Isar Aerospace

[PM3]

I got to hear a short talk by one of the founders of Isar Aerospace yesterday. I didn't get to take notes and it was somewhat superficial, but I'll try to remember as much as I can:
- They have secured/are looking for the order of €100m in funding
- They started out developing engines for sale but now want to build an entire 500kg-1t launch vehicle
- Currently around 20 engineers, end of year ~50 mostly engineers, 150 needed for the first launch
- They specifically want to not do any development in the US to circumvent ITAR and be able to sell engines and technology on the world market
- One of their primary investors is a former SpaceX VP and early employee who is now helping out in sales. Between the lines he indicated they are in talks with actual customers
- They're looking at an orbital launch in 2021 from an undisclosed government-provided launch pad

There are at least two former-SpaceX anchor investors with Isar Aerospace (source):

- David Giger, former Director of Dragon Spacecraft Development and Dragon Propulsion, now VP of Launch Vehicle Development at Relativity Space

- Bulent Altan, who was at SpaceX from 2004-2014, then again from 2016-2017 in Starlink top management (source)

Altan, who was vice president of satellite mission assurance, said he had responsibilities like those of a chief engineer on Starlink, and worked on the constellation “almost to the handover of the prototypes” in 2017, before leaving to start the venture capital firm Global Space Ventures, which is currently raising funds.

Isar Aerospace was founded in March 2018 as a spin-off from "Cryosphere", which is the rocket engine department of the Munich University student's project WARR - "Wissenschaftliche Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Raketentechnik und Raumfahrt" - Scientific Working Group for Rocket Technology and Space Flight". Cryosphere has developed a hybrid rocket engine named "Battleship", which they claim is "Europe’s most powerful cryogenic hybrid rocket engine".

Isar Areospace's engine is called Aquila and the launcher "Spectrum". It's a gas-generator cycle engine burning "hydrocarbons" with LOX, so that's not the Cryosphere hybrid engine but a separate development.

(The company name refers to the Isar, a River in Bavaria where all those organizations are located, and where the rocket would be launched.)

[Tywin]

[
(The company name refers to the Isar, a River in Bavaria where all those organizations are located, and where the rocket would be launched.)

Very interesting, another new launcher company...well 100 millions is not a joke...

They create the most powerful engine hybrid of Europe, but they don't use in her own rocket...ummm?

Launch from Bavaria? It's that possible?

[niwax]

Very interesting, another new launcher company...well 100 millions is not a joke...

Launch from Bavaria? It's that possible?

I don't think launches will be from Bavaria, he specifically mentioned being in contact with governments to secure a launch pad. There is a sounding rocket range in Norway as well as developments in the UK. Other than that the only European option I can think of is Kourou. There is also Russia and Ukraine, but neither seem easy politically. Maybe Israel.

Most likely they're following things like the Spaceport Scotland projects since they're likely to get a good deal there.

[Tywin]

They can launch from Azores, Portugal too...

[PM3]

Umm... yes. This is a cornerstone of the Bavarian state's prestige project "Bavaria One", which I thought will take place completely in Bavaria. But of course, that state is too crowded for space launches.

[ringsider]

Umm... yes. This is a cornerstone of the Bavarian state's prestige project "Bavaria One"

No it's not. If there was such a cornerstone it would be OHB's "Rocket Factory Augsburg" project which is far more credible.

But even that project is hit by the failure of the whole Bavaria One concept, which now has hardly any money allocated. They just recently announced a mere EURO 5m for these kinds of projects (plus another EURO 25m for a satellite centre) instead of the expected EURO 700m for all kinds of things including Hyperloop.

If any of these these German projects  expected that money then they have a problem. At minimum they have a delay, possibly worse.

[PM3]

But even that project is hit by the failure of the whole Bavaria One concept, which now has hardly any money allocated. They just recently announced a mere EURO 5m for these kinds of projects (plus another EURO 25m for a satellite centre) instead of the expected EURO 700m for all kinds of things including Hyperloop.

Don't be fooled by political statemens of Bavarian opposition parties that were ventilated through the media. ;-) Politician's speak in that state is traditonally very hefty and exaggerated.

Goal of "Bavaria One" is to build up a satellite industy in Bavaria and have the sats launched on a Bavarian-made rocket. 700m is the sum of long-term investments - mostly private - that are hoped to be achived after stimulating this project by some public money. 30m public money for the first two years is not bad. Private capital invested will be multiple times of that.

