Author Topic: Interorbital Systems Flights  (Read 25926 times)

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7795
  • Australia
  • Liked: 2530
  • Likes Given: 594
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."



When someone is wishing for a pony, there's little to be gained by suggesting a unicorn would be ever better.. ya know, unless it's sarcasm.

Offline ChrisWilson68

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3302
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 1911
  • Likes Given: 2153
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: 7795
  • Australia
  • Liked: 2530
  • Likes Given: 594
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 »
When someone is wishing for a pony, there's little to be gained by suggesting a unicorn would be ever better.. ya know, unless it's sarcasm.

Offline ChrisWilson68

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3302
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 1911
  • Likes Given: 2153
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: 7795
  • Australia
  • Liked: 2530
  • Likes Given: 594
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #4 on: 04/01/2014 02:32 AM »
Here's the video.


When someone is wishing for a pony, there's little to be gained by suggesting a unicorn would be ever better.. ya know, unless it's sarcasm.

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7795
  • Australia
  • Liked: 2530
  • Likes Given: 594
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.
When someone is wishing for a pony, there's little to be gained by suggesting a unicorn would be ever better.. ya know, unless it's sarcasm.

Offline mheney

  • The Next Man on the Moon
  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 721
  • Silver Spring, MD
  • Liked: 327
  • Likes Given: 186
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: 9448
  • Liked: 332
  • Likes Given: 421
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: 1761
  • Liked: 177
  • Likes Given: 132
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: 1258
  • Liked: 324
  • Likes Given: 416
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: 10129
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 2064
  • Likes Given: 283
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: 3302
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 1911
  • Likes Given: 2153
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: 753
  • Likes Given: 622
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: 2117
  • Liked: 191
  • Likes Given: 90
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

Online Jarnis

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 981
  • Liked: 492
  • Likes Given: 126
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: 753
  • Likes Given: 622
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: 3302
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 1911
  • Likes Given: 2153
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: 7795
  • Australia
  • Liked: 2530
  • Likes Given: 594
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.
When someone is wishing for a pony, there's little to be gained by suggesting a unicorn would be ever better.. ya know, unless it's sarcasm.

Online Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2693
  • California
  • Liked: 2122
  • Likes Given: 1210
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: 1077
  • Liked: 146
  • Likes Given: 11
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: 2738
    • Don't worry.. we can still be fans of OSC and SNC
  • Liked: 942
  • Likes Given: 663
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: 451
  • Liked: 200
  • Likes Given: 24
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: 451
  • Liked: 200
  • Likes Given: 24
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: 7795
  • Australia
  • Liked: 2530
  • Likes Given: 594
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.
When someone is wishing for a pony, there's little to be gained by suggesting a unicorn would be ever better.. ya know, unless it's sarcasm.

Offline Katana

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 223
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 2
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: 223
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 2
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: 7795
  • Australia
  • Liked: 2530
  • Likes Given: 594
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.
When someone is wishing for a pony, there's little to be gained by suggesting a unicorn would be ever better.. ya know, unless it's sarcasm.

Offline Katana

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 223
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 2
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: 1077
  • Liked: 146
  • Likes Given: 11
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: 7795
  • Australia
  • Liked: 2530
  • Likes Given: 594
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 »
When someone is wishing for a pony, there's little to be gained by suggesting a unicorn would be ever better.. ya know, unless it's sarcasm.

Offline R7

  • Propulsophile
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2738
    • Don't worry.. we can still be fans of OSC and SNC
  • Liked: 942
  • Likes Given: 663
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: 2738
    • Don't worry.. we can still be fans of OSC and SNC
  • Liked: 942
  • Likes Given: 663
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: 223
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 2
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: 7795
  • Australia
  • Liked: 2530
  • Likes Given: 594
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.
When someone is wishing for a pony, there's little to be gained by suggesting a unicorn would be ever better.. ya know, unless it's sarcasm.

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: 7795
  • Australia
  • Liked: 2530
  • Likes Given: 594
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.
 
When someone is wishing for a pony, there's little to be gained by suggesting a unicorn would be ever better.. ya know, unless it's sarcasm.

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: 7795
  • Australia
  • Liked: 2530
  • Likes Given: 594
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 :)
When someone is wishing for a pony, there's little to be gained by suggesting a unicorn would be ever better.. ya know, unless it's sarcasm.

Offline Katana

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 223
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 2
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: 2738
    • Don't worry.. we can still be fans of OSC and SNC
  • Liked: 942
  • Likes Given: 663
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: 7795
  • Australia
  • Liked: 2530
  • Likes Given: 594
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #44 on: 06/17/2015 04:43 AM »
When someone is wishing for a pony, there's little to be gained by suggesting a unicorn would be ever better.. ya know, unless it's sarcasm.

Offline R7

  • Propulsophile
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2738
    • Don't worry.. we can still be fans of OSC and SNC
  • Liked: 942
  • Likes Given: 663
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: 7795
  • Australia
  • Liked: 2530
  • Likes Given: 594
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.
When someone is wishing for a pony, there's little to be gained by suggesting a unicorn would be ever better.. ya know, unless it's sarcasm.

