Author Topic: Relativity Space: General Thread  (Read 327268 times)

Offline imprezive

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 188
  • Liked: 121
  • Likes Given: 26
Re: Relativity Space: General Thread
« Reply #800 on: 09/08/2023 05:32 am »
We’ll see how real that contract is if they get flying. Virgin Orbit had an anchor deal with OneWeb too and we all know how that worked out.

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47313
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 80124
  • Likes Given: 36283
Re: Relativity Space: General Thread
« Reply #801 on: 09/08/2023 07:10 pm »
twitter.com/relativityspace/status/1700223492124442657

Quote
Welcome to our crib. Nearly 300 acres of Relativity at @NASAStennis. 🧵

📍 A-2 Test Stand advanced vertical first stage testing for #TerranR. 🚀

https://twitter.com/relativityspace/status/1700223661209432308

Quote
📍 R Complex, A new dual-bay vertical engine test stand 🔥

twitter.com/relativityspace/status/1700223884132495643

Quote
📍E2 Development, qualification, and acceptance testing of our #AeonR engine components

https://twitter.com/relativityspace/status/1700224224554791006

Quote
📍E4, dual-bay test stands previously used for Terran 1 stage testing and Aeon 1 engine testing.

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47313
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 80124
  • Likes Given: 36283
Re: Relativity Space: General Thread
« Reply #802 on: 09/11/2023 03:47 pm »
Quote
Brost: Terran 1 launch "made it very clear to us where 3D-printing is much better than traditional manufacturing and where it's not."

https://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1701260613089890619

Quote
[Tory] Bruno compliments Relativity "on what you guys have done, it's absolutely amazing." Fully agree that the most complex parts that take the longest to fabricate by traditional means "are absolutely outstanding" when fabricated with 3D-printing.

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47313
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 80124
  • Likes Given: 36283
Re: Relativity Space: General Thread
« Reply #803 on: 10/02/2023 05:16 pm »
twitter.com/relativityspace/status/1708885588378836998

Quote
💫 Unlock the capabilities of Dual Plasma with our additive manufacturing team. 🧵

https://twitter.com/relativityspace/status/1708885731102675332

Quote
💡What’s Dual Plasma? This advanced manufacturing method allows two distinct plasma sources to create precise and high-quality surface modifications on materials, enhancing their performance and functionality for various industrial applications.

Quote
💡 With Terran R nearly six times the total printed content by mass compared to Terran 1, our Stargate metal 3D printers are advancing with the early benefits of Dual Plasma 👇

✔️ Enhanced control over penetration profile and melt-off rates
✔️ Higher deposition rate while maintaining stability and print quality
✔️ Extended run times due to minimal spatter and fume generation

https://twitter.com/relativityspace/status/1708886258532110750

Quote
🧠 Starting with a blank sheet design, we've developed in-house hardware, system configurations, and integration methods to incorporate the new tech.

🚀 https://www.relativityspace.com/careers

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47313
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 80124
  • Likes Given: 36283
Re: Relativity Space: General Thread
« Reply #804 on: 10/11/2023 03:01 pm »
https://twitter.com/relativityspace/status/1712108984138911970

Quote
✍️ We’ve inked a multi-year, multi-launch agreement for #TerranR with @INTELSAT , operator of the largest integrated space and terrestrial network in the world! 🛰️

Get the full scoop:

https://www.relativityspace.com/press-release/2023/10/9/relativity-space-and-intelsat-sign-multi-launch-agreement-for-terran-r

Quote
RELATIVITY SPACE AND INTELSAT SIGN MULTI-LAUNCH AGREEMENT FOR TERRAN R
Deal marks the latest announcement of Relativity’s Terran R launch contracts, totaling $1.8 billion in backlog across nine customers.

