Author Topic: Firefly Aerospace  (Read 3145 times)

Online ringsider

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 312
  • Liked: 130
  • Likes Given: 18
Firefly Aerospace
« on: 07/10/2017 09:37 AM »
This is an apparent rebirth of an older company, "Firefly Space Systems". Discussion on that old (and now defunct) company was here: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=33757 (topic now locked)

New company is Firefly Aerospace, with website at http://fireflyaerospace.com/

Creation Date: 2017-03-23

Only one link on the page:-

maito:info@it-ukraine.com

Also the old www.fireflyspace.com website now has some references to the new corporate name.

Edit/Lar: crosslink and expand to more like a proper header.
« Last Edit: 07/19/2017 04:04 PM by Lar »

Offline MechE31

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 111
  • MELBOURNE, FL
  • Liked: 231
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Firefly Aerospace
« Reply #1 on: 07/19/2017 11:35 AM »
Aviation week put out a (paywalled) article on the re-emergence of Firefly Aerospace last week

http://aviationweek.com/awinspace/firefly-re-emerges-upgraded-alpha-rocket-design

Highlights:

Fully funded by high net worth individual
About 1 year behind original Firefly schedule (original launch of Q2 2018)
Upgraded performance
Switch to pump fed engine, not sure if it will be aerospike
Named Reaver

Online ringsider

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 312
  • Liked: 130
  • Likes Given: 18
Re: Firefly Aerospace
« Reply #2 on: 07/19/2017 01:32 PM »
Aviation week put out a (paywalled) article on the re-emergence of Firefly Aerospace last week

http://aviationweek.com/awinspace/firefly-re-emerges-upgraded-alpha-rocket-design

Highlights:

Fully funded by high net worth individual
About 1 year behind original Firefly schedule (original launch of Q2 2018)
Upgraded performance
Switch to pump fed engine, not sure if it will be aerospike
Named Reaver

Well, they may be slightly ahead of Vector if they can salvage the burners.

Offline TrevorMonty

Re: Firefly Aerospace
« Reply #3 on: 07/19/2017 03:27 PM »


Aviation week put out a (paywalled) article on the re-emergence of Firefly Aerospace last week

http://aviationweek.com/awinspace/firefly-re-emerges-upgraded-alpha-rocket-design

Highlights:

Fully funded by high net worth individual


Another billionaire that wants to be millionaire.

Here is hoping they are successful this time round.


Online ringsider

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 312
  • Liked: 130
  • Likes Given: 18
Re: Firefly Aerospace
« Reply #4 on: 07/29/2017 12:35 PM »
www.fireflyaerospace.com now re-directs to the old Firefly website.

Looks like new jobs being posted.

http://www.fireflyspace.com/careers

Offline starbase

  • Member
  • Posts: 16
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 15
Re: Firefly Aerospace
« Reply #5 on: 08/21/2017 08:44 PM »

Offline Andy Bandy

  • Member
  • Posts: 13
  • California
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Firefly Aerospace
« Reply #6 on: 08/21/2017 09:01 PM »
Markusic is back at CEO. Appears to be following the Ukrainian billionaire Maxym Polyakov's business plan. Polyakov is head of EOS Launcher based out of Silicon Valley. Been working for a number of years with organizations in native Ukraine on launchers, satellites, etc. The billionaire picked up most of Firefly's assets when they were auctioned off. Also called in a $1 million note originally held by Space Florida.

Offline TrevorMonty

Re: Firefly Aerospace
« Reply #7 on: 08/21/2017 10:53 PM »
Is firefly owned and financed by Polyakov?.

Offline Andy Bandy

  • Member
  • Posts: 13
  • California
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Firefly Aerospace
« Reply #8 on: 08/21/2017 10:58 PM »
Is firefly owned and financed by Polyakov?.

Yes. EOS Launcher is his company. EOS Launcher is the one that scooped up most of Firefly's assets. I'm guessing given that Virgin Galactic sued Markusic over the aerospike engine the company is probably pursuing some other engine tech.

Offline TrevorMonty

Re: Firefly Aerospace
« Reply #9 on: 08/23/2017 12:41 AM »
Seems Firefly is fully owned and funded by Noosphere. A larger
1000kg Alpha is likely to better bet for smallsat constellations, especially as cubesat LV market is looking to be oversupplied in near future. 

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/3311/1

But one of those creditors, a fund called Noosphere Ventures, acquired the assets of Firefly when they want up for auction in the spring. “After they acquired the assets they started a new company, called Firefly Aerospace,” Markusic said. He was brought back to the company as its president.

The new Firefly is now wholly owned by Noosphere Ventures, which Markusic said had sufficient money to fund Firefly’s development without the need to go out and raise additional money. However, he didn’t rule out raising some outside funding for “capital efficiency” but added it wasn’t necessary for the company to develop the Alpha rocket.


Offline Prettz

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 120
  • Atlanta, GA
  • Liked: 53
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: Firefly Aerospace
« Reply #10 on: 08/23/2017 01:21 AM »
Noosphere? Must be a STALKER reference.

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3616
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 2417
  • Likes Given: 790
Re: Firefly Aerospace
« Reply #11 on: 09/09/2017 05:10 AM »
Salvaging spent GEO sats to use for Mars equipment supply, ok ...

Quote
Tom Markusic from @Firefly_Space presenting stratregy to get to Mars now @TheMarsSociety #Mars

https://twitter.com/arminellis/status/906257800623407104

Offline HMXHMX

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1364
  • Liked: 835
  • Likes Given: 256
Re: Firefly Aerospace
« Reply #12 on: 09/10/2017 02:48 AM »
Salvaging spent GEO sats to use for Mars equipment supply, ok ...

Quote
Tom Markusic from @Firefly_Space presenting stratregy to get to Mars now @TheMarsSociety #Mars

https://twitter.com/arminellis/status/906257800623407104

Say what?  :(  There are few things less useful for going to Mars than a spent GEO bird...

Also, from The Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies:  "Ownership of objects launched into outer space, including objects landed or constructed on a celestial body, and of their component parts, is not affected by their presence in outer space or on a celestial body or by their return to the earth. Such objects or component parts found beyond the limits of the State Party to the Treaty on whose registry they are carried shall be returned to that State Party, which shall, upon request, furnish identifying data prior to their return."

In other words, there is no salvage in space.  (You'd have to buy the hardware.)

Offline Craftyatom

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 309
  • Software!
  • Arizona, USA
  • Liked: 229
  • Likes Given: 1295
Re: Firefly Aerospace
« Reply #13 on: 09/10/2017 05:13 PM »
Also, from The Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies:  "Ownership of objects launched into outer space, including objects landed or constructed on a celestial body, and of their component parts, is not affected by their presence in outer space or on a celestial body or by their return to the earth. Such objects or component parts found beyond the limits of the State Party to the Treaty on whose registry they are carried shall be returned to that State Party, which shall, upon request, furnish identifying data prior to their return."

In other words, there is no salvage in space.  (You'd have to buy the hardware.)
To be fair, I don't think the asking price for a passivated satellite in a graveyard orbit is very much at all.

Not that this sounds like I good idea to me, for a number of reasons, but you could probably gain access to the satellites pretty cheaply.  Might be more expensive to get the plans so that you could see where the useful parts are, and how to remove/use them.
All aboard the HSF hype train!  Choo Choo!

Tags: