After the stage test RUD, I think we can safely assume that RS1 will not launch before second half of 2022.https://spacenews.com/abl-space-systems-rocket-stage-destroyed-in-test-accident/See the ABL thread for more discussion on this incident.
Quote from: PM3 on 01/20/2022 07:37 pmAfter the stage test RUD, I think we can safely assume that RS1 will not launch before second half of 2022.https://spacenews.com/abl-space-systems-rocket-stage-destroyed-in-test-accident/See the ABL thread for more discussion on this incident.It says an upper stage. More than one upper stage exists and not all are flight articles. Also it is not yet confirmed by the company that the stage that had an RUD is associated with this mission.
Quote from: trimeta on 12/05/2021 08:27 pmI think it's been said before, but I'm still unclear on how isogrid tanks line up with their low launch costs. For that matter, I also don't understand how the RS1 delivers more payload to orbit than Firefly Alpha or Terran 1 while having lower thrust on both the first and second stages than those vehicles.Isogrid is not expensive if you mill it in 3-axis then form it, which ABL appears to do. Maybe RS1 has a better mass fraction than those other rockets (I don't think either one has any internal stiffeners at all?).
I think it's been said before, but I'm still unclear on how isogrid tanks line up with their low launch costs. For that matter, I also don't understand how the RS1 delivers more payload to orbit than Firefly Alpha or Terran 1 while having lower thrust on both the first and second stages than those vehicles.
And ABL has been moving slow for a while now.
* Relativity Space: founded in 2015. Haven't started running stage tests yet.
Quote from: ParabolicSnark on 01/21/2022 03:47 pmQuote from: PM3 on 01/21/2022 06:09 amAnd ABL has been moving slow for a while now.ABL was founded in 2017 and are running stage tests 4 years later. In what world is that slow?In fall 2020, they announced this launch for Q1 2021. Nothing happened. In fall 2021, they announced it for Q1 2022. Nothing happens. Taking >> 1 year for something you said you will to do within < 6 months is slow.Let's hope this pattern will not continue ...
Quote from: PM3 on 01/21/2022 06:09 amAnd ABL has been moving slow for a while now.ABL was founded in 2017 and are running stage tests 4 years later. In what world is that slow?
Quote from: feliciadawkins on 12/05/2021 11:21 pmQuote from: trimeta on 12/05/2021 08:27 pmI think it's been said before, but I'm still unclear on how isogrid tanks line up with their low launch costs. For that matter, I also don't understand how the RS1 delivers more payload to orbit than Firefly Alpha or Terran 1 while having lower thrust on both the first and second stages than those vehicles.Isogrid is not expensive if you mill it in 3-axis then form it, which ABL appears to do. Maybe RS1 has a better mass fraction than those other rockets (I don't think either one has any internal stiffeners at all?).That's how all isogrids are done, including ULA's? Mostly ends up being a question of optimizing material removal toolpaths, etc. There's always other tricks to reduce cost. Maybe it's not as large of a fraction of launch cost for a rocket of this size.
Quote from: russianhalo117 on 01/20/2022 09:53 pmIt says an upper stage. More than one upper stage exists and not all are flight articles. Also it is not yet confirmed by the company that the stage that had an RUD is associated with this mission.Even if there was another, flight-ready upper stage (there is no information about that): The failure needs to be investigated. FAA will require an explanation and a fix before allowing a launch. And then they will have to repeat the test, after repairing the test stand. And ABL has been moving slow for a while now.
It says an upper stage. More than one upper stage exists and not all are flight articles. Also it is not yet confirmed by the company that the stage that had an RUD is associated with this mission.
After the incident, he said the company expects a three-month delay in that first launch. The upper stage being built for the second RS1 launch will now be used for the first launch. The lower stage is complete and currently in storage in Kodiak, while the interstage between the first and second stages is being shipped to Kodiak. The payload fairing has completed acceptance testing and will soon be shipped to the launch site.
“Our strategy in developing RS1 is to rapidly test, iterate and sometimes fail. An engine hard start was a known risk in this campaign,” O’Hanley said. “This strategy has been highly successful in helping us to uncover unknown unknowns and has been the underpinning of our rapid progress over the past three years.”
The payload fairings, payload adapter and interstage have now been shipped to Kodiak. OmniTeq will be the first customer going to a 350km x 200km polar orbit. Images are from Dan Piemont (Co-founder, CTO), more images and details here: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6896504302077145088/
It amuses me a company which has yet to launch anything calls itself "a leader in the small launch market" (page 3 of user guide).
Quote from: Welsh Dragon on 02/14/2022 09:47 amIt amuses me a company which has yet to launch anything calls itself "a leader in the small launch market" (page 3 of user guide).If those 58 launch options of their shareholder Lockheed Martin materialize, ABL may be the small launch manifest leader. And they offer lowest cost in the 1 ton to LEO class, because they build the simplest rocket.https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/05/lockheed-martin-buys-up-to-58-launches-from-rocket-builder-abl-space.html
Every startup says stuff like that.