NASASpaceFlight.com Forum

Commercial and US Government Launch Vehicles => Commercial Space Flight General => Topic started by: Don RN on 01/28/2010 04:08 pm

Title: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Don RN on 01/28/2010 04:08 pm
Armadillo has posted a new update on their website (1/27).  A lot of nice information and video.  About 30 separate topics covering the past 6 months or so.

http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Home/News?news_id=369 (http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Home/News?news_id=369)

now back to 1+ years of happy lurking!   ;D

Don
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Tergenev on 01/29/2010 07:42 pm
Thanks for the link.

What was most interesting from this recent update was that a) It wasn't written by John Carmack, but more interestingly b) Armadillo is starting to get a bit guarded with the information they share. I guess the heady, early, 'we're all one big team' era of the micro-space industries has officially ended.

Particularly, when talking about their boosted hop tests to 800 and 1200 meters, they don't describe the problems or solutions they encountered...

Quote
We could go into some of the specific details we learned during these tests, but in the interest of prudence, we felt that some of this information might make it just a bit too easy for our competitors. 

I think someone was stung by the fact that Masten 'snuck in and stole' their Tier 2 lunar lander prize. (My description of their likely emotional reaction, not Armadillo's words.)
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Robotbeat on 01/29/2010 07:47 pm
Thanks for the link.

What was most interesting from this recent update was that a) It wasn't written by John Carmack, but more interestingly b) Armadillo is starting to get a bit guarded with the information they share. I guess the heady, early, 'we're all one big team' era of the micro-space industries has officially ended.

Particularly, when talking about their boosted hop tests to 800 and 1200 meters, they don't describe the problems or solutions they encountered...

Quote
We could go into some of the specific details we learned during these tests, but in the interest of prudence, we felt that some of this information might make it just a bit too easy for our competitors. 

I think someone was stung by the fact that Masten 'snuck in and stole' their Tier 2 lunar lander prize. (My description of their likely emotional reaction, not Armadillo's words.)
I don't think that era has ended. Both teams still talk on the Arocket mailing list. They still talk about cooperation, etc. If they weren't interested in cooperation, they wouldn't post on Arocket. And pretty much everyone likes Paul Breed (of Unreasonable Rocket). There was a lot of drama in the Lunar lander xprize competition, but also still a heck of a lot of cooperation.

Their reaction to the controversial X-Prize ruling is understandable.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: jongoff on 01/30/2010 05:49 am
Thanks for the link.

What was most interesting from this recent update was that a) It wasn't written by John Carmack, but more interestingly b) Armadillo is starting to get a bit guarded with the information they share. I guess the heady, early, 'we're all one big team' era of the micro-space industries has officially ended.

Particularly, when talking about their boosted hop tests to 800 and 1200 meters, they don't describe the problems or solutions they encountered...

Quote
We could go into some of the specific details we learned during these tests, but in the interest of prudence, we felt that some of this information might make it just a bit too easy for our competitors. 

I think someone was stung by the fact that Masten 'snuck in and stole' their Tier 2 lunar lander prize. (My description of their likely emotional reaction, not Armadillo's words.)
I don't think that era has ended. Both teams still talk on the Arocket mailing list. They still talk about cooperation, etc. If they weren't interested in cooperation, they wouldn't post on Arocket. And pretty much everyone likes Paul Breed (of Unreasonable Rocket). There was a lot of drama in the Lunar lander xprize competition, but also still a heck of a lot of cooperation.

We're still friends.  I'm pretty sure we'll be playing hookie from the presentations at Space Access and talking shop out in the courtyard just as much as any previous year.  This is now a full-time job for both of our groups, so we have a bit more at stake than just a really sweet hobby, so its understandable that we're not always going to give away the recipe to our magic squirrel juice de jour.  But that doesn't mean we won't still be trying to be as open as we reasonably can be without giving away the shop. 

Also, part of why John didn't write this is that he has a new little boy (I think number two for them)--having three little boys myself, I can completely empathize.

~Jon
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Lampyridae on 01/31/2010 11:34 pm
LOL, that weiner-roasting video is going in my archives! Nice flight of the Methane Mod too.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Don RN on 02/06/2010 02:01 am
Thanks for the link.

.... b) Armadillo is starting to get a bit guarded with the information they share. I guess the heady, early, 'we're all one big team' era of the micro-space industries has officially ended.


We're still friends.  I'm pretty sure we'll be playing hookie from the presentations at Space Access and talking shop out in the courtyard just as much as any previous year.  This is now a full-time job for both of our groups, so we have a bit more at stake than just a really sweet hobby, so its understandable that we're not always going to give away the recipe to our magic squirrel juice de jour.  But that doesn't mean we won't still be trying to be as open as we reasonably can be without giving away the shop. 

Also, part of why John didn't write this is that he has a new little boy (I think number two for them)--having three little boys myself, I can completely empathize.

~Jon

Thanks Jon.

  It seems to me that one would need to go back quite some time in the Armadillo archives before seeing a lot of the technical detail.  I don't think this update is much changed from recent updates. 
  I am happy that they continue to provide insight to their activities and challenges.  This type of sharing is exciting and enjoyable as an amateur observer.
  This update also clearly attempted to separate out the personal feelings and reactions about the Lunar Lander Challenge.  Armadillo very clearly offered congratulations and support to Masten.

Don
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Zapp on 02/17/2010 08:03 am
New photos on Russell Blink's flickr page

http://www.flickr.com/photos/27997120@N05/

I wonder what this new vehicle is for?
From the looks of it Im thinking methane pixel 2.0 for simply going high altitude.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Robotbeat on 02/17/2010 08:33 pm
New photos on Russell Blink's flickr page

http://www.flickr.com/photos/27997120@N05/

I wonder what this new vehicle is for?
From the looks of it Im thinking methane pixel 2.0 for simply going high altitude.

Yup, it looks like all the tanks are insulated, so I'd bet money it's methane/Lox.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: corrodedNut on 04/26/2010 09:45 pm
New videos, from their Space Access 2010 presentation:

http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Home/Gallery/Videos

Three formats, 8 1/2 min long, check it out...
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Zapp on 04/30/2010 07:52 am
Ohh I wonder how far of they are from actually building this thing?

http://www.spaceadventures.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=suborbital.welcome

http://armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Home/News?news_id=370
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: A_M_Swallow on 04/30/2010 09:10 pm
To improve the impact an announcement of a new vehicle should have a picture of the vehicle that the press can publish.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Cinder on 04/30/2010 11:10 pm
Is it the vehicle cfg you see at the end of the Space Access 2010 video?
http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Home/Gallery/Videos
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: kkattula on 05/01/2010 09:38 am
To improve the impact an announcement of a new vehicle should have a picture of the vehicle that the press can publish.

What new vehicle?  It's simply an agrrement to market services when Armadillo are able to offer them.

Armadillo are still expanding the altitude & velocity envelopes for their Mod vehicles. And dealing with some regulatory issues testing at their home base.

When they can reliably fly a mod to high altitude, I expect they'll finalize a design for a manned vehicle. The one at the end of the video is most likely their current concept of what it might look like, but likely to change based on flight experience.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: DiggyCoxwell on 05/03/2010 10:12 pm
  Armadillo and Space Adventures have come to an agreement
for ticket sales for suborbital flights.
  Asking passengers to pay $102,000 per suborbital flight.
Hmmmm.
I could almost afford it, assuming I don't have to wait 10 years.
John Carmack has been in this aerospace endeavor for 10 years
thereabouts; what has he accomplished in that time?
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: heroineworshiper on 05/03/2010 10:33 pm
Why not announce future Mars missions for $100,000 & partner with Space Adventures?  If you announce a future mission to Alpha Centuri, they'll throw in a free hibachi knife set with your partnership.



Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Robotbeat on 05/03/2010 10:45 pm
Why not announce future Mars missions for $100,000 & partner with Space Adventures?  If you announce a future mission to Alpha Centuri, they'll throw in a free hibachi knife set with your partnership.
Because Armadillo has real (yes, reusable without refurbishment) rocket hardware propelling multiple crewed aircraft:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lXfy43L8Og

And are making successful VTVL flights (up and down, controlled) to nearly beyond 1 km (though the one shown is only to about 3000 feet):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwMNBCQ1BJ8

As well as experience flying (not just testing on a bench) liquid methane/liquid oxygen VTVL rockets:
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: neilh on 05/13/2010 06:50 pm
There's a rather extensive article on Armadillo Aerospace in the Dallas Observer. It includes quite a few details about Armadillo's formative years which I hadn't seen before:

http://www.dallasobserver.com/2010-05-13/news/with-nasa-s-future-uncertain-a-team-of-dallas-rocketeers-competes-in-the-race-to-privatize-the-final-frontier/1
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: cuddihy on 05/13/2010 08:57 pm
  Armadillo and Space Adventures have come to an agreement
for ticket sales for suborbital flights.
  Asking passengers to pay $102,000 per suborbital flight.
Hmmmm.
I could almost afford it, assuming I don't have to wait 10 years.
John Carmack has been in this aerospace endeavor for 10 years
thereabouts; what has he accomplished in that time?

well you could get a pretty good idea just by reading all the updates he's posted. Here's some highlights:

flown over 20 different VTVL rockets on over 100 flights
created a volunteer based company that has nearly single-handedly created an industry and now has developed into a private, for-profit company
first to win a lunar lander challeng
inspired thousands, including some now in the industry including all three competitors he faced in the LLC
been pretty much the Orville and Wilbur Wright of private VTVL flight.

Is that a good start?

Posted from my iPhone
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: neilh on 05/13/2010 09:50 pm
well you could get a pretty good idea just by reading all the updates he's posted. Here's some highlights:

flown over 20 different VTVL rockets on over 100 flights
created a volunteer based company that has nearly single-handedly created an industry and now has developed into a private, for-profit company
first to win a lunar lander challeng
inspired thousands, including some now in the industry including all three competitors he faced in the LLC
been pretty much the Orville and Wilbur Wright of private VTVL flight.

Is that a good start?

Posted from my iPhone

I'm not aware of more recent numbers, but it's also worth noting that Armadillo's total expenditures up until 2008 were just $3.5 million.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Robotbeat on 06/05/2010 09:44 pm
Woo!!
Phil Eaton, on the ARocket mailing list:
Quote
I hate to scoop John, but I can't help myself!

Armadillo just completed a boosted hop to 2000 feet with an engine shutdown
and extended freefall under a small drogue.

Everything went well and the mod executed a Masten-esque maneuver to return
to the pad.

Matt will have video sometime in the next day or 2 I am sure...  It was
REALLY cool!

Phil
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: neilh on 06/05/2010 09:50 pm
Woo!!
Phil Eaton, on the ARocket mailing list:
Quote
I hate to scoop John, but I can't help myself!

Armadillo just completed a boosted hop to 2000 feet with an engine shutdown
and extended freefall under a small drogue.

Everything went well and the mod executed a Masten-esque maneuver to return
to the pad.

Matt will have video sometime in the next day or 2 I am sure...  It was
REALLY cool!

Phil

Wow, I look forward to that video. This friendly competitiveness between Armadillo and Masten is great to see.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: jongoff on 06/06/2010 12:09 am
Woo!!
Phil Eaton, on the ARocket mailing list:
Quote
I hate to scoop John, but I can't help myself!

Armadillo just completed a boosted hop to 2000 feet with an engine shutdown
and extended freefall under a small drogue.

Everything went well and the mod executed a Masten-esque maneuver to return
to the pad.

Matt will have video sometime in the next day or 2 I am sure...  It was
REALLY cool!

Phil

Wow, I look forward to that video. This friendly competitiveness between Armadillo and Masten is great to see.

John Carmack on aRocket:

2000', engine relight under drogue.

> From: Matt Ross <[email protected]>
> Date: June 5, 2010 5:29:14 PM CDT
>
> Here's the view from the tripod camera. I should be able to get to editing up the other angles within the next day or so.
>
> http://media.armadilloaerospace.com/2010_06_05/2010_06_05_Mod_free_flight-engine_restart.wmv
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: jongoff on 06/06/2010 12:11 am
Quote from: John Carmack's email

2000', engine relight under drogue.

> http://media.armadilloaerospace.com/2010_06_05/2010_06_05_Mod_free_flight-engine_restart.wmv

I have to say, I wasn't a fan of drogue chutes before this, and am even less of a fan now.  But the vehicle recovered very well.  Man, that was impressive/scary/impressive!

~Jon
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Lee Jay on 06/06/2010 12:31 am
Why aren't you a fan of chutes?  My attitude is, rockets are the worst devices at producing delta-V.  Practically everything else is better (rotors, props, jets, wings, chutes, buoyancy, etc.).  Therefore, if another device can be used, it should be used.  Rockets should be used where there's no practical alternative to solve the needed problem.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Robotbeat on 06/06/2010 12:35 am
Why aren't you a fan of chutes?  My attitude is, rockets are the worst devices at producing delta-V.  Practically everything else is better (rotors, props, jets, wings, chutes, buoyancy, etc.).  Therefore, if another device can be used, it should be used.  Rockets should be used where there's no practical alternative to solve the needed problem.
He's a fan of (more solid) aerodynamic surfaces which aren't chutes. Chutes are less predictable. There's substantial (and difficult to model... though not impossible... I did a summer's research under a professor who was partly responsible for modeling MSL's parachutes) fluid-structure interaction that is something that's far easier to engineer with certainty with a solid surface.

Of course, I should just let Jon speak for himself. ;)
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Harlan on 06/06/2010 02:02 am
I have to say, I wasn't a fan of drogue chutes before this, and am even less of a fan now.  But the vehicle recovered very well.  Man, that was impressive/scary/impressive!

Holy crap! I might have gone with "scary/impressive/scary"! If that was my expensive, hand-constructed vehicle swinging through those angles, I'd have had a heart attack! Was a little hard to tell from the ground video, but it looked to me like they popped the chute a bit early, before the vehicle had enough negative velocity to be very stable under it...
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: savuporo on 06/06/2010 02:16 am
Scary. Use streamers to stabilize, rather than drogue chutes ?
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: jongoff on 06/06/2010 04:25 am
Why aren't you a fan of chutes?  My attitude is, rockets are the worst devices at producing delta-V.  Practically everything else is better (rotors, props, jets, wings, chutes, buoyancy, etc.).  Therefore, if another device can be used, it should be used.  Rockets should be used where there's no practical alternative to solve the needed problem.
He's a fan of (more solid) aerodynamic surfaces which aren't chutes. Chutes are less predictable. There's substantial (and difficult to model... though not impossible... I did a summer's research under a professor who was partly responsible for modeling MSL's parachutes) fluid-structure interaction that is something that's far easier to engineer with certainty with a solid surface.

Of course, I should just let Jon speak for himself. ;)

You did a good enough job of speaking for me.  :-)

~Jon
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: neilh on 06/06/2010 05:23 am
Quote from: John Carmack's email

2000', engine relight under drogue.

> http://media.armadilloaerospace.com/2010_06_05/2010_06_05_Mod_free_flight-engine_restart.wmv

I have to say, I wasn't a fan of drogue chutes before this, and am even less of a fan now.  But the vehicle recovered very well.  Man, that was impressive/scary/impressive!

I wonder if the chutes were also there to make the impact somewhat survivable for the lander if the engine failed to restart.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: zaitcev on 06/06/2010 10:16 pm
I am very impressed that the control system was able to stabilize the mod although you can see it took it some oscillatons (which it dampened properly).
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: kkattula on 06/06/2010 10:27 pm
Quote from: John Carmack's email

2000', engine relight under drogue.

> http://media.armadilloaerospace.com/2010_06_05/2010_06_05_Mod_free_flight-engine_restart.wmv

I have to say, I wasn't a fan of drogue chutes before this, and am even less of a fan now.  But the vehicle recovered very well.  Man, that was impressive/scary/impressive!

I wonder if the chutes were also there to make the impact somewhat survivable for the lander if the engine failed to restart.

Nope. John Carmack said terminal velocity under the drogue was 50 m/s. Not survivable.

Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: hop on 06/06/2010 11:38 pm
I am very impressed that the control system was able to stabilize the mod although you can see it took it some oscillatons (which it dampened properly).
Agreed, looks like the rocket tug-a-war paid off :)
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: corrodedNut on 06/07/2010 02:19 am
Check out the new videos:


http://www.youtube.com/v/9u0qlIoSSkQ

http://www.youtube.com/v/x8_e2kiLzUk

Man, what a weekend this has been...
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: spacedive on 06/07/2010 05:15 am
That was awesome.

John Carmack is fantastic!

Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Crispy on 06/07/2010 11:32 pm
That's some very nice stabilization coming out of the drogue separation. I get the feeling you could fling one of those things into the air randomly and it'd land on its feet like a cat :)
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: neilh on 06/08/2010 12:37 am
Slashdot story on Masten and Armadillo submitted by yours truly. ;)

http://science.slashdot.org/story/10/06/07/2216258/Masten-and-Armadillo-Perform-First-VTVL-Restarts
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: savuporo on 06/08/2010 06:40 am
Heh, the article submission sort of points at Armadillo playing the second violin again ..
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: DanielW on 06/12/2010 04:26 pm
Apparently John just picked Masten's pocket.

http://hobbyspace.com/nucleus/?itemid=21313 (http://hobbyspace.com/nucleus/?itemid=21313)
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Solo on 06/12/2010 09:58 pm
Wow, what a week, between SpaceX, Armadillo and Masten!
I guess I'm biased toward Armadillo because I learned about their work first, and I've been keeping up with them much longer.  So way to go John Carmack!  It's really cool to think that they've gone from garage-level to verging on suborbital attempts in a few years.  It just goes to show what an ambitious, talented person can do in the world today.  I can't wait to see what happens next! 
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: savuporo on 06/13/2010 03:27 am
It's really cool to think that they've gone from garage-level to verging on suborbital attempts in a few years.
Not knocking AA, i've been a fan of theirs since they started.
Its just an observation that they aways seem to be around a year or a bit more away from actual suborbital flights. If you remember, they were planning to win the original X-Prize ..
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Danderman on 06/13/2010 05:51 am
Not knocking AA, i've been a fan of theirs since they started.
Its just an observation that they aways seem to be around a year or a bit more away from actual suborbital flights. If you remember, they were planning to win the original X-Prize ..

I agree that AA is always 12 months from suborbital flight in space, but their development effort nonetheless is fantastic.

What I don't know is how their lander is going to fare at transonic speeds, and during atmospheric re-entry.

Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: corrodedNut on 06/27/2010 04:40 pm
Flight today?

http://twitpic.com/20an6z

Yes?

http://twitpic.com/20asq4

Well, now that I've done the math, I think this must have happened yesterday Sat 26.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: mmeijeri on 06/27/2010 05:09 pm
Would it be fair to say some of the New Space companies have now matched or even surpassed the capabilities of DC-X, and on a much smaller budget? Also a little under twenty years later of course and with much lower performing engines.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Jim on 06/27/2010 05:12 pm
Would it be fair to say some of the New Space companies have now matched or even surpassed the capabilities of DC-X, and on a much smaller budget? Also a little under twenty years later of course and with much lower performing engines.

no, it was a much larger vehicle
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: NotGncDude on 06/27/2010 05:19 pm
Would it be fair to say some of the New Space companies have now matched or even surpassed the capabilities of DC-X, and on a much smaller budget? Also a little under twenty years later of course and with much lower performing engines.

no, it was a much larger vehicle

So? In terms of flight time and ability to do in-air restart they have.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: corrodedNut on 06/27/2010 05:28 pm
Don't forget the much more fancy landing gear.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Garrett on 06/27/2010 05:29 pm
Would it be fair to say some of the New Space companies have now matched or even surpassed the capabilities of DC-X, and on a much smaller budget? Also a little under twenty years later of course and with much lower performing engines.

no, it was a much larger vehicle
And larger is better?
Any chance the DC-X was larger than it needed to be? I'm thinking along the lines of the SF to San Jose CalTrain. A beast of a train that makes it look like the engineers were trying to use as much metal as possible!
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: neilh on 06/27/2010 06:04 pm
Some info on Armadillo's work with Project M:

http://twitter.com/wikkit/status/16957478457
http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local-beat/Up-UP-and-Away-isnt-Far-Away-.html
Quote
On Wednesday, the team launched a prototype they've partnered with NASA to test.
"It's to test out some of these capabilities on the ground. To understand how they work. To further improve our capabilities so that we can prepare for an eventual launch to the moon," said Jon Olansen with NASA.
"The reason they partnered with us is we can do things phenomenally quickly," said Milburn. "In three months, we've gotten a vehicle that's test flying that would have probably taken them three years."
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Robotbeat on 06/30/2010 04:54 am
Armadillo just did a boosted hop to 2000 ft, not a record breaker (for them or anyone) and they didn't do an airstart or anything, but they did use an aerosurface for roll control instead of using pressurant in cold gas thrusters (the usual method for roll control for them). This will help them conserve pressurant/consumables. They say they may have to move to Oklahoma for higher trips after a few flights.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: corrodedNut on 07/01/2010 01:24 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AA1e33lRNs4

"This video is of NASA Project M Lander free flight test at Armadillo Aerospace outside of Dallas. The lander launched on June 23rd 2010. This is the prototype of the lander that will launch a version of Robonaut on future exploratory missions"

I guess "M" is for methane.

PS: I guess not, while this is Armadillo's Pixel vehicle re-purposed as a methane test bed, "Project M" is that 1000 day NASA project. I guess "M" is for Moon.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Lee Jay on 07/01/2010 01:31 pm
Looked like a lot of cosine losses, didn't it?
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: kkattula on 07/01/2010 02:18 pm
Was that frost on the injector and around the top of the chamber?  Sure looked like it. 

I believe they use fuel film cooling. Seems it's so effective the top of the engine never gets hot enough to melt the frost from the Liquid Methane & LOX.

Edit:  Watching it again, the frost actually develops and grows on the engine while operating.  Cool.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: ugordan on 07/01/2010 02:21 pm
Looked like a lot of cosine losses, didn't it?

I think that would be qualified as steering losses, not cosine losses.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: NotGncDude on 07/01/2010 02:26 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AA1e33lRNs4

"This video is of NASA Project M Lander free flight test at Armadillo Aerospace outside of Dallas. The lander launched on June 23rd 2010. This is the prototype of the lander that will launch a version of Robonaut on future exploratory missions"

I guess "M" is for methane.

Whoa. That's quite an oscillation there. I thought they had overcome that.

Now I see why John Carmack dislikes the quad configuration.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: mmeijeri on 07/01/2010 02:29 pm
I guess "M" is for Moon.

I think it's the Roman numeral M for 1000, this is supposed to be a project that would land something useful on the moon within 1000 days after the start of the project.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Danderman on 07/01/2010 02:45 pm
I guess "M" is for Moon.

I think it's the Roman numeral M for 1000, this is supposed to be a project that would land something useful on the moon within 1000 days after the start of the project.

How do they propose to store the LOX en route to the Moon?
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: mmeijeri on 07/01/2010 02:49 pm
How do they propose to store the LOX en route to the Moon?

