/op/innovation/taylor.pdf)
http://www.g2mil.com/stage.htm (http://www.g2mil.com/stage.htm)
-
there hasn't been a rail-launched orbital launcher from the US since a long time ago! (Apparently it will even make use of a left-over rail launcher for the Scout rocket that last flew almost 20 years ago!)
There hasn't been an US rail-launched orbital launcher at all. The left-over Scout launch will be converted to a rail launcher for the Super Strypi (or SPARK) project.
BTW, the illustration in the last post shows an older incarnation of the Super Strypi vehicle. The Castor-4 stage and the 2 Terrier boosters have now been replaced with a GEM-46 (a.k.a. LEO-46) first stage without boosters.
-
The second flight (ORS-4 mission) will carry HiakaSat-1 (http://ors.csd.disa.mil/media/ORS-4-final-Aug-2012.pdf) (formerly HawaiiSat 1) as the main payload and several cubesats (including 8 EDSN cubesats (http://www.nasa.gov/offices/oct/stp/small_satellite_subsystem_tech/edsn.html) for NASA).
-
Here is the environmental assessment (Nov. 2012)
http://www.govsupport.us/ORSSSEA/Documents/DEA.pdf
Some interesting facts:
* 1st flight is planned for September 2013 with Hiakasat and several cubsats (ORS-4 mission)
* 2nd flight is planned for 2014, no payload assigned yet
* the 3rd stage is no longer the "Spark-30" (a.k.a. Star-30BP), but a "LEO-1" (likely an Orbus-1)
Spark-30 is only to be flown on first flight according to past reply's I have received because it allows for space on top for additional instrumentation to be flown to gather data for the flight.
-
Spark-30 is only to be flown on first flight according to past reply's I have received because it allows for space on top for additional instrumentation to be flown to gather data for the flight.
That's interessting. The environmental assessment is the most recent document on the Super-Strypi project, which i have found, but i does not mention the Spark-30 anymore. Perhaps they have changed the configuration meanwhile. From when is your info?
-
Spark-30 is only to be flown on first flight according to past reply's I have received because it allows for space on top for additional instrumentation to be flown to gather data for the flight.
That's interessting. The environmental assessment is the most recent document on the Super-Strypi project, which i have found, but i does not mention the Spark-30 anymore. Perhaps they have changed the configuration meanwhile. From when is your info?
My info comes from University of Hawaii personnel. What date do you have on your info. The info I have mentions both, but clearly states Spark-30 for only first flight. My info is up to 25 October 2012. Maybe there is another test flight without payload that i am not aware of, but this is what I have at the moment. Their has been a few test flights flown (orbital/suborbital) to date and Spark-30 is not as powerful to my knowledge as the other stage. I will sleuth around the sites a bit more and see if I can find anything else. Please keep me updated with what else you find.
-
I just got some new info on this. I'll try to post.
The weird thing is that this rocket seems to have a bunch of different names. I think I saw it at the Aerojet booth listed as "Leonides" but nobody at a press conference used that name.
First flight is scheduled for later this year.
-
I just got some new info on this. I'll try to post.
The weird thing is that this rocket seems to have a bunch of different names. I think I saw it at the Aerojet booth listed as "Leonides" but nobody at a press conference used that name.
First flight is scheduled for later this year.
There was a press conference about this rocket? :o
What kind of market is this aimed at? There can't be that many US cubesats flying to support it at more than 1-2 launches per year....
-
What kind of market is this aimed at?
Payload wise, seems like market that the original Falcon I was supposed to address.
-
I just got some new info on this. I'll try to post.
The weird thing is that this rocket seems to have a bunch of different names. I think I saw it at the Aerojet booth listed as "Leonides" but nobody at a press conference used that name.
First flight is scheduled for later this year.
There was a press conference about this rocket? :o
What kind of market is this aimed at? There can't be that many US cubesats flying to support it at more than 1-2 launches per year....
