Author Topic: Interorbital Systems Flights  (Read 29612 times)

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

Online Kryten

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 467
  • Liked: 207
  • 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 »

Offline 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.


Online Kryten

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 467
  • Liked: 207
  • 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 »

Offline 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: 7994
  • Australia
  • Liked: 2708
  • Likes Given: 655
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.
Jeff Bezos has billions to spend on rockets and can go at whatever pace he likes! Wow! What pace is he going at? The slowest possible.

Offline Katana

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 250
  • Liked: 22
  • Likes Given: 5
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: 250
  • Liked: 22
  • Likes Given: 5
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: 7994
  • Australia
  • Liked: 2708
  • Likes Given: 655
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.
Jeff Bezos has billions to spend on rockets and can go at whatever pace he likes! Wow! What pace is he going at? The slowest possible.

Offline Katana

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 250
  • Liked: 22
  • Likes Given: 5
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: 1079
  • Liked: 147
  • 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: 7994
  • Australia
  • Liked: 2708
  • Likes Given: 655
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 »
Jeff Bezos has billions to spend on rockets and can go at whatever pace he likes! Wow! What pace is he going at? The slowest possible.

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: 250
  • Liked: 22
  • Likes Given: 5
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: 7994
  • Australia
  • Liked: 2708
  • Likes Given: 655
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.
Jeff Bezos has billions to spend on rockets and can go at whatever pace he likes! Wow! What pace is he going at? The slowest possible.

Offline 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: 7994
  • Australia
  • Liked: 2708
  • Likes Given: 655
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.
 
Jeff Bezos has billions to spend on rockets and can go at whatever pace he likes! Wow! What pace is he going at? The slowest possible.

Offline 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

Tags: