Author Topic: Launcher Space: General Company and Development Updates and Discussions  (Read 53061 times)

Offline Tywin

I open, this new thread about this interesting company, based in NY...The founder is Max Haot

https://launcherspace.com/



They don't have to much information in her website, but in the past, we have some news about her development and new hiring:


https://twitter.com/launcher/status/1060277338255097871

https://spacenews.com/launcher-takes-long-term-view-of-small-launch-market/

They look like don't have rush...

Quote
Haot said that, under current schedules, their vehicle will make a first test flight in 2025 and enter commercial service in 2026. The vehicle has a “conservative” target of placing 300 kilograms into a 200 kilometer orbit.

Quote
Haot said he believes that focusing on performance, rather than rushing into the market with another small launch vehicle, is a better strategy. “We have a very long-term view, 10 to 20 years,” he said. “We don’t believe that the people that got there a few years before will be the winners. We believe that the ones operating with the highest margin will be the winner.”


And now, they claim, have the biggest rocket engine, make in a 3D printed machine...

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/20/brooklyn-rocket-start-up-launcher-gets-largest-single-piece-3d-printed-engine.html

Really interesting this new war, for the rockets in 3D...

Will see...
« Last Edit: 08/07/2019 01:59 am by Andy USA »
The knowledge is power...Everything is connected...
The Turtle continues at a steady pace ...

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47310
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 80116
  • Likes Given: 36283
https://twitter.com/launcher/status/1098258459508858883

Quote
2024 first test flight target. Commercial/profitable by end of 2026.

Quote from: @13ericralph31
How do you foresee Rocket-1 competing with a small LV industry populated by mature rockets like Electron/Terran/RS-1/LauncherOne? If Rocket Lab is to be believed, individual Electron missions are priced under $10M *already* and cadence aspirations would bring > economies of scale

https://twitter.com/launcher/status/1098944051448111105

Quote
Launcher's thesis is that performance-driven design will win over first to market. Same rocket cost and mass -> Less propellant -> more payload -> More revenue potential per launch OR ability to reduce the price to grab market share.

Offline vaporcobra

Damn, I'm loving whoever holds the social media reins at Launcher. A solid dozen or more insightful comments (check their tweet replies) and this updated overview of Rocket-1.

Quote
Updated Rocket-1 spec/target below - 775 kg to 200 km. Same total rocket mass. Engine performance target increased, vehicle mass budget and un-used propellant assumptions slightly more aggressive. It might take a few flights to get there.

https://twitter.com/launcher/status/1099312754756911104
« Last Edit: 02/23/2019 09:11 pm by vaporcobra »

Offline spacevogel

  • Member
  • Posts: 28
  • Liked: 22
  • Likes Given: 42
https://twitter.com/launcher/status/1099678085727899648 (and the following thread):

Quote
MILESTONE: Liquid oxygen regenerative cooling proven on our E-1 rocket engine (3D printed in copper alloy). Made by @3TRPD on @EOSNorthAmerica @EOSGmbH M290.

LOX cooling benefits include (a) The ability to use both propellants for cooling in E-2 - thereby increasing coolant budget (b) Larger cooling channels making DMLS powder removal easier (c) Improved injector mixing and resulting improved performance thanks to gaseous oxygen.

Typical regen cooling uses fuel such as kerosene/RP-1. @NASA and Energia have tested LOX cooling and released papers confirming the benefits - but no known production engine uses it yet.

This photo was captured during an oxygen rich transient. It demonstrates the cleaner exhaust of E1-LOXCOOL725 when compared to our previous E-1 version/injector. Video to be released on Monday.