University of Hawaii and Scandia National Laboratory state that it is a U.S. government launcher for lite class satellites from USA/NATO Governments and USA/Canada Universities. Canada apparently invested quite a bit in project in exchange for rides of hitchhiker payloads following end of Space Shuttle flying them a few years back.
-
I just got some new info on this. I'll try to post.
The weird thing is that this rocket seems to have a bunch of different names. I think I saw it at the Aerojet booth listed as "Leonides" but nobody at a press conference used that name.
First flight is scheduled for later this year.
There was a press conference about this rocket? :o
What kind of market is this aimed at? There can't be that many US cubesats flying to support it at more than 1-2 launches per year....
Yeah, a few weeks ago at the National Space Symposium. The press conference was about the upcoming launch, not specifically the rocket. The rocket is sponsored by the USAF's Operationally Responsive Space (ORS) office. Cheap, rapid launch small rocket.
I have to admit to being totally surprised by the whole thing. I was sitting at lunch next to someone who told me that they were doing a press conference about it in a few hours and I was free to attend. I did and suddenly discovered that there was a rocket under development--and a planned Hawaii orbital launch--that I had never heard of. And I read a lot of stuff! So I went and got their press packet and the information. Limited info on the rocket itself, more on the payload. I'll scan and post here.
-
Yeah, a few weeks ago at the National Space Symposium. The press conference was about the upcoming launch, not specifically the rocket. The rocket is sponsored by the USAF's Operationally Responsive Space (ORS) office. Cheap, rapid launch small rocket.
I have to admit to being totally surprised by the whole thing. I was sitting at lunch next to someone who told me that they were doing a press conference about it in a few hours and I was free to attend. I did and suddenly discovered that there was a rocket under development--and a planned Hawaii orbital launch--that I had never heard of. And I read a lot of stuff! So I went and got their press packet and the information. Limited info on the rocket itself, more on the payload. I'll scan and post here.
Great! I am looking forward to see this stuff.
-
I'll convert to jpegs shortly.
-
Here you go.
-
Should mention that the rocket is spin stabilized.
-
So, like Lambda L4-S? But for very different reasons...
-
So, like Lambda L4-S? But for very different reasons...
similar but not on all stages.
-
The page 1 that Blackstar posted says that it is spin-stabilized through the entire flight?
-
short article frm Space.com
http://www.space.com/20849-hawaii-small-satellite-launch.html
-
The page 1 that Blackstar posted says that it is spin-stabilized through the entire flight?
My info must be out of date then.
-
I'm assuming that even if it spins for the whole flight, the upper stage(s) at least would have some kind of attitude control system for pitch over for orbital injection.
-
...
The weird thing is that this rocket seems to have a bunch of different names. I think I saw it at the Aerojet booth listed as "Leonides" but nobody at a press conference used that name.
...
Definitely confusing with so many names. LEONIDAS was at one time the name of the satellite sponsoring program: Low Earth Orbiting Nanosatellite Integrated Defense Autonomous System. Not sure why it's still hanging around...
-
Rail launcher for Hawaii’s first space launch completed
http://www.hawaii.edu/news/2013/10/29/rail-launcher-for-hawaiis-first-space-launch-completed/
Photo: Sandia National Lab.
-
So on Friday I got out to the old SLC-5 site. It was flattened in 2010 or so. Some of the high pressure tanks went to Edwards and the rail launcher went to... Hawaii.
Now that's actually rather interesting. There is a document on the net somewhere listing SLC-5 as a possible launch site for Super Strypi. I think that was around 2004 or so. Of course that never happens, SLC-5 gets demolished, and then the rail ends up in Hawaii. Small world, huh?
Here are a couple of photos I took at the former SLC-5 site. The sign is at what used to be the entrance to the launch pad. The other picture is at what used to be the launch building. SLC-6 is off in the distance. I have some more photos, but they show a big patch of dirt where the SLC-5 Scout rocket facility used to be located.
-
Rail launcher for Hawaii’s first space launch completed
http://www.hawaii.edu/news/2013/10/29/rail-launcher-for-hawaiis-first-space-launch-completed/
Photo: Sandia National Lab.
I am trying to figure out if this rail launcher was taken from SLC-5 at Vandenberg about three years ago. I was at SLC-5 around 2005 or so (and at least one time earlier) and I was told that the rail went to Hawaii. However, there are enough differences that I cannot tell if any of the SLC-5 rail is being used here.
-
It has previously been stated that the rail from SLC-5 would be used.
-
It has previously been stated that the rail from SLC-5 would be used.
Which is somewhat interesting, as SLC-5 was not a rail launcher.
The erectable part (mast on SLC-5, now rail on LP-41) is definitely a new construction. The base part looks, if it could have been taken from SLC-5, but has been somewhat modified.
-
Okay, here is a paper that appears to date from 1998 that discusses Super Strypi. If I am reading this correctly, it says that there was supposed to be a new rail launcher installed at SLC-5. However, that never happened.
My colleague at Vandenberg thinks that the rail from SLC-5 went to Hawaii. Maybe it is being used for another purpose out there.
-
Okay, here is a paper that appears to date from 1998 that discusses Super Strypi. If I am reading this correctly, it says that there was supposed to be a new rail launcher installed at SLC-5. However, that never happened.
My colleague at Vandenberg thinks that the rail from SLC-5 went to Hawaii. Maybe it is being used for another purpose out there.
If i remember correctly, the original intention was, that the SLC-5 launch structure was to be fitted with a launch rail.
The now published show, that a new rail-tower was constructed. That leaves the base structure, which could be inherited from SLC-5. The photos hint, that these base parts may have indeed been retained, but in a modified form.
-
A contact of mine who runs the Vandenberg Historical Museum at SLC-10, confirmed for me that the SLC-5 launching hardware was indeed sent to Hawaii before the pad's demolition.
-
A contact of mine who runs the Vandenberg Historical Museum at SLC-10, confirmed for me that the SLC-5 launching hardware was indeed sent to Hawaii before the pad's demolition.
We talked to the same person.
My point is that although that may have been the plan, it is possible that they chose to do something different and built a new structure. We'd need to contact the people involved in the project to find out what they have actually done.
-
So what's up with this? I just saw on the launch schedule that its first flight is planned in November? :o
-
So what's up with this? I just saw on the launch schedule that its first flight is planned in November? :o
Hot off the presses: Aerojet has completed test firing the first stage motor. (http://investor.gencorp.com/releaseDetail.cfm?ReleaseID=866142) :)
Aerojet Rocketdyne Completes Successful LEO-46 Rocket Motor Test
SACRAMENTO, Calif., Aug. 13, 2014 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Aerojet Rocketdyne, a GenCorp (NYSE:GY) company, today announced that its Low Earth Orbiting Nanosatellite Integrated Defense Autonomous System (LEONIDAS) first stage solid propellant rocket motor (LEO-46) successfully completed a hot-fire static test at the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) at Edwards Air Force Base in California.
Aerojet Rocketdyne monitored the full-scale, full-duration firing of the 52-inch diameter by 40-foot long motor as it generated nearly 300,000-lbf of thrust during the 73-second test. LEO-46 is the first stage of a three-stage propulsion system developed for the Super Strypi rail-launched, spin stabilized launch vehicle.
The unique design of the solid rocket motors (SRM), combined with the simplicity of the launch vehicle architecture, enables low cost space access for small satellite packages up to 250 kg to 300 kg. The LEO-46 firing completes the series of three successful LEO motor ground test demonstrations. The LEO-7 second stage motor and the LEO-1 third stage motor were successfully tested in August 2012 and September 2013, respectively.