And the methane too. Cryocoolers maybe? It's only for a couple of days.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Robotbeat on 07/01/2010 03:49 pm
Both methane and LOx are "space-storable." Remember, hypergolic fuels have to be heated so they don't freeze in space.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: mmeijeri on 07/01/2010 03:55 pm
I'm not sure LOX/methane are storable in LEO without active cooling, but I have nothing against using cryocoolers and the lander wouldn't spend a lot of time in LEO anyway. And if we were to use noncryogenic propellant I wouldn't be thinking of hypergolics but kerosene/peroxide if Armadillo were doing it. They'd still have to start the engines in microgravity. A positive expulsion device is not the only way to do this, but it is one reasonably simple way.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: hop on 07/03/2010 10:13 pm
Another neat Project M video with more background, via http://twitter.com/wikkit/statuses/17652968435

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-j95FleDEfo
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: corrodedNut on 07/06/2010 12:46 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-q-cO3z6BsI&feature=player_embedded

"A flight to 2000ft AGL of an Armadillo Aerospace "Mod" VTVL rocket, with a shiny new actuated roll vane, 2010/06/22.

Rather than using cold gas thrusters to move the vehicle around the vertical axis (roll), an aerodynamic surface is actuated to provide roll. In the split screen, it's the aluminum plate on the right; the camera is pointed straight up. The view on the left is looking straight down, to show the roll orientation over time."
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: corrodedNut on 07/06/2010 01:26 pm
I'll try and put recent Mod vehicle flights in the correct order:

June 5- Free flight to 2000', engine shutdown, drogue deploy and release, restart.

Video here: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=20233.msg602376#msg602376

June 22- Free flight to 2000' with aerodynamic roll control vane. Non-consequential, inadvertent drogue deploy.

Video here: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=20233.msg615226#msg615226

June 27- Possible flight to 6000' ?? with "a new multi-point drogue attachment and cutaway system"

EDIT: June 26 flight to 2000' see post below with video.

Pictures here: http://twitpic.com/20an6z and http://twitpic.com/20asq4

P.S. Fins are back, baby!!!  (well, sort of)
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: corrodedNut on 07/11/2010 12:47 am
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7sdHzY3xFA&feature=player_embedded

"The second engine-out flight, from June 26th, 2010. This time the drogue is attached at four individual points for more stability. This cut also shows the vane controlling roll."
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: corrodedNut on 07/11/2010 04:10 am
Same flight, different video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2l3ANwQhSMo

"A flight of the Armadillo Aerospace "Mod" vehicle on 2010.06.26. This was the first flight test of a four-point drogue attachment system, which increases the stability of the system when falling with the engine off."

The far right camera angle, looking from the pad up, you can really see how well the vehicle corrects its self after re-light.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Zapp on 08/12/2010 11:01 am
A new update at
http://armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Home/News?news_id=371
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: maitri982 on 08/15/2010 02:07 am
You know, many New Space fans like myself have been following SpaceX closely as they have the potential to open up Space Access at much lower prices than previously possible.

But after seeing the current progress of Armadillo I am beginning to wonder if I bet on the wrong horse for a significant reduction in space access that could make it possible for only moderately well off people to get there...and I don't mean suborbital either.

These guys are doing some great work.  I look forward to their starting to fly actual people to suborbit and then taking the big leap to space.  i wonder if Carmack has any ideas already what he could sell that ticket for and still make money?

Kevin
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: corrodedNut on 09/02/2010 01:17 pm
New ProjectM video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ByFzAQla0wg

"This video shows the third free flight of the Project M lander out at Armadillo Aerospace."

Here's the ProjectM channel:

http://www.youtube.com/user/NASAProjectM#p/u
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: corrodedNut on 09/14/2010 12:06 pm
New tether test video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qa5_ijzkDkU

"Includes induced perturbations to test recovery from aerodynamic impulses, and the telescopic legs extending at the end. We were ready to free-flight after this test, but a two-hour FAA hold would have put us too late in the day. Will probably try for the free flight later today."

See Armadillo's channel:

http://www.youtube.com/armadilloaerospace
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Robotbeat on 09/14/2010 10:53 pm
Now that looks like a space ship!
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Lars_J on 09/14/2010 11:17 pm
Very nice... Although it seems like the legs should be 50% longer.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Robotbeat on 09/14/2010 11:20 pm
Very nice... Although it seems like the legs should be 50% longer.
I think they're assuming they will land on concrete.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: simonbp on 09/15/2010 01:38 am
Now that looks like a space ship!

Indeed; amazing the difference a little bodywork can make.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: savuporo on 09/15/2010 01:49 am
How many of you still remember this ?

http://media.armadilloaerospace.com/2004_06_15/perfectBoostedHop.mpg
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: zaitcev on 09/16/2010 05:57 pm
Does anyone know why they use 4 pneumatic legs and not 3 or 5? If one leg fails to deploy, 3 others won't save the vehicle from tilting. Might as well either use 3 for mass savings or 5 for a degree of redundancy. But 4 is the worst choice. In case of old MOD, the 4 legs formed a structure that allowed for easy transport on a truck, I imagine. But now a supporting structure is necessary anyway. Or take another case, Masten had an airframe with 4 members, so 4 legs made structural sense for ease of design and building. None of this applies to new aeroshell MOD. I do not understand this design decision. Anyone has a good guess?

-- Pete
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: jabe on 09/16/2010 06:22 pm
Very nice... Although it seems like the legs should be 50% longer.
My thoughts exactly...hope they land on flat ground or the engine may get nose full of dirt :)
jb

edit: check here (http://twitpic.com/2p07vn) for close up of it :)
oh..and their youtube channel now has the just done untethered flight now up...
http://www.youtube.com/armadilloaerospace
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: corrodedNut on 09/17/2010 12:36 am
Seen this "original" version yet?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZytS2K-gPw

Is this the first free-flight take off with the 'stand off' tubes? It looks like it leans a little for half a second after ignition, and bounces bit more than usual at landing.

"This is the view from the west side of the pad looking east. It's taken from an HD camcorder turned on its side to get a taller view of the take off and landing. The landing portion shows a nice view of the legs deploying. Best viewed in HD on a big monitor. In fact, if you choose "original" from the resolution pull-down, and you're lucky to have a 30-in. monitor, you're seeing this video in 1600 pixel vertical resolution!"
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Cinder on 09/17/2010 01:28 am
I must be missing something.  I only see 1080p as highest resolution.

edit - Have to watch it on the actual youtube page.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: beancounter on 09/17/2010 01:29 am
Where would people say Marsten and Armadillo are at present in relation to each other's progress. 
Marsten was more accurate landing in the comp' but with respect to their technology, it seems like they're running pretty much neck and neck.
Any thoughts?
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: DanielW on 09/17/2010 03:38 am
Does anyone know why they use 4 pneumatic legs and not 3 or 5? If one leg fails to deploy, 3 others won't save the vehicle from tilting. Might as well either use 3 for mass savings or 5 for a degree of redundancy. But 4 is the worst choice. In case of old MOD, the 4 legs formed a structure that allowed for easy transport on a truck, I imagine. But now a supporting structure is necessary anyway. Or take another case, Masten had an airframe with 4 members, so 4 legs made structural sense for ease of design and building. None of this applies to new aeroshell MOD. I do not understand this design decision. Anyone has a good guess?

-- Pete

Actually 4 seems a good choice to me.  You assume that there is a significant chance of one leg failing to deploy.  It is not a significant threat at all.  They all run off the ullage pressure.  If one does not deploy then they all probably did not.  The craft would probably be salvageable in case of a tip-over. AA's rockets are next to bullet proof.  Highly reliable system = no need for five legs.

Four does however give a significant increase in stability over three.  At this point in their testing they just need to go fast in the thick part of the atmosphere to get a handle on dynamics. Mass fraction and performance are not a big issue until they got for 100km.  For now not having to bang dents out of tanks outweighs mass savings.

Though truthfully, their landings are accurate enough that three legs would probably be sufficient.  I do think that four was a good decision for a first go at a new technique.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: simonbp on 09/17/2010 03:43 am
The staged deployment makes it kinda look like stop-motion animation!

@zaitcev: orthogonal structures are easier to design/build than isometric
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: NotGncDude on 09/17/2010 04:35 am
Does anyone know why they use 4 pneumatic legs and not 3 or 5? If one leg fails to deploy, 3 others won't save the vehicle from tilting. Might as well either use 3 for mass savings or 5 for a degree of redundancy. But 4 is the worst choice. In case of old MOD, the 4 legs formed a structure that allowed for easy transport on a truck, I imagine. But now a supporting structure is necessary anyway. Or take another case, Masten had an airframe with 4 members, so 4 legs made structural sense for ease of design and building. None of this applies to new aeroshell MOD. I do not understand this design decision. Anyone has a good guess?

-- Pete

Actually 4 seems a good choice to me.  You assume that there is a significant chance of one leg failing to deploy.  It is not a significant threat at all.  They all run off the ullage pressure.  If one does not deploy then they all probably did not.  The craft would probably be salvageable in case of a tip-over. AA's rockets are next to bullet proof.  Highly reliable system = no need for five legs.

Four does however give a significant increase in stability over three.  At this point in their testing they just need to go fast in the thick part of the atmosphere to get a handle on dynamics. Mass fraction and performance are not a big issue until they got for 100km.  For now not having to bang dents out of tanks outweighs mass savings.

Though truthfully, their landings are accurate enough that three legs would probably be sufficient.  I do think that four was a good decision for a first go at a new technique.

What? This doesn't make sense. 4 legs don't increase stability at all. The only reason you put 4 is that you can make the vehicle tighter for the same tip-over angle. Other than that they are just heavier and decrease reliability.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: NotGncDude on 09/17/2010 04:37 am
Where would people say Marsten and Armadillo are at present in relation to each other's progress. 
Marsten was more accurate landing in the comp' but with respect to their technology, it seems like they're running pretty much neck and neck.
Any thoughts?

Masten lost all their engineers. It's gonna take them a while to recover.

Disclaimer, before they get p**sed with me: Sure, they got new ones already, and they are great, no doubt, but these transitions take time.

ps. the censorship here is rather silly, they won't let me write pi**ed
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: NotGncDude on 09/17/2010 04:42 am
Does anyone know why they use 4 pneumatic legs and not 3 or 5? If one leg fails to deploy, 3 others won't save the vehicle from tilting. Might as well either use 3 for mass savings or 5 for a degree of redundancy. But 4 is the worst choice. In case of old MOD, the 4 legs formed a structure that allowed for easy transport on a truck, I imagine. But now a supporting structure is necessary anyway. Or take another case, Masten had an airframe with 4 members, so 4 legs made structural sense for ease of design and building. None of this applies to new aeroshell MOD. I do not understand this design decision. Anyone has a good guess?

-- Pete

Agreed. But...

The reason for 4 legs is that you can keep them closer to the structure than 3 legs. 3 legs have to be much longer which is a pain with deployable mechanisms (thin DCX, Blue Origin, LEM, etc). That's why Masten dropped the 3 legs from Xoie and went to 4 with Aero-xoie which is based on the same core.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: NotGncDude on 09/17/2010 04:55 am
The staged deployment makes it kinda look like stop-motion animation!

@zaitcev: orthogonal structures are easier to design/build than isometric

To be fair, yes, it's also easier to build. That's good enough of a reason sometimes.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Lars_J on 09/17/2010 06:42 am
Am I the only one thinking that this flight looked a bit er... lacking in stability? Perhaps the software needs to be tweaked, or they did it on purpose, but it sure looked like the engine kept vectoring significantly back and forth through most of the ascent. The descent looked better though.

I also think that while the legs are technically long enough, the short length means that the engine nozzle is inches away from the ground - which might make throttling during the terminal landing a bit tricky. Perhaps it contributed to the 'jump' at the end.

But then again I could be waaaay off base. :)
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Zapp on 09/17/2010 06:57 am
Am I the only one thinking that this flight looked a bit er... lacking in stability? Perhaps the software needs to be tweaked, or they did it on purpose, but it sure looked like the engine kept vectoring significantly back and forth through most of the ascent. The descent looked better though.
John Carmack on Twitter: "Excellent free flight with deployable legs. Behaves a bit differently, will tune control parameters before next flight."
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Zapp on 09/17/2010 07:45 am
Does anyone know why they use 4 pneumatic legs and not 3 or 5? If one leg fails to deploy, 3 others won't save the vehicle from tilting. Might as well either use 3 for mass savings or 5 for a degree of redundancy. But 4 is the worst choice. In case of old MOD, the 4 legs formed a structure that allowed for easy transport on a truck, I imagine. But now a supporting structure is necessary anyway. Or take another case, Masten had an airframe with 4 members, so 4 legs made structural sense for ease of design and building. None of this applies to new aeroshell MOD. I do not understand this design decision. Anyone has a good guess?

-- Pete

Remember it is still a MOD and on them they use a four point mounting design for the enginebracket, so Im guessing four legs is the simplest/lightest way to do things without a whole redesign. Checkout the pictures on James Bauers flickrpage.
 
http://www.flickr.com/photos/29153024@N07/4895843083
http://www.flickr.com/photos/29153024@N07/4896439766
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: jongoff on 09/17/2010 08:05 am
Where would people say Marsten and Armadillo are at present in relation to each other's progress. 
Marsten was more accurate landing in the comp' but with respect to their technology, it seems like they're running pretty much neck and neck.
Any thoughts?

Masten lost all their engineers. It's gonna take them a while to recover.

Disclaimer, before they get p**sed with me: Sure, they got new ones already, and they are great, no doubt, but these transitions take time.

ps. the censorship here is rather silly, they won't let me write pi**ed

Note: this is probably a better topic for the Masten thread, but someone did ask about a Masten/Armadillo comparison.

Well, while they definitely had some pretty tough transition issues to work through, things are picking up again.  I was down there in Mojave for two weeks late last month training my replacement, Alex.  And I'm still available for consultation if they get stuck on any propulsion problem for too long.  Reuben's already up to speed pretty well.  He started the day I quit back at the start of July.  He was the crew chief for XCOR's X-Racer, and our systems while different are at least of a similar flavor.  He's pretty much up-to-speed by now.  Ian was definitely hard to replace, and that's where I expect the most transition challenges to come from, but his replacement George is pretty darned sharp too...

And don't forget that Ken and Dave are still there.  There's a lot of institutional knowledge between the two of them...

And the aeroshell stuff is finally coming through.  They had some snags and delays, but the intertank mockup piece got in (there were twitpics a few days ago).  The LOX tank and landing gear are done.  The engine is mostly ready to go back together.  The fuel tank is done. 

There still are a lot of bits and pieces to be done, the transition is a challenge, and they have a much smaller team, and far less resources.  But I think the approach they're taking is better (I'm very biased on that count though), so we'll see.  I think Armadillo may have pulled back into the lead, but you have to admit that when you compare their in-air relights, Masten's was a heck of a lot more graceful and crisp...

Masten is still definitely the underdog again, but they seem to do well in that position...

Ok, enough tooting my old horn there...

And...enough...ellipses...to...make...an...English...teacher...cry...

~Jon
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Zapp on 09/17/2010 04:08 pm
Another video from the latest flight

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_Xiq3dYJlM&feature=youtu.be&hd=1
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: mr. mark on 09/17/2010 04:27 pm
Excuse me but, I don't see where all of this is going. Spacex is already next year going to be delivering cargo to the ISS. Boeing's CST-100 is conceptually way ahead of this project and should be ready to put people in orbit around 2015. Virgin Galactic's Spaceship 2 is a much safer ride as far as passengers and is farther down the line than this. So where does this research fit in? I can see Lunar and possibly planetary lander possibilities but other than that? It seems their program needs more focus and direction as far as a ultimate destination. Sounds like they have corporate management problems and a need to communicate their ideas to the public better. As far as I can see they are in the same class as Copenhagen Suborbitals. Their launch was canceled by a hair dryer.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: mmeijeri on 09/17/2010 04:30 pm
And...enough...ellipses...to...make...an...English...teacher...cry...

Don't worry, you can't have spaceflight without tripping over conics. ;)
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Lars_J on 09/17/2010 04:41 pm
Excuse me but, I don't see where all of this is going. Spacex is already next year going to be delivering cargo to the ISS. Boeing's CST-100 is conceptually way ahead of this project and should be ready to put people in orbit around 2015. Virgin Galactic's Spaceship 2 is a much safer ride as far as passengers and is farther down the line than this. So where does this research fit in? I can see Lunar and possibly planetary lander possibilities but other than that? It seems their program needs more focus and direction as far as a ultimate destination. Sounds like they have corporate management problems and a need to communicate their ideas to the public better. As far as I can see they are in the same class as Copenhagen Suborbitals. Their launch was canceled by a hair dryer.

If they aren't launching a capsule on an expendable rocket, what's the point? Is that what you are saying?  ::)

If you *bothered* to do some research, you would know that orbital is a long-term goal of theirs. Once they gain confidence and experience with suborbital space hops, they have written about plans to put an expendable 2nd stage on top for orbital launches, and then take it from there.

But who needs low-cost RLVs, right?  ;D

EDIT: Now I remember you - you're the same guy who complained that 'Copenhagen' was not valuing human life enough... I should not have bothered.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Robotbeat on 09/17/2010 04:42 pm
Excuse me but, I don't see where all of this is going. Spacex is already next year going to be delivering cargo to the ISS. Boeing's CST-100 is conceptually way ahead of this project and should be ready to put people in orbit around 2015. Virgin Galactic's Spaceship 2 is a much safer ride as far as passengers and is farther down the line than this. So where does this research fit in? I can see Lunar and possibly planetary lander possibilities but other than that? It seems their program needs more focus and direction as far as a ultimate destination. Sounds like they have coprate management problems and a need to communicate their ideas to the public better. As far as I can see they are in the same class as Copenhagen Suborbitals. Their launch was canceled by a hair dryer.

Armadillo (and Masten, etc) have a very important role. Have you noticed how SpaceX, while still cheaper in some respects than ULA, still are around the same order of magnitude in cost?

We still have a long way to go. Arguably, work like that which Armadillo is doing is more important than what SpaceX is doing. Armadillo is practicing reusing rockets over and over again, focusing on a quick turnaround concept of operations. We aren't going to get truly cheap and reliable access to space without that capability. We just aren't.

Virgin Galactic will not be orbital for a long time, and their airlaunch technique is very expensive at a large enough scale to launch people into full orbit. They may get there eventually, but I think that Armadillo (and Masten) have an approach that is much more scalable and with lower capital costs.

Ultimately, the real reason their research is important is because you can't have a truly vibrant space economy with only one or two launch providers, even if they are inexpensive. You have to have diverse competition (though, since the industry is just starting to grow, a victory for one of these companies will actually probably help the others as well).

And the retractable legs are important to reduce the drag, because very soon these folks are going to go past the Kármán line (and back, safely), and to get there they will need to go supersonic.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: butters on 09/17/2010 04:47 pm
Excuse me but, I don't see where all of this is going. Spacex is already next year going to be delivering cargo to the ISS. Boeing's CST-100 is conceptually way ahead of this project and should be ready to put people in orbit around 2015. Virgin Galactic's Spaceship 2 is a much safer ride as far as passengers and is farther down the line than this. So where does this research fit in? I can see Lunar and possibly planetary lander possibilities but other than that? It seems their program needs more focus and direction as far as a ultimate destination. Sounds like they have corporate management problems and a need to communicate their ideas to the public better. As far as I can see they are in the same class as Copenhagen Suborbitals. Their launch was canceled by a hair dryer.

Their intention is short-duration microgravity and (maybe) vacuum experiments.  Like an advanced reusable sounding rocket.  Their objective is suborbital (at least for the foreseeable future), so it makes little sense to compare them to SpaceX or Boeing.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: NotGncDude on 09/17/2010 05:37 pm
Where would people say Marsten and Armadillo are at present in relation to each other's progress. 
Marsten was more accurate landing in the comp' but with respect to their technology, it seems like they're running pretty much neck and neck.
Any thoughts?

Masten lost all their engineers. It's gonna take them a while to recover.

Disclaimer, before they get p**sed with me: Sure, they got new ones already, and they are great, no doubt, but these transitions take time.

ps. the censorship here is rather silly, they won't let me write pi**ed

Note: this is probably a better topic for the Masten thread, but someone did ask about a Masten/Armadillo comparison.

Well, while they definitely had some pretty tough transition issues to work through, things are picking up again.  I was down there in Mojave for two weeks late last month training my replacement, Alex.  And I'm still available for consultation if they get stuck on any propulsion problem for too long.  Reuben's already up to speed pretty well.  He started the day I quit back at the start of July.  He was the crew chief for XCOR's X-Racer, and our systems while different are at least of a similar flavor.  He's pretty much up-to-speed by now.  Ian was definitely hard to replace, and that's where I expect the most transition challenges to come from, but his replacement George is pretty darned sharp too...

Sorry Jon :) I knew this was going to get me in trouble. I agree with this, all I'm saying is that these transitions slow down progress for a bit. In any case, it's an Armadillo thread so I'll shut up.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Zapp on 09/17/2010 05:54 pm
sounds like they just flew again, twitter:
ArmadilloGadget(Phil Eaton): Awesome flight! Ben will have video later.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: kch on 09/17/2010 06:24 pm
And...enough...ellipses...to...make...an...English...teacher...cry...

Don't worry, you can't have spaceflight without tripping over conics. ;)

And a good thing, too -- who'd want to get "Hooked on Conics"?  :)
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: savuporo on 09/17/2010 07:01 pm
Here we have a great Heinleinian rocketship rehearsing its landings, poised to start flying out of the atmosphere .. and all you guys do is argue about how many legs it should have !

;)

EDIT: seeing this one flying, reminded me about the ISAS/JAXA RVT program again, i wonder how these guys are progressing:
http://ina-lab.isas.jaxa.jp/about/index_e.html

There hasnt been a test flight in a long time.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Zapp on 09/17/2010 07:57 pm
twitter: ID_AA_Carmack: We repeated the rocket flight this morning with the addition of having it land offset from the liftoff point and some other changes.

Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: zaitcev on 09/18/2010 02:05 am
Here we have a great Heinleinian rocketship rehearsing its landings, poised to start flying out of the atmosphere .. and all you guys do is argue about how many legs it should have !
Who knows, perhaps one of us is going to have to make a decision in the future, and judgement is not something found in a textbook.

That said, I just noticed that PPTK NP also has 4 legs (they unfold from the bottom to the outside, in the opposite direction to RXVT).

-- Pete
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Zapp on 09/18/2010 06:40 am
twitter: wikkit: Friday's launch video: http://youtu.be/2mD0obLCrR0 My airflow string experiment failed, I'll use cotton strings next time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2mD0obLCrR0&feature=youtu.be



"Friday's successful launch of the Armadillo Aerospace 'Mod' rocket flying just over 2000 feet, from a launch stand to the center of the pad.

These relatively low flights are for testing and verification of the flight controls under increased acceleration and higher wind speeds. This vehicle, or one like it, will be flying Commercial Reusable Suborbital Research (CRuSR) payloads for Nasa in the near future.

Watch it twice so you can see the landing gear extend!"
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Patchouli on 09/18/2010 06:58 am
Excuse me but, I don't see where all of this is going. Spacex is already next year going to be delivering cargo to the ISS. Boeing's CST-100 is conceptually way ahead of this project and should be ready to put people in orbit around 2015. Virgin Galactic's Spaceship 2 is a much safer ride as far as passengers and is farther down the line than this. So where does this research fit in? I can see Lunar and possibly planetary lander possibilities but other than that? It seems their program needs more focus and direction as far as a ultimate destination. Sounds like they have corporate management problems and a need to communicate their ideas to the public better. As far as I can see they are in the same class as Copenhagen Suborbitals. Their launch was canceled by a hair dryer.