Offline ParabolicSnark

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 145
  • CA
  • Liked: 188
  • Likes Given: 124
New website update: https://launcherspace.com/

Few interesting points:
1) They have 4 engines on the first stage and one on the second, all at the same nominal thrust. This is certainly different from the 9/1 ratio you see on the Rocket Lab Electron and SpaceX Falcon 9. This probably explains why the apparent staging ratio seems so off. The vehicle acceleration at SECO has got to be pretty high.
2) They continue to share probably more than they should and have published the state-point diagram in both SI and US Customary units.
3) They're doing ox-rich stage combustion with an LOx-cooled chamber. Material properties are going to clutch here.
4) The two stage fuel pump is pretty uncommon for an RP-1 engine. The second stage only gets 3.5% of the main flow and is primary for the pre-burner with a tapoff leg, probably for trim control or propellant utilization. Normally they would pump up all the fuel to the same pressure and orifice it down. This approach is more efficient, but it does make the turbopump harder.
5) Depending on the shaft speed of the pump, the 20 psi inlet pressure is sporty. Same with the 60 psi at -290F (instead of fully saturated at -297F.
6) "Licensed orbit-proven liquid oxygen pump design".  ??? They're too small for most of the "old space" stuff, and anything from SpaceX and Rocket Lab. "Orbit-proven" nixes Ursa-Major. Maybe something through a partnership with AFRL?

With points #4 and #5, combined with the ox-rich turbine, that is a *hard* turbopump, particularly for your first engine. They've done great things with their (subscale) combustor so I don't want to count them out.
« Last Edit: 08/07/2019 02:02 am by Andy USA »

Offline russianhalo117

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8740
  • Liked: 4646
  • Likes Given: 768
New website update: https://launcherspace.com/

Few interesting points:
1) They have 4 engines on the first stage and one on the second, all at the same nominal thrust. This is certainly different from the 9/1 ratio you see on the Rocket Lab Electron and SpaceX Falcon 9. This probably explains why the apparent staging ratio seems so off. The vehicle acceleration at SECO has got to be pretty high.
2) They continue to share probably more than they should and have published the state-point diagram in both SI and US Customary units.
3) They're doing ox-rich stage combustion with an LOx-cooled chamber. Material properties are going to clutch here.
4) The two stage fuel pump is pretty uncommon for an RP-1 engine. The second stage only gets 3.5% of the main flow and is primary for the pre-burner with a tapoff leg, probably for trim control or propellant utilization. Normally they would pump up all the fuel to the same pressure and orifice it down. This approach is more efficient, but it does make the turbopump harder.
5) Depending on the shaft speed of the pump, the 20 psi inlet pressure is sporty. Same with the 60 psi at -290F (instead of fully saturated at -297F.
6) "Licensed orbit-proven liquid oxygen pump design".  ??? They're too small for most of the "old space" stuff, and anything from SpaceX and Rocket Lab. "Orbit-proven" nixes Ursa-Major. Maybe something through a partnership with AFRL?

With points #4 and #5, combined with the ox-rich turbine, that is a *hard* turbopump, particularly for your first engine. They've done great things with their (subscale) combustor so I don't want to count them out.
This is likely a born out of Ukraine project. The website has grammar and style mistakes indicative of translation although it has been polished a bit so not a machine translation job.

Offline bjartur

  • Member
  • Posts: 2
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 0
This is likely a born out of Ukraine project. The website has grammar and style mistakes indicative of translation although it has been polished a bit so not a machine translation job.

Having heard Haot speak at length about his long journey towards the launch industry I can assure you it is not. If you are curious to learn more about Launcher, check out the interview episodes he did on the Aerospace Engineering podcast, Prehype, or The Prepared. Haot began with a particular business case and a long-standing desire to enter the launch industry--their Ukrainian engineer/designer, Nikischenko, did not join until well after Launcher was founded & funded. Only one of their five employees is a native English speaker (and only one of those five is Ukrainian), which, although interesting for an American firm, certainly does not make them a Ukrainian shell company.

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47310
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 80116
  • Likes Given: 36283
twitter.com/launcher/status/1176199852407099392

Quote
More 💎💎💎🚀. To further reduce the cost of 3D printing our highest performance copper alloy engines - we more than doubled the powder layer thickness and as a result sped up the 3D printing time by more than 2X. Made possible by AMCM and @3t_am_ltd on an @EOSGmbH 3D printer.

https://twitter.com/launcher/status/1176199858878853122

Quote
In this test last week, we proved that with this new process, we can reach the highest performance mix ratio (2.62) at 98%+ efficiency.

Offline starbase

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 369
  • Liked: 324
  • Likes Given: 93
bit.ly/SpaceLaunchCalendar ☆ bit.ly/SpaceEventCalendar

Offline Tywin

The knowledge is power...Everything is connected...
The Turtle continues at a steady pace ...

