About 10 seconds of flight here, before it disappears into the clouds:https://twitter.com/astrodigitalgeo/status/893539892352831489EDIT: also, sounds like engine shut down at around 10 second mark.
Quote from: Lars-J on 07/26/2017 08:41 pmAnd it may simply be out of range for a "garage based" operation, no matter the brilliance of some ideas. The romantic notion that any idea can be hatched and executed in a garage if you just work hard enough may not be realistic. At some point the needs of the operation will require an upgrade in resources and facilities.The whole point of Vector is as an opposite to RL. That you can start off with garage shop stuff, get 90% of the way there with it, having garage shop costs accumulating over less than a few years, then a fraction of a year at 2-5x of higher costing to refine what you're missing, and have a vehicle with a radically lower cost structure. ...
And it may simply be out of range for a "garage based" operation, no matter the brilliance of some ideas. The romantic notion that any idea can be hatched and executed in a garage if you just work hard enough may not be realistic. At some point the needs of the operation will require an upgrade in resources and facilities.
Quote from: savuporo on 08/02/2017 01:07 amQuote from: QuantumG on 07/31/2017 11:04 pmQuote from: savuporo on 07/30/2017 06:17 amQuote from: TrevorMonty on 07/30/2017 03:43 amGarage level development may get you orbital prototype but gearing up for large scale low cost production and launch requires large capital outlay. RL recent fund raising round was for volume production facilities. Nobody will get to orbit or an orbital prototype with 'garage level development' and neither will Vector, by their own statements. They have stated the intent of hiring hundreds of people over next few years. That's not a garage. Not really disputing you, but why do you say that? I don't think you'd get a very reliable launch vehicle from garage-level development but I can't see why you can't get to orbit. Paul Breed is making a serious attempt. Because it's a relatively complex engineering problem, that takes a certain number of manhours of diverse engineering skills to be put into it. On top of that, it's not a trivial operational and regulatory problem either. Unless you can license or buy large parts of the design off the shelf, like engines or avionics, there is just that amount of work needs to be done, there aren't many shortcuts.SpaceX was around 500 people when they finally reached orbit, around 100 when they first tried. ... You can obviously do better, but as of today there aren't many ways of doing drastically better. There isn't a "certain number" of hours. Nothing in physics says "well, they only put 20,000 man hours in instead of the requisite 500,000, so no orbit this time."This is lazy thinking. It's still usually true, but not actually a certainty.
Quote from: QuantumG on 07/31/2017 11:04 pmQuote from: savuporo on 07/30/2017 06:17 amQuote from: TrevorMonty on 07/30/2017 03:43 amGarage level development may get you orbital prototype but gearing up for large scale low cost production and launch requires large capital outlay. RL recent fund raising round was for volume production facilities. Nobody will get to orbit or an orbital prototype with 'garage level development' and neither will Vector, by their own statements. They have stated the intent of hiring hundreds of people over next few years. That's not a garage. Not really disputing you, but why do you say that? I don't think you'd get a very reliable launch vehicle from garage-level development but I can't see why you can't get to orbit. Paul Breed is making a serious attempt. Because it's a relatively complex engineering problem, that takes a certain number of manhours of diverse engineering skills to be put into it. On top of that, it's not a trivial operational and regulatory problem either. Unless you can license or buy large parts of the design off the shelf, like engines or avionics, there is just that amount of work needs to be done, there aren't many shortcuts.SpaceX was around 500 people when they finally reached orbit, around 100 when they first tried. ... You can obviously do better, but as of today there aren't many ways of doing drastically better.
Quote from: savuporo on 07/30/2017 06:17 amQuote from: TrevorMonty on 07/30/2017 03:43 amGarage level development may get you orbital prototype but gearing up for large scale low cost production and launch requires large capital outlay. RL recent fund raising round was for volume production facilities. Nobody will get to orbit or an orbital prototype with 'garage level development' and neither will Vector, by their own statements. They have stated the intent of hiring hundreds of people over next few years. That's not a garage. Not really disputing you, but why do you say that? I don't think you'd get a very reliable launch vehicle from garage-level development but I can't see why you can't get to orbit. Paul Breed is making a serious attempt.
Quote from: TrevorMonty on 07/30/2017 03:43 amGarage level development may get you orbital prototype but gearing up for large scale low cost production and launch requires large capital outlay. RL recent fund raising round was for volume production facilities. Nobody will get to orbit or an orbital prototype with 'garage level development' and neither will Vector, by their own statements. They have stated the intent of hiring hundreds of people over next few years. That's not a garage.
Garage level development may get you orbital prototype but gearing up for large scale low cost production and launch requires large capital outlay. RL recent fund raising round was for volume production facilities.
Agenda next week: another first;2nd stage static engine test this time in Tucson! Busy two weeks for us at Vector stay tuned! #NewSpaceRace
Specifically, I'm curious if VectorSS has the ingenuity, business acumen and intellectual base to develop and field a launch service without substantially expanding their company. This would dependent on a small number of brilliant minds, as well as strategic decisions production and on dual-use components. I this regard, I disagree with savoporo's assertion high number of engineers, manhours and investment is required for viability as history is full of examples of individuals besting entire industries and behemoth conglomerates in similar manner.