Offline R7

  • Propulsophile
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2738
    • Don't worry.. we can still be fans of OSC and SNC
  • Liked: 942
  • Likes Given: 663
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: 7795
  • Australia
  • Liked: 2530
  • Likes Given: 594
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.
When someone is wishing for a pony, there's little to be gained by suggesting a unicorn would be ever better.. ya know, unless it's sarcasm.

Offline Kryten

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 451
  • Liked: 200
  • Likes Given: 24
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: 3302
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 1911
  • Likes Given: 2153
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: 7795
  • Australia
  • Liked: 2530
  • Likes Given: 594
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.
When someone is wishing for a pony, there's little to be gained by suggesting a unicorn would be ever better.. ya know, unless it's sarcasm.

Offline R7

  • Propulsophile
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2738
    • Don't worry.. we can still be fans of OSC and SNC
  • Liked: 942
  • Likes Given: 663
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: 7795
  • Australia
  • Liked: 2530
  • Likes Given: 594
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.
When someone is wishing for a pony, there's little to be gained by suggesting a unicorn would be ever better.. ya know, unless it's sarcasm.

Online savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4699
  • Liked: 773
  • Likes Given: 251
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

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sxqBfe1L0A?t=745

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

  • Member
  • Posts: 53
  • Liked: 98
  • Likes Given: 76
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #57 on: 11/08/2015 08:44 PM »

Offline Phil Stooke

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 265
  • Canada
  • Liked: 153
  • Likes Given: 0
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: 412
  • Liked: 137
  • Likes Given: 1
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: 7795
  • Australia
  • Liked: 2530
  • Likes Given: 594
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.
When someone is wishing for a pony, there's little to be gained by suggesting a unicorn would be ever better.. ya know, unless it's sarcasm.

Offline Darren_Hensley

  • System Software Engineer, MCTP, NGC, Ft Leavenworth Ks
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 175
  • Captian(ret) USS Pabilli, Timefleet, UFP-TIC
  • Alamogordo NM
    • H-10-K Enterprises
  • Liked: 7
  • Likes Given: 16
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: 7795
  • Australia
  • Liked: 2530
  • Likes Given: 594
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.
When someone is wishing for a pony, there's little to be gained by suggesting a unicorn would be ever better.. ya know, unless it's sarcasm.

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9448
  • Liked: 332
  • Likes Given: 421
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.

Online savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4699
  • Liked: 773
  • Likes Given: 251
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

Online savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4699
  • Liked: 773
  • Likes Given: 251
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: 175
  • Captian(ret) USS Pabilli, Timefleet, UFP-TIC
  • Alamogordo NM
    • H-10-K Enterprises
  • Liked: 7
  • Likes Given: 16
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 cosmonautdjp

  • Member
  • Posts: 58
  • Liked: 21
  • Likes Given: 39
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: 5961
  • Lafayette/Broomfield, CO
  • Liked: 1892
  • Likes Given: 656
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: 3302
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 1911
  • Likes Given: 2153
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

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3269
  • AR USA / Berlin, DE / Moscow, RF
  • Liked: 534
  • Likes Given: 332
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: 3302
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 1911
  • Likes Given: 2153
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: 10129
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 2064
  • Likes Given: 283
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

  • ... a free man
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 145
  • Liked: 78
  • Likes Given: 93
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

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1126
  • Melbourne, Australia
    • Norton Consultants
  • Liked: 357
  • Likes Given: 264
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

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1126
  • Melbourne, Australia
    • Norton Consultants
  • Liked: 357
  • Likes Given: 264
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: 3302
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 1911
  • Likes Given: 2153
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: 26
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #78 on: 10/11/2016 05:45 PM »
What is the gas pressurizing the propellant tanks?.

Online savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4699
  • Liked: 773
  • Likes Given: 251
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: 182
  • Liked: 75
  • Likes Given: 7
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.

Online savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4699
  • Liked: 773
  • Likes Given: 251
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

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1126
  • Melbourne, Australia
    • Norton Consultants
  • Liked: 357
  • Likes Given: 264
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: 182
  • Liked: 75
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: Interorbital Systems Flights
« Reply #83 on: 10/18/2016 07:38 AM »
Government support needed

Not a hope in hell.

Online savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4699
  • Liked: 773
  • Likes Given: 251
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

Online savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4699
  • Liked: 773
  • Likes Given: 251
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

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1126
  • Melbourne, Australia
    • Norton Consultants
  • Liked: 357
  • Likes Given: 264
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: 412
  • Liked: 137
  • Likes Given: 1
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.

Online savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4699
  • Liked: 773
  • Likes Given: 251
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

Online savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4699
  • Liked: 773
  • Likes Given: 251
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

Online savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4699
  • Liked: 773
  • Likes Given: 251
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

Online savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4699
  • Liked: 773
  • Likes Given: 251
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: 175
  • Captian(ret) USS Pabilli, Timefleet, UFP-TIC
  • Alamogordo NM
    • H-10-K Enterprises
  • Liked: 7
  • Likes Given: 16
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

Tags: