Author Topic: Astra Space  (Read 262043 times)

Online TrevorMonty

Re: Astra Space
« Reply #760 on: 06/15/2022 10:56 am »
Scout also had a poor early launch record. The first 30 launches had 13 failures and 1 partial failure!

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=44689.msg2377201#new
Was it government funded?. I doubt private investors  would keep funding at this failure rate.
« Last Edit: 06/16/2022 12:13 am by zubenelgenubi »

Online edzieba

  • Virtual Realist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4429
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 6464
  • Likes Given: 35
Re: Astra Space
« Reply #761 on: 06/15/2022 12:11 pm »
Scout also had a poor early launch record. The first 30 launches had 13 failures and 1 partial failure!

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=44689.msg2377201#new
Was it government funded?. I doubt private investors  would keep funding at this failure rate.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk
As Astra received funding via a SPAC merger, they have a half billion dollar cash reserve which investors provided sight-unseen. That's a lot of on-ramp for Astra to pursue a riskier development strategy (rather than more ground testing before flying) without needing to court investors again until they have a system demonstrating reliable operation.

If you mean Scout, it was a NACA programme with LTV as the prime contractor, at least to start with. It became a grab-bag of variants and derivates developed and used by different agencies.

Offline imprezive

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 116
  • Liked: 60
  • Likes Given: 22
Re: Astra Space
« Reply #762 on: 06/15/2022 01:20 pm »
Scout also had a poor early launch record. The first 30 launches had 13 failures and 1 partial failure!

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=44689.msg2377201#new

I donít think anyone would argue that designing rockets was difficult in the 1950s. If your brand new Corolla breaks down no one says itís fine my Ď57 Chevy broke down all the time too, cars are hard. Expectations can and should change with time and industry maturity.

Online TrevorMonty

Re: Astra Space
« Reply #763 on: 06/15/2022 05:01 pm »

Scout also had a poor early launch record. The first 30 launches had 13 failures and 1 partial failure!

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=44689.msg2377201#new

I donít think anyone would argue that designing rockets was difficult in the 1950s. If your brand new Corolla breaks down no one says itís fine my Ď57 Chevy broke down all the time too, cars are hard. Expectations can and should change with time and industry maturity.

A lot things would've broken on Corolla prototypes before they went to production.  Even then still get odd recall. Luckily for automotive engineers they didn't need to figure out point of failure from remains of wreck at bottom of 5000ft cliff everytime something went wrong.

Because LVs are so unforgiving need to spend lot effort trying guess every point of failure. Even when design is sound still have to manufacturer to very high standard, no Friday afternoon lemons allowed or could be end of company.

While design and manufacturing tools have improved dramatically since 50s the unforgiving nature of launch hasn't.
« Last Edit: 06/16/2022 12:15 am by zubenelgenubi »

Offline imprezive

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 116
  • Liked: 60
  • Likes Given: 22
Re: Astra Space
« Reply #764 on: 06/16/2022 04:59 am »

Scout also had a poor early launch record. The first 30 launches had 13 failures and 1 partial failure!

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=44689.msg2377201#new

I donít think anyone would argue that designing rockets was difficult in the 1950s. If your brand new Corolla breaks down no one says itís fine my Ď57 Chevy broke down all the time too, cars are hard. Expectations can and should change with time and industry maturity.

A lot things would've broken on Corolla prototypes before they went to production.  Even then still get odd recall. Luckily for automotive engineers they didn't need to figure out point of failure from remains of wreck at bottom of 5000ft cliff everytime something went wrong.

Because LVs are so unforgiving need to spend lot effort trying guess every point of failure. Even when design is sound still have to manufacturer to very high standard, no Friday afternoon lemons allowed or could be end of company.

While design and manufacturing tools have improved dramatically since 50s the unforgiving nature of launch hasn't.

Sure but this want a development launch for Astra this was a production customer launch.

Offline Toast

Re: Astra Space
« Reply #765 on: 06/16/2022 05:36 am »

Scout also had a poor early launch record. The first 30 launches had 13 failures and 1 partial failure!

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=44689.msg2377201#new

I donít think anyone would argue that designing rockets was difficult in the 1950s. If your brand new Corolla breaks down no one says itís fine my Ď57 Chevy broke down all the time too, cars are hard. Expectations can and should change with time and industry maturity.

A lot things would've broken on Corolla prototypes before they went to production.  Even then still get odd recall. Luckily for automotive engineers they didn't need to figure out point of failure from remains of wreck at bottom of 5000ft cliff everytime something went wrong.

Because LVs are so unforgiving need to spend lot effort trying guess every point of failure. Even when design is sound still have to manufacturer to very high standard, no Friday afternoon lemons allowed or could be end of company.

While design and manufacturing tools have improved dramatically since 50s the unforgiving nature of launch hasn't.

Sure but this want a development launch for Astra this was a production customer launch.
True, but it's worth noting that while this was a launch for a paying customer, that paying customer was NASA and they did so as a part of a low-cost high-risk program intended to support emerging launch providers with the full understanding that there was a substantially higher risk of failure.

Offline XRZ.YZ

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 136
  • Charlotte,NC
  • Liked: 103
  • Likes Given: 35
Re: Astra Space
« Reply #766 on: 06/19/2022 02:59 am »
Scout also had a poor early launch record. The first 30 launches had 13 failures and 1 partial failure!

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=44689.msg2377201#new
Was it government funded?. I doubt private investors  would keep funding at this failure rate.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk
As Astra received funding via a SPAC merger, they have a half billion dollar cash reserve which investors provided sight-unseen. That's a lot of on-ramp for Astra to pursue a riskier development strategy (rather than more ground testing before flying) without needing to court investors again until they have a system demonstrating reliable operation.

If you mean Scout, it was a NACA programme with LTV as the prime contractor, at least to start with. It became a grab-bag of variants and derivates developed and used by different agencies.

From their most recent financial report.
https://investor.astra.com/news-releases/news-release-details/astra-announces-first-quarter-2022-financial-results
They have 161M cash on hand on 2022 Mar 31st. (Sure, they have other asset can convert to cash, but at which rate is less clear) Their total current asset is 275M and total asset is 439M

And in Q1 2022 they have operation cash flow is -48M and -21M in capital expenditure. (This is from cash flow table, from statement of operation, they loss 85M in Q1)

And their income is almost negligible at 3M per launch.
So if they can not raise more cash either by issue stock or debt by end of 2022 or first half of 2023. They are bankrupt.

And there is no chance they can have a working test launch for Rocket 4 by that time.



XQCR LLYZ GYZH HZSZ

Offline josephus

  • Member
  • Posts: 13
  • Let me play among the stars
  • Liked: 9
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: Astra Space
« Reply #767 on: 06/19/2022 11:42 am »
Scout also had a poor early launch record. The first 30 launches had 13 failures and 1 partial failure!

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=44689.msg2377201#new
Was it government funded?. I doubt private investors  would keep funding at this failure rate.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk
As Astra received funding via a SPAC merger, they have a half billion dollar cash reserve which investors provided sight-unseen. That's a lot of on-ramp for Astra to pursue a riskier development strategy (rather than more ground testing before flying) without needing to court investors again until they have a system demonstrating reliable operation.

If you mean Scout, it was a NACA programme with LTV as the prime contractor, at least to start with. It became a grab-bag of variants and derivates developed and used by different agencies.

From their most recent financial report.
https://investor.astra.com/news-releases/news-release-details/astra-announces-first-quarter-2022-financial-results
They have 161M cash on hand on 2022 Mar 31st. (Sure, they have other asset can convert to cash, but at which rate is less clear) Their total current asset is 275M and total asset is 439M

And in Q1 2022 they have operation cash flow is -48M and -21M in capital expenditure. (This is from cash flow table, from statement of operation, they loss 85M in Q1)

And their income is almost negligible at 3M per launch.
So if they can not raise more cash either by issue stock or debt by end of 2022 or first half of 2023. They are bankrupt.

And there is no chance they can have a working test launch for Rocket 4 by that time.

Astra had $255.2 million in cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities at the end of March 2022. Marketable securities are financial instruments which, per definition, can be quickly liquidated (cashed in) on public markets. Astra may have around $175 million in cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities by the end of June 2022 if its guidance from the last earning report call is spot on.

https://investor.astra.com/news-releases/news-release-details/astra-announces-first-quarter-2022-financial-results
Quote
Cash and cash equivalents and marketable securities totaled $255.2. Cash and cash equivalents were $161.5 million and marketable securities totaled $93.7 million as of March 31, 2022.
Quote
For the second quarter ending June 30, 2022, we currently expect:
Adjusted EBITDA Loss* between $(58) million and $(64) million.
Depreciation and Amortization between $2.9 million and $3.2 million.
Stock-based compensation between $15 million and $18 million.
Cash taxes of approximately zero.
Basic shares outstanding between 267 million and 270 million.
Capital expenditures between $18 million and $23 million.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/marketablesecurities.asp
Quote
Marketable securities are liquid financial instruments that can be quickly converted into cash at a reasonable price. The liquidity of marketable securities comes from the fact that the maturities tend to be less than one year, and that the rates at which they can be bought or sold have little effect on prices.

Brannon, the Astra's chief financial officer, said during the earnings report call on May 5 that their spending will slow down in the third quarter due to the completion of their factory expansion. Astra may be currently financed for 1 year with an upcoming capital raise in early 2023 or sooner in case of favourable market conditions. Its financial situation is not its single greatest current issue because it may be good enough if they can succeed in upcoming missions and launch more payloads in 2022 or it will not matter if Rocket 3.3 will keep failing, customers will keep losing their payloads and faith and an insurance will skyrocket.

I wonder whether Astra will fix current issues in time to launch the next batch of TROPICS satellites and whether some new issues will affect the next launch.
Let me see what nuclear spring is like on Jupiter and Mars

Offline imprezive

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 116
  • Liked: 60
  • Likes Given: 22
Re: Astra Space
« Reply #768 on: 06/20/2022 05:43 am »

Scout also had a poor early launch record. The first 30 launches had 13 failures and 1 partial failure!

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=44689.msg2377201#new

I donít think anyone would argue that designing rockets was difficult in the 1950s. If your brand new Corolla breaks down no one says itís fine my Ď57 Chevy broke down all the time too, cars are hard. Expectations can and should change with time and industry maturity.

A lot things would've broken on Corolla prototypes before they went to production.  Even then still get odd recall. Luckily for automotive engineers they didn't need to figure out point of failure from remains of wreck at bottom of 5000ft cliff everytime something went wrong.

Because LVs are so unforgiving need to spend lot effort trying guess every point of failure. Even when design is sound still have to manufacturer to very high standard, no Friday afternoon lemons allowed or could be end of company.

While design and manufacturing tools have improved dramatically since 50s the unforgiving nature of launch hasn't.

Sure but this want a development launch for Astra this was a production customer launch.
True, but it's worth noting that while this was a launch for a paying customer, that paying customer was NASA and they did so as a part of a low-cost high-risk program intended to support emerging launch providers with the full understanding that there was a substantially higher risk of failure.

No it was not. VCLS is the program for supporting emerging launch providers. Astra blew that one up too. TROPICS is supposed to be a functional science constellation.

Online edzieba

  • Virtual Realist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4429
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 6464
  • Likes Given: 35
Re: Astra Space
« Reply #769 on: 06/20/2022 10:00 am »

Scout also had a poor early launch record. The first 30 launches had 13 failures and 1 partial failure!

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=44689.msg2377201#new

I donít think anyone would argue that designing rockets was difficult in the 1950s. If your brand new Corolla breaks down no one says itís fine my Ď57 Chevy broke down all the time too, cars are hard. Expectations can and should change with time and industry maturity.