Quote from: imprezive on 08/05/2017 03:49 pmI'm curious what examples of an individual/really small team upending a heavy manufacturing industry you are thinking of? (That comes across as sarcasm/being an asshole but it's not intended to be, I'm genuinely curious). Off the top of my head -- I'd submit Wernher von Braun educating the US on rocketry, developing Redstone, those lessons leading to Atlas and Titan, and delivering the Moon.
I'm curious what examples of an individual/really small team upending a heavy manufacturing industry you are thinking of? (That comes across as sarcasm/being an asshole but it's not intended to be, I'm genuinely curious).
Techies would submit, among plenty of examples, the four-man team that developed Android and sold it to Google.
Here’s a quote that will warm your heart from Jim Cantrell:@jamesncantrell 12h ago“I have bug bites on my scalp after joining search for @vectorspacesys rocket yesterday in @CamdenSpaceport jungle w/ gators snakes & pigs” alongside a picture of an alligator he must have seen in the Camden "jungle." They also posted a picture of a wild hog running by the rocket at the launch pad during their delay. Did they drive 1969 miles so they could launch with our pigs and alligators? I think these desert boys were quite surprised about Camden's wilderness!!!!
I'd submit the brilliant young engineer E. Gifford Emery who single-handedly developed the B-17 in 11mos, only reason Boeing exists today.
..Which was based of Linux, which is actually a much better example of one guy changing everything.
These examples are not applicable to VectorSS, but they may still be capable of reimagining the rocket's design, production and wisely selecting what to manufacture, to outsourced, and what off-the-shelf components can be repurposed (the "maker" approach). I'm wondering if anyone else thinks they have the mind/s to do it, or if they must compensate with quantity of minds, money and manhours.
After a little more thought, I'd submit; Inventors; Preeminent, political, tech investor Edison's power grid lost to inventor Tesla's AC design. Eli Whitney's cotton gin revolutionized production and replaced all previous methods. Sam Colt made all men equal with the invention of the revolver to become the primary manufacturer. Motorhead and bike builder Glenn Curtiss developed the first self-powered flight and all early developments of aircraft design, control and production while the patent troll and conartist Wrights looked for investors and royalties. Roving gasoholic Bob Lutz saved multiple car companies from oblivion. Apple was the original technology populists and garage band. Scientists; This is a huge list dating back millennia, including Galileo and Copernicus for their correction of collective idiocy, Maxwell for recognizing electric and magnetic fields are one, and Einstein for recognizing mass and energy are one. Sociology; Individuals are the only true drivers like Mahatma Ghandhi, Che Guevera, Martin Luther King and Donald Trump overthrowing massive establishments. Religions are overthrown by individuals like Jesus, Buddah and Mohammad. Note - Let's not discuss these figures.Quote from: Propylox on 08/05/2017 05:03 pmThese examples are not applicable to VectorSS, but they may still be capable of reimagining the rocket's design, production and wisely selecting what to manufacture, to outsourced, and what off-the-shelf components can be repurposed (the "maker" approach). I'm wondering if anyone else thinks they have the mind/s to do it, or if they must compensate with quantity of minds, money and manhours.In any system, including evolution itself, progress does not come from large institutions and collectivism. These can only offer something new, sometimes worse - sometimes better, while great advancements come from small groups and individuals. I ask if VectorSS, or any of the other rocketry garage bands have such individuals, or if they're just doing what everyone else is and have no real chance at success.
-snips-According to the NOTAM, Vector was only approved to 5,500 feet but I saw the engine flameout at about 10 seconds which was probably about 1,200-1,500 feet. A back of the envelope calculation indicated that they might not have reached 200mph. Not only did they veer well off target (their video was clear on that), but to make things worse, they must have had a hard landing....The attached file is the spot they launched from and is validated from their video. The rocket began to curve westerly almost as soon as it left the launch pad....Beyond the promotional value for the proposed Spaceport Camden, Vector and their customer, it is hard to see what advancement was made by launching an unguided Class 3 amateur to a tiny fraction of the altitude and velocity needed to orbit.
This being the second of up to six test flights culminating in an orbital launch, does anyone expect the next to have an avionics package and articulating engine? That's really the point where a hobbyist rocket becomes a real one, even before VectorSS starts mounting their 2nd stage.
Will be under the same FAA waiver as Camden lots of good engineering can be had at low altitudes. Block 0.003 will feature thrust vectoring
First ever remote test & our very first engine test at the proposed new Vector factory location in Tucson, AZ #Tucson
Video of todays successful prototype 2nd stage engine test in Tucson, AZ
Highlight video of the historic first launch at @CamdenSpaceport of our Vector-R prototype block 0.002 on August 3rd
QuoteHighlight video of the historic first launch at @CamdenSpaceport of our Vector-R prototype block 0.002 on August 3rdAgain I'm amazed they think nothing about showing OSHA violations in their promotional videos...Working from a pallet on a forklift is not a good practice!
2 B.002 patches avail now celebrating 1st launch @CamdenSpaceport & special Vector friends #LEMANS24 @CorvetteRacing goo.gl/hTQLvZ
I Worked With Elon Musk And Learned That Intelligence Is Not The Key To Success
Just arrived our new composite winding machine! It will be used to wind carbon fiber fuel tanks and composite nozzles