October 11, 2023 – Long Beach, CA and McLean, VA – Relativity Space, the preeminent 3D printed rocket company, announced today that it has signed a multi-year, multi-launch Launch Services Agreement (LSA) with Intelsat, operator of the largest integrated space and terrestrial network in the world. Under the agreement, Relativity will launch Intelsat satellites on Terran R as early as 2026. 

As a medium-to-heavy-lift, reusable launch vehicle made for growing satellite launch demand and eventually multiplanetary transport, Terran R provides both government and commercial customers affordable access to space, in LEO, MEO, GEO and beyond. Relativity has a total of nine signed customers for Terran R, including multiple launches and totaling more than $1.8 billion in backlog.   

“We are honored to be working with Intelsat to launch future spacecraft into their industry leading satellite fleet,” said Tim Ellis, Co-Founder and CEO of Relativity Space. “They have an incredible company and team as a world leader in content connectivity with nearly 60 satellites already in orbit. The space industry clearly requires more commercially competitive, diversified, and disruptive launch capacity. Relativity is developing Terran R as a customer-focused reusable launch vehicle to solve this need. We look forward to planning, executing, and successfully launching these missions together with Intelsat.”   

“After 60 years of commercial satellite launches, Intelsat and our customers have come to expect reliability, efficiency and flexibility from our launch providers,” said Jean-Luc Froeliger, Intelsat Senior Vice President of Space Systems. “Relativity has developed an innovative design and production process for the Terran R, which will deliver benefits to Intelsat for years to come.” 

Terran R was developed to accommodate the growing demand for large constellation launch services. With a payload fairing that offers the right market fit to meet a variety of needs, Terran R supports use cases from dedicated payload deployments of constellation customers or single geosynchronous satellites to rideshare configurations for multiple customers per launch. Putting customers first, Relativity is designing and manufacturing rockets that offer high performance and reliability, while costing less to produce and fly.  

Terran R is designed and manufactured at Relativity’s headquarters in Long Beach, CA, which is home to its fourth generation Stargate metal 3D printers. Stage and engine testing is conducted at NASA’s Stennis Space Center in Mississippi and Terran R will launch Intelsat missions from Space Launch Complex 16, Relativity’s orbital launch site at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station in Florida. 

For more information about Terran R, please visit: https://www.relativityspace.com/terran-r.
« Last Edit: 10/11/2023 03:02 pm by FutureSpaceTourist »

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47313
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 80124
  • Likes Given: 36283
Re: Relativity Space: General Thread
« Reply #805 on: 10/19/2023 05:06 am »
https://twitter.com/relativityspace/status/1714729493179625520

Quote
From a swamp to a built-up dual-bay vertical engine test stand in <12 months.

✔️Test stand activation
✔ First #AeonR powerpack installed
🔜 Powerpack testing

Starting point: October 2022👇

Quote
Early 2023 propellant farm and stand foundation begin to take shape!

https://twitter.com/relativityspace/status/1714730519848714473

Quote
By summer of 2023

✔️ Water tower
✔️ Propellant farm
✔️ Engine stand infrastructure

Quote
✔️Flame diverter arrival and install

https://twitter.com/relativityspace/status/1714731127204966481

Quote
September 2023. The R Complex first dual-bay vertical engine test stand is ready for its first test article. Hello #AeonR powerpack.

Quote
October 2023. The stand is alive. ⚡Standard feedline flushes ensure the cleanliness and proper functioning of the feedlines that deliver propellants to various components of the test stand.

https://twitter.com/relativityspace/status/1714732106025496656

Quote
Testing out the sprinklers. 🚿 Stand testing FireX (fire extinguishing system) to ensure that we have full coverage of critical hardware in the event of a fire.