If they aren't launching a capsule on an expendable rocket, what's the point? Is that what you are saying?  ::)

If you *bothered* to do some research, you would know that orbital is a long-term goal of theirs. Once they gain confidence and experience with suborbital space hops, they have written about plans to put an expendable 2nd stage on top for orbital launches, and then take it from there.

But who needs low-cost RLVs, right?  ;D

EDIT: Now I remember you - you're the same guy who complained that 'Copenhagen' was not valuing human life enough... I should not have bothered.


One thing I see here is a potential lunar lander.

A suborbital VTOL RLV is pretty close to what you'd need for a lunar lander.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: kkattula on 09/18/2010 07:38 am
One thing I see here is a potential lunar lander.

A suborbital VTOL RLV is pretty close to what you'd need for a lunar lander.


Maybe NASA should run a competition to encourage that sort of development?  Oh wait...  ;)
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: swampcat on 09/18/2010 10:17 am
What was that thing that flew by about 9-10 seconds into the video? Looked like a plastic bag of some sort.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: corrodedNut on 09/18/2010 04:30 pm
twitter: ID_AA_Carmack: We repeated the rocket flight this morning with the addition of having it land offset from the liftoff point and some other changes.

Like the new "Li'l Soyuz Jr." launch pad.  This is really getting fun to watch.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Zapp on 09/18/2010 06:49 pm
twitter:
ArmadilloGadget: after 5 rocket racer runs we are about to pull out for a couple mod tests.

again?!!? they must have a bulk discount on lox...
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Robotbeat on 09/18/2010 07:24 pm
twitter:
ArmadilloGadget: after 5 rocket racer runs we are about to pull out for a couple mod tests.

again?!!? they must have a bulk discount on lox...
Isn't it great? One of the biggest costs of these flights is propellant!

But in bulk, LOX is cheaper than your fuel. And you can get a machine to make it yourself, if you really do a lot of launches and get sick of trucking LOX in.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: A_M_Swallow on 09/19/2010 02:01 pm
Armadillo (and Masten, etc) have a very important role. Have you noticed how SpaceX, while still cheaper in some respects than ULA, still are around the same order of magnitude in cost?

We still have a long way to go. Arguably, work like that which Armadillo is doing is more important than what SpaceX is doing. Armadillo is practicing reusing rockets over and over again, focusing on a quick turnaround concept of operations. We aren't going to get truly cheap and reliable access to space without that capability. We just aren't.

{snip}

Earth to LEO is not the only place that can use a reusable rocket, LEO to EML-1 could as well.  Within 5 years SpaceX (Dragon), Orbital (Cygnus) and Boeing (CST-100) will all have capsules that can deliver cargo and possibly people to LEO.  In newspaper interviews Bigelow has expressed a desire to place one of its modules at Earth-Moon Lagrange Point 1 (EML-1).  Consequently a way of getting from LEO to EML-1 will probably be needed.

There may be an opportunity for Armadillo and/or Masten to supply a chemical space tug to push the capsules from LEO to EML-1.

Delta-V LEO to EML-1 is 3.77 km/s with something like 0.126 km/s to rendezvous with a spacestation.
Delta-V Low Lunar Orbit to Moon's surface is about 1.87 km/s giving a return delta-V of about 3.74 km/s.
These figures are sufficiently close investigating questions about fuel tank size and the number of engines required for a tug to push a capsule may be worth while.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: corrodedNut on 09/30/2010 08:06 pm
NuSpace is blowin' id up

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VnIpgor0un8

"Testing an aluminum 15-inch diameter tank to its bursting point, shot at 300fps. This one gives way at 460 PSI. The point of a test like this is to see if the test tank would meet our needs in terms of how much it weighs vs. how much pressure it can hold, and what margins we'd have to stay within to safely use it on an actual rocket."
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: corrodedNut on 10/04/2010 12:20 pm
I was watching sportscenter this morning, and what did I see? An ad for BlackBerry? With some sort of strange, gnome-shaped hovering rocket?
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: neilh on 10/08/2010 08:02 pm
I was watching sportscenter this morning, and what did I see? An ad for BlackBerry? With some sort of strange, gnome-shaped hovering rocket?

Yup, it's Armadillo in a Blackberry commercial :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BriXRKUTX8
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: bad_astra on 10/13/2010 06:50 am
I don't watch TV all that often, but had Top Gear on BBC-America, when that came on. I literally jumped out of my chair. For an odd moment I thought it was an Armadillo commercial. In a way, it was.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: savuporo on 10/16/2010 05:43 am
very small update (http://neighborsgo.com/stories/61259) on Armadillo plans.

Quote
As part of its NASA-funded research, the firm plans to launch two flights this fall in Oklahoma and a third one later in New Mexico. Armadillo is aiming for an altitude of about 9 miles for the first two flights and 25 miles for the third.
.
.
The team hopes to launch a manned flight to space by late 2012, said Plano resident and Armadillo co-founder Neil Milburn.

I had sort of expected their schedule to pick up a lot after the LLC completion, and the research grants.

Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Robotbeat on 10/16/2010 06:01 am
very small update (http://neighborsgo.com/stories/61259) on Armadillo plans.

Quote
As part of its NASA-funded research, the firm plans to launch two flights this fall in Oklahoma and a third one later in New Mexico. Armadillo is aiming for an altitude of about 9 miles for the first two flights and 25 miles for the third.
.
.
The team hopes to launch a manned flight to space by late 2012, said Plano resident and Armadillo co-founder Neil Milburn.

I had sort of expected their schedule to pick up a lot after the LLC completion, and the research grants.


Cool! 25 miles up is practically vacuum. If things work there at 25 miles, they'll most likely work at 100 miles up, too... as long as you have the performance to get there.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: savuporo on 10/17/2010 04:59 pm
Via hobbyspace (http://hobbyspace.com/nucleus/index.php?itemid=24403) and Ben Brockert comes this bit:

Quote
More firing on the 4k alcohol engine, boy is that thing loud.

Hm .. where are they using that ? Rocket racer ?

Another tidbit, this SpaceAdventures video contains a shot of assembled cluster of 4 supermods standing in the hangar.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2jLYa1Wfy8#t=2m00s

at 2:03 in the video. They havent flown that yet, have they ?
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: NotGncDude on 10/19/2010 04:34 am
Via hobbyspace (http://hobbyspace.com/nucleus/index.php?itemid=24403) and Ben Brockert comes this bit:

Quote
More firing on the 4k alcohol engine, boy is that thing loud.

Hm .. where are they using that ? Rocket racer ?

I was going to say it's for JSC's RR2 (48" quad) but that one is methane. So yeah, what's that one for? Ben around here?
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Robotbeat on 10/19/2010 01:42 pm
I'm also very curious to see what that cluster is for... the start of multi-stage runs?
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: DanielW on 10/19/2010 11:56 pm
I'm also very curious to see what that cluster is for... the start of multi-stage runs?

I think that the cluster was a fitting check that they did a year or two ago. I am pretty sure that they have no such cluster bolted together at the moment.

The 4k lbf alcohol engine is most likely for their first suborbital vehicle. Now that they have seen what atmospheric forces do to their mod. They may be planning on building just a really big mod.

I have not done the math on it. They could be doing either a one ton mod or a 5 ton quad + capsule arrangement.

Either way is exciting stuff!
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: corrodedNut on 12/19/2010 02:57 pm
New Armadillo video:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UCSy3WZUW3I&feature=youtu.be


"Testing a parachute deployment process by dropping a weight out of an airplane. As you can see there was excellent spatial coordination between the drop team and the recovery team"

http://www.youtube.com/user/armadilloaerospace
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Stephan on 12/19/2010 03:24 pm
Wow, close call for the car :)
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: NotGncDude on 12/25/2010 02:44 am
Via hobbyspace (http://hobbyspace.com/nucleus/index.php?itemid=24403) and Ben Brockert comes this bit:

Quote
More firing on the 4k alcohol engine, boy is that thing loud.

Hm .. where are they using that ? Rocket racer ?

I was going to say it's for JSC's RR2 (48" quad) but that one is methane. So yeah, what's that one for? Ben around here?

Now I suspect it's for the "tube rocket"
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: corrodedNut on 01/13/2011 01:37 pm
Tube rocket:

http://flightplan.xprize.org/post/2717882796/2011-has-been-off-to-an-eventful-start-for-our-two

I wonder why they have decided to go with the conventional "tube rocket" design now? Does high altitude make them nervous, ie. get experience with a traditional (and perhaps cheaper) HPR design before risking their LLC hertiage vehicles?  Masten, on the other hand, seems content to evolve their LLC vehicle to high altitude filghts.

It'll be interesting to watch these two stratagies play out in the coming year.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: maitri982 on 01/13/2011 01:50 pm
BTW...i thought Armadillo was supposed to do a high altitude flight at the end of 2010?  I guess they didn't make the deadline.

I look forward to seeing them finally launch one of their rockets to much higher altitudes instead of the relatively small hops we have been treated to for years now.

It's time to push the limits and see what your rocket can do...

Kevin
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Moe Grills on 01/13/2011 07:19 pm
BTW...i thought Armadillo was supposed to do a high altitude flight at the end of 2010?  I guess they didn't make the deadline.

I look forward to seeing them finally launch one of their rockets to much higher altitudes instead of the relatively small hops we have been treated to for years now.

It's time to push the limits and see what your rocket can do...

Kevin


Ditto.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: rdale on 01/13/2011 07:34 pm
Ditto.

What?
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: rklaehn on 01/13/2011 07:39 pm
Tube rocket:

http://flightplan.xprize.org/post/2717882796/2011-has-been-off-to-an-eventful-start-for-our-two

I wonder why they have decided to go with the conventional "tube rocket" design now? Does high altitude make them nervous, ie. get experience with a traditional (and perhaps cheaper) HPR design before risking their LLC hertiage vehicles?  Masten, on the other hand, seems content to evolve their LLC vehicle to high altitude filghts.

It'll be interesting to watch these two stratagies play out in the coming year.

Armadillo aerospace is a commercial company now. So maybe they think there is a market for a reusable sounding rocket using their existing technology.

I am sure they will continue their VTVL work as well.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: NotGncDude on 01/13/2011 08:06 pm
Tube rocket:

http://flightplan.xprize.org/post/2717882796/2011-has-been-off-to-an-eventful-start-for-our-two

I wonder why they have decided to go with the conventional "tube rocket" design now? Does high altitude make them nervous, ie. get experience with a traditional (and perhaps cheaper) HPR design before risking their LLC hertiage vehicles?  Masten, on the other hand, seems content to evolve their LLC vehicle to high altitude filghts.

It'll be interesting to watch these two stratagies play out in the coming year.

Armadillo aerospace is a commercial company now. So maybe they think there is a market for a reusable sounding rocket using their existing technology.

I am sure they will continue their VTVL work as well.

I'll venture it's a combination of getting there fast, get paid for it, and learning about high mach flight with a more traditional rocket.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: simonbp on 01/16/2011 10:25 pm
I wonder why they have decided to go with the conventional "tube rocket" design now?

The conventional design is conventional for a good reason. Indeed, the link you had said it best: for the same propellant mass, less structural mass, and much less drag. For the high-altitude flights, they're going to need to go much faster than they're ever gone, and unless they want to loose a lot to drag, that means a tube-shaped rocket. Remember, drag force goes as velocity squared...
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Robotbeat on 01/17/2011 03:27 am
I wonder why they have decided to go with the conventional "tube rocket" design now?

The conventional design is conventional for a good reason. Indeed, the link you had said it best: for the same propellant mass, less structural mass, and much less drag. For the high-altitude flights, they're going to need to go much faster than they're ever gone, and unless they want to loose a lot to drag, that means a tube-shaped rocket. Remember, drag force goes as velocity squared...
Drag is proportional to Velocity squared times frontal area (usually) times a drag coefficient (depends on the shape). The last two parts are what determine the usual "rocket" shape. And drag coefficient changes once you go transonic then supersonic then hypersonic...
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Lars_J on 01/17/2011 03:32 am
It will be interesting to see what landing legs they put on this thing...
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: corrodedNut on 01/23/2011 04:44 pm
It will be interesting to see what landing legs they put on this thing...

None, apparently...but here's an eye-full of everything else:

http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Home/News?news_id=372
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Robotbeat on 01/23/2011 05:07 pm
It will be interesting to see what landing legs they put on this thing...

None, apparently...but here's an eye-full of everything else:

http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Home/News?news_id=372
Interesting... It's still supposed to be reusable, though.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: neilh on 01/23/2011 07:00 pm
Also, quite a few new Armadillo images were added yesterday to Flickr by "weldsman":

http://www.flickr.com/photos/29153024@N07/
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: mto on 03/01/2011 12:53 am
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfPDlV5FR4g (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfPDlV5FR4g)
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: mto on 03/02/2011 02:24 am
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu4ny06F0U8&feature=uploademail (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu4ny06F0U8&feature=uploademail)
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: kevin-rf on 03/02/2011 02:29 pm
In the slow mo, did something tangle, or is that a backup strap incase I assume some sort of shock absorber broke?
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: simonbp on 03/02/2011 06:47 pm
Thanks; it's really looking like a super-sized Estes rocket, complete with pop-off nose! :)

And welcome to the site!
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: mto on 03/02/2011 10:13 pm
And welcome to the site!
Thanks! I've been lurking for a while and enjoying the great content.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: zaitcev on 03/06/2011 08:37 pm
So, if Stig lands on its engine and smashes it by design, it clearly is not "reusable". Therefore, it is in the same class as SpaceLoft XL. Both of them launch from the same site. So, is one any better than other? Cheaper? Better payload environment?
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: hop on 03/06/2011 09:16 pm
So, if Stig lands on its engine and smashes it by design, it clearly is not "reusable".
It is not designed to smash the engine, and chambers and/or nozzles are replaceable.

See posts by Ben here http://spacefellowship.com/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=396&start=2265 and here http://spacefellowship.com/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=12017&start=15

In any case, the primary purpose is to gain experience going high and fast.

Armadillo recently posted a hold down firing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XjuakhbnH_s
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: yg1968 on 03/11/2011 03:21 pm
It's not a new video (7 months old) but I haven't seen this video posted in this thread yet:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOXAEBRR0dI

It has a cool video of an Armadillo capsule at the end.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: swampcat on 03/29/2011 07:35 am
Word from a-rocket is that AA will attempt a launch of  "Stig" to 100k' this weekend from Spaceport America.

Looking forward to the video.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: beancounter on 03/29/2011 07:50 am
Bit of a pity seeing AA revert back to 'traditional' designs but guess there's a reason for that.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: QuantumG on 03/29/2011 08:34 am
http://twitpic.com/4ehbld

Does that look traditional to you?
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: A_M_Swallow on 03/29/2011 11:49 pm
http://twitpic.com/4ehbld

Does that look traditional to you?


Yes.

A long thin tube with a point at one end with fins and nozzle at the other end.  The tradition arrow.

edit: spelling
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Jason1701 on 03/30/2011 12:04 am
Stig illustrates that beauty is certainly more than skin deep.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: beancounter on 03/30/2011 03:48 am
Stig illustrates that beauty is certainly more than skin deep.

So what's the point in building and flying a 'traditional' stick with an engine that has the capability to hover or restart?  What's the payload likely to be?  What's the max diameter of the payload?  They're questions that'll be answered eventually but my main question is why this particular development path?
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: A_M_Swallow on 03/30/2011 04:06 am
Stig illustrates that beauty is certainly more than skin deep.

So what's the point in building and flying a 'traditional' stick with an engine that has the capability to hover or restart?  What's the payload likely to be?  What's the max diameter of the payload?  They're questions that'll be answered eventually but my main question is why this particular development path?

It all depends on whether the Project M mini lunar lander is still alive.
http://robonaut.jsc.nasa.gov/future (http://robonaut.jsc.nasa.gov/future)
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: hop on 03/30/2011 04:06 am
They're questions that'll be answered eventually but my main question is why this particular development path?
As armadillo have clearly explained (http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Home/News?news_id=372), the primary purpose is to gain experience flying high and fast.

The appearance of the previous vehicles was also dictated by their intended missions...
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Zapp on 03/30/2011 08:04 am
They're questions that'll be answered eventually but my main question is why this particular development path?
As armadillo have clearly explained (http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Home/News?news_id=372), the primary purpose is to gain experience flying high and fast.

The appearance of the previous vehicles was also dictated by their intended missions...

"In the currently regulatory regime there is a significant gradation between a "class 3" vehicle that flies with less than 200,000 pound-seconds of impulse, under 150km, and unmanned, vs. one that exceeds that quantity of impulse, altitude, or is manned. Vehicles in the lower echelon can be operated under a waiver, whereas ones above require a launch license. The waiver is at least four times faster and easier to get than the license. That encourages us to learn as much as we can with a waivered vehicle before making the step up. "
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: kevin-rf on 03/30/2011 12:41 pm
With the Lox/Alcohol choice, kinda makes me nostalgic for Viking ;)

Add two more stages and ...

Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Zapp on 04/01/2011 06:04 am
New update

http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Home/News?news_id=374

yay
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Jason1701 on 04/01/2011 03:51 pm
That was a great update. I hope they have a perfect flight.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: simonbp on 04/01/2011 10:36 pm
And some sage advice from Carmack:

Quote
Essentially every single time you make a decision with "flight weight" as a deciding factor, you are making a mistake. Pushing for flying something instead of just doing test stand work is important, but you are many, many generations away from building some mass-ratio 8 vehicle where you are shaving every gram of weight. There is over an order of magnitude difference between what commercial orbital vehicles need to care about with respect to weight and what a new comer to experimental liquid rocketry should be caring about. A liquid fueled rocket can fly just fine with a mass ratio of 1.25.

Go for the solution that looks easiest, with almost no regard for performance. It will turn out not to be easy, but if you lowballed your expectations enough, you might actually succeed in making it fly, instead of winding up with a failed and abandoned project.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: RocketEconomist327 on 04/01/2011 10:46 pm
I love what 'Dillo is doing...

LOVE IT.

VR
RE327
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: swampcat on 04/02/2011 09:38 pm
AA's John Carmack reports from NM via aRocket:

Quote
Initial attempt was scrubbed at the last minute when an uninvited party (a hunter) entered the exclusion zone.

Second attempt had startup transient problems.  We continue to have startup problems in New Mexico that we don't have in Texas.

After cold soaking under the lox tank through these efforts, the batteries started to weaken, and we had to de-tank.

For reasons that aren't clear yet, WSMR closed the rest of our launch window today, and we may not get another opportunity until Tuesday, which sucks.  We'll have plenty of time to look at the startup data...
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Zapp on 04/04/2011 08:35 am
Neil Milburn's presentation at the suborbital vehicles session at the FAA conference back in February,link from spacetransportnews.


http://www.hobbyspace.com/nucleus/index.php?itemid=28366
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: bad_astra on 04/07/2011 03:25 am
With the latest delays from WSMR, it makes one wonder how the spaceport is going to be viable once it really gets underway, if there are constant delays from that range.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: hokieSpace05 on 04/09/2011 03:59 am
I'm guessing they haven't fixed their engine startup issues? Or they are still under launch restrictions?

Anyone know?
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: swampcat on 04/09/2011 11:22 am
I'm guessing they haven't fixed their engine startup issues? Or they are still under launch restrictions?

Anyone know?

They went back to Texas. WSMR apparently wouldn't clear their launch from SA in the time they had available. No word yet on what the problem was from WSRM's POV, the start-up issues or about another attempt.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: hop on 04/09/2011 08:16 pm
I'm guessing they haven't fixed their engine startup issues? Or they are still under launch restrictions?

Anyone know?

They went back to Texas. WSMR apparently wouldn't clear their launch from SA in the time they had available. No word yet on what the problem was from WSRM's POV, the start-up issues or about another attempt.
Via Jeff Foust on twitter: http://twitter.com/#!/jeff_foust/status/56801176024383489
Quote
Armadillo hopes to have new agreement with WSMR signed next week to permit Tube launch the following week. #sa11
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: swampcat on 04/10/2011 08:45 am
Via Jeff Foust on twitter: http://twitter.com/#!/jeff_foust/status/56801176024383489
Quote
Armadillo hopes to have new agreement with WSMR signed next week to permit Tube launch the following week. #sa11

Thanks for that.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: hop on 04/16/2011 06:43 pm
A few tidbits...
- The methane quad has a new home page: http://morpheuslander.jsc.nasa.gov/ (via http://twitter.com/MorpheusLander )
- Mod gets some sweet 50s style fins: http://twitpic.com/4lm807
- No news on when they can try to fly stig again: http://spacefellowship.com/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=396&start=2302
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: zaitcev on 04/18/2011 04:53 am
Reminds the discussion about the number of legs? Well, now we have 5.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Robotbeat on 04/19/2011 03:07 am
Reminds the discussion about the number of legs? Well, now we have 5.
And zero. Stig.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: hop on 05/03/2011 10:24 pm
Not really sure where this belongs, but it's an Armadillo vehicle so I'm putting it here. Project Morpheus is live streaming a test of their quad vehicle right now http://morpheuslander.jsc.nasa.gov/live/
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Robotbeat on 05/04/2011 02:16 am
I love the personification of the Morpheus vehicle. Very Japanese. ;)
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: mto on 05/13/2011 05:02 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTmlDmlVbFc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTmlDmlVbFc)
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Danderman on 05/13/2011 05:05 pm
That's why they have a tether.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: HammerD on 05/13/2011 05:11 pm
That's why they have a tether.


That is a nasty test. Looks like they really need alot of work on it.  They should thrust up the engine slower...
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: A_M_Swallow on 05/13/2011 10:31 pm
Test #4 on 4th May 2011 was better behaved.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_5nFTOiUt0&feature=player_embedded (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_5nFTOiUt0&feature=player_embedded)
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: NotGncDude on 05/15/2011 04:14 am
Still clearly unstable though. :(
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: NotGncDude on 05/15/2011 04:16 am
That's why they have a tether.


That is a nasty test. Looks like they really need alot of work on it.  They should thrust up the engine slower...

I saw in some forum that it was an electronics problem that caused the the engine to fail open. The flight software aborted instantly but couldn't shutdown. (disclaimer: I have not confirmed this)
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: hokieSpace05 on 05/21/2011 09:42 pm
I saw in some other forums that the tube rocket (aka Stig) may have had an "event".  Anyone here any other info?

comments section...
http://hobbyspace.com/nucleus/?itemid=29641
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: hop on 05/21/2011 11:50 pm
In other armadillo news, fin mod did a static fire: https://twitter.com/wikkit/status/72021780570714112

Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: mto on 06/06/2011 09:30 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyE0IKweVXE

A full throttle hold down test of the Armadillo Aerospace Mod rocket, nicknamed "Dalek", on 2011.05.26. This is approximately the burn time that the vehicle will have in free flight.

This represents around 180,000 lb*s of total impulse, near the upper end of what the FAA defines as a Class 3 Amateur Rocket. In the letter scale used in small rockets, it would be a 'T'.

The engine runs on liquid oxygen and denatured ethanol. This rocket will be flying payloads for the Nasa Commercial Reusable Suborbital Research program, aka CRuSR.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Jason1701 on 06/06/2011 09:56 pm
I'm looking forward to seeing this fly free. I just hope AA is more open with its activities than it was with the likely destruction of Stig.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Danderman on 06/07/2011 12:38 am
Is Dalek really that stable, or are tie down lines keeping it from swinging around?

 ???
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Robotbeat on 06/07/2011 12:39 am
Is Dalek really that stable, or are tie down lines keeping it from swinging around?