"This final LEO hot-fire test highlights the success of our robust, affordable large motor development efforts," said Tyler Evans, Aerojet Rocketdyne vice president of the Rocket ShopSM Defense Advanced Programs. "With the advent of the LEO family of motors, along with our recent large class (92") second stage static tests, Aerojet Rocketdyne is an industry leader in newly developed large solid rocket motors."
Aerojet Rocketdyne will complete final build-up of a flight motor set this year to support the ORS-4 launch mission. Sponsored by the Operationally Responsive Space Office, in partnership with Sandia National Laboratories, the University of Hawaii/Hawaii Space Flight Laboratory, the Pacific Missile Range Facility and Aerojet Rocketdyne, the ORS-4 mission will launch out of Kauai, Hawaii. The maiden flight will represent the largest propulsion system ever launched from a rail system.
"The LEO motors and their variants will serve applications in small launch vehicles, target vehicles and national defense architectures," said Paul Meyer, Aerojet Rocketdyne senior vice president, Advanced Programs and Business Development. "This tremendous effort was accomplished in our Rocket ShopSM by a small team of dedicated personnel working closely with colleagues in industry, academia and government agencies. I am very excited about the upcoming Super Strypi flight test and the future educational, commercial and national security benefits achieved with this new launch vehicle."
Aerojet Rocketdyne is a world-recognized aerospace and defense leader providing propulsion and energetics to the space, missile defense and strategic systems, tactical systems and armaments areas, in support of domestic and international markets. GenCorp is a diversified company that provides innovative solutions that create value for its customers in the aerospace and defense, and real estate markets. Additional information about Aerojet Rocketdyne and GenCorp can be obtained by visiting the companies' websites at www.Rocket.com and www.GenCorp.com.
-
First launch slipping into next January: http://spacenews.com/article/military-space/41923ors-4-launch-from-hawaii-delayed-until-january (http://spacenews.com/article/military-space/41923ors-4-launch-from-hawaii-delayed-until-january)
-
Launch cost is mentioned at $16M per mission, which might eventually become $12M per mission. This is for a 300 kg payload. That works out to $53K/kg initially and $40K/kg later. That's not very cheap.
-
I like how this conept of "solids" being "low-cost" keeps coming up and there's really no data to support that supposition given their low performance....
Randy
-
Has any western organization made liquids work for less than $16 million?
SpaceX abandoned the Falcon 1 concept after a few launches, Antonio a while back mentioned that Pegasus was in the $20 million range (Wiki sites has an out of date 1994 number)... Wiki numbers give Vega costing some 1 billion euro's to develop (700 million euro to develop, 400 million euro for the test flights) and 32 million euro's per flight.
Using those numbers, $16 million for access to space sounds like a fair price. The only thing currently cheaper is the subsidized Dnepr which uses refurbished ICBM's and may or not be breaking even.
Sometimes it is about a payload to a given orbit, and not about the mass to orbit.
-
Has any western organization made liquids work for less than $16 million?
Armadillo Aerospace, Masten Space Systems, XCOR?
-
To orbit?
-
Garvey Spacecraft Corporation's Nanosat Launcher
Garvey Spacecraft Selected for STTR Phase I Award to Fund Small Launch Vehicle
(http://www.parabolicarc.com/2014/05/06/garvey-spacecraft-sttr-phase/)
Not there yet
-
Lambda 4S is more comparable to Super Stypi; except for the whole part where Lambda was unguided! IIRC, the only rocket without a guidance system to reach orbit.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lambda_4S
-
Has any western organization made liquids work for less than $16 million?
SpaceX abandoned the Falcon 1 concept after a few launches, Antonio a while back mentioned that Pegasus was in the $20 million range (Wiki sites has an out of date 1994 number)... Wiki numbers give Vega costing some 1 billion euro's to develop (700 million euro to develop, 400 million euro for the test flights) and 32 million euro's per flight.
Using those numbers, $16 million for access to space sounds like a fair price. The only thing currently cheaper is the subsidized Dnepr which uses refurbished ICBM's and may or not be breaking even.
Sometimes it is about a payload to a given orbit, and not about the mass to orbit.
I seem to recall that all told Black Arrow was rather "cheap" though I'm not sure what the prices in current money would be. (http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/blaarrow.htm)
Randy
-
Well first you would have to convert all those pounds to Kg, then figure out how many Euro's in a Kg ;)
-
This should be close to first launch by now, any updates?
-
Launch cost is mentioned at $16M per mission, which might eventually become $12M per mission. This is for a 300 kg payload. That works out to $53K/kg initially and $40K/kg later. That's not very cheap.
Their pricing is on par with RocketLab and Firefly.
-
First launch slipping into next January: http://spacenews.com/article/military-space/41923ors-4-launch-from-hawaii-delayed-until-january (http://spacenews.com/article/military-space/41923ors-4-launch-from-hawaii-delayed-until-january)
Bump.
-
First launch slipping into next January: http://spacenews.com/article/military-space/41923ors-4-launch-from-hawaii-delayed-until-january (http://spacenews.com/article/military-space/41923ors-4-launch-from-hawaii-delayed-until-january)
Bump.
It has definitely slipped deeper into 2015, but is there any news around about this project?
-
First launch slipping into next January: http://spacenews.com/article/military-space/41923ors-4-launch-from-hawaii-delayed-until-january (http://spacenews.com/article/military-space/41923ors-4-launch-from-hawaii-delayed-until-january)
Bump.
It has definitely slipped deeper into 2015, but is there any news around about this project?
This web page lists a March 1 date for a "Super Strypi 2" with an "ORS-4" payload.
http://www.eclipticenterprises.com/conferences
- Ed Kyle
-
I haven't seen the "Super Strypi 2" designator before.
But during development, the first version was to use the Spark-30 (a.k.a. Star-30BP) stage 3, which was later to be replaced with the LEO-1 (Orbus-1A) stage 3. In the current plan, the 1st vehicle will also fly with an LEO-1 upper stage, i.e. in the second configuration, which is possibly dubbed "Super Strypi 2".
-
I haven't seen the "Super Strypi 2" designator before.
But during development, the first version was to use the Spark-30 (a.k.a. Star-30BP) stage 3, which was later to be replaced with the LEO-1 (Orbus-1A) stage 3. In the current plan, the 1st vehicle will also fly with an LEO-1 upper stage, i.e. in the second configuration, which is possibly dubbed "Super Strypi 2".
yes, but I think there might be a few minor tweaks in SS2 configuration.
Edit: One person said it was ATK rolling out a new motor version from manufacturing upgrade and tweak in the casing.
-
Mid-2016, according to the FY 2016 budget request. Apparently there are issues with the first stage motor.
http://www.saffm.hq.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-150130-013.pdf
Look under FY 2015 plans on page 226.
Where it says:
"ORS-4 launch date was originally scheduled for Jan 2015, but first stage motor complications have caused a delay. The restoration of the first stage motor is expected to delay the launch until mid-2016."
This is the Aerojet Rocketdyne LEO-46 motor that was reported to have been test fired in August, 2014, with build up of the first flight motor commencing then. LEO-46 is supposed to be based on the long-ago-developed GEM-46 that boosted Delta 3 and Delta 2H. I've no idea what "restoration" means in this context.
Note also that FY15 funding doubled over FY14 for that ORS Tier 3 category.
- Ed Kyle
-
GEM 46 is an ATK product, what does that have to do with Aerojet?
-
GEM 46 is an ATK product, what does that have to do with Aerojet?
That is a very good question. All I know is that "LEO-46 a.k.a. GEM-46" is listed in numerous sources. The numerous sources might be mistaken, or ATK might supply the core solid motor to Aerojet, or some other arrangement might have been involved.
- Ed Kyle
-
Who provides the TVC on the GEM-46?