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47313
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 80124
  • Likes Given: 36283
Re: Relativity Space: General Thread
« Reply #806 on: 10/20/2023 06:25 pm »
https://twitter.com/relativityspace/status/1715429919566819651

Quote
🧵800+ tests. <24 months. 2 states. Multiple test cells. Break down our 4 testing buckets with us.👇

Quote
Thrust Chamber Assembly testing @NASAStennis  packs a punch at the E1 and E2 test cells, capturing data from:

🔥 TCA
🔥 TCA Sub-scale
🔥 TCA Igniters

https://twitter.com/relativityspace/status/1715430548594946393

Quote
📍E2 test cell, The GG category (Gas Generator) data encompasses

⚡ Gas Generator testing
⚡ Gas Generator Igniter
⚡ Heat Exchangers

Quote
📍Factory Test Yard, Long Beach, CA. Turbomachinery testing includes:

⛽ Fuel Turbopump
⛽ Lox Turbopump

https://twitter.com/relativityspace/status/1715431273236496555

Quote
Valve testing across Long Beach and Stennis facilities totals more than 200+ tests, covering:

🔩 Main valve
🔩 Throttle valve
🔩 GG isolation valve
🔩 Cyro iso valve

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47313
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 80124
  • Likes Given: 36283
Re: Relativity Space: General Thread
« Reply #807 on: 10/24/2023 07:42 pm »
https://twitter.com/relativityspace/status/1716894976918110352

Quote
One year ago today, our 4th Generation Stargate 3D metal printers were unveiled. Introducing horizontal printing for bigger and faster prints. Each round of innovation and design built on our printer's predecessors. Take a look back at Stargate's printing evolution. 👇

Quote
Gen 1: Discovery. From an idea to reality. Exploring and developing our printing capabilities.
Stargate 1st generation metal 3d printer

https://twitter.com/relativityspace/status/1716895342590083490

Quote
Gen 2: Feasibility. The realm of possibilities. Refining and enhancing our printers.
Stargate 2nd generation metal 3d printer

Quote
Gen 3: Size: #Terran1 production. 🚀
Stargate 3rd generation metal 3d printer

https://twitter.com/relativityspace/status/1716895937917055406

Quote
Gen 4: Size & Speed 👉 further developing our large-scale printing capabilities. Currently printing: #TerranR development domes.
« Last Edit: 10/24/2023 07:44 pm by FutureSpaceTourist »

Offline trimeta

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1659
  • Kansas City, MO
  • Liked: 2121
  • Likes Given: 57
Re: Relativity Space: General Thread
« Reply #808 on: 11/29/2023 07:59 pm »
Interview with Tim Ellis on the topic of building backlog (that is, signing launch contracts) for unflown rockets. As one might expect, he strongly disagrees with Peter Beck's perspective, saying that "Deciding not to build a backlog is taking a business strategy that has failed pretty epically in history across other products, which is, ‘build it and they will come,’ without actually validating that your pricing and your product capabilities are something that solves the customer problem such that they’re willing to put up material cash up front."

Although I did find this part telling:
Quote
Ellis said that signing these LSAs also gives a greater look into a customer’s technical plans and what their requirements are. Relativity was able to see the need for a second launch provider for all the forthcoming telecom constellations — such as OneWeb’s, a company that announced a launch agreement with Relativity in June 2022 — because it was in conversation with prospective customers, Ellis said.

“There was this need and we saw that early,” he said. “Why we were able to see that early is because we were actually talking with customers, and we were actually working to sign launch deals with them.”

It doesn't seem to me like signing contracts was necessary to understand that there would be demand for a non-SpaceX launch provider among the companies directly competing with Starlink.

Online DanClemmensen

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5316
  • Earth (currently)
  • Liked: 4151
  • Likes Given: 1672
Re: Relativity Space: General Thread
« Reply #809 on: 11/29/2023 08:09 pm »

It doesn't seem to me like signing contracts was necessary to understand that there would be demand for a non-SpaceX launch provider among the companies directly competing with Starlink.
I don't understand. If SpaceX provides the lowest price to orbit and meets all my technical and schedule requirements, why would I pick another launch provider? They'll take my money and launch my satellites. My money is very unlikely to affect their bottom line much, because if I don't use them then someone else will.