 ???
Tie-downs.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: mto on 06/07/2011 02:10 pm
... and now in 3D :D


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwaAuybiPbw
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Owen on 06/16/2011 01:40 pm
Tube Rocket and SuperMod Launch Report
http://armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Home/News?news_id=375
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Jason1701 on 06/16/2011 03:05 pm
Very sad reading. I wonder what's next for Armadillo; the update didn't say.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Gregori on 06/16/2011 03:52 pm
Not that sad reading. What would be sad is if there had been people on a vehicle like this before they knew about all it problems!!

Being able to weed out problems on launch vehicles through constant testing is going to lead to being able to produce highly reliable systems!! Its good that they know now rather than later.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: baldusi on 06/16/2011 04:06 pm
If they keep going, they will learn a lot. It's obvious that they have been applying a system of testing in actual flights, instead of thorough component testing. I still remember that Carmack blogged that he had to write down a checklist, after the first test of their lander. I would have expected them to have developed a checklist much earlier in their program. So I guess they are taking a strategy of erring on the side of lack of testing. And learning from errors. Similar to the original Russian approach. Incidentally, it's a technique that usually works very well with software.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Danderman on 06/16/2011 04:37 pm
Any launch is a learning experience, especially the bad ones.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Robotbeat on 06/16/2011 05:20 pm
Any launch is a learning experience, especially the bad ones.

When you have a reusable rocket (like both Supermod and Tube Rocket), much, much better to have a successful test flight than an unsuccessful one! Probably lost about $100,000 for each of the failures, maybe more. With an expendable rocket, you're going to blow that wad of cash on the test flight either way.

Sucks. Hopefully they do much better on their next launch.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: kkattula on 06/16/2011 05:34 pm
I'm looking forward to seeing this fly free. I just hope AA is more open with its activities than it was with the likely destruction of Stig.

How much more open do you want?  Flight reports and onboard video from both, with detailed fault analysis.

I greatly appreciate their willingness to share information with us.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: kkattula on 06/16/2011 05:41 pm
Any launch is a learning experience, especially the bad ones.

When you have a reusable rocket (like both Supermod and Tube Rocket), much, much better to have a successful test flight than an unsuccessful one! Probably lost about $100,000 for each of the failures, maybe more. With an expendable rocket, you're going to blow that wad of cash on the test flight either way.

Sucks. Hopefully they do much better on their next launch.

OTGH, Armadillo have always said they expect to crash occasionally.

There was a lot of new stuff in both these tests, and most of it worked pretty well. so I'm still pretty impressed.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Robotbeat on 06/16/2011 05:42 pm
I'm looking forward to seeing this fly free. I just hope AA is more open with its activities than it was with the likely destruction of Stig.

How much more open do you want?  Flight reports and onboard video from both, with detailed fault analysis.

I greatly appreciate their willingness to share information with us.
Seriously, this is incredibly detailed. Couldn't ask for more, with on-board video showing exactly the moment (in slow-motion, no less) of hardware failure (at least for the Mod). It is just not immediate enough for some people, I guess.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: savuporo on 06/16/2011 08:08 pm
A lot of completely new hardware on the first real high altitude high speed flights. im a bit puzzled.

roll vane in stig nose, airdrop parafoils ..

Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: simonbp on 06/16/2011 09:17 pm
Wow. Two launches, two brushfires.

The analysis is really goos and through, though, and shows that AA are less and less amateurs and more real rocketeers...

Quote
The day before the launch is not the ideal day to complete engineering of any system on the rocket, unless absolutely necessary.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: jongoff on 06/17/2011 12:31 am
Any launch is a learning experience, especially the bad ones.

When you have a reusable rocket (like both Supermod and Tube Rocket), much, much better to have a successful test flight than an unsuccessful one! Probably lost about $100,000 for each of the failures, maybe more. With an expendable rocket, you're going to blow that wad of cash on the test flight either way.

Sucks. Hopefully they do much better on their next launch.

Quite a bit more than $100k.  John said that Stig was around the price of a new Ferrari.  When you count in fully-burdened labor costs for 8 people, the labor quickly starts dominating.

~Jon
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: zaitcev on 06/17/2011 08:02 pm
I wish it were more of fly a little, test a little, and not as much of all-out effort.

As far as openness is concerned, they could've at least twittered something about a crash. They are under no obligation to provide us entertainment, so nobody can expect them release any reports or whatnot, except to customers. This means, by the way, if there is no immediate PR, we're not likely to know if a flight has even taken place.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Robotbeat on 06/17/2011 08:06 pm
I wish it were more of fly a little, test a little, and not as much of all-out effort.

As far as openness is concerned, they could've at least twittered something about a crash. They are under no obligation to provide us entertainment, so nobody can expect them release any reports or whatnot, except to customers. This means, by the way, if there is no immediate PR, we're not likely to know if a flight has even taken place.
Are you on the ARocket mailing list? That is the best place for news from folks like Armadillo, etc. You can ask them questions, and they may well answer.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: mr. mark on 06/17/2011 08:28 pm
My biggest problem with Armadillo is their lack of marketing a complete vehicle and sticking with the design. To the outside public both them and Masten seem to be mainly a research platform. Compare that to Spacex,Orbital and Virgin Galactic/Scaled that out of the chute choose to research and fly their vehicles completed Falcon1&9, Taurus 2 and SS2.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: hop on 06/17/2011 08:44 pm
My biggest problem with Armadillo is their lack of marketing a complete vehicle and sticking with the design.
You mean other than a complete turnkey propulsion system for the Rocket Racing league ? Or a turnkey quad for project Morpheus ?

Although I too am sometimes bemused by Armadillos switching between different vehicle designs, a fair bit of this has actually been driven by customers and other outside forces like the LLC.

Quote
Compare that to Spacex,Orbital and Virgin Galactic/Scaled that out of the chute choose to research and fly their vehicles completed Falcon1&9, Taurus 2 and SS2.
Completely different companies with different goals. Also, SpaceX went through quite a few configuration changes...
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Robotbeat on 06/17/2011 09:00 pm
Agreed. Also, Armadillo and Masten are going through a lot of revisions because they are trying to develop a totally reusable orbital system while finding business along the way. They don't have enough resources to do an all-up spacecraft development program, like Orbital, SpaceX, and Virgin. They also don't have a short-term end-goal like Virgin does.


BTW, Armadillo Aerospace has built an incredible number of unique liquid rocket engines. Just read their past news posts.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: NotGncDude on 06/19/2011 05:21 am
Any launch is a learning experience, especially the bad ones.

When you have a reusable rocket (like both Supermod and Tube Rocket), much, much better to have a successful test flight than an unsuccessful one! Probably lost about $100,000 for each of the failures, maybe more. With an expendable rocket, you're going to blow that wad of cash on the test flight either way.

Sucks. Hopefully they do much better on their next launch.

Indeed.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: kkattula on 06/19/2011 05:14 pm
Don't forget they did a lot of tie down and hover tests on both these vehicles. Much more like flights than traditional static tests.  So these two tests were more like envelope expansion, than all up first flights.

Still sucks though.  :(

Better luck next time!
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: A_M_Swallow on 10/03/2011 12:55 am
Armadillo is testing its latest engine.

Armadillo CH4K LOX/Methane rocket engine test for Nasa Project Morpheus
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcDSn_qIwrM&feature=digest_refresh_sun (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcDSn_qIwrM&feature=digest_refresh_sun)

"A liquid oxygen/liquid methane engine under development for Nasa's Project Morpheus. This 4000lb-force engine was designed, built, and tested by Armadillo Aerospace. It's a pressure-fed engine with a pintle injector of particularly low pressure drop, with replaceable injector elements for tuning mixing behavior.

This firing was on 21 September 2011.
"
The engine is air restartable.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Cinder on 10/03/2011 10:31 am
What's going on near the middle of the bottom hemisphere of the tank?  Right around seven seconds into the video.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Hauerg on 10/03/2011 11:26 am
What's going on near the middle of the bottom hemisphere of the tank?  Right around seven seconds into the video.
Ice coming off the tank due to vibrations, methinks.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: baldusi on 10/03/2011 01:17 pm
That explosion before the start, would it means it pyrotechnically started?
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Robotbeat on 10/03/2011 03:20 pm
That explosion before the start, would it means it pyrotechnically started?
I'm pretty sure it's not. That doesn't fit with Armadillo Aerospace's usual concept of operations.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: ugordan on 10/03/2011 03:26 pm
I wouldn't classify that as an *explosion* by any stretch.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: savuporo on 11/03/2011 08:39 pm
Time to bump this thread just a little, Armadillos seem to put their rocket pieces together again and come out with much longer version
http://hobbyspace.com/nucleus/index.php?itemid=33600

Wonder if John Carmack is actively back in the development cycle at AA at all, with id Software having shipped their latest creation recently.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Jason1701 on 11/06/2011 03:10 am
Stig static test.

http://twitpic.com/7b5xqd
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: zaitcev on 11/08/2011 03:58 am
Story by an apparent witness:
 http://www.pilotsofamerica.com/forum/showpost.php?p=799591&postcount=29

What was that white-white-red beacon though? Going to remember that just in case.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: mto on 11/23/2011 02:46 am
A couple of short tube rocket flight tests and a tank burst test

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIg9PbZ32QU (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIg9PbZ32QU)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovZpfcLS7hA (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovZpfcLS7hA)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2R6HyMwFxU (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2R6HyMwFxU)
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Confusador on 12/06/2011 07:28 pm
Apparently Armadillo had a successful test over the weekend.

Quote
Armadillo Aerospace Launches Successfully from Spaceport America    
 (http://www.spaceportamerica.com/news/press-releases/408-armadillo-aerospace-launches-successfully-from-spaceport-america.html)
PRESS RELEASE

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

DECEMBER 6, 2011

Armadillo Aerospace Launches Successfully from Spaceport America

UPHAM, NM – New Mexico Spaceport Authority (NMSA) officials announced today a successful launch over the weekend of an advanced sounding rocket designed and built by Armadillo Aerospace. The launch took place from Spaceport America's vertical launch complex on Sun., Dec. 4. The test flight was a non-public, unpublished event at the request of Armadillo Aerospace, as the company is testing proprietary advanced launch technologies.

Saturday’s Armadillo launch successfully lifted off at approximately 11:00 a.m. (MST), which was within the dedicated, five-hour launch window, and reached its projected sub-orbital altitude of 124,000 feet (37.7 km).

“This successful test of our “STIG A” reusable sub-orbital rocket technology represents major progress for the Armadillo Aerospace flight test program,” said Neil Milburn, Vice President of Program Management at Armadillo Aerospace. “The flight successfully demonstrated many of the technologies that we need for our manned sub-orbital program.” Armadillo Aerospace is a leading developer of reusable rocket-powered vehicles and plans to provide a platform for civilian access to suborbital space via its partnership with Space Adventures, Ltd.

“Spaceport America has been an ideal launch facility for this kind of vehicle R&D testing activity,” said John Carmack, President and CTO of Armadillo Aerospace.

The vehicle housed a scientific payload as well. The experiment was designed, built, tested, integrated, and performed by a team of undergraduate students at the School of Aeronautics and Astronautics in the College of Engineering at Purdue University. The experiment studied a liquid and gas flow process that is sensitive to the gravity and acceleration levels encountered during spaceflight.

The latest launch represents yet another successful experience at Spaceport America, the nation’s first purpose-built commercial spaceport. “We are extremely pleased to support Armadillo Aerospace as they conduct their high altitude vehicle flight testing, and look forward to hosting their NASA-funded suborbital research launches. Spaceport America continues to set the precedent for safe, efficient, effective service for commercial spaceflight customers,” said NMSA Executive Director Christine Anderson. This Armadillo Aerospace launch marks the thirteenth vertical launch test from the Spaceport America Vertical Launch Complex since 2006.

A couple of pics from Twitter:
http://twitpic.com/7pf5um (http://twitpic.com/7pf5um)
http://twitpic.com/7pf4y4 (http://twitpic.com/7pf4y4)

And a video:
Streaming video footage of the launch is available on YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rz-wtnVUAEk)
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Robotbeat on 12/06/2011 08:04 pm
Congratulations! :)
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: mmeijeri on 12/06/2011 08:43 pm
Almost the same altitude as Blue Origin, but successfully this time!
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Owen on 12/06/2011 09:08 pm
Another video with the descent

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNtR5HIL3FM
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Jason1701 on 12/06/2011 09:15 pm
Great news! They were actually several times as high as Blue Origin.

Anyone know what Armadillo's highest altitude was before this?
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: sandrot on 12/06/2011 09:28 pm
Oops!
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: mmeijeri on 12/06/2011 09:30 pm
Great news! They were actually several times as high as Blue Origin.

The Blue Origin site says they reached 45,000 ft:

Successful Short Hop, Setback, and Next Vehicle (http://www.blueorigin.com/updates/updates-2011-09-02-Successful-Short-Hop-Setback-and-Next-Vehicle.html)

Working their way toward the Karman line...

EDIT: Oops, Armadillo reached 137,500 ft, which is indeed several times as high. Even more impressive!
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Robotbeat on 12/06/2011 09:33 pm
You can see some red plastic melting from aeroheating dribbling on the camera lens/cover.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Apollo-phill on 12/06/2011 09:45 pm
Congrats to Armadillo from a supporter

Just love those last few seconds in video showing the launch in slow-motion - great

A-P
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Seer on 12/06/2011 10:42 pm
You did it, congratulations. Dizzy now.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Rocket Science on 12/06/2011 11:08 pm
Epic video! Big time “October Sky” moment, congrats to everyone!!  :)
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: douglas100 on 12/06/2011 11:12 pm
Excellent!

I wonder if anyone knows whether there is any roll control on this vehicle?
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Robotbeat on 12/06/2011 11:32 pm
Excellent!

I wonder if anyone knows whether there is any roll control on this vehicle?
Doubtful. You don't need it really, especially with fins for passive roll limiting.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: A_M_Swallow on 12/06/2011 11:38 pm
Well done.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Lars_J on 12/06/2011 11:40 pm
Excellent!

I wonder if anyone knows whether there is any roll control on this vehicle?
Doubtful. You don't need it really, especially with fins for passive roll limiting.

I have no doubts that better roll control will be added for future flights.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Robotbeat on 12/06/2011 11:52 pm
Excellent!

I wonder if anyone knows whether there is any roll control on this vehicle?
Doubtful. You don't need it really, especially with fins for passive roll limiting.

I have no doubts that better roll control will be added for future flights.
Well, eventually... But remember that there are full orbital flights which don't even have roll control for some of the stages.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: billh on 12/07/2011 01:09 am
Excellent!

I wonder if anyone knows whether there is any roll control on this vehicle?
There are two tiny roll control fins about two thirds of the way up the vehicle. Armadillo has talked about them before in various places. Clearly they're still working out the bugs.  :)
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: zaitcev on 12/07/2011 02:36 am
There are two tiny roll control fins about two thirds of the way up the vehicle. Armadillo has talked about them before in various places.
Similar roll control fins are found at many guided missiles; in many cases they are used for directional control as well: the missile is given a steady rotation, and the fins are moved together as appropriate to the phase of the spin. Also, Angara's URM-1 (flown twice in KSLV-1) includes roll control fins, but they are attached at the tail compartment. From what I heard from military missile developers, a care must be taken not to stall these control surfaces by excessive angle.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Jason1701 on 12/07/2011 06:40 am
Great news! They were actually several times as high as Blue Origin.

The Blue Origin site says they reached 45,000 ft:

Successful Short Hop, Setback, and Next Vehicle (http://www.blueorigin.com/updates/updates-2011-09-02-Successful-Short-Hop-Setback-and-Next-Vehicle.html)

Working their way toward the Karman line...

EDIT: Oops, Armadillo reach 137,500 ft, which is indeed several times as high. Even more impressive!

It's never been clear whether BO's vehicle actually blew up at 45k or if that's just where they terminated the thrust.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: david1971 on 12/07/2011 07:08 am
http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Home/News?news_id=376

"Armadillo is expecting to fly over 100,000' next month, and I am not trivializing any aspect of the effort. If we get the vehicle back intact, we ahould be attempting a 100km flight on the next trip."
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Robotbeat on 12/07/2011 03:45 pm
http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Home/News?news_id=376

"Armadillo is expecting to fly over 100,000' next month, and I am not trivializing any aspect of the effort. If we get the vehicle back intact, we ahould be attempting a 100km flight on the next trip."
The rocket did get banged up (parachute only partially deployed, I believe). Don't know if they'll go to 100km.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Moe Grills on 12/07/2011 07:17 pm
http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Home/News?news_id=376

"Armadillo is expecting to fly over 100,000' next month, and I am not trivializing any aspect of the effort. If we get the vehicle back intact, we ahould be attempting a 100km flight on the next trip."

You sound like an insider.
So did the STIG actually reach 137,500 ft altitude?

If so - damaged or not upon return (things can be fixed; or improved copies can be made) - you have reached a point where I'm considering asking the moderator of this thread to move Armadillo Aerospace to the ("Other Launchers" webpage) suborbital-flight thread.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: NotGncDude on 12/13/2011 05:13 am
Great news! They were actually several times as high as Blue Origin.

The Blue Origin site says they reached 45,000 ft:

Successful Short Hop, Setback, and Next Vehicle (http://www.blueorigin.com/updates/updates-2011-09-02-Successful-Short-Hop-Setback-and-Next-Vehicle.html)

Working their way toward the Karman line...

EDIT: Oops, Armadillo reach 137,500 ft, which is indeed several times as high. Even more impressive!

It's never been clear whether BO's vehicle actually blew up at 45k or if that's just where they terminated the thrust.

These two rockets are very different beasts so I would not compare them (even though to I am not terribly impressed by Blue Origin's performance to date). STIG is closer to a sounding rocket and these fly to 500+ km regularly.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: savuporo on 12/13/2011 03:26 pm
http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Home/News?news_id=376

"Armadillo is expecting to fly over 100,000' next month, and I am not trivializing any aspect of the effort. If we get the vehicle back intact, we ahould be attempting a 100km flight on the next trip."

You sound like an insider.
So did the STIG actually reach 137,500 ft altitude?

If so - damaged or not upon return (things can be fixed; or improved copies can be made) - you have reached a point where I'm considering asking the moderator of this thread to move Armadillo Aerospace to the ("Other Launchers" webpage) suborbital-flight thread.

John Carmack posts updates now and then to the ARocket list. ( and sometimes twitter )

According to hist latest post, they did get GPS readings up almost to a 140kft altitude. Apparently the rocket was "pretty banged up" after landing, due to the main parachute rip.
They are also working on a full update for their website.

EDIT: oh and yes this was a sort of actual suborbital launch, they flew a small payload (http://www.lcsun-news.com/las_cruces-news/ci_19485995)
Quote
The vehicle housed a scientific payload as well. The experiment was designed, built, tested, integrated, and performed by a team of undergraduate students at the School of Aeronautics and Astronautics in the College of Engineering at Purdue University. The experiment studied a liquid and gas flow process that is sensitive to the gravity and acceleration levels encountered during spaceflight.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Robotbeat on 12/13/2011 03:31 pm
I'd prefer this thread stay here instead of moving to the "Other Launchers" thread way at the bottom.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: PMN1 on 12/19/2011 08:05 pm
Wonder if Top Gear have heard where the STIG has gone?
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: asdyt on 12/23/2011 12:32 pm
Stiga launch report.
http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Home/News?news_id=377 (http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Home/News?news_id=377)
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: tigerade on 12/23/2011 12:50 pm
Stiga launch report.
http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Home/News?news_id=377 (http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Home/News?news_id=377)

Good read.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Lars_J on 12/23/2011 04:59 pm
Yep, and here's the relevant section about the roll issue:
Quote
As you can see in the video, the rocket wobbled at around cloud level, which was a combination of atmospheric turbulence combined with the rocket going through the transonic regime. The roll control vanes high on the rocket had good authority on the roll rate, but experienced a control inversion from 460-480m/s. That control inversion, likely from a shockwave reflecting off the cable fairing, meant that as the vanes moved to reduce the roll they actually increased it.

Given unexpectedly increased roll control in the wrong direction the rocket did a snap roll, which increased the roll rate beyond the software's preset roll rate limit. Upon exceeding that limit, the rocket went into a preprogrammed mode to maximize the burn by locking the roll vanes and engine gimbal to center. The roll rate dropped and Stiga continued on unguided, watching the GPS to ensure that it was not exceeding the preset maximum range.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Robotbeat on 12/23/2011 06:07 pm
Really great report... This part was interesting:
"The rocket's position over the pad had been held well; at 18,000 feet above launch pad the rocket was only thirty feet away from being perfectly above the pad. However, once the gimbal was locked the vehicle began a slow arc over. 38.5 seconds into the burn, when the vehicle hit the maximum range of 7km, the engine was shut down and the vehicle was left to coast to apogee. A full burn would have been closer to 50 seconds."

Within 30 feet of the launch pad at 18,000 feet... that's pretty good!

Also, looks like they could go to the Karman Line on their next flight which could be pretty soon, since it sounds like most of the rocket, as a function of how hard it is to replace, is still usable or reparable for the next flight, even though they had a hard landing. Really cool. Hope they can launch again soon.

It's interesting that they could send commands as it was coming down, including commanding a dump of the LOx.

I do wonder if they've considered a different design of a ballute, such as one filled via the pressurant gas (should be useful at lower air densities).
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: go4mars on 12/23/2011 09:03 pm
I do wonder if they've considered a different design of a ballute, such as one filled via the pressurant gas (should be useful at lower air densities).
"The ballute isn't worth fixing, but we have a new design in progress. We're working with some folks who are interested in ballute research, and hopefully will be able to trade expertise on supersonic decelerators for the data created by actually flying them."

Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Moe Grills on 12/23/2011 09:47 pm
Yep, and here's the relevant section about the roll issue:
Quote
As you can see in the video, the rocket wobbled at around cloud level, which was a combination of atmospheric turbulence combined with the rocket going through the transonic regime. The roll control vanes high on the rocket had good authority on the roll rate, but experienced a control inversion from 460-480m/s. That control inversion, likely from a shockwave reflecting off the cable fairing, meant that as the vanes moved to reduce the roll they actually increased it.

Given unexpectedly increased roll control in the wrong direction the rocket did a snap roll, which increased the roll rate beyond the software's preset roll rate limit. Upon exceeding that limit, the rocket went into a preprogrammed mode to maximize the burn by locking the roll vanes and engine gimbal to center. The roll rate dropped and Stiga continued on unguided, watching the GPS to ensure that it was not exceeding the preset maximum range.

That reminds me of what those 'lucky' test-pilots, who survived, reported
when prior to Chuck Yeager's attempt they told that when their high-speed aircraft entered the transonic zone, approaching Mach-1,
their aircraft controls did not respond in ways they expected; even
doing the opposite of what the controls were supposed to do.