-
Who provides the TVC on the GEM-46?
Don't know, other than that they were hydraulic TVC systems that are no longer used (with the retirement of Delta 3). ATK more recently has used Moog actuator systems for missile defense tests using TVC steerable GEM-40s. Moog also makes GEM-60 TVC systems for Delta 4, among devices for numerous rockets.
http://www.moog.com/markets/space/launch-vehicles/commercial-launchers/
- Ed Kyle
-
GEM 46 is an ATK product, what does that have to do with Aerojet?
That is a very good question. All I know is that "LEO-46 a.k.a. GEM-46" is listed in numerous sources. The numerous sources might be mistaken, or ATK might supply the core solid motor to Aerojet, or some other arrangement might have been involved.
- Ed Kyle
I guess, there was a mixup uf designations during development. In 2009, it was baselined with a GEM-46 motor, but sometimes later the the motor development was contracted to Aerojet, who deignated their motor LEO-46. Apparently i've got somewhat confused on the designations.
Apparently the Aerojet motors are all new developed motors.
-
Does anyone know how much has been spent on this program since 2008?
-
Mid-2016, according to the FY 2016 budget request. Apparently there are issues with the first stage motor.
Sheesh. I sat in a press briefing on this mission/flight in May 2013 and the launch was then scheduled for November. It has now slipped almost three years since then?
I feel sorry for the university students who worked on the payload. They're all gonna be graduated, if they haven't already. But to be honest, I couldn't figure this thing out at all. It didn't seem like a capability that anybody requires. I wonder if it was earmarked money, or somebody's pet project.
-
Mid-2016, according to the FY 2016 budget request. Apparently there are issues with the first stage motor.
Sheesh. I sat in a press briefing on this mission/flight in May 2013 and the launch was then scheduled for November. It has now slipped almost three years since then?
I feel sorry for the university students who worked on the payload. They're all gonna be graduated, if they haven't already. But to be honest, I couldn't figure this thing out at all. It didn't seem like a capability that anybody requires. I wonder if it was earmarked money, or somebody's pet project.
It was an earmark. The money was originally intended to be spent on the DARPA/AirLaunch QuickReach, but some backdoor maneuvering at final Defense Appropriations bill Conference Committee markup assigned it to this project.
I note that the project has a schedule to first flight longer than it took to go to the moon.
-
Mid-2016, according to the FY 2016 budget request. Apparently there are issues with the first stage motor.
Sheesh. I sat in a press briefing on this mission/flight in May 2013 and the launch was then scheduled for November. It has now slipped almost three years since then?
I feel sorry for the university students who worked on the payload. They're all gonna be graduated, if they haven't already. But to be honest, I couldn't figure this thing out at all. It didn't seem like a capability that anybody requires. I wonder if it was earmarked money, or somebody's pet project.
That seminar, was it at a "US Space and Missile Defense Symposium"? I think the answer to the question about capability lies within that phrase somewhere. It is a Sandia project, after all. It seems to me that the all-new motors are superfluous unless they are being developed for some long-term purpose. I also suspect that the original "cheap" development costs have ballooned.
- Ed Kyle
-
That seminar, was it at a "US Space and Missile Defense Symposium"? I think the answer to the question about capability lies within that phrase somewhere. It is a Sandia project, after all. It seems to me that the all-new motors are superfluous unless they are being developed for some long-term purpose. I also suspect that the original "cheap" development costs have ballooned.
No, I was at the National Space Symposium in Colorado Springs in 2013. By chance during lunch I sat next to a woman from Hawaii who was associated with the project. She explained what she was doing and I was surprised because it was a space project I had never heard about before. So I went to their press conference later in the day. Not really any press there, and I asked a few questions that I think made them nervous. They were planning a launch by the end of the year and everything seemed to be fine. I realized that was not the case when the launch didn't happen then.