Offline trimeta

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1659
  • Kansas City, MO
  • Liked: 2121
  • Likes Given: 57
Re: Relativity Space: General Thread
« Reply #810 on: 11/29/2023 08:36 pm »

It doesn't seem to me like signing contracts was necessary to understand that there would be demand for a non-SpaceX launch provider among the companies directly competing with Starlink.
I don't understand. If SpaceX provides the lowest price to orbit and meets all my technical and schedule requirements, why would I pick another launch provider? They'll take my money and launch my satellites. My money is very unlikely to affect their bottom line much, because if I don't use them then someone else will.
The number of people in this forum who argue "the world has room for exactly one launch provider, there is no need whatsoever for more than one organization to manage all of space"...maybe this is less obvious than I thought.

Online DanClemmensen

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5316
  • Earth (currently)
  • Liked: 4151
  • Likes Given: 1672
Re: Relativity Space: General Thread
« Reply #811 on: 11/29/2023 08:49 pm »

It doesn't seem to me like signing contracts was necessary to understand that there would be demand for a non-SpaceX launch provider among the companies directly competing with Starlink.
I don't understand. If SpaceX provides the lowest price to orbit and meets all my technical and schedule requirements, why would I pick another launch provider? They'll take my money and launch my satellites. My money is very unlikely to affect their bottom line much, because if I don't use them then someone else will.
The number of people in this forum who argue "the world has room for exactly one launch provider, there is no need whatsoever for more than one organization to manage all of space"...maybe this is less obvious than I thought.

I'm not claiming there is only room for one. I'm observing that there is currently no competition based on objective metrics. Eventually, someone will be able to compete on price or on some other metric and I may choose to use them. Until they can compete, I will let someone else choose to use an alternate provider.

Offline whitelancer64

Re: Relativity Space: General Thread
« Reply #812 on: 11/29/2023 09:00 pm »

It doesn't seem to me like signing contracts was necessary to understand that there would be demand for a non-SpaceX launch provider among the companies directly competing with Starlink.
I don't understand. If SpaceX provides the lowest price to orbit and meets all my technical and schedule requirements, why would I pick another launch provider? They'll take my money and launch my satellites. My money is very unlikely to affect their bottom line much, because if I don't use them then someone else will.

This is like asking why, if Toyota makes the cheapest cars, does anyone else buy a vehicle from any other manufacturer. The price of something isn't the only consideration for most people for most products. This is also true of the rocket launch market. Sometimes cost is a minor consideration.
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Online DanClemmensen

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5316
  • Earth (currently)
  • Liked: 4151
  • Likes Given: 1672
Re: Relativity Space: General Thread
« Reply #813 on: 11/29/2023 09:35 pm »

It doesn't seem to me like signing contracts was necessary to understand that there would be demand for a non-SpaceX launch provider among the companies directly competing with Starlink.
I don't understand. If SpaceX provides the lowest price to orbit and meets all my technical and schedule requirements, why would I pick another launch provider? They'll take my money and launch my satellites. My money is very unlikely to affect their bottom line much, because if I don't use them then someone else will.

This is like asking why, if Toyota makes the cheapest cars, does anyone else buy a vehicle from any other manufacturer. The price of something isn't the only consideration for most people for most products. This is also true of the rocket launch market. Sometimes cost is a minor consideration.
Sure, customers can have multiple metrics. I thought that these would be covered in "technical requirements" in this industry, but maybe there are others I can think of one or two, such as corporate viability and freedom from geopolitical issues. The RD-180 was the very best engine for Atlas V based on cost, schedule, and reliability, but ULA ended up in a bind because of Russian geopolitics. I'm still not seeing any metrics that are analogous to the Toyota decision.

What other metrics or decision criteria do you have in mind?