As for atmospheric turbulence? Winds? I guess any agency, group or individual attempting to launch high-altitude rockets will never get away from the need of using meteorological sounding-balloons before any viable launch attempt.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: douglas100 on 12/23/2011 10:35 pm
Great stuff, and interesting information about the roll control that I asked about earlier.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Robotbeat on 01/18/2012 05:13 am
https://twitter.com/#!/ID_AA_Carmack/status/158385393862066177/photo/1
Quote
Jan 14, 2012
ID_AA_Carmack
John Carmack
Nozzle extension for better high altitude performance on next flight pic.twitter.com/IX3EUXjB
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: simonbp on 01/18/2012 02:43 pm
I remember (6+ years ago), Carmack really talking up a nozzleless rocket as the Next Big Thing. Now, they're putting nozzle extensions on their rockets... ;)
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: JohnFornaro on 01/19/2012 02:33 pm
https://twitter.com/#!/ID_AA_Carmack/status/158385393862066177/photo/1
Quote
Jan 14, 2012
ID_AA_Carmack
John Carmack
Nozzle extension for better high altitude performance on next flight pic.twitter.com/IX3EUXjB

That looks to be a conical nozzle.  I thought that profile wasn't the most efficient.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: nacnud on 01/19/2012 02:43 pm
It isn't but is probably better than no extension.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: simonbp on 01/19/2012 02:59 pm
The optimal nozzle is closer to a hyperboloid, but since in that case the part that would be non-conical is the part of the nozzle that's already there, they can't really change it. So, working with what they had, the conical extension makes by far the most amount of sense. If they were to machine a new altitude engine from scratch, then a hyperboloid nozzle would make sense (and have slightly higher thrust and Isp than the cone).
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Robotbeat on 01/19/2012 03:05 pm
The optimal nozzle is closer to a hyperboloid, but since in that case the part that would be non-conical is the part of the nozzle that's already there, they can't really change it. So, working with what they had, the conical extension makes by far the most amount of sense. If they were to machine a new altitude engine from scratch, then a hyperboloid nozzle would make sense (and have slightly higher thrust and Isp than the cone).
Hyperboloid near the throat, maybe, but the rest optimal when it is closer to a paraboloid.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: JohnFornaro on 01/19/2012 05:19 pm
I too thought parabloid was best.  Back to Sutton this evening for a re-read.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: simonbp on 01/20/2012 01:55 am
A parabola is just a hyperbola with eccentricity equal to unity.

At any rate, because of throat effects and the exhaust heating the nozzle (thus causing non-adiabatic expansion), the actual optimal shape is not a perfect parabola, but more closely approximated by narrower hyperbola. IIRC, a parabola is only optimal for an infinitely small throat and perfectly adiabatic exhaust.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Robotbeat on 01/21/2012 03:45 am
@wikkit
Ben Brockert
"We did a full engine burn on the Armadillo Stiga again today, here's one photo from that. twitpic.com/89o1lt "
"Six steel cables in pairs anchored to three 1-yard concrete blocks buried in the ground."
"The vehicle is also being held up by a crane truck, by the way. It's not hovering at the end of the cables or anything."

(BTW, I believe that the hyperboloid-at-the-parabolic-limit-for-the-rest-of-the-nozzle and the hyperboloid-at-the-throat are revolved around different axes, so they aren't the same thing, though the fundamental 2d shape is, of course, a conic section.)
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Robotbeat on 01/29/2012 06:29 am
Another successful (mostly?) Stiga launch!

From Jeff Foust on twitter about 7 hours ago:
http://twitter.com/#!/jeff_foust

"Just got a press release from the NM Spaceport Authority that Armadillo Aerospace did another STIG-A test flight today at Spaceport America.
...
According to the release, "the rocket was successfully retrieved after a hard landing" in the planned recovery zone.
...
Take[off] was successful according to the release and rocket reached 137,000 ft. However, its recovery system "did not function properly"."
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: QuantumG on 01/29/2012 06:32 am
"Parachutes sucks" - John Carmack, before changing his mind :)
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Robotbeat on 01/29/2012 07:02 am
"Parachutes sucks" - John Carmack, before changing his mind :)

Maybe early-Carmack was right?

(personally, I just think that recovery mechanisms are hard... think of how long it took Armadillo to get to this point of flying to over 100,000 feet successfully twice... getting the recovery system to work reliably may take a while).
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: QuantumG on 01/29/2012 07:57 am
Maybe early-Carmack was right?

:)

Quote
(personally, I just think that recovery mechanisms are hard... think of how long it took Armadillo to get to this point of flying to over 100,000 feet successfully twice... getting the recovery system to work reliably may take a while).

Yeah, they had a great recovery system.. legs and fuel.. but they decided they needed to go with parachutes and set that aside. Last I heard, the suborbital space tourism vehicle they're working on for Space Adventures is going to use parachutes too. (!)
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: Robotbeat on 01/30/2012 07:02 am
Maybe early-Carmack was right?

:)

Quote
(personally, I just think that recovery mechanisms are hard... think of how long it took Armadillo to get to this point of flying to over 100,000 feet successfully twice... getting the recovery system to work reliably may take a while).

Yeah, they had a great recovery system.. legs and fuel.. but they decided they needed to go with parachutes and set that aside. Last I heard, the suborbital space tourism vehicle they're working on for Space Adventures is going to use parachutes too. (!)
Yeah, it's like someone switched the brains of Musk and Carmack about a year or two ago. (Carmack abandoned vertical landing and is taking up parachutes... Musk abandoned parachutes and is taking up vertical landing.)
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: dcporter on 01/30/2012 11:53 am
Yeah, it's like someone switched the brains of Musk and Carmack about a year or two ago. (Carmack abandoned vertical landing and is taking up parachutes... Musk abandoned parachutes and is taking up vertical landing.)
Parachutes apparently don't work from orbit or near-orbit, while VTVL seems complicated, expensive to engineer, and overkill for suborbital trips. Sounds to me like Carmack woke up to economic realities, and Musk woke up to physical ones. =)
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: ugordan on 01/30/2012 12:03 pm
Twin sonic booms from Stiga reentry:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifAaMZcr2v4
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Chris Bergin on 01/30/2012 12:06 pm
Changed the thread title to something better.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: MikeMelga on 01/30/2012 02:58 pm
Yeah, it's like someone switched the brains of Musk and Carmack about a year or two ago. (Carmack abandoned vertical landing and is taking up parachutes... Musk abandoned parachutes and is taking up vertical landing.)
Parachutes apparently don't work from orbit or near-orbit, while VTVL seems complicated, expensive to engineer, and overkill for suborbital trips. Sounds to me like Carmack woke up to economic realities, and Musk woke up to physical ones. =)
Also I think there is a limit on the weight you can put on parachutes. A parachute being opened would create a massive instant deceleration that would break any aramid/vectran lines. Physic properties of materials are not scalable...

I guess they would have to be multi stage parachutes (small-medium-big), which would require very thick aramid lines which would have problems in folding. Then the points of attachment would have to be massively reinforced.
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: savuporo on 01/30/2012 03:18 pm
Parachutes apparently don't work from orbit or near-orbit, while VTVL seems complicated, expensive to engineer, and overkill for suborbital trips. Sounds to me like Carmack woke up to economic realities, and Musk woke up to physical ones. =)
One of the stated goals of building a suborbital VTVL was to achieve massively quick turnaround - gas and go, and thus inherently very high flight rate. Flight rate dominates the economics of any launch vehicle ( or aircraft, for that matter )

I am a big fan of parachutes for individual backup, being a skydiver myself. Parachutes as primary vehicle recovery mechanism .. its fine for a prototype or two, but for operational vehicles , just say no.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Robotbeat on 02/02/2012 11:12 pm
Apparently, Stig-A III actually made it nearly to the Karman Line! They estimate real peak altitude at somewhere between 75-95km (EDIT:That's what Carmack said on ARocket.... the SpacePortAmerica press release says ~82km).
http://www.spaceportamerica.com/news/press-releases/420-armadillo-aerospace-launches-their-third-stig-a-rocket-from-spaceport-america.html


Amazing pictures from nearly the Karman Line: http://www.spaceportamerica.com/press-access.html Haven't had the chance to see the footage.

(the bright orange ballute can also be seen... the enormous amounts of UV up there must make the fluorescent material glow like crazy!)
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: QuantumG on 02/02/2012 11:20 pm
(the bright orange ballute can also be seen... the enormous amounts of UV up there must make the fluorescent material glow like crazy!)

Rave... in... space!!
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: tigerade on 02/02/2012 11:28 pm


Amazing pictures from nearly the Karman Line: http://www.spaceportamerica.com/press-access.html Haven't had the chance to see the footage.

Fantastic pictures.  :)  Good work Armadillo.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Moe Grills on 02/03/2012 08:18 pm
Apparently, Stig-A III actually made it nearly to the Karman Line! They estimate real peak altitude at somewhere between 75-95km (EDIT:That's what Carmack said on ARocket.... the SpacePortAmerica press release says ~82km).

   ;D

82 Km (51+ miles)? Hey! I'm not complaining! They used to give
X-15 test-pilots their astronaut-wings for matching and passing that altitude.

Definition of space is still arbitrary. Ask most people, you'll get different answers.  If you have a good vacuum-pump and bell jar at home, the best vacuum you can obtain is far inferior to the hard vacuum at 80km.

A few more launches like these, with steady improvements continuing,
then John Carmack can put up an "OPEN FOR BUSINESS" sign in a year or two.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: kkattula on 02/04/2012 07:29 am
...A few more launches like these, with steady improvements continuing,
then John Carmack can put up an "OPEN FOR BUSINESS" sign in a year or two.

They've already done paid work for NASA and DoD, not to mention all the Rocket Racing League stuff.  :)
Title: Re: New Update Posted at Armadillo Aerospace
Post by: kkattula on 02/04/2012 07:54 am
Yeah, it's like someone switched the brains of Musk and Carmack about a year or two ago. (Carmack abandoned vertical landing and is taking up parachutes... Musk abandoned parachutes and is taking up vertical landing.)

The stated purpose of Stig was to let them initially explore high altitude and high velocity flight without trying to do VTVL at the same time.

It's a reasonable enough approach; first learn how to do VTVL RLV, next learn how to go high & fast, lastly put them together.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: simonbp on 02/04/2012 07:58 pm
And, it should be said, Stig doesn't use conventional parachutes either, but rather a ballute (with which they have have limited success).
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Robotbeat on 02/05/2012 05:35 am
And, it should be said, Stig doesn't use conventional parachutes either, but rather a ballute (with which they have have limited success).
Stig also uses a regular parachute (well, I believe it's a steerable ram-air parachute... it was for the first flight).
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Owen on 02/22/2012 06:31 pm
Update on the latest flight
http://armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Home/News?news_id=378

Video, with the impact at the end.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aw11NFz14sA
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Robotbeat on 02/22/2012 06:50 pm
Update on the latest flight
http://armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Home/News?news_id=378

Video, with the impact at the end.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aw11NFz14sA
Ouch... "Shovel recovery"... but they forgot the shovel! :D

Interesting that this second flight of Stiga used much of the same hardware (most?) as flew on the previous flight.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: baldusi on 02/22/2012 06:58 pm
Quote
Next up for Armadillo is a larger diameter tube rocket, meant to carry significant payload to 125km.
So, Stig-B will have a wider body. I guess it will also have a more powerful engine?
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Robotbeat on 02/22/2012 07:46 pm
Quote
Next up for Armadillo is a larger diameter tube rocket, meant to carry significant payload to 125km.
So, Stig-B will have a wider body. I guess it will also have a more powerful engine?
Not necessarily... Did you see how fast Stiga shot off the rocket pad? I suspect that because of Armadillo's VTVL experience, they could make a rocket with quite a low T/W at lift-off and still get it to work. Stiga had much higher T/W than Stig.

That said, it's not necessarily that hard for them to make another rocket engine. They've made countless different liquid rocket engines.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: savuporo on 02/22/2012 09:54 pm
Quote
The GPS was just being finicky, it didn't have anything physically wrong with it. It remains an item that has been less reliable at the spaceport than at home base;
..
Quote
Telemetry was lost above 19.4km, which was unsurprising as the telemetry had not worked at full range during an aircraft-based test.

... this is just all question marks to me. Why would one fly with known issues like the GPS ? Why would you fly without full telemetry for the full flight ?
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Robotbeat on 02/22/2012 10:01 pm
Quote
The GPS was just being finicky, it didn't have anything physically wrong with it. It remains an item that has been less reliable at the spaceport than at home base;
..
Quote
Telemetry was lost above 19.4km, which was unsurprising as the telemetry had not worked at full range during an aircraft-based test.

... this is just all question marks to me. Why would one fly with known issues like the GPS ? Why would you fly without full telemetry for the full flight ?
GPS didn't have any effect on the outcome of the flight, and they knew that.

A perfect vehicle in perfect conditions costs an infinite amount of money and has an infinitely long schedule.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: QuantumG on 02/22/2012 10:03 pm
Good answer Robobeat.. and without the selective editing:

Quote
The GPS was just being finicky, it didn't have anything physically wrong with it. It remains an item that has been less reliable at the spaceport than at home base; for the next rocket we will be switching back to an independent GPS unit rather than the current integrated IMU/GPS.

It's called learning.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: savuporo on 02/22/2012 10:42 pm

It's called learning.


No question. I bet the learning would be more effective with full instrumentation and data stream back intact though.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: QuantumG on 02/22/2012 10:50 pm
No question. I bet the learning would be more effective with full instrumentation and data stream back intact though.

They're still learning how to do that. (I thought that was clear).
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: dcporter on 02/23/2012 03:37 pm
No question. I bet the learning would be more effective with full instrumentation and data stream back intact though.

They are presently learning how to get full instrumentation and to stream data back intact.

Edit: What QG said.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Moe Grills on 02/23/2012 05:34 pm
  They're edging up.
   First, 82; now 95 Km altitude.

  But I'm interested in the microgravity time interval.
 I suspect that this rocket obtained close to 200 seconds of microgravity.

  Microgravity is a valuable commodity; just ask scientists and researchers who are willing to shell out bucks to obtain it.

Now that AA is virtually in competition, or soon will be, with UP Aerospace, how much will they charge for payloads to be sent up?

  Suppose AA charges 10 dollars per kilogram per-second of microgravity; to send up a 10 kilogram payload, for 200 seconds of microgravity,  the
estimated scale would result in a customer being required to pay
$20,000 to AA.
   Am I close to the correct estimate?
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Robotbeat on 02/23/2012 05:52 pm
  They're edging up.
   First, 82; now 95 Km altitude.

  But I'm interested in the microgravity time interval.
 I suspect that this rocket obtained close to 200 seconds of microgravity.

  Microgravity is a valuable commodity; just ask scientists and researchers who are willing to shell out bucks to obtain it.

Now that AA is virtually in competition, or soon will be, with UP Aerospace, how much will they charge for payloads to be sent up?

  Suppose AA charges 10 dollars per kilogram per-second of microgravity; to send up a 10 kilogram payload, for 200 seconds of microgravity,  the
estimated scale would result in a customer being required to pay
$20,000 to AA.
   Am I close to the correct estimate?
Not now. They haven't got recoverability and reusability down yet, but they definitely plan to... Small, expendable, liquid sounding rockets are expensive... Hundreds of thousands of dollars. They get paid more for recoverability and it costs them a heck of a lot less if they're reusable, so they are not yet at the point where they are profitable by just taking payloads. (If they were to go for just expendable sounding rockets, solids are probably a better way to go.) That said, Stiga was flown twice (it was rebuilt, many or even most parts by cost were reused).
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: baldusi on 02/23/2012 06:12 pm
Let's not forget Masten.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: vulture4 on 03/08/2012 01:42 am
I have heard there was a period of collaboration between Armadillo and JSC, which was putting together a small VTVL test vehicle. But then talk of collaboration seemed to fade away. Are they still working together?
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: docmordrid on 03/08/2012 02:02 am
http://morpheuslander.jsc.nasa.gov/
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Solo on 03/11/2012 02:10 am
So, there's a physicist in my department at the University of Wisconsin - Madison who does research using an x-ray telescope lofted by a Black Brant V.  Their earlier flights had 240s of microgravity, with a 26 kg payload.  They had major concerns with the high vibration environment of the solid motors on the Brant.  I think that Armadillo Aerospace would be competitive.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: ceauke on 06/27/2012 03:04 pm
Hi guys

I know if there's no update it's because there is no update but I'm wondering if I missed something. Seems like armadillo posts less frequent updates these days.

Are they working on something big and will update when appropriate milestones are reached or are they just more shy these days?
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Space Junkie on 06/27/2012 06:12 pm
Hi guys

I know if there's no update it's because there is no update but I'm wondering if I missed something. Seems like armadillo posts less frequent updates these days.

Are they working on something big and will update when appropriate milestones are reached or are they just more shy these days?

Not much recently. It always amazed me that they released as much information as they did in the past. (If I had a similar company it would resemble Blue Origin in terms of openness.)  There is this though:

https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/215964944347312128 (https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/215964944347312128)
Quote from: Jeff Faust
At @SpaceUpHOU comm'l space panel, Armadillo's Neil Milburn says STIG-B flight planned for late July/early August from NM.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Robotbeat on 06/27/2012 06:20 pm
Hi guys

I know if there's no update it's because there is no update but I'm wondering if I missed something. Seems like armadillo posts less frequent updates these days.

Are they working on something big and will update when appropriate milestones are reached or are they just more shy these days?
I think I heard a rumor of a July launch of Stig-B. Should go well past 100km.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Confusador on 06/27/2012 09:59 pm
Jeff also had a post with some more details (http://"http://www.newspacejournal.com/2012/06/22/armadillo-and-xcor-updates-from-houston/") that I'd been meaning to reference here.

There's some implication that the long pole in the delay has been getting a license, since they can't use the experimental permits they had been as this is a revenue generating flight.    Maybe someone else can confirm the extent to which that's true, I haven't yet found any other comments.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: QuantumG on 06/27/2012 10:51 pm
They're doing work for NASA.. thus they are now boring. ;)

Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: HMXHMX on 06/28/2012 05:22 pm
They're doing work for NASA.. thus they are now boring. ;)



I understood that they had stopped working with NASA?
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Robotbeat on 06/28/2012 05:38 pm
They're doing work for NASA.. thus they are now boring. ;)



I understood that they had stopped working with NASA?
They have a NASA payload on Stig-B, according to the article. Anytime you get paid for a launch, you are generally not eligible for an experimental launch license.

I quite disagree with QuantumG's (admittedly tongue in cheek) statement. They would need a launch license for ANY paying customer. And doesn't mean they're boring. ;)
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: QuantumG on 06/28/2012 10:07 pm
I quite disagree with QuantumG's (admittedly tongue in cheek) statement. They would need a launch license for ANY paying customer. And doesn't mean they're boring. ;)

The complaint was about the infrequency of updates. That corresponds exactly with when they started taking NASA money. There was an uptick when @wikkit joined the company, but his enthusiasm isn't sufficient to keep the updates coming. Fundamentally, their current activities are boring to the general public - flying suborbital unmanned vehicles that are only partially reusable are, at least by appearances, no more interesting than any of the other sounding rocket companies. If the dream of flying tourists to space is still alive at Armadillo, and I truly believe it is, they're openly telling the public with their silence that they're a long way from achieving it.

The company that put man in the air (http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Home/News?news_id=175) back in 2002 is not the same company today, and it's a direct result of their funding source.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Robotbeat on 06/28/2012 10:11 pm
Carmack is also pretty busy himself with Id stuff. That's the bigger factor, IMHO. They are more professional now and less amateur. They're not doing it just for fun anymore. If it's because of their funding source, it's because their funding source is no longer just John Carmack.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: QuantumG on 06/28/2012 10:12 pm
Carmack is also pretty busy himself with Id stuff. That's the bigger factor, IMHO. They are more professional now and less amateur. They're not doing it just for fun anymore. If it's because of their funding source, it's because their funding source is no longer just John Carmack.

So it is because of their funding source. We miss the Armadillo Aerospace that had fun.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Robotbeat on 06/28/2012 10:18 pm
Carmack is also pretty busy himself with Id stuff. That's the bigger factor, IMHO. They are more professional now and less amateur. They're not doing it just for fun anymore. If it's because of their funding source, it's because their funding source is no longer just John Carmack.

So it is because of their funding source. We miss the Armadillo Aerospace that had fun.

Yes, they are now a business, not a hobby.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Lars_J on 06/28/2012 10:26 pm
What is the current propellant of choice these days? Still LOX/alcohol? Or something else?

I looked at their site, and did not see any explicit mention of what they use besides LOX.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Robotbeat on 06/29/2012 06:24 pm
What is the current propellant of choice these days? Still LOX/alcohol? Or something else?

I looked at their site, and did not see any explicit mention of what they use besides LOX.
It still uses LOx and ethyl alcohol (i.e. ethanol). According to the text accompanying this official video on youtube (on the official armadillo youtube account): www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ADKbHB-BO0
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: JBF on 06/29/2012 06:49 pm
What is the current propellant of choice these days? Still LOX/alcohol? Or something else?

I looked at their site, and did not see any explicit mention of what they use besides LOX.
It still uses LOx and ethyl alcohol (i.e. ethanol). According to the text accompanying this official video on youtube (on the official armadillo youtube account): www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ADKbHB-BO0

No that's impressive, keeping a long skinny rocket vertical with only 1 engine.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Robotbeat on 06/29/2012 06:55 pm
Funny thing about that is that long skinny rockets actually tend to be a little easier to control in a hover (higher center of mass makes it easier, don't have to worry about uneven tank drainage like in a quad-tank setup). And a single engine is easier to gimbal, control. (Gimballing is a lot easier than differential throttling.)
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: QuantumG on 06/30/2012 12:55 am
No that's impressive, keeping a long skinny rocket vertical with only 1 engine.

The point of it is vertical landing.. which they're not doing anymore.

It's still a great way to test the vehicle before flight, but it's overkill for just that.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Robotbeat on 06/30/2012 05:00 am
No that's impressive, keeping a long skinny rocket vertical with only 1 engine.

The point of it is vertical landing.. which they're not doing anymore.

It's still a great way to test the vehicle before flight, but it's overkill for just that.

I don't see why it's overkill. A great idea as you said, IMHO.

And they certainly plan on returning to vertical landing, according to what they've said.

Separating the vertical landing problem from the suborbital, supersonic, Karman-line-breaking problem and solving them individually before solving them at the same time makes a lot of sense to me. Or, it at very least seems like a perfectly valid approach to overcoming the hurdle of doing both at the same time. They plan on doing recovery/reuse. In fact, I believe they're even using the same physical engine--with modifications--that came from Stig-A which ended up using the shovel recovery method (was supposed to be parachute recovery ;)). Yeah, they overbuilt that engine a bit. ;)
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: QuantumG on 06/30/2012 05:20 am
And they certainly plan on returning to vertical landing, according to what they've said.

When? Everything public I've heard in the last year says they're not. At NSRC they made the official comment that their suborbital tourism vehicle won't be vertical landing.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: kkattula on 06/30/2012 12:08 pm
No that's impressive, keeping a long skinny rocket vertical with only 1 engine.

The point of it is vertical landing.. which they're not doing anymore.

It's still a great way to test the vehicle before flight, but it's overkill for just that.


Umm, most single engine, long skinny rockets manage to stay vertical on launch. Until they start their gravity turns.  Keeping the rocket pointed in the right direction is kind of important. ;)

The big difference here is doing it while maintaining a steady T/W of 1.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: vulture4 on 07/05/2012 04:34 pm
In vertical landing of an actual spacecraft fuel is critical; one really can't hover for extended periods as the DC-X did without burning a lot of fuel. To minimize gravity losses on a vertical landing the engines would have to be fired at the last second to decelerate just before touchdown. It might be a little too dramatic for the average tourist. With a gliding approach or a parachute the descent is a bit slower.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Moe Grills on 07/05/2012 09:29 pm
   I see it coming to pass.
John Carmack surely has conceived of and and made a computer graphics design for a cluster of STIGs to be used to launch a manned space vehicle to a 100 km altitude.
It seems a logical progression from the single STIG sounding rocket to an occupied suborbital space-vehicle using clusters of them to get up there.

