Author Topic: Introducing Firefly Space Systems  (Read 340703 times)

Offline Gliderflyer

Re: Introducing Firefly Space Systems
« Reply #480 on: 08/06/2016 02:03 am »
There is a new Aviation Week article on Firefly: http://aviationweek.com/space/firefly-targets-late-fall-alpha-aerospike-rocket-tests
Unfortunately, it is behind a paywall. It has some nice details on their engine (mass flow, chamber pressure, etc). There is also an updated picture (attached) of their aerospike. It now looks more like an actual aerospike and less like a plug nozzle.
I tried it at home

Offline NaN

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 248
  • Liked: 248
  • Likes Given: 232
Re: Introducing Firefly Space Systems
« Reply #481 on: 08/06/2016 05:33 am »
I think the issues are much deeper.

I actually downloaded the documents mentioned in that post last night, and the complaint of VG is that he:-

- started his - competing - company while at VG (documented);
- used VG company resources to do so (documented);
- tried to hire away his colleagues for his startup while still an employee (documented);
- used his access as an employee of VG to their customers to bankroll his startup (documented);
- and finally used IP he was working on for VG as the core of his competing startup (also documented - according to VG, he actually emailed VG's internal counsel to try to get his aerospike work removed from his IPR agreement while he was still an employee and they refused).

Thank you for the summary, seems like a serious list if proven. If he directly used VG resources to work on Firefly stuff then it gives them some sort of claim - I have done side projects before but always very careful not to use company resources or time in any way. If you let your side project touch your employer's resources then you put your ownership of it at risk... that is how I understood it, anyway.
What does (documented) mean. A judge accepted the conclusion? Or it's just something VG claims they can document?

Would be a pity if Firefly were derailed due to this, I have been watching with interest.

Offline ringsider

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 714
  • Liked: 506
  • Likes Given: 97
Re: Introducing Firefly Space Systems
« Reply #482 on: 08/06/2016 09:36 am »
"Documented" means VG filed certified copies of emails sent/received by Markusic on VG computers between himself and employees, as well as to/from King and Blum, discussing the startup, as well as copies of business plans with dates, company founding documents from the state registry, meeting dates, records of attachment of USB sticks to computers, signed employment contracts, signed IPR agreements, signed non solicitation agreement, personal emails to Richard Branson, etc etc.

Pretty hard evidence, in other words. The main filing is 370 pages.

I agree with you that the mixing of his employment resources with his external activities is very tricky. He would not be the first person to suffer for that. And if you are VG, what do you really want - Firefly out of business I guess? So you have to think that this is a pretty serious threat to the future of the business if the entire company was founded on that basis - don't forget Blum and King were VG space tourist customers as well, and they all met at a private tour of VG facilities (there's an email chain about that too).

I saw earlier here that they recently raised $19m from crowdfunding / SeedInvest. I really wonder if those investors understood the nature of this dispute, because if not, that might lead to more fallout.
« Last Edit: 08/06/2016 09:41 am by ringsider »

Offline NaN

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 248
  • Liked: 248
  • Likes Given: 232
Re: Introducing Firefly Space Systems
« Reply #483 on: 08/07/2016 05:02 pm »
And if you are VG, what do you really want - Firefly out of business I guess? So you have to think that this is a pretty serious threat to the future of the business if the entire company was founded on that basis - don't forget Blum and King were VG space tourist customers as well, and they all met at a private tour of VG facilities (there's an email chain about that too).

VG would not necessarily want them out of business - if VG had a significant stake in someone taking a different attack on this very difficult market, it would act as a hedge.
My uneducated opinion is that, using the Zuckerberg settlements as a model, at most Markusic would give up some portion of his own stake and Firefly could continue on without more radical changes. Hopefully this legal cloud can be removed and we can get back to talking about aerospikes ;)

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: Introducing Firefly Space Systems
« Reply #484 on: 08/07/2016 05:29 pm »

Sounds like the very reason California isn't friendly to non-competes.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline pippin

  • Regular
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2575
  • Liked: 312
  • Likes Given: 45
Re: Introducing Firefly Space Systems
« Reply #485 on: 08/07/2016 11:52 pm »
But this is not about non-compete clauses, it's about IP breach and misconduct while still under contract, that's something different and would be the same in California

Offline meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14158
  • N. California
  • Liked: 14046
  • Likes Given: 1392
Re: Introducing Firefly Space Systems
« Reply #486 on: 08/08/2016 03:55 am »
But this is not about non-compete clauses, it's about IP breach and misconduct while still under contract, that's something different and would be the same in California

So now a lot depends on what he signed when he joined up.  Given that he wasn't exactly an intern, you always fill out the list of IP and skills you bring with you (not only patents.  Any IP.)

And beyond IP, if he just used company resources (email system and phones and whatnot) this doesn't give the company automatic ownership of what he did.  It just means he violated rules.

That said, it doesn't sound like it's going well for him in court.
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline ringsider

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 714
  • Liked: 506
  • Likes Given: 97
Re: Introducing Firefly Space Systems
« Reply #487 on: 08/08/2016 10:48 am »
That said, it doesn't sound like it's going well for him in court.

Looks like Virgin are also suing the CFO, Michael Blum, in Nevada. Not sure why.

https://www.clarkcountycourts.us/Anonymous/CaseDetail.aspx?CaseID=11649595

Offline pippin

  • Regular
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2575
  • Liked: 312
  • Likes Given: 45
Introducing Firefly Space Systems
« Reply #488 on: 08/08/2016 10:51 am »
But this is not about non-compete clauses, it's about IP breach and misconduct while still under contract, that's something different and would be the same in California

So now a lot depends on what he signed when he joined up.  Given that he wasn't exactly an intern, you always fill out the list of IP and skills you bring with you (not only patents.  Any IP.)

And beyond IP, if he just used company resources (email system and phones and whatnot) this doesn't give the company automatic ownership of what he did.  It just means he violated rules.

That said, it doesn't sound like it's going well for him in court.
Usually it should give them ownership if he did things during office hours unless agreed otherwise or clearly unrelated to their business which will be hard to argue here

Anyway... I don't know details so this is pretty much speculation my point was just that this has nothing to do with non-compete clauses
« Last Edit: 08/08/2016 10:53 am by pippin »

Offline meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14158
  • N. California
  • Liked: 14046
  • Likes Given: 1392
Re: Introducing Firefly Space Systems
« Reply #489 on: 08/08/2016 02:39 pm »
But this is not about non-compete clauses, it's about IP breach and misconduct while still under contract, that's something different and would be the same in California

So now a lot depends on what he signed when he joined up.  Given that he wasn't exactly an intern, you always fill out the list of IP and skills you bring with you (not only patents.  Any IP.)

And beyond IP, if he just used company resources (email system and phones and whatnot) this doesn't give the company automatic ownership of what he did.  It just means he violated rules.

That said, it doesn't sound like it's going well for him in court.
Usually it should give them ownership if he did things during office hours unless agreed otherwise or clearly unrelated to their business which will be hard to argue here

Anyway... I don't know details so this is pretty much speculation my point was just that this has nothing to do with non-compete clauses
Agree on non compete, less so on ownership.

Automatic ownership is on what you did as part of your work there.

Other stuff, it depends on the state you're litigating in.
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline NaN

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 248
  • Liked: 248
  • Likes Given: 232
Re: Introducing Firefly Space Systems
« Reply #490 on: 08/08/2016 04:49 pm »
Usually it should give them ownership if he did things during office hours unless agreed otherwise or clearly unrelated to their business which will be hard to argue here

I think that is my understanding as well. IMHO at minimum his personal shares (and job) are at high risk, if the claims are proven. And beyond that there is a huge question mark over new shares I would think. This is what one judge said:

THE COURT: So your remedy on arbitration would be to enter a judgment against Dr. Markusic and take all his stock in Galactic and then, take over the corporation and find out. I mean, it's very easy. I would do that if I was the litigator if the arbiter would go along with it. Seems like the arbiter might if they stonewall it.

Yikes.

This doesn't mean this is a realistic outcome of the mediation. This judge took a very dim view of their attempt to 'stonewall' a mediation order to produce documents. I think he's basically saying comply with the order or you will regret it, suckas.

Producing the documents will then show if actual documents were taken (bad) or if Firefly produced their own new work using the expertise of its employees including Markusic. It's perfectly legal to take expertise you acquire at one employer and apply it at a new one, for obvious reasons.


Offline ringsider

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 714
  • Liked: 506
  • Likes Given: 97
Re: Introducing Firefly Space Systems
« Reply #491 on: 08/08/2016 09:54 pm »
Hmm. I of course see your point but I think you would have another view in this case of you read the complaint and the supporting documents. I have the main pdf files from the LA court for both sides now. The only reason VG is taking people to actual court is that they are failing to respond to subpoenas issued last year, and with all the delaying tactics from the Firefly Space side the rationale for delaying starts to look a little specious.

I do think it is a pity they are in this situation, but actually if you look at the technical decisions they are also shifting in an alarming manner considering they are planning a 2018 launch e.g. from meth to RP-1, and therefore from from autogenous pressure to He blowdown. The rationale for this change was strange when you consider that was a core technology of the company, almost like the change was... not preferred? Compared to RL - who have had several delays but as far as I know no major tech spec changes - it just looks a little random, and I suspect these legal matters are not helpful.

Offline Davidthefat

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 464
  • Rockets are life.
  • Greater Los Angeles Area, California
  • Liked: 288
  • Likes Given: 71
Re: Introducing Firefly Space Systems
« Reply #492 on: 08/08/2016 10:10 pm »
While it may have been the core technology of the company during founding, it was more or less something on paper. It's probably due to the unexpectedly high heat transfer that is faced by the aerospike scheme that prevented the progression of the specific technology. For a monolithic thrust chamber, the volume to chamber wall area is bigger than the ratio on an aerospike.

Due to the much lower boiling point of methane and simply the fact that there's more surface area for heat transfer to occur, it causes issues with keeping the propellant from boiling within the cooling chambers. It also poses a challenge in cooling the pintle injector that they use. With RP-1, the propellant is still in a liquid state and provides cooling of the outside of the pintle. If the propellant is injected as a gas, it doesn't provide that cooling and alternate injector schemes will have to be investigated. Shortening the pintle injector still possesses the cooling issue as now the combustion is occurring so close to the injector face.

That combined with the fact that they are pursuing an aerospike, I think it was just an engineering decision to choose between aerospike and autogenously pressurized methane. Aerospike won out cause it's a flashier technology. At least that's my theory.

Offline Archibald

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2611
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 1096
Re: Introducing Firefly Space Systems
« Reply #493 on: 08/09/2016 09:24 am »
Quote
That combined with the fact that they are pursuing an aerospike, I think it was just an engineering decision to choose between aerospike and autogenously pressurized methane. Aerospike won out cause it's a flashier technology. At least that's my theory.

I was quite surprised, too, to see a "return of the aerospike" that way - small startup, expendable vehicle, no liquid hydrogen. Quite a long way from NASA X-33.
Han shot first and Gwynne Shotwell !

Offline Nomic

  • Member
  • Posts: 47
  • Liked: 23
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Introducing Firefly Space Systems
« Reply #494 on: 08/09/2016 01:19 pm »
Have they said how they plan to cool the plug? Surely regenerative cooling the plug and combustion chambers is to much of a pressure drop.

Offline meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14158
  • N. California
  • Liked: 14046
  • Likes Given: 1392
Re: Introducing Firefly Space Systems
« Reply #495 on: 08/09/2016 02:58 pm »
Have they said how they plan to cool the plug? Surely regenerative cooling the plug and combustion chambers is to much of a pressure drop.
The plug is a lot smaller than a nozzle.

Could they have a smaller cooling flow that goes into the exhaust, running parallel to the main flow into the chamber?

Still a waste of propellant, but maybe the only available option?
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: Introducing Firefly Space Systems
« Reply #496 on: 08/09/2016 03:00 pm »
Abandoning the hokey plug nozzle is fine.

I just want these companies (Rocketlab, Virgin Galactic, Firefly, Garvey/Vector, etc) to get something flying. Then refine the technology, add a plug nozzle or methane fuel or whathaveyou.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline GalacticIntruder

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 512
  • Pet Peeve:I hate the word Downcomer. Ban it.
  • Huntsville, AL
  • Liked: 247
  • Likes Given: 70
Re: Introducing Firefly Space Systems
« Reply #497 on: 08/09/2016 03:26 pm »
« Last Edit: 08/09/2016 03:26 pm by GalacticIntruder »
"And now the Sun will fade, All we are is all we made." Breaking Benjamin

Offline Gliderflyer

Re: Introducing Firefly Space Systems
« Reply #498 on: 08/09/2016 03:26 pm »
Have they said how they plan to cool the plug? Surely regenerative cooling the plug and combustion chambers is to much of a pressure drop.
I believe they are cooling it with the helium used for tank press. The helium bottles are stored in the LOX tank, so this has the benefit of warming it up.
I tried it at home

Offline ringsider

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 714
  • Liked: 506
  • Likes Given: 97
Re: Introducing Firefly Space Systems
« Reply #499 on: 08/09/2016 03:49 pm »
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tS-pDQdb2_4&feature=youtu.be

FFSS with Tom Markusic, and team.

Copper engine chamber. I mean, it's an impressive and slick video, but that's a copper engine, right - green flame? That has a certain (early) place in the engine development cycle for thermal measurements.
« Last Edit: 08/09/2016 08:26 pm by ringsider »

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1