Online GreenShrike

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 274
  • Liked: 320
  • Likes Given: 679
Nice Engine!

https://twitter.com/launcher/status/1193724586879340546

Certainly looks nice.

Follow up says it's ORSC, not an expander. It has about 1/10th the output of a Merlin-vac -- that's a small engine for staged combustion!

https://twitter.com/launcher/status/1193950035651768325


It would be interesting to contrast this engine against Masten's Broadsword -- a 25k lbf (SL) / 35k lbf (vac) dual-expander methalox engine. Similar sizes, but rather different paths to get there.
TriOptimum Corporation            Science
                                      Military /_\ Consumer

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47310
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 80116
  • Likes Given: 36283
https://twitter.com/launcher/status/1216825611341258752

Quote
The first public opening to join the @launcher team: Propulsion Test Engineer to help us build and test the Launcher E-2 liquid 🚀 engine. Apply: linkedin.com/jobs/view/1645… #propulsion

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47310
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 80116
  • Likes Given: 36283
https://twitter.com/launcher/status/1250149968754638848

Quote
ANNOUNCEMENT: Launcher has signed a Space Act Agreement with @NASAStennis to locate our full-scale test fire facility at Stennis. The first campaign is expected this summer as part of our @AF_SBIR_STTR  contract to test-fire our 22k lbf thrust E-2 engine.

https://spacenews.com/launcher-to-test-engines-at-stennis/

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47310
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 80116
  • Likes Given: 36283
https://twitter.com/launcher/status/1254791766147989505

Quote
The test stand frame for Launcher E-2 is ready to be powder coated. Thanks to our partner millermetal.com for their great work.

Offline CameronD

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2366
  • Melbourne, Australia
    • Norton Consultants
  • Liked: 863
  • Likes Given: 547
https://twitter.com/launcher/status/1250149968754638848

Quote
ANNOUNCEMENT: Launcher has signed a Space Act Agreement with @NASAStennis to locate our full-scale test fire facility at Stennis. The first campaign is expected this summer as part of our @AF_SBIR_STTR  contract to test-fire our 22k lbf thrust E-2 engine.

What are those blocks they're using for blast protection?
With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine - however, this is not necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are
going to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly overhead.

Offline ParabolicSnark

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 145
  • CA
  • Liked: 188
  • Likes Given: 124
What are those blocks they're using for blast protection?

Those just look like pre-fab concrete blocks (something like these). A lot of companies have been using them for quickly building blast walls or flame trenches. Heck, the bulk of Rocket Lab's primary stand structure appears to be made from them.

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47310
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 80116
  • Likes Given: 36283
https://twitter.com/launcher/status/1261425386115616768

Quote
Launcher E-2 - the world largest single part 3D printed combustion chamber is ready for nitrogen, liquid nitrogen and water cleaning followed by a water cold flow session.

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47310
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 80116
  • Likes Given: 36283
https://twitter.com/launcher/status/1267879323547193344

Quote
This week we have also started the E-2 🚀 engine combustion chamber and injector heat treatment processes at our partner Accurate Brazing (accuratebrazing.com). Step 1: Stress relief in a vacuum furnace. Next : Cut the chamber off the plate by wire edm followed by HIP.

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47310
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 80116
  • Likes Given: 36283
https://twitter.com/launcher/status/1270714384973783040

Quote
The Launcher E-2 3D printed 🚀 engine combustion chamber is back home at @Newlab - Next steps: complete taps with @FlexArmInc, machining the flange, cooling channels chemical etching and polishing the inner wall.

Offline ParabolicSnark

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 145
  • CA
  • Liked: 188
  • Likes Given: 124
Are all those propellant ports NPT? I'm estimating they're about 2" NPT. In the photo where it's still copper, they've got NPT to Quick-Clamp flanges (like these on McMaster-Carr).

I'm surprised they would select NPT over a straight-thread solution. While NPT is rated for the pressure, the quality of the seal on the threads, even with pipe tape, is pretty bad, particularly for cryogenics. Straight-thread solutions seal on a dedicated seal and are much more reliable.

Tags:
 

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