  As for a paying passenger/pilot?
I wonder if John has thought outside the box and arranged for the possibility that some brave and rich person would be willing to be a 'test-pilot' on one of his future spacecraft?
  Instead of John paying for a test-pilot, the reverse is possible; it would be profitable for someone with money and guts to pay him for the privilege of going up to 100km in his craft.
 
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Space Junkie on 07/05/2012 09:57 pm
  As for a paying passenger/pilot?
I wonder if John has thought outside the box and arranged for the possibility that some brave and rich person would be willing to be a 'test-pilot' on one of his future spacecraft?
  Instead of John paying for a test-pilot, the reverse is possible; it would be profitable for someone with money and guts to pay him for the privilege of going up to 100km in his craft.
Maybe. But it seems like a huge complication for a tight group like Armadillo to bring an 'outsider' in to fly on an experimental launch.

I'm not sure the choice of test pilot matters much though. Liability aside, the bad PR from a suborbital spaceflight death would be catastrophic regardless of who it is.

It might be worse if a paying customer died rather than a company test pilot, but only slightly.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: aero on 07/05/2012 11:35 pm
I'm sure test pilots must be licensed by the FAA, and that the FAA permits for the test flight vehicle require licensed test pilots. Something so blatant and public as using an unlicensed vehicle for commercial purposes would surely bring the hammer down.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Jason1701 on 07/26/2012 07:05 pm
AA got an RLV launch license from the FAA (Stig-B).
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: A_M_Swallow on 07/26/2012 07:14 pm
AA got an RLV launch license from the FAA (Stig-B).

What type of licence?  For operational flights or for test flights?
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: savuporo on 07/26/2012 07:51 pm
Operational.

Quote
“The Operator Launch License enables Armadillo Aerospace to launch payloads for revenue service” said Milburn. “The inaugural flight of STIG B scheduled for this summer is carrying two revenue payloads, one for Vega Space and the other for the University of Purdue, and, if successful, this will qualify the STIG vehicles for NASA’s Flight Opportunities Program.”

full PR (http://www.parabolicarc.com/2012/07/26/armadillo-aerospace-gets-launch-license-for-reusable-stig-b/)
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Confusador on 07/27/2012 12:59 am
AA got an RLV launch license from the FAA (Stig-B).

What type of licence?  For operational flights or for test flights?

It's an Operator Launch License, because they're carrying a commercial payload, but as it's the first flight of Stig-B I don't think you can really call it anything other than a test flight.

Reports are that they have it planned for 25-26 Aug.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: savuporo on 07/27/2012 01:06 am
More details posted by Doug Messier here
http://www.parabolicarc.com/2012/07/26/more-details-on-armadillos-faa-launch-license/

a launch a month ambition. That'd be nice to see, if they actually follow through on their plans for a change
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: AnalogMan on 07/28/2012 03:46 pm
Just for completeness here is the FAA license document:

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/launch_license/active_licenses/media/LRLO_12-080.pdf (http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/launch_license/active_licenses/media/LRLO_12-080.pdf)

[copy also attached]
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Danderman on 07/28/2012 06:24 pm
AA got an RLV launch license from the FAA (Stig-B).

Big, big news, if its a launch operator's license.

Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Robotbeat on 07/28/2012 08:26 pm
Also shows options for the multi-stage (orbital?) Stigs.

The largest looks like it should be capable of orbital flights, if they can shave enough weight off the center stage and make incremental performance improvements elsewhere.

Just as likely, it's merely a power-point "what if" with an orbital system being something different (or further on the back-burner than this makes it look).

http://www.parabolicarc.com/2012/07/26/armadillo-aerospace-gets-launch-license-for-reusable-stig-b/

The Stig-III doesn't appear to be orbital-capable (not enough stages or the right staging ratio for a pressure-fed to get orbital), more like a high-suborbital like a traditional multi-stage sounding rocket but serving also as a platform for testing staging techniques (something I don't think they've done before).
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: jongoff on 07/28/2012 09:11 pm
Also it came out at NewSpace that Ben Brockert recently left AA.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: savuporo on 08/11/2012 09:41 pm
I was trawling NTRS for recent LOX/Methane propulsion related materials , and ran across this, i dont think ive seen it posted elsewhere
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20090032801_2009026914.pdf


( Was actually surprised to see how much has been done and much data is there for the Aerojet, ATK/XCOR, Norhtrop/Grumman, PWR RS-18, KTE etc LOX/methane thrusters in all shapes and sizes ranging from 5 to 7500lbf . There is even a very detailed pdf test report publicly available on jsc server from Aerojet tests that is clearly marked as ITAR sensitive .. )
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: spectre9 on 08/12/2012 05:23 am
Dead link.

Either the server is down or it's been removed.

This is why it's good to attach.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: zt on 08/12/2012 07:42 am
works for me
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: spectre9 on 08/12/2012 08:36 am
Thanks zt. Looks like some good stuff in there.  ;D
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: grythumn on 08/12/2012 03:16 pm
[blink] Does "accent" have a meaning I'm not familiar with in this context, or did they mean "ascent"?

-R C
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: vulture4 on 08/21/2012 02:39 am
works for me

I notice the Armadillo rocket fuel tanks were vertically stacked rather than using four tanks around the engine as in the Morpheus.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: jongoff on 08/21/2012 02:56 am
works for me

I notice the Armadillo rocket fuel tanks were vertically stacked rather than using four tanks around the engine as in the Morpheus.

Yeah, their earlier Quad vehicles had a similar layout to Morpheus (and the Lunar Module Descent Stage), but John Carmack wasn't really a fan of that orientation after all the issues they ran into, and so their newer vehicles all have vertically stacked tanks. IIRC, I remember John saying (at Space Access most likely) something about trying to talk the Project M guys out of the Quad architecture, but failing.

~Jon
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: A_M_Swallow on 08/21/2012 03:48 am

Yeah, their earlier Quad vehicles had a similar layout to Morpheus (and the Lunar Module Descent Stage), but John Carmack wasn't really a fan of that orientation after all the issues they ran into, and so their newer vehicles all have vertically stacked tanks. IIRC, I remember John saying (at Space Access most likely) something about trying to talk the Project M guys out of the Quad architecture, but failing.

~Jon

The Project M white paper shows Robonaut exiting the lander from the side.  If the tanks are stacked then the cargo will either have to climb down a ladder or use a tall ramp.
http://robonaut.jsc.nasa.gov/future/whitepaper/default.asp (http://robonaut.jsc.nasa.gov/future/whitepaper/default.asp)

Project Morpheus could still change lander design.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: jongoff on 08/21/2012 10:30 pm

Yeah, their earlier Quad vehicles had a similar layout to Morpheus (and the Lunar Module Descent Stage), but John Carmack wasn't really a fan of that orientation after all the issues they ran into, and so their newer vehicles all have vertically stacked tanks. IIRC, I remember John saying (at Space Access most likely) something about trying to talk the Project M guys out of the Quad architecture, but failing.

~Jon

The Project M white paper shows Robonaut exiting the lander from the side.  If the tanks are stacked then the cargo will either have to climb down a ladder or use a tall ramp.
http://robonaut.jsc.nasa.gov/future/whitepaper/default.asp (http://robonaut.jsc.nasa.gov/future/whitepaper/default.asp)

Project Morpheus could still change lander design.

I was suggesting something more Xeus/DTAL-esque.

~Jon
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: A_M_Swallow on 08/22/2012 12:05 am

Yeah, their earlier Quad vehicles had a similar layout to Morpheus (and the Lunar Module Descent Stage), but John Carmack wasn't really a fan of that orientation after all the issues they ran into, and so their newer vehicles all have vertically stacked tanks. IIRC, I remember John saying (at Space Access most likely) something about trying to talk the Project M guys out of the Quad architecture, but failing.

~Jon

The Project M white paper shows Robonaut exiting the lander from the side.  If the tanks are stacked then the cargo will either have to climb down a ladder or use a tall ramp.
http://robonaut.jsc.nasa.gov/future/whitepaper/default.asp (http://robonaut.jsc.nasa.gov/future/whitepaper/default.asp)

Project Morpheus could still change lander design.

I was suggesting something more Xeus/DTAL-esque.

~Jon

Half tonne to 14 tonne payload.  That is an order of magnitude bigger.  A Moon business is likely to find having both small + cheap and a large + expensive landers useful.

The large lander could have 4 or 5 (or 9) engines.  Or develop a big engine.  Something cheaper than the RL-10 that burns a space storable fuel.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: jongoff on 08/22/2012 02:11 pm
I said Xeux/DTAL-esque. You can do horizontal landers like that with non-Centaur-derived main propulsion. But this is getting far afield for an AA thread.

I'm looking forward to seeing how Stig-B does with its flight (notionally set for next month).

~Jon
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: zt on 09/03/2012 06:15 pm
https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/242668869586673666/photo/1

Quote
20" diameter rockets are perfect for launching nephews into space

Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: jongoff on 09/03/2012 09:31 pm
I showed that to my boys, and my 7 year old said that he wanted the next ride. :-)
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: beancounter on 09/04/2012 02:08 am
I showed that to my boys, and my 7 year old said that he wanted the next ride. :-)
Hope they sort out their recovery system unless there's some hidden agenda here :)
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: jongoff on 09/04/2012 04:47 pm
I showed that to my boys, and my 7 year old said that he wanted the next ride. :-)
Hope they sort out their recovery system unless there's some hidden agenda here :)

Well, I said he wanted to go, I didn't say that *I* wanted him to go.

~Jon
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: savuporo on 09/05/2012 11:03 pm
I hope thats a sign of them getting ready. When they got the launch license (http://www.newspacejournal.com/2012/07/27/armadillo-receives-a-launch-license-for-stig-b/), the press release said:
Quote
Armadillo is planning the first launch of the STIG-B the weekend of August 25-26 at Spaceport America in New Mexico, with of goal of reaching an altitude of 100 kilometers.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: A_M_Swallow on 09/07/2012 07:20 pm
New Scientist has the 100 km launch of Stig tomorrow Saturday September 8th, 2012.
http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2012/09/armadillo-aerospace-prepares-f.html?DCMP=OTC-rss&nsref=online-news (http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2012/09/armadillo-aerospace-prepares-f.html?DCMP=OTC-rss&nsref=online-news)

The company also announced that they are working on a manned 8 engined version called Black Armadillo.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: savuporo on 09/10/2012 03:44 pm
(tumbleweed)

anyone see launch reported ?
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: thydusk666 on 09/10/2012 03:55 pm
"Update, 10 September 2012: Armadillo Aerospace has not yet launched Stig into space. New Space Watch reports that the planned launch is now expected on 22 or 23 September."

http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2012/09/armadillo-aerospace-prepares-f.html?DCMP=OTC-rss&nsref=online-news
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Confusador on 09/10/2012 08:10 pm
And the NewSpace Watch (http://www.newspacewatch.com/articles/armadillo-stig-b-rocket-launch-on-saturday.html) report is that the move is "due to range issues."  Which I'll admit surprises me a bit, since there's not much flying out of there, but on the other hand the spaceport doesn't have much experience yet either.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: zaitcev on 09/10/2012 09:03 pm
Not much flies, but it does. A week ago a TFR popped up, with purpose marked as "Space Launch". Its location was not in Spaceport America though. So White Sands people keep busy and sometimes even go outside of their own restricted airspace.

Edit: Attaching map. Arrow with "SA" is location of Spaceport America.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: tigerade on 09/26/2012 07:15 pm
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=21895.msg958139#msg958139

From the Spaceport America thread, there is an update showing that Armadillo's STIG-B will launch in early October.  It says it's a larger, higher performing variant of STIG-A.  The launch will be licensed by the FAA.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: QuantumG on 10/03/2012 12:09 am
Ben Brockert posted this picture on twitter.

http://twitpic.com/b0aw10

Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: vulture4 on 10/03/2012 02:52 pm
I wonder what mods have been made to the recovery system? Perhaps a drouge chute?
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: thydusk666 on 10/03/2012 03:44 pm
Is it planned to do a powered landing?
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Jason1701 on 10/03/2012 03:47 pm
Is it planned to do a powered landing?

No. Like the other Stigs, it will probably do a ballute + steerable parachute recovery.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: vulture4 on 10/03/2012 04:18 pm
Is it planned to do a powered landing?

No. Like the other Stigs, it will probably do a ballute + steerable parachute recovery.

I just love the popout nosecone, just like my old Estes models but a lot bigger.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Robotbeat on 10/03/2012 04:22 pm
Is it planned to do a powered landing?
It's planned to land on the rocket nozzle, the strongest part of the rocket. And the only part of this rocket that survived the previous flight to near space (and shovel recovery). It's the only part (I think?) that is reused, since the rest of Stig was destroyed last time. Nearly indestructible.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: savuporo on 10/07/2012 07:45 pm
Well, the flight didnt go so well (http://www.newspacewatch.com/articles/armadillo-stig-b-launch-success.html).
Quote
Twitter / ID_AA_Carmack:

 Armadillo flight at Spaceport America hit an abort limit, but the recovery system functioned properly, so the vehicle is safe.

EDIT: and more from JC on Arocket
Quote
Stig hit a ground speed abort limit, even though the predicted impact point was still only half our clear zone.  The control parameters were unchanged from the last launch, so the heavier vehicle wasn't as tightly controlled.

On the bright side, the steerable parachute finally got a chance to work properly, bringing the rocket right back to the launch point.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Jason1701 on 10/07/2012 11:39 pm
It's great news that they finally got recovery to work.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: DanielW on 10/09/2012 01:37 am
Landing under steerable parachute.

https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/255468073883144193/photo/1/large (https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/255468073883144193/photo/1/large)

Wish it showed a bit more of the parachute.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Zond on 11/03/2012 09:27 pm
Stig-B was launched again but also aborted again in flight.
Quote
The Armadillo rocket launch aborted early again today. Recovery was successful, but we need to rework some systems before next flight.
https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/264832123079380992 (https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/264832123079380992)
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: mto on 12/06/2012 05:55 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UV7zL07Tof8&feature=em-uploademail

Wamore Guided Recovery System on Stig B

"This is a video of the first Stig B flight that shows the liftoff and landing in the same camera angle. This precision is not an anomaly! They typically land within 80 meters of the intended point. In this case they were 55 meters from the intended point.

Even with the slight damage to the canopy, it still flew like a dream. It had a bit of a line dump when it opened and the slider came down early. Even still everything held together as designed and the unit experienced a perfect recovery.

One cautionary note. Make sure you program your landing point in a clear area away from the launch rail. This thing is accurate enough that if you use the launch point you are at risk of crashing into your launch tower when it comes back!

Contact Mark Kusbel at Wamore Inc. [email protected] His company has built and tested guidance units from 25 lbs and less up to 30,000 lbs. The one in the video is rated for 2200+ lbs.

Is it expensive? Well, that depends. Cost for a new 4 wheeler or a jeep to chase across the desert, $2000+. The ability to walk 100 yards and walk back with a 100K' shot, priceless!"
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Silmfeanor on 12/06/2012 09:00 pm
That is seriously impressive. woah.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: corrodedNut on 12/06/2012 09:11 pm
Maybe this is a little OT, but why aren't these types of steerable, ram-air parafoils used in reentry vehicles? X-38 did, but no other vehicles since. At first glance it seems like a better solution than airbags, landing rockets, etc.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: mto on 12/20/2012 11:48 pm
Neil's British quote of the day, "That was a real Rip-Snorter!"


Another day at the shop... I was amused to hear Neil exclaim how that one was a real "Rip Snorter"! I must admit though, it really sounded nice and ran exceptionally smooth!


http://youtu.be/QanDBi44FL8
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: simonbp on 12/21/2012 04:32 am
That is seriously impressive. woah.

RTLS indeed!
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Zond on 01/08/2013 06:10 pm
LaunchDatePayloadVehicleCompanySiteResult
213Jan 05, 2013ScientificSTIG-B IIIArmadilloSpAmericaFailure

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/launch_license/licensed_launches/historical_launch/ (http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/launch_license/licensed_launches/historical_launch/)
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Jason1701 on 01/09/2013 12:37 pm
I wonder if that means failure to achieve full mission profile, or loss of vehicle.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: johng on 01/09/2013 02:09 pm
Maybe this is a little OT, but why aren't these types of steerable, ram-air parafoils used in+ reentry vehicles? X-38 did, but no other vehicles since. At first glance it seems like a better solution than airbags, landing rockets, etc.

Ram-airs have many more failure modes than a round parachute.  That is, there are many more options for how they can open wrong, as Armadillo seems to be working through. 

As a result, failure rates are higher for ram-airs than for round parachutes, even among the ones that people wear.  That's why people wear a reserve.  Problems could all be worked through and mitigated to some extent with good engineering, like any other aerostructure.  Of course that takes time, money, and would generally increase complexity and weight of the system. 

For exmaple, one mitigation used with round parachutes is the cluster.  3 Parachutes, rated such that if one fails, landing with the other 2 is still survivable.  There is no practical way to cluster ram-airs. So, you would have to have a reserve of some sort for redundancy.Things then start getting tricky with how you get rid of a malfunction, reorient a capsule, and put another parachute out there.  Extra weight, extra cost, extra altitude required. 

I could go on and on.  But to keep it short, like any system, there are trades plus and minus to be made, and when comparing systems, the ones with the most net upside are selected. 
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: go4mars on 01/09/2013 02:18 pm
I could go on and on.
Please do!
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: johng on 01/09/2013 02:41 pm
I could go on and on.
Please do!

Nah, it is getting off topic, and I get paid to go on and on about parachutes. :)
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: beancounter on 01/17/2013 12:46 am
Any further update on the failure?  I've searched everywhere I can think of with no luck.  :(
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Robotbeat on 01/17/2013 08:23 pm
Any further update on the failure?  I've searched everywhere I can think of with no luck.  :(
I tweeted John, and there's going to be an update soon.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: go4mars on 01/17/2013 08:32 pm
Nah, it is getting off topic, and I get paid to go on and on about parachutes. :)
Well when your treatise on parachutes shows up on Amazon some day, consider me a likely buyer.  :)
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: mto on 01/30/2013 03:20 pm
What Joseph heard, What Joseph "Thought" he heard...
"Published on Jan 30, 2013
Joseph is the only one of us with experience in the military. Not that he was experiencing any sort of post traumatic flashbacks or anything, but he did say the response to the initial sound was purely reflex... I can see why!

Still, the Artillery shell wins hands down!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibI8qGSNIFk&feature=em-uploademail
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Robotbeat on 01/30/2013 04:05 pm
Shovel recovery.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: notsorandom on 01/30/2013 04:10 pm
Shovel recovery.
Contingency lithobraking.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: savuporo on 02/12/2013 10:52 pm
http://armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Home/News?news_id=380

Thats in addition to the long post by Phil Eaton a few days ago on aRocket that talked about their parachute woes at length.

Curiously, none of the recent posts by AA guys or JC himself have mentioned anything about their near term plans.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: mto on 02/17/2013 07:54 pm
STIG B-I Behind Crew View

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=742LB4r7sg8
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: mto on 02/17/2013 07:55 pm
Trimmed Down Facing on board RedB0005

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UolAOKdLsaM

the title makes no sense to me (above) but I think it's the air view of this;

Wamore Guided Recovery System on Stig B

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UV7zL07Tof8
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: QuantumG on 02/17/2013 09:40 pm
Crazy audio on the on-board video. Some of it is quite haunting.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: ugordan on 02/17/2013 09:49 pm
Some of it is quite haunting.

Agree. Some of it sounds like something György Ligeti would come up with.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Robotbeat on 02/18/2013 12:16 am
http://armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Home/News?news_id=380

Thats in addition to the long post by Phil Eaton a few days ago on aRocket that talked about their parachute woes at length.
...
Yeah, I highly recommend reading that post/email. Very, very detailed.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: corrodedNut on 02/23/2013 05:19 pm
The next part of that update has been posted:

http://armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Home/News?news_id=422

"STIG B-I Mission, Saturday October 6th 2012"
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: savuporo on 02/24/2013 03:46 am
Im surprised that noone has approached Armadillo yet with a proposal to quadruple their funding to get things moving faster. Their saga is now over 13 years old.

It seems like with a bit of a funding boost they could make more bold choices like following the rule of always building 2.5x ( 2 whole, plus a set of critical spares ) flight hardware units and not getting stalled.

I assume they know what every skydiver knows, that their parachute recovery system will never be 99% reliable - but i figure its a stopgap solution anyway.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Robotbeat on 02/24/2013 05:25 am
Im surprised that noone has approached Armadillo yet with a proposal to quadruple their funding to get things moving faster. Their saga is now over 13 years old.

It seems like with a bit of a funding boost they could make more bold choices like following the rule of always building 2.5x ( 2 whole, plus a set of critical spares ) flight hardware units and not getting stalled.

I assume they know what every skydiver knows, that their parachute recovery system will never be 99% reliable - but i figure its a stopgap solution anyway.
The parachute for skydiving is much more than 99% reliable, otherwise it'd be too risky even with a backup for recreational skydiving like we have today.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Jason1701 on 02/24/2013 06:25 am
Im surprised that noone has approached Armadillo yet with a proposal to quadruple their funding to get things moving faster. Their saga is now over 13 years old.

It seems like with a bit of a funding boost they could make more bold choices like following the rule of always building 2.5x ( 2 whole, plus a set of critical spares ) flight hardware units and not getting stalled.

I assume they know what every skydiver knows, that their parachute recovery system will never be 99% reliable - but i figure its a stopgap solution anyway.
The parachute for skydiving is much more than 99% reliable, otherwise it'd be too risky even with a backup for recreational skydiving like we have today.

Removing all the electronics and e-matches really makes a difference..
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: savuporo on 02/24/2013 07:43 am
The parachute for skydiving is much more than 99% reliable, otherwise it'd be too risky even with a backup for recreational skydiving like we have today.
Actually not quite. From many years of personal experience, probably around 1-2% of deployments have a very minor hiccup of some sort or another, either related to packing or less than ideal deployment position, speed etc.  By hiccup i don't mean a malfunction, malfunctions require cut-away and deploying the reserve, whereas things like hesitating pilot chute, minor line twists, a loose brake line, rough openings etc are just minor annoyances for a human skydiver and easily overcome. Automated systems will not cope that well, and they are not carrying a reserve either.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: QuantumG on 02/24/2013 10:19 am
Im surprised that noone has approached Armadillo yet with a proposal to quadruple their funding to get things moving faster. Their saga is now over 13 years old.

It seems like with a bit of a funding boost they could make more bold choices like following the rule of always building 2.5x ( 2 whole, plus a set of critical spares ) flight hardware units and not getting stalled.

Heh. John Carmack has all the money he wants. Armadillo is progressing at the pace he dictates. Our mistake is assuming that he knows where he wants the company to go. He hasn't found it yet. The whole thing is a learning experience. It's "research". If he knew how to make fully reusable cheap rockets Armadillo would be doing it, but he doesn't.. yet.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Robotbeat on 02/24/2013 05:57 pm
Im surprised that noone has approached Armadillo yet with a proposal to quadruple their funding to get things moving faster. Their saga is now over 13 years old.

It seems like with a bit of a funding boost they could make more bold choices like following the rule of always building 2.5x ( 2 whole, plus a set of critical spares ) flight hardware units and not getting stalled.