A lot things would've broken on Corolla prototypes before they went to production.  Even then still get odd recall. Luckily for automotive engineers they didn't need to figure out point of failure from remains of wreck at bottom of 5000ft cliff everytime something went wrong.

Because LVs are so unforgiving need to spend lot effort trying guess every point of failure. Even when design is sound still have to manufacturer to very high standard, no Friday afternoon lemons allowed or could be end of company.

While design and manufacturing tools have improved dramatically since 50s the unforgiving nature of launch hasn't.

Sure but this want a development launch for Astra this was a production customer launch.
True, but it's worth noting that while this was a launch for a paying customer, that paying customer was NASA and they did so as a part of a low-cost high-risk program intended to support emerging launch providers with the full understanding that there was a substantially higher risk of failure.

No it was not. VCLS is the program for supporting emerging launch providers. Astra blew that one up too. TROPICS is supposed to be a functional science constellation.
The launch contract for TROPICS was assigned before Astra received it's first VADR award. To add to the confusion, TROPICS is itself a Venture Class mission, but that's the mission not the launch contract.

Offline imprezive

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 116
  • Liked: 60
  • Likes Given: 22
Re: Astra Space
« Reply #770 on: 06/20/2022 05:27 pm »

Scout also had a poor early launch record. The first 30 launches had 13 failures and 1 partial failure!

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=44689.msg2377201#new

I donít think anyone would argue that designing rockets was difficult in the 1950s. If your brand new Corolla breaks down no one says itís fine my Ď57 Chevy broke down all the time too, cars are hard. Expectations can and should change with time and industry maturity.

A lot things would've broken on Corolla prototypes before they went to production.  Even then still get odd recall. Luckily for automotive engineers they didn't need to figure out point of failure from remains of wreck at bottom of 5000ft cliff everytime something went wrong.

Because LVs are so unforgiving need to spend lot effort trying guess every point of failure. Even when design is sound still have to manufacturer to very high standard, no Friday afternoon lemons allowed or could be end of company.

While design and manufacturing tools have improved dramatically since 50s the unforgiving nature of launch hasn't.

Sure but this want a development launch for Astra this was a production customer launch.
True, but it's worth noting that while this was a launch for a paying customer, that paying customer was NASA and they did so as a part of a low-cost high-risk program intended to support emerging launch providers with the full understanding that there was a substantially higher risk of failure.

No it was not. VCLS is the program for supporting emerging launch providers. Astra blew that one up too. TROPICS is supposed to be a functional science constellation.
The launch contract for TROPICS was assigned before Astra received it's first VADR award. To add to the confusion, TROPICS is itself a Venture Class mission, but that's the mission not the launch contract.

Astra hasnít received any VADR contracts that Iím aware of. Iím talking about the VCLS Demo 2 contract. Yes TROPICS was a venture class mission but the VCLS Demo missions is what I was referring to as those are specifically for supporting emerging launch providers.

https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-awards-venture-class-launch-services-demonstration-2-contract

Offline Davidthefat

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 463
  • Rockets are life.
  • Greater Los Angeles Area, California
  • Liked: 287
  • Likes Given: 70
Re: Astra Space
« Reply #771 on: 06/23/2022 06:42 pm »
Anyone notice the Mike Krene left Astra in May?

[zubenelgenubi: Un-corrected the autocorrect typo.]
« Last Edit: 07/14/2022 11:00 pm by zubenelgenubi »

Online TrevorMonty

Re: Astra Space
« Reply #772 on: 06/23/2022 07:06 pm »
Anyone notice the Mike Keene left Astra in May?
Who is Mike Keene?


« Last Edit: 06/23/2022 11:17 pm by zubenelgenubi »

Offline butters

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2321
  • Liked: 1521
  • Likes Given: 521
Re: Astra Space
« Reply #773 on: 06/23/2022 07:24 pm »
Anyone notice the Mike Keene left Astra in May?
I think you mean Mike Krene. Interesting resume. Rocketdyne, SpaceX, Blue Origin. Astra for one year only. The Firefly deal was made about four months after he joined.

Offline Celeste_El

  • Member
  • Posts: 24
  • MA
  • Liked: 45
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Astra Space
« Reply #774 on: 06/24/2022 02:20 am »
Anyone notice the Mike Keene left Astra in May?

I noticed that too. Looks like he left about 2 months ago to work full time at a propulsion company he founded about a year ago called Reach Space tech. They have nothing listed on their website but here's the link regardless: https://reachspace.com/

I also noticed Stratos Davlos (VP of software engineering) also isnt listed on their team page anymore. His linkedin still says he works there but its possible he just hasn't updated it if he did leave. I was keeping an eye on it. 

Offline Davidthefat

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 463
  • Rockets are life.
  • Greater Los Angeles Area, California
  • Liked: 287
  • Likes Given: 70
Re: Astra Space
« Reply #775 on: 06/24/2022 03:55 am »
Anyone notice the Mike Keene left Astra in May?
I think you mean Mike Krene. Interesting resume. Rocketdyne, SpaceX, Blue Origin. Astra for one year only. The Firefly deal was made about four months after he joined.

Autocorrect on my phone.


Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27741
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 51563
  • Likes Given: 22091
Re: Astra Space
« Reply #776 on: 07/21/2022 12:40 am »
twitter.com/jacktwhitlock/status/1549612034471378944

Quote
@Peter_J_Beck What are your opinions on @Astraís plans for the future?

https://twitter.com/peter_j_beck/status/1549665672073867264

Quote
Aspirations are easy to sell, execution is always the absolute measure and there is often a little too much of one and not enough of the other in the industry.

Online TrevorMonty

Re: Astra Space
« Reply #777 on: 07/21/2022 01:14 am »
twitter.com/jacktwhitlock/status/1549612034471378944

Quote
@Peter_J_Beck What are your opinions on @Astraís plans for the future?

https://twitter.com/peter_j_beck/status/1549665672073867264

Quote
Aspirations are easy to sell, execution is always the absolute measure and there is often a little too much of one and not enough of the other in the industry.
Nothing wrong in what he said but it's not a good look criticizing competition, best leave that to Elon.
« Last Edit: 07/21/2022 01:20 am by zubenelgenubi »

Online M.E.T.

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1970
  • Liked: 2441
  • Likes Given: 371
Re: Astra Space
« Reply #778 on: 07/21/2022 02:49 am »
twitter.com/jacktwhitlock/status/1549612034471378944

Quote
@Peter_J_Beck What are your opinions on @Astraís plans for the future?

https://twitter.com/peter_j_beck/status/1549665672073867264

Quote
Aspirations are easy to sell, execution is always the absolute measure and there is often a little too much of one and not enough of the other in the industry.
Nothing wrong in what he said but it's not a good look criticizing competition, best leave that to Elon.

Also a good measure of pot calling the kettle black in that tweet.

Online TrevorMonty

Re: Astra Space
« Reply #779 on: 07/21/2022 10:39 am »

twitter.com/jacktwhitlock/status/1549612034471378944

Quote
@Peter_J_Beck What are your opinions on @Astraís plans for the future?

https://twitter.com/peter_j_beck/status/1549665672073867264

Quote
Aspirations are easy to sell, execution is always the absolute measure and there is often a little too much of one and not enough of the other in the industry.
Nothing wrong in what he said but it's not a good look criticizing competition, best leave that to Elon.

Also a good measure of pot calling the kettle black in that tweet.

RL are executing but launch rates are nowhere  levels Beck predicted a few years ago. So yeah a bit of pot calling kettle black. RL's saving grace is their booming space systems which has lot to do with some shrewd acquisitions.
« Last Edit: 07/22/2022 03:21 am by zubenelgenubi »

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement SkyTale Software GmbH
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0