-
I do know that qualification motors were completed and fired because they were in some pressers and i also know that work on flight motors was started, but is where the info trail ends. some effects may be due to mergers and PAO changes to what can be public info which is primarily the case of Aerojet Rocketdyne and is not the case with Orbital ATK.
-
The ORS director told in an interview, that the launch is now in the fall of 2015. They had a design flaw in the stage 1 motor, but came to the conclusion that they could fly with this system at a slightly elevated risk.
http://spacenews.com/ors-director-were-not-here-to-build-neat-toys/
-
Interesting read, so who offered $30 million for SBSS? Orbital on a Pegasus?
-
Interesting read, so who offered $30 million for SBSS? Orbital on a Pegasus?
It's been a while since a Pegasus cost less than $40M. ORS-3 (Minotaur I) was $28.8M though so...
-
But, can Minotaur I reach the 0 degree orbit that SBSS requires. A very interesting puzzle.
-
But, can Minotaur I reach the 0 degree orbit that SBSS requires. A very interesting puzzle.
Maybe with HAPS kick stage?
-
The original thread was splited into two threads: one continuing to be about the launch vehicle itself, the other about the inaugural mission.
-
Any news on a possible second flight?
-
Any news on a possible second flight?
The ORS-Squared payload has finished assembly and testing and is ready for integration with the launch vehicle. ORS-Squared is flying on this flight according to some information I got a hold of which includes this site: http://cosmiac.org/space-missions/ors-squared/ Other than that I cannot find any new information and University of Hawaii's Hawaii Space Flight Laboratory has dropped all references to the LEONIDAS mission series and have moved on to sounding rockets. I have some other places to check for information, but that is all I can find so far.
NET 2017 - ORS-Squared (ORS2), STU-2: Second LEONIDAS Mission (CubeSats, Small Satellites) - SPARK/Super Strypi - Kauai Test Facility (KTF) PMRF-41
-
Any news on a possible second flight?
The ORS-Squared payload has finished assembly and testing and is ready for integration with the launch vehicle. ORS-Squared is flying on this flight according to some information I got a hold of which includes this site: http://cosmiac.org/space-missions/ors-squared/ Other than that I cannot find any new information and University of Hawaii's Hawaii Space Flight Laboratory has dropped all references to the LEONIDAS mission series and have moved on to sounding rockets. I have some other places to check for information, but that is all I can find so far.
NET 2017 - ORS-Squared (ORS2), STU-2: Second LEONIDAS Mission (CubeSats, Small Satellites) - SPARK/Super Strypi - Kauai Test Facility (KTF) PMRF-41
Hm, the Cosmiac site still dates from the time before the maiden Super-Strypi flight, where ORS-Squared was originally scheduled to fly, but was removed from the launch a few weeks before. Since then, the page has not changed and it is not clear, if ORS-Squared will ever fly. The Super-Strypi references there all concern the maiden flight, not the second.
HSFL told me about a year ago, that they do not plan a second flight. So if a second flight happens, it will likely without HSFL involvement.
Currently i think, a second flight is unlikely to happen.
-
One and done. Any others beside Conestoga? (Not including sole sub-variants of existing launch vehicle families.)
- Ed Kyle
-
One and done. Any others beside Conestoga? (Not including sole sub-variants of existing launch vehicle families.)
- Ed Kyle
Paektusan carrying Kwangmyŏngsŏng-1 perhaps. The launch vehicle was derived from the Taepodong-1 missile with a solid upper stage added. The rest of North Korean launches have used the Unha based on the Taepodong-2 missile.
-
One and done. Any others beside Conestoga? (Not including sole sub-variants of existing launch vehicle families.)
- Ed Kyle
Paektusan carrying Kwangmyŏngsŏng-1 perhaps. The launch vehicle was derived from the Taepodong-1 missile with a solid upper stage added. The rest of North Korean launches have used the Unha based on the Taepodong-2 missile.
I don't know if J-I counts; it was designed to be orbital, but its only launch was suborbital.