Heh. John Carmack has all the money he wants. Armadillo is progressing at the pace he dictates. Our mistake is assuming that he knows where he wants the company to go. He hasn't found it yet. The whole thing is a learning experience. It's "research". If he knew how to make fully reusable cheap rockets Armadillo would be doing it, but he doesn't.. yet.

They aren't bumbling around not knowing where they're going. They have explicit plans and goals, short-term and long, starting with flying (and recovering) suborbital payloads and getting paid for it. They also plan on using a descendent of STIG as a reusable pop up booster with expendable upper stage(s) for nanosat-scale orbital launches.

I actually think that a super strict plan is counterproductive when the goal is sustainable, cheap access to space.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: QuantumG on 02/24/2013 08:49 pm
They aren't bumbling around not knowing where they're going.

I didn't say they were.

Quote
They have explicit plans and goals, short-term and long, starting with flying (and recovering) suborbital payloads and getting paid for it.

They have no longer term plans, because they've yet to figure out "what works".

I'm not making this up, John says so all the time.

Quote
They also plan on using a descendent of STIG as a reusable pop up booster with expendable upper stage(s) for nanosat-scale orbital launches.

If the STIG line works, they might do that. So far it's doing pretty well, but there's still plenty to learn.

Quote
I actually think that a super strict plan is counterproductive when the goal is sustainable, cheap access to space.

Which is what I said! savuporo was wondering why Armadillo hasn't quadrupled their funding and got things moving faster.. his conclusion that it is a lack of funding is wrong. Their saga is now over 13 years old because they're trying to crack a tough nut and so far they haven't done it.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Robotbeat on 02/24/2013 08:55 pm
Good clarification.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: savuporo on 02/24/2013 11:57 pm
Which is what I said! savuporo was wondering why Armadillo hasn't quadrupled their funding and got things moving faster.. his conclusion that it is a lack of funding is wrong. Their saga is now over 13 years old because they're trying to crack a tough nut and so far they haven't done it.

I didnt conclude that they lack funding. I suggested that funding constraints DO force them into suboptimal decisions sometimes, as they do for everyone else. The fact that STIG-B doesnt have a spare ready to go indicated that they dont have "all the money they want".

I recall a quote where JC stated the approximate cost of their vehicles has jumped from a BMW to Ferrari, which makes them much more cautious about lithobraking or somesuch, but i can't find a link right now.

EDIT: from aRocket
Quote
John Carmack
3/28/11

Things are looking good for an attempt at flying over 100,000’ this weekend with our big tube rocket.
 
For reasons that still aren’t exactly clear to me, this vehicle took longer to build than any of our previous ones.  With all the full time salaries, that also makes it the most expensive vehicle we have made.  I have said that watching one of our serial-produced mods crash from an altitude flight is “like watching a BMW fall out of the sky”.   Losing this vehicle will be more like planting a Ferrari.  A turbo Ferrari. Realistically, it is almost inevitable.  If we get a successful first flight, everything will work out fine, but I imagine the mood in the shop will be pretty grim while building up a new version of this vehicle if all we got out of the previous one was a couple hover tests and a crash.
 
Despite being extremely upset with how long it took us to get to flight-ready, I find myself now wishing we had another week to run additional tests, but we have already postponed launch once at Spaceport America, and we really should take our shot now.
 
If we get the vehicle back and it performs as expected, we should be able to take it over 100km by upgrading various parts of the vehicle in a couple months.
 
John Carmack
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: QuantumG on 02/25/2013 12:01 am
The fact that STIG-B doesnt have a spare ready to go indicated that they dont have "all the money they want".

Why would you have a spare ready to go on a research vehicle?

They're only flying it to learn how hard it is to fly.

Your thesis is wrong.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: savuporo on 02/25/2013 12:13 am
Why would you have a spare ready to go on a research vehicle?
To not stall your research project in the event of inevitable mishap, adjust, fix the problem and move on. Members of Armadillo team, and other teams building experimental vehicles have all stated on numerous occasions that they really would prefer to have multiple copies of flight hardware plus a healthy stock of long lead parts.
Probably every hobbyists building actual hardware will tell you the same, it's pretty obvious to me as i am letting magic smoke out of various electronics components myself on a regular basis and im not going to argue this further with you.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Robotbeat on 02/25/2013 12:14 am
The fact that STIG-B doesnt have a spare ready to go indicated that they dont have "all the money they want".

Why would you have a spare ready to go on a research vehicle?

They're only flying it to learn how hard it is to fly.

Your thesis is wrong.

So is yours. They've got paying customers to fly payloads on STIG variants. It's not just research. (And that's probably a good thing, as it keeps them a little more focused.)
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: QuantumG on 02/25/2013 12:27 am
They've got paying customers to fly payloads on STIG variants. It's not just research. (And that's probably a good thing, as it keeps them a little more focused.)

They customers know what they're buying.

Building two of a prototype is a waste. You'd only do it if time was more important to you than money.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: savuporo on 02/25/2013 12:27 am
Another recent interesting tidbit from aRocket was this:

Quote
Total expenditures on Armadillo over the last twelve years are nearly $10 million -- almost eight figures.  I think I could orbit something for less than another $10 million, but the credibility on that should be rather low, considering I thought that Stig would be successfully flying payloads after $2 million in development costs.

Saying you could build a nanosat launcher for $10 million is not certifiably insane, but it is very aggressive, and very likely to fail.  Thinking you can do it for less than $1 million is out of touch with reality.

John Carmack
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: savuporo on 02/28/2013 09:57 pm
Building two of a prototype is a waste. You'd only do it if time was more important to you than money.

I dont think Neil Milburn was reading what internet quarterbacks are posting on various forums, but here you go:
http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Home/News?news_id=430
Quote
The game plan moving forward is to build a mini fleet of at least three or possibly more STIG vehicles. This will allow us to campaign the STIG vehicle for commercial scientific payloads and even suffer some damage or loss of vehicle without having to halt the campaign for any considerable period of time. There will also be some modest reductions in vehicle costs by buying some components in quantity and simply by batch production.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: QuantumG on 02/28/2013 10:03 pm
Building two of a prototype is a waste. You'd only do it if time was more important to you than money.

I dont think Neil Milburn was reading what internet quarterbacks are posting on various forums, but here you go:
http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Home/News?news_id=430
Quote
The game plan moving forward is to build a mini fleet of at least three or possibly more STIG vehicles. This will allow us to campaign the STIG vehicle for commercial scientific payloads and even suffer some damage or loss of vehicle without having to halt the campaign for any considerable period of time. There will also be some modest reductions in vehicle costs by buying some components in quantity and simply by batch production.

Yes, exactly. I don't know how I can make this more clear: once they work out the kinks they intend to use this vehicle line for the Flight Opportunities Program and other commercial flights, but they haven't done that yet. There is no intention to build multiple prototype vehicles of an identical design in order to do more testing faster, which was (somehow) savuporo's argument for why Armadillo needs more money.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: savuporo on 02/28/2013 10:18 pm
There is no intention to build multiple prototype vehicles of an identical design in order to do more testing faster
Thats exactly their stated intent, in the paragraph above.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: QuantumG on 02/28/2013 10:26 pm
There is no intention to build multiple prototype vehicles of an identical design in order to do more testing faster
Thats exactly their stated intent, in the paragraph above.

Reading comprehension.. get some.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Robotbeat on 02/28/2013 10:28 pm
They said they wished they had built more copies of STIG already, including the "prototype" one they just flew (and crashed).
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Robotbeat on 02/28/2013 10:28 pm
Once they get the kinks out, they'll only need one...
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: QuantumG on 02/28/2013 10:29 pm
If you're going to claim they said something, quote it, otherwise you're just making it up.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Robotbeat on 02/28/2013 10:32 pm
If you're going to claim they said something, quote it, otherwise you're just making it up.

I read it on ARocket. Can't link to it. I'm not even sure I can quote it, as it isn't public (you have to join the list to even see the archive). And I certainly am not going to look through hundreds of emails to "prove someone is wrong on the internet." You don't have to believe me, but that's what I read.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: QuantumG on 02/28/2013 11:41 pm
I read it on ARocket. Can't link to it.

Tell me the date and who was speaking.

Quote
And I certainly am not going to look through hundreds of emails to "prove someone is wrong on the internet." You don't have to believe me, but that's what I read.

No I don't.

If you're not willing to back up your statements of fact with evidence, just keep quiet.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Lars_J on 03/01/2013 12:21 am
The latest Armadillo news update has something to say about the recent discussion:

http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Home/News?news_id=430

Quote
The game plan moving forward is to build a mini fleet of at least three or possibly more STIG vehicles. This will allow us to campaign the STIG vehicle for commercial scientific payloads and even suffer some damage or loss of vehicle without having to halt the campaign for any considerable period of time. There will also be some modest reductions in vehicle costs by buying some components in quantity and simply by batch production. The one other major change that we are considering for STIG is to increase propellant tank sizes to offset the mass creep experienced with STIG B. This simple change, potentially with an increase in helium tank capacity, will allow the next generation of STIG vehicles to readily reach space with substantially larger payloads.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: QuantumG on 03/01/2013 12:22 am
Already quoted. Did you even read the thread before posting?
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Lars_J on 03/01/2013 12:33 am
Already quoted. Did you even read the thread before posting?

Apparently not! And are people always so grumpy down in Aussie-land?  :D
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Robotbeat on 03/01/2013 01:15 am
I read it on ARocket. Can't link to it.

Tell me the date and who was speaking.

Quote
And I certainly am not going to look through hundreds of emails to "prove someone is wrong on the internet." You don't have to believe me, but that's what I read.

No I don't.

If you're not willing to back up your statements of fact with evidence, just keep quiet.
It was Carmack relatively recently (within the last month). Going off of memory.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: QuantumG on 03/01/2013 01:30 am
Already quoted. Did you even read the thread before posting?

Apparently not! And are people always so grumpy down in Aussie-land?  :D

Sorry Lars_J. I shouldn't snap at you.

Allow me to remind myself of some famous advice:

Quote
I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken! - Oliver Cromwell

So what's the argument here?

Im surprised that noone has approached Armadillo yet with a proposal to quadruple their funding to get things moving faster. Their saga is now over 13 years old.

It seems like with a bit of a funding boost they could make more bold choices like following the rule of always building 2.5x ( 2 whole, plus a set of critical spares ) flight hardware units and not getting stalled.

I think savuporo is using terrible logic because, frankly, I think making two vehicles only to discover that it has a fatal design flaw or two - especially when you expect it will have a fatal design flaw or two because you're only just learning how to make reusable launch vehicles - is a big waste of money. But what if I'm wrong?

savuporo thinks I am. He thinks Armadillo would love to make multiple vehicles and they need more funding to do it. He presents evidence of this, which is the same quote you provided Lars_J.

Quote
The game plan moving forward is to build a mini fleet of at least three or possibly more STIG vehicles. This will allow us to campaign the STIG vehicle for commercial scientific payloads and even suffer some damage or loss of vehicle without having to halt the campaign for any considerable period of time. There will also be some modest reductions in vehicle costs by buying some components in quantity and simply by batch production. The one other major change that we are considering for STIG is to increase propellant tank sizes to offset the mass creep experienced with STIG B. This simple change, potentially with an increase in helium tank capacity, will allow the next generation of STIG vehicles to readily reach space with substantially larger payloads. -

I think Neil Milburn is actually talking about the game plan for the commercial campaign after they get a successful space shot and vehicle recovery. So this quote doesn't validate savuporo's argument that Armadillo would love to be building multiple prototype vehicles to avoid "getting stalled".  But what if I'm wrong?

That would mean Armadillo has heeded savuporo's sage advice and is now "following the rule of always building 2.5x". In fact, they're building more than 2.5x! But that also means they have the funding to do that, right now. As I said:

Heh. John Carmack has all the money he wants. Armadillo is progressing at the pace he dictates.

I don't think I'm wrong, but by thinking it possible I've shown that savuporo has to be either way.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: e of pi on 03/01/2013 01:33 am
It was Carmack relatively recently (within the last month). Going off of memory.
John Carmack, Jan 29, email title "Stig data, was RE: smallest realistically useful payload for orbital booster?"
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: QuantumG on 03/01/2013 01:47 am
It was Carmack relatively recently (within the last month). Going off of memory.
John Carmack, Jan 29, email title "Stig data, was RE: smallest realistically useful payload for orbital booster?"

Thanks.

"One of the biggest mistakes in Stig development was only building them one at a time." - John Carmack

Okay, I was wrong.

PM me if you want more information about aRocket's quoting policy.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: mto on 03/01/2013 09:18 pm
This is the full flight of STIG-B 3. A sad day for Armadillos.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=skzwuvYxZRw&feature=em-uploademail
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: mto on 03/01/2013 09:19 pm
Good Flight and Recovery, Multi Angle

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSO8BlMQYxo&feature=em-uploademail
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: catdlr on 03/05/2013 08:49 pm
Full Stig B Recovery System development

Published on Mar 5, 2013
by: armadilloaerospace
This is the development process of the Main parachute recovery system for the Armadillo STIG B Rocket. There is more information available on development of the Ballute, that will be a separate video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c55L-6Wo_dQ
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: mto on 03/05/2013 10:33 pm
Stig-B Final Moments

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNuCiFGU0jM
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: savuporo on 04/20/2013 11:37 pm
From
http://www.newspacewatch.com/articles/space-access03913-summary-and-resources.html

Quote
A couple of high profile firms that were regulars of past meetings did not show up:
Masten Space Systems did not attend presumably because of ongoing activity with Xombie and Xaero-B
Armadillo Aerospace also did not attend. No info about their status, though there were  rumors that they have cut back to three full-time employees.

After more than 10 years, they are realizing that getting to space is indeed harder than doing
i  = 0x5f3759df - ( i >> 1 );

?
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: FutureSpaceTourist on 04/21/2013 12:06 am
If true, the rumours about AA are sad. I'm guessing a lack of current  income beyond what John Carmack is able to self-fund?
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: zaitcev on 07/30/2013 05:31 pm
Any post-mortem?
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: FutureSpaceTourist on 08/02/2013 05:51 am
Any post-mortem?

See here: http://www.newspacejournal.com/2013/08/01/carmack-armadillo-aerospace-in-hibernation-mode/ (http://www.newspacejournal.com/2013/08/01/carmack-armadillo-aerospace-in-hibernation-mode/)
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Crispy on 08/02/2013 11:14 am
Carmack gave his yearly keynote speech at QuakeCon yesterday, and the first question in the Q&A was about Armadillo. Here's what he had to say:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=cWA_9L70moE&t=299

Taking AA commercial put money-making projects in the way of their own aims.
So Carmack cancelled the side projects and used his own money to run it for two years. $1m a year. But he wasn't hands-on, and what he calls "Creeping Professionalism" sucked the fun and immediacy out of it for the rest of the team. Productivity declined and they had some disheartening failures. So AA is now in "hibernation" mode, ticking over with a handful of employees, waiting for either Carmack to get free time and money or "someone with a few million dollars who wants to build rockets".

EDIT: Which is exactly what the above linked article says :)
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: R7 on 08/02/2013 11:29 am
See here: http://www.newspacejournal.com/2013/08/01/carmack-armadillo-aerospace-in-hibernation-mode/ (http://www.newspacejournal.com/2013/08/01/carmack-armadillo-aerospace-in-hibernation-mode/)

Quote
Carmack offered several possible reasons why work on the STIG vehicles didn’t go as fast as he’d hoped. One was that he was not involved in the company on a day-to-day basis during this time, focused instead on software development. “Me not being there left me in a position of not wanting to second-guess the boots on the ground,” he said. “I left my hands off the wheel.”

No offence but when he had his hands on the wheel AA was juggling between propellants and had some silly army-of-bubbles LV plans. With STIG the rocket started to look like rockets are supposed to and they were making progress towards space.

Quote
Funding Armadillo, he said, has “always been a negotiation with my wife,” he said, setting aside some “crazy money” to spend on it. “But I’ve basically expended my crazy money on Armadillo, so I don’t expect to see any rockets in the real near future unless we do wind up raising some investment money on it.”

STIG tried to cross the Kármán line but crossed the Kang line (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katherine_Anna_Kang) instead?  ::)
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Danderman on 08/02/2013 02:09 pm
This is a sad day indeed.

I would never have guessed that AA would fall by the wayside before Masten, but I didn't count on the problem that to launch conventional rockets would take the fun out of it. 

If it had to write an epitaph for AA, it would to note that they lost too much time fooling around with prop combinations other than LOX/kerosene; if they could have had that time back, they may have advanced much farther.


Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: simonbp on 08/02/2013 07:14 pm
I don't understand why they went with such a radical change as pixel -> stig; why not just put an aero faring on the older rockets and see how you could go. Stig's problem was never reaching altitude, it was returning safely...
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Lars_J on 08/02/2013 10:19 pm
Sad to hear. But a lot of their enthusiasm and testing frequency seems to have gone drastically when they abandoned VTVL designs.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Chris-A on 08/03/2013 02:13 am
Sad news. On the other hand, you have to make money or have deep pockets. :(
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: mwfair on 08/03/2013 03:03 am
First thing I learned in Aero Engr 101 was "How to make a small fortune in Aerospace".
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: sanman on 08/03/2013 06:53 pm


http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/08/02/armadillo_aerospace_hibernation/

Maybe he just needs to take time out to improve his business model
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Robert Thompson on 08/03/2013 07:43 pm
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/08/02/armadillo_aerospace_hibernation/
"
The difference between the fortunes of Armadillo Aerospace and SpaceX might come down to Musk's messianic quest to "die on Mars," Carmack indicated.

"A couple of weeks ago I was trading some emails with Elon Musk from SpaceX, and I was saying I'm excited about these virtual reality things and other stuff, and he kind of hits me with this 'if it's not on the path of colonizing Mars or making the money to fund colonizing Mars, then it's just not that important.' He's making me feel guilty for not thinking on an planetary scale. Elon is serious about all that stuff."
"
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Robotbeat on 08/03/2013 07:45 pm
He hasn't been devoting his resources to aerospace like he has in the past. Saw this coming for quite a while. Which isn't to say they won't start up again.

But without vision, the people perish. If your head guy isn't devoting much of his personal will to the project, it's just not going to go anywhere.

There's more information on ARocket.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Patchouli on 08/03/2013 11:02 pm


http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/08/02/armadillo_aerospace_hibernation/

Maybe he just needs to take time out to improve his business model

Definitely sad news as they were a very interesting and off beat company that did things differently until recently.

Hopefully he'll be able to rethink his business model and come up with some money.
You need to either have deep pockets or be making money at it.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: FutureSpaceTourist on 08/03/2013 11:06 pm
I'm saddened too. I think a key issue is that John Carmack has a day job and AA just can't make enough progress without a leader with enough time to focus and push things on.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: mwfair on 08/05/2013 02:30 pm
AA is a reflection of Carmack, and it seemed to me like Carmack mostly just had a desire to build engines and rocket systems, for the fun of it (that probably describes all the crew).
The business model was secondary, and was either  A) 'build it and they will come' (on the off chance the a finished rocket is produced), and/or B) build a reputation for creative, quality solutions to limited problems that would result in contracting work with clients who needed rocket help.
 The product part turned out not to happen, IMHO because he was mostly motivated by the fun of it, not by a concrete, viable goal with a realistic customer base. 
As it turned out though, B) did happen.  JSC hired him to build exactly the kind of tinkering system that he was so successful in cranking out.
IMO, the above is most admirable and reasonable.  It contributed to the industry, and has resulted in a body of work that could be used to go all the way, i.e. A) above could be resurrected.
But Carmarck succeeded in doing what, in my estimation, he set out to do.  Have fun.  Either he can change his goals and restart the thing, or could sell it to be reformed with a viable business plan.
In my experience as an engineer, the hardest aspect of things is the product planning and marketing, i.e. 'business plan'.
Carmack succeeded in this with Quake due to both programming and business savvy.  But the rocket 'product equation' didn't quite solve.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: zaitcev on 08/05/2013 04:38 pm
The most important lesson is that as soon as newly constituted employees turned to the "real rocket" mode, they failed, because they blew the budget. This is what the "rockets are hard" crowd fail to understand again and again: the legacy way is not just the expensive way, it's ludicrously expensive way.

Some of the carping in this thread was simply obscene, and honestly it's a big pity that John didn't succeed. On the other hand, they do ignore every time Elon talks about ridiculous quotes from his suppliers for things like valves that are 30 times cheaper when made by SpaceX in-house. So even if John has succeeded, they would still say it.

All that wealth is taken from the customers, eventually, and floats into the pockets of people who are making a comfortable living by preaching "rockets are hard". This has got to stop for humanity to make meaningful progress in space.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: mr. mark on 08/05/2013 04:52 pm
Armadillo was just way too out front and did not have a good business plan going forth. They could have concentrated on eventual private research landers for the Moon and eventually Mars. Instead, they funneled money on pet projects with little or no focus on the end result. The company is still a good buy for someone who has a strong focus and can sift through the mud and focus the program. I'd kill off the Stig program. UP Aerospace already has that nitch. As I said focus the technology already developed toward a near term lunar lander for private research. This seems well within their sphere.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: baldusi on 08/05/2013 05:01 pm
Looking at the history of their postings, I'm finding that because rockets are hard, you can't keep the tinkerer's attitude if you actually want to have a solid product. From things as little as not having a written launch sequence, and after having it not having validated it, to the problems they had with the navigation, telemetry and recovery systems. Most of those failures had "lack of ground testing" all over them.
There's a reason rockets can spend a year in the pad for the inaugural launch (think Delta IV Heavy at Vandemberg or Falcon 9 Flt 1). There's a lot of tests to make sure everything works. Of course you can do the old Russian way and launch ten or so prototypes until you have all the procedures set. But in the end that depends on extremely cheap labor.
My sense is that he assumed that the step from 60km to recoverable 200km was linear, when in fact is more like exponential. I'm pretty sure that he could do it a lot cheaper than if you asked LM or Astrium to develop such a system. But it was probably more like 5M and five years than 2M and two years.
In the end, I still believe that purely commercial companies can do it for 50% to 20% of a legacy system. But not by 2% to 5%. Even in the above stated case of SpaceX, one thing is the manufacturing and certification cost and another the design and qualification cost. SpaceX has one huge factory and lots of tooling and employees working on space quality production. I'm pretty sure they have one of the most efficient plants around and it's very difficult to compete on the marginal price with them. Any third party would have to dedicate a significant effort to keep all the certified processes and quality control just for a few parts. Thus, for SpaceX in particular, it's quite possible that they are doing the most economically sound decision by doing almost everything in house.
But they can do that because the have billions in contracts. AA wanted to do a business where they would have contracts in the 100k's range. That's two or three orders of magnitude less than SpaceX. At those revenue levels you simply can't afford your own factoy. Look at the trouble they had finding a bath big enough to age their new tanks. And that's something that's a century old process. There's no secret on how to do it. It's just that it's simply too expensive for AA. SpaceX could afford it no problem. AA couldn't for their business model.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: mr. mark on 08/05/2013 05:25 pm
Looking at the history of their postings, I'm finding that because rockets are hard, you can't keep the tinkerer's attitude if you actually want to have a solid product. From things as little as not having a written launch sequence, and after having it not having validated it, to the problems they had with the navigation, telemetry and recovery systems. Most of those failures had "lack of ground testing" all over them.
There's a reason rockets can spend a year in the pad for the inaugural launch (think Delta IV Heavy at Vandemberg or Falcon 9 Flt 1). There's a lot of tests to make sure everything works. Of course you can do the old Russian way and launch ten or so prototypes until you have all the procedures set. But in the end that depends on extremely cheap labor.
My sense is that he assumed that the step from 60km to recoverable 200km was linear, when in fact is more like exponential. I'm pretty sure that he could do it a lot cheaper than if you asked LM or Astrium to develop such a system. But it was probably more like 5M and five years than 2M and two years.
In the end, I still believe that purely commercial companies can do it for 50% to 20% of a legacy system. But not by 2% to 5%. Even in the above stated case of SpaceX, one thing is the manufacturing and certification cost and another the design and qualification cost. SpaceX has one huge factory and lots of tooling and employees working on space quality production. I'm pretty sure they have one of the most efficient plants around and it's very difficult to compete on the marginal price with them. Any third party would have to dedicate a significant effort to keep all the certified processes and quality control just for a few parts. Thus, for SpaceX in particular, it's quite possible that they are doing the most economically sound decision by doing almost everything in house.
But they can do that because the have billions in contracts. AA wanted to do a business where they would have contracts in the 100k's range. That's two or three orders of magnitude less than SpaceX. At those revenue levels you simply can't afford your own factoy. Look at the trouble they had finding a bath big enough to age their new tanks. And that's something that's a century old process. There's no secret on how to do it. It's just that it's simply too expensive for AA. SpaceX could afford it no problem. AA couldn't for their business model.