Offline whitelancer64

Re: Relativity Space: General Thread
« Reply #814 on: 11/29/2023 11:15 pm »

It doesn't seem to me like signing contracts was necessary to understand that there would be demand for a non-SpaceX launch provider among the companies directly competing with Starlink.
I don't understand. If SpaceX provides the lowest price to orbit and meets all my technical and schedule requirements, why would I pick another launch provider? They'll take my money and launch my satellites. My money is very unlikely to affect their bottom line much, because if I don't use them then someone else will.

This is like asking why, if Toyota makes the cheapest cars, does anyone else buy a vehicle from any other manufacturer. The price of something isn't the only consideration for most people for most products. This is also true of the rocket launch market. Sometimes cost is a minor consideration.
Sure, customers can have multiple metrics. I thought that these would be covered in "technical requirements" in this industry, but maybe there are others I can think of one or two, such as corporate viability and freedom from geopolitical issues. The RD-180 was the very best engine for Atlas V based on cost, schedule, and reliability, but ULA ended up in a bind because of Russian geopolitics. I'm still not seeing any metrics that are analogous to the Toyota decision.

What other metrics or decision criteria do you have in mind?

Same reasons why people buy anything that's more expensive than a cheaper alternative. A good sales pitch, brand loyalty, better quality / reliability - or the perception of it, availability, customer service, options available for customization. Probably a lot more things like that as well.
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Offline xyv

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 221
  • South of Vandenberg
  • Liked: 507
  • Likes Given: 92
Re: Relativity Space: General Thread
« Reply #815 on: 11/30/2023 12:48 am »
What is this blind spot that people have about business entities being run by logical robots.  Companies are run by people and they don't check their rationality at the door.  As my friend who taught me so much about program management explained "...people buy from people..."   So yea, Relativiity found out about an opportunity because they were there already talking about other business. 

Companies don't just share future plans and needs with other companies unless they have something to contribute to the business case.
« Last Edit: 12/01/2023 01:09 am by xyv »

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39247
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25174
  • Likes Given: 12102
Re: Relativity Space: General Thread
« Reply #816 on: 11/30/2023 03:46 am »
Buying from multiple providers gives you better bargaining power. Basically, if Relativity’s price is $20M for your payload, SpaceX doesn’t get to charge $50M.

The second provider determines the price SpaceX can charge.
« Last Edit: 11/30/2023 03:49 am by Robotbeat »
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

Online DanClemmensen

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5316
  • Earth (currently)
  • Liked: 4151
  • Likes Given: 1672
Re: Relativity Space: General Thread
« Reply #817 on: 11/30/2023 03:59 am »
Buying from multiple providers gives you better bargaining power. Basically, if Relativity’s price is $20/kg, SpaceX doesn’t get to charge $100/kg.
You don't need to buy from multiple providers for this to be true. You just need to get multiple bids. The market as a whole needs multiple credible providers for this to work, but ensuring the existence of multiple credible providers is not the responsibility of any one customer. In a hypothetical market that has one crushingly superior vendor, the remaining vendors exit the market and the one vendor reverts to monopoly pricing. Eventually, a new credible competitor emerges.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39247
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25174
  • Likes Given: 12102
Re: Relativity Space: General Thread
« Reply #818 on: 11/30/2023 04:12 am »
Sounds like a huge business risk. Seems like if you’re doing a ton of flights, it would be worth buying a few launches from all the lower cost launch providers if you can.
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

Online DanClemmensen

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5316
  • Earth (currently)
  • Liked: 4151
  • Likes Given: 1672
Re: Relativity Space: General Thread
« Reply #819 on: 11/30/2023 04:50 am »
Sounds like a huge business risk. Seems like if you’re doing a ton of flights, it would be worth buying a few launches from all the lower cost launch providers if you can.
Sure, but how many customers are that big ("a ton of flights")? I know of two other than SpaceX: USSF (NSSL) and Amazon (Kuiper). Those two customers may sustain a credible competitive market for the rest of us. But I don't think even those two can continue to pay much more than twice the price of SpaceX service for very many launches.

Tags:
 

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