When you are a small company the last thing that you want to do is enter a market that has already been cornered. You need to find a nitch market for yourself. Lunar landers for private and scholastic research would have been a better option with the product they had on hand. Suborbital research would have been a hard nut to crack from a business perspective. Too many small companies already out there. At the end of the day, suborbital is just that suborbital. The end result is the same whether you have reuse or not. Research gets done. A lot of companies fighting over a small piece of pie.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: bad_astra on 08/07/2013 04:59 pm
I'm sad to see this happen to Armadillo. As others have said, they were one of my favorites.

I did think that many of their failures were perhaps a bit too public. It was refreshing to see build-a-little-test-a-little actually demonstrated out in the open, but it probably scared off investors who did not want their name attached to a lot of video clips of vehicles augering in.

They also seemed to have been all over the place on development plans. H202 monoprop w/jet vanes, then differential thrusters, then quads, then stigs, etc. If they had focused part of their energy on some lower hanging fruit and procuded consistant, albeit smaller, successes, could they have been more akin to where XCOR is at? Hard to say. If RRL had been a success, we might well be talking about how well they are doing right now, but many a good idea is hinged on the success of another.

I do hope the situation improves and someone with the means can save the Armadillo.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: A_M_Swallow on 08/07/2013 05:16 pm
One bit of good news for Armadillo they are no longer competing with the Falcon 1 to launch cubesats.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Lars_J on 08/07/2013 08:52 pm
One bit of good news for Armadillo they are no longer competing with the Falcon 1 to launch cubesats.

Huh?
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Cinder on 08/07/2013 10:49 pm
Carmack has added another work priority (Oculus Rift) above id software, which was itself above AA.  He's gushing pretty good over OR, unlike about id, nevermind AA.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: beancounter on 08/08/2013 01:41 am
One bit of good news for Armadillo they are no longer competing with the Falcon 1 to launch cubesats.

Huh?
Exactly, F1 no longer exists.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: savuporo on 08/08/2013 01:47 am
Quote
, waiting for either Carmack to get free time and money or "someone with a few million dollars who wants to build rockets".

Oh, but some very wise people here were saying that Carmack had "all the money he wanted".

I dont think a few million dollars here would do the trick, if their previous run rate was a $1m a year - which is really cheap if you factor in only the labor of a few good top talent engineers - to keep the team motivated and on a path of sustained, interesting progress you would probably need to be running at $5M a year or so.

Many people with software backgrounds get into hardware projects and lose momentum in the similar way - for your software team building kick ass tech, you provide them with a few laptops and a few expensive tech toys as a downpayment, but from there on its pretty much salary, reasonable working environment but most of all results in a way of built, demonstrable tech that keep them engaged.
For hardware guys - you have to burn money on an ongoing basis to keep the metal moving, whether its chips, pcbs, pistons and exhaust parts, rocket motors or something else. Your guys WILL get bored looking at the same rocket for years - and Armadillo definitely slowed down in that regard towards the end. Any serious rapid development HW shop HAS to give enough freedom to engineers to burn out H-bridges, melt combustion chambers and annoy the hell out of neighbors, and you have to budget for that and make sure you can spin out usable products from that destructive cycle.


Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: savuporo on 08/08/2013 02:14 am
Remember that one of the causes Carmack pointed to, himself, was that expensive and difficult-to-work materials were creeping into their designs.
Right - and at this point you would have to make a clear decision -
- multiply your cash burn rate accordingly
- slow down your hw progress
- go with the low tech, cheap materials approach at the expense of less elegant designs.

first usually involves finding other investors and a lot of people dont want do do that to retain full control
slowing down has the risks that AA ran into
third approach engineers just generally dont like in a lot of cases - every engineer wants to build elegant designs. However, effectiveness is often fundamentally at odds with elegance.

Quote
Akin's 36: Any run-of-the-mill engineer can design something which is elegant. A good engineer designs systems to be efficient. A great engineer designs them to be effective.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Lars_J on 08/08/2013 04:25 am
One bit of good news for Armadillo they are no longer competing with the Falcon 1 to launch cubesats.

Huh?
Exactly, F1 no longer exists.

Exactly, and Armadillos orbital plans were so vague and decades off that "falcon 1 competition" statement makes even less sense... Hence my "Huh?".
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: JazzFan on 08/08/2013 05:06 am
Sarcasm.........., got it.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Danderman on 08/08/2013 05:29 am
Oculus Rift hires Doom co-creator John Carmack as Chief Technology Officer

http://www.engadget.com/2013/08/07/oculus-rift-john-carmack-cto/

Carmack tweeted a bit of clarity to his new role at Oculus among his other jobs, saying, "My time division is now Oculus over Id over Armadillo. Busy busy busy!"
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: QuantumG on 08/08/2013 01:59 pm
Quote
, waiting for either Carmack to get free time and money or "someone with a few million dollars who wants to build rockets".

Oh, but some very wise people here were saying that Carmack had "all the money he wanted".

and I stand by it. That's why he's not out raising money. Carmack don't work that way. If it can't be done with his out-of-pocket he simply doesn't do it. AA is being slow walked now because Carmack has come to the startling conclusion that this rocket stuff *really is hard*.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: R7 on 08/08/2013 04:58 pm
Why won't they throttle down to work on STIG with the earlier volunteer work mode and correct the errors mentioned? Hibernation sounds like nothing will happen.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: DanielW on 08/09/2013 03:50 am
I seem to remember him saying (in quake con keynote QA?) that he might have to wait for another liquidity event. Zenimax going public? or some other. I don't think the terms of the id deal were ever disclosed. But it stands to reason that he may not really have the liquid assets to pursue rocketry right now regardless of net worth.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: FutureSpaceTourist on 08/09/2013 05:50 am
Carmack tweeted a bit of clarity to his new role at Oculus among his other jobs, saying, "My time division is now Oculus over Id over Armadillo. Busy busy busy!"

Which sadly means no work on AA for probably a couple of years or more. As he seems more passionate about VR than rockets now, I wonder if he'll ever seriously return to AA?
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: QuantumG on 08/09/2013 01:44 pm
The changes away from VTVL were driven by the requirement of actually flying something for a customer. The customer wants altitude and that's how you get it. Masten, on the other hand, went and found a customer who wanted the vehicles they actually build (they're flying Mars reentry trajectory simulations for JPL, for anyone who didn't know).
 
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Lurker Steve on 08/09/2013 01:59 pm
Quote
, waiting for either Carmack to get free time and money or "someone with a few million dollars who wants to build rockets".

Oh, but some very wise people here were saying that Carmack had "all the money he wanted".

and I stand by it. That's why he's not out raising money. Carmack don't work that way. If it can't be done with his out-of-pocket he simply doesn't do it. AA is being slow walked now because Carmack has come to the startling conclusion that this rocket stuff *really is hard*.

I would think that if it was my money involved in the project, I would want to share in the fun. Why contribute millions of dollars, just so someone else can have fun with rockets ?

Now that I know Armadillo was run by the guy from ID, I can see why he's in no rush.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Robotbeat on 08/09/2013 03:57 pm
I liked the approach that they were doing.

It's possible Armadillo will rise again. I bet Carmack will have some other idea he wants to try out eventually.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Paul Adams on 08/09/2013 04:07 pm
Going out on a limb here - would this be a good crowd soured funding project? If he has only spent $2,000,000 to date, what could be done with another $2,000,000?

How many on NSF would be willing to donate $30 - $100?

Apologies if this has been raised previously.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: R7 on 08/09/2013 07:11 pm
Another way to get it would have been by clustering their VTVL modules together.  And that was the way they originally intended to deal with the need for greater delta-v.

Eventually people (re)discover the drag, and reasons why sleek pointy things work best.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Lars_J on 08/09/2013 07:20 pm
Another way to get it would have been by clustering their VTVL modules together.  And that was the way they originally intended to deal with the need for greater delta-v.

Eventually people (re)discover the drag, and reasons why sleek pointy things work best.

Sure... But as grasshopper shows - tall, thin, and pointy rockets can be VTVL too. I'm surprised they abandoned it, when the software for VTVL control seemed to be a significant part of Carmacks passion.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Moe Grills on 08/09/2013 08:53 pm
Another way to get it would have been by clustering their VTVL modules together.  And that was the way they originally intended to deal with the need for greater delta-v.

Eventually people (re)discover the drag, and reasons why sleek pointy things work best.

Sure... But as grasshopper shows - tall, thin, and pointy rockets can be VTVL too. I'm surprised they abandoned it, when the software for VTVL control seemed to be a significant part of Carmacks passion.

I still think space-gliders (VLOHL) beat the hell out of any VTOVL craft
of the same mass and size as far as the theoretical number of passengers that can be lofted into space is concerned.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Lars_J on 08/09/2013 09:37 pm
What does that have anything to do with Armadillo?
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: savuporo on 08/09/2013 09:55 pm
If he has only spent $2,000,000 to date,
He has spent far more ( and also had some revenue )
The estimated figures can be found in the thread
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: KelvinZero on 08/10/2013 03:02 am
When people say he had a bad business model, well yeah, but how much market is there for this sort of thing anyway? four years ago it might have looked different. My first though was, another victim of congress axing Obama's tech development plan. I just don't think a market for lunar landers exists outside of that.

If an obvious market existed I would feel much better, because the date at which regular commercial access to the moon arrived would be on the way and the only question affected by business competence would be which company got the lions share of this market. I don't feel that at all.

Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: QuantumG on 08/10/2013 04:49 am
Customers are where you find you them.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Moe Grills on 08/10/2013 09:57 pm
When people say he had a bad business model, well yeah, but how much market is there for this sort of thing anyway? four years ago it might have looked different. My first though was, another victim of congress axing Obama's tech development plan. I just don't think a market for lunar landers exists outside of that.


First: Let's give credit to Mr. Carmack for actually building rocket hardware, not vaporware.
Second: And he actually send up some rockets close to the Karman Line; how many private individuals and corporations have done that over 60 years? Did you say, not many?

Also, don't blame government for AA's collapse
AA courageously took financial and engineering risks, and you know the rest. Some gotta win, some gotta lose. Cry the blues.

Remember, Mr. Carmack started this effort when the XPrize was offered
and eventually won by his rival, Mr Rutan and company.
 
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Moe Grills on 08/10/2013 10:01 pm
What does that have anything to do with Armadillo?


VTVL, or VTOVL?
It's a dead-end technology for this one-gee planet. I don't know why Mr. Carmack pursued that VTVL/VTOVL path when space gliders are the way to go, either for suborbital
or orbital flights for as many passengers as you can cram into one of them.
I'm exaggerating a little with the word 'cram'.
See if you have a sense of humor.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: R7 on 08/10/2013 10:07 pm
I don't know why Mr. Carmack pursued that VTVL/VTOVL path when space gliders are the way to go

Perhaps because he was pursuing the prize purse of Lunar Lander Challenge?
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Lars_J on 08/10/2013 11:01 pm
What does that have anything to do with Armadillo?


VTVL, or VTOVL?
It's a dead-end technology for this one-gee planet. I don't know why Mr. Carmack pursued that VTVL/VTOVL path when space gliders are the way to go, either for suborbital
or orbital flights for as many passengers as you can cram into one of them.
I'm exaggerating a little with the word 'cram'.
See if you have a sense of humor.

I have a sense of humor... But I fail to appreciate the comedy in your posts. What does a glider have to do with Armadillo? Did I miss their memo about building a glider? And if not, what makes your comment amusing despite its off topic-ness?
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: KelvinZero on 08/11/2013 02:25 am
First: Let's give credit to Mr. Carmack for actually building rocket hardware, not vaporware.
Second: And he actually send up some rockets close to the Karman Line; how many private individuals and corporations have done that over 60 years? Did you say, not many?

Also, don't blame government for AA's collapse
AA courageously took financial and engineering risks, and you know the rest. Some gotta win, some gotta lose. Cry the blues.

Remember, Mr. Carmack started this effort when the XPrize was offered
and eventually won by his rival, Mr Rutan and company.

This is true, and what QuantumG said is also true. Thing is I want to see someone landing stuff on the moon. Im not confident customers are there to find just yet and Im not confident that Armadillo failing simply changes the name of the group that will begin regular landings there.

The issue of whether we should have a NASA that uses tax payers money is wider than this thread. I think that if the direction taken with the lunar lander challenges had been continued we could have got these regular landings at a moderate cost compared to other NASA expenditures and the spaceflight industry today would be more interesting than it is.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: tobi453 on 08/11/2013 10:27 pm
Here's my personal assessment: in my opinion the problem was that they didn't recognize the potential of a pump in the design. Yes a rocket engine with pump is much more complex, but even more powerful. Apart from the isp, it is the pump that makes liquids so much more powerful compared to solids or hybrids. With a pressure fed design they couldn't really separate themselves from sounding rockets with solids. There are sounding rockets much more powerful out there than STIG. They can reach 1000km with one stage and are not that expensive.

So which "new space" companies in the rocket business have a pump in their design? SpaceX and XCOR.

My bet is that those have a very promising future.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: mr. mark on 08/11/2013 10:47 pm
I think it would have been very hard for Armadillo's STIG suborbital research rocket to close a business case around it. Has anyone crunched the numbers say a STIG versus a UP aerospace research rocket. Not sure the numbers  would justify reuse.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Robotbeat on 08/12/2013 12:16 am
What does that have anything to do with Armadillo?


VTVL, or VTOVL?
It's a dead-end technology for this one-gee planet. I don't know why Mr. Carmack pursued that VTVL/VTOVL path when space gliders are the way to go, either for suborbital
or orbital flights for as many passengers as you can cram into one of them.
I'm exaggerating a little with the word 'cram'.
See if you have a sense of humor.
Good one. ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OX2-qEC7P_I

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGimzB5QM1M

Carmack is very close to being vindicated in his choice of VTVL for reusable launch vehicle. Give it a year or two for SpaceX's first stage vertical landing or, should SpaceX fail, five (for Blue Origin).
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: SpacexULA on 08/12/2013 01:21 am
Carmack is very close to being vindicated in his choice of VTVL for reusable launch vehicle. Give it a year or two for SpaceX's first stage vertical landing or, should SpaceX fail, five (for Blue Origin).

I still wonder how a Masten/Armadillo/Upaerospace could survive is SpaceX started allowing suborbital payloads on the first stage if recovery of Falcon 1.1 to water works out.

Considering almost no Falcon 1.1 flight is maxing out the payload to orbit, that's a LOT of mass that can go up and come down with the first stage that would usually go up on sounding rockets.

Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Robotbeat on 08/12/2013 03:44 am
Carmack is very close to being vindicated in his choice of VTVL for reusable launch vehicle. Give it a year or two for SpaceX's first stage vertical landing or, should SpaceX fail, five (for Blue Origin).

I still wonder how a Masten/Armadillo/Upaerospace could survive is SpaceX started allowing suborbital payloads on the first stage if recovery of Falcon 1.1 to water works out.

Considering almost no Falcon 1.1 flight is maxing out the payload to orbit, that's a LOT of mass that can go up and come down with the first stage that would usually go up on sounding rockets.
Masten can offer a lot quicker turnaround.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: R7 on 08/12/2013 06:41 am
There are sounding rockets much more powerful out there than STIG. They can reach 1000km with one stage and are not that expensive.

What sounding rocket goes that high with one stage, how much does it cost and what's the max acceleration?
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: ChrisWilson68 on 08/14/2013 07:03 pm
This may not be a very popular opinion, but for myself I'm not too bothered by Armadillo disappearing.  In my view, they were always just a hobby.  There's nothing wrong with a hobby, and if it entertained the people who worked on it, that's great.  But I don't think Armadillo made -- or had any chance of making, if it had continued -- any impact on the wider industry.  Virgin Galactic has a better approach to getting people and cargo to and from suborbital hops.  If the people who used to work at Armadillo go to work at some other aerospace company, they're likely to be contributing more to the industry there.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Robotbeat on 08/14/2013 07:12 pm
Armadillo and others had an impact. It helped prove VTVL feasibility (perhaps convinced Musk to do Grasshopper when he saw multiple small groups getting VTVL working repeatably) and trained many engineers on building rockets hands-on. There has been plenty of mobility between the different rocket companies. People switched back and forth between Masten and Armadillo. Some undoubtedly work for SpaceX or Virgin Galactic or XCOR or Blue Origin now.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: kkattula on 08/14/2013 07:49 pm
Armadillo and others had an impact. It helped prove VTVL feasibility (perhaps convinced Musk to do Grasshopper when he saw multiple small groups getting VTVL working repeatably) and trained many engineers on building rockets hands-on. There has been plenty of mobility between the different rocket companies. People switched back and forth between Masten and Armadillo. Some undoubtedly work for SpaceX or Virgin Galactic or XCOR or Blue Origin now.

Not to mention NASA now have Morpheus (derived from Armadillo technology) and Mighty Eagle flying.

Armadillo showed everyone that you don't need even a (low by aerospace standards) DC-X level budget to do VTVL rockets.

They pioneered the use of tether testing under cranes and tried out many other ideas. A huge contribution to New Space.

Anyone who thinks they were just a hobby, clearly hasn't been paying attention for the last decade.


Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: ChrisWilson68 on 08/14/2013 08:05 pm
Anyone who thinks they were just a hobby, clearly hasn't been paying attention for the last decade.

Or, they've been paying attention but they have a different opinion than you of the same facts.

Why is it so hard for so many people to acknowledge that other people can have different opinions from the same facts?  Why the need to insist people who disagree are ignorant?
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Robotbeat on 08/14/2013 08:14 pm
...Because some people's opinion is wrong. ;)

Look, the people involved in Armadillo were real people. Saying what they spent years and years on was just a "hobby" would probably /not/ be something you'd say to their face, would it?

Some of those people read this thread.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: bioelectromechanic on 08/18/2013 10:36 pm
Armadillo is a world class company, they do stuff many countries can't.
I look up to the people which are part of it.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: sdsds on 11/23/2013 07:32 pm
Carmack leaves id Software.

http://gamasutra.com/view/news/205539/John_Carmack_officially_leaves_id_Software.php
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Elmar Moelzer on 11/25/2013 06:59 pm
Carmack leaves id Software.

http://gamasutra.com/view/news/205539/John_Carmack_officially_leaves_id_Software.php
Yeah, I heard that. Wonder what that means for Armadillo.
Also, and somewhat OT, I wonder whether there will be another quakecon and if, without him as speaker.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Danderman on 12/31/2013 02:12 am
Well, it is sad that AA has folded.

This is one company that did have the capability of going very far with their rockets. I suspect that they had reached the point where it wasn't as much fun as before, and the prospects of making any cash were sufficiently remote that Mr. Carmack did the math and went home.

Let's hope that he generates some more cash and comes back for more punishment.

What separates John Carmack from many others is that he came onto the scene, just like everyone else, and expected to be flying in space Real Soon Now. He got serious enough to understand that space was not as easy as he thought, but still persevered to the point of developing serious hardware.

Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: savuporo on 12/31/2013 02:27 am
Not sure if this was ever posted here, but Carmack gave plenty of reasons why he quit

http://www.newspacejournal.com/2013/08/01/carmack-armadillo-aerospace-in-hibernation-mode/

I keep wondering what happened to the team.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Elmar Moelzer on 12/31/2013 11:03 pm
Damn, that sucks!
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: jongoff on 03/25/2014 09:47 pm
It probably does not mean that AA is coming back any time soon, but Oculus, the company that John Carmack is now the CTO of, just got bought by Facebook for $2B. It will be interesting to see if John decides to get involved in space things again once whatever "golden handcuffs" the acquisition terms include run out. I don't know John well enough to know if he's been burned-out on space by his AA experience, or if he's interested in getting involved again. And if he does, who knows if it'll be in the rocket side or some other part of the puzzle.

But I'm sure that won't stop rampant speculation! :-)

~Jon
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Robotbeat on 03/25/2014 09:49 pm
It probably does not mean that AA is coming back any time soon, but Oculus, the company that John Carmack is now the CTO of, just got bought by Facebook for $2B. It will be interesting to see if John decides to get involved in space things again once whatever "golden handcuffs" the acquisition terms include run out. I don't know John well enough to know if he's been burned-out on space by his AA experience, or if he's interested in getting involved again. And if he does, who knows if it'll be in the rocket side or some other part of the puzzle.

But I'm sure that won't stop rampant speculation! :-)

~Jon
Well, apparently you've been able to get him to do some free consultation work on using the Oculus for tele-operation in space for Altius Space via Twitter. :D
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: jongoff on 03/25/2014 10:08 pm
Well, apparently you've been able to get him to do some free consultation work on using the Oculus for tele-operation in space for Altius Space via Twitter. :D

Back in December. I picked a bad day to follow-up on that conversation! :-)

~Jon
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: Robotbeat on 03/25/2014 10:11 pm
Well, apparently you've been able to get him to do some free consultation work on using the Oculus for tele-operation in space for Altius Space via Twitter. :D

Back in December. I picked a bad day to follow-up on that conversation! :-)

~Jon
Ha, no kidding!
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: QuantumG on 03/25/2014 10:48 pm
Wow.. that's a pretty fast startup to exit!
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: jongoff on 03/26/2014 12:49 am
Wow.. that's a pretty fast startup to exit!

Wow. Founded in mid 2012, and exiting for $2B at the end of Q1 2014--not even 2yrs. Really impressive!

~Jon
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: billh on 03/26/2014 01:11 am
Wow.. that's a pretty fast startup to exit!

Wow. Founded in mid 2012, and exiting for $2B at the end of Q1 2014--not even 2yrs. Really impressive!

~Jon
C'mon, Jon! Get with the program!!  :)
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: R7 on 03/26/2014 06:59 am
Uh oh, will the VRgear be available without some force-fed Facebook account requirement. Ex stalking goes 3D. Well, at least John got some nice injection of 'crazy money'.
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: corrodedNut on 03/30/2014 01:08 pm
"The FB deal probably will get me to take another swing at aerospace, but not for several years.I have divided my focus too much in the past."

https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/450031715017179136
Title: Re: Armadillo Aerospace Update Thread
Post by: IRobot on 03/30/2014 01:37 pm
"I'm fine with Elon Musk being "Plan A". I can be backup plan C."

https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/450033123464474624