[PM3]

New Spectrum webpage with nice renderings: https://www.isaraerospace.com/spectrum.php

Length: 27 m
Diameter: 2 m
Fairing options (max. payload size): 1.8 x 4.9 and 2.5 x 5.3 m

1st stage engines: 9 x 75 kN, engine-out capability
2nd stage engine: 1 x 94 kN

1000 kg to LEO
700 kg to SSO (height?)

This is Firefly Alpha class.

Payload User's Guide available on request: https://www.isaraerospace.com/launch.php

Hiring: Sales Manager, Accountant, Propulsion Engineer, Propulsion Testing Engineer, Propulsion Testing Technician, Avionics Testing Engineer, Avionics Testing Technician, Electrical Engineer, Satellite Integration Engineer, Structural Engineer, Production Technician, Quality Assurance Engineer, IT Administrator, People Manager

[bolun]

SN article with info about target price, launch site, etc.

German launch startup raises $17 million with help from Airbus Ventures and an ex-SpaceX employee

[Blackjax]

The fact that they seem to have secured enough funding to get them through most or all of their development is definitely a point in their favor and puts them in a fairly small subset of the large number of launchers that have been claimed to be under development.  That said I have been through the info about this launcher and I am having trouble spotting anything about it which seems to stand out as a competitive advantage except for the fact that they are in Europe.  They are targeting somewhere between $16m and $17m per launch.  This gives them the following per kg pricing vs the vehicles they are most comparable to:

Isar Spectrum $16k-$17k
Firefly Alpha $15k
ABL RS1 $10k
Relativity Terran 1 $8k

For European payloads that want to fly specifically on a European launcher I suppose they might be able to compete, but that would likely mean they are strealing that payload from the Vega or Ariane 6.  I wonder what dynamics of the situation would be with ESA and Arianespace.  Things might get interesting if they suck the wind out of the sails on the Vega.

Does anyone see anything else about the vehicle or their stated plan that stands out?  Otherwise they just look like the weakest in their cohort of "launchers at the high end of the small launcher space who might actually reach a demo flight".

[TrevorMonty]

Fuel is light hydrocarbon, I'm assuming that is methane.
Upper start engine can do multiple restarts which will be needed on rideshare missions.

Yet another 9+1 engine LV, unlike Electron the 1000kg LVs should be able to do propulsive reentry, while sacrificing payload performance, still light enough for Mid Air Recovery.

[TrevorMonty]

The fact that they seem to have secured enough funding to get them through most or all of their development is definitely a point in their favor and puts them in a fairly small subset of the large number of launchers that have been claimed to be under development.  That said I have been through the info about this launcher and I am having trouble spotting anything about it which seems to stand out as a competitive advantage except for the fact that they are in Europe.  They are targeting somewhere between $16m and $17m per launch.  This gives them the following per kg pricing vs the vehicles they are most comparable to:

Isar Spectrum $16k-$17k
Firefly Alpha $15k
ABL RS1 $10k
Relativity Terran 1 $8k

For European payloads that want to fly specifically on a European launcher I suppose they might be able to compete, but that would likely mean they are strealing that payload from the Vega or Ariane 6.  I wonder what dynamics of the situation would be with ESA and Arianespace.  Things might get interesting if they suck the wind out of the sails on the Vega.

Does anyone see anything else about the vehicle or their stated plan that stands out?  Otherwise they just look like the weakest in their cohort of "launchers at the high end of the small launcher space who might actually reach a demo flight".

They will need to rely on europe market as its up against stiff competition. Firefly and ABL plan to fly in 2020 with Relativity in 2021. By 2021 Firefly and ABL should be flying regularly giving one year lead and most importantly flight proven LV. NB it can take while to go from successful demo flight to commercial operation, typically LV needs changes that first couple flights show up.

[ringsider]

Airbus, which owns 50% of ArianeGroup, buys into the very last startup to appear - and one that:

- competes directly with Vega

- has no discernable technical advantage

- is located in the highest cost part of Europe and

- is run by recent university graduates?

This is an interesting puzzle.

SpinLaunch is easy to understand - high risk but high potential to disrupt - but what motivates this odd move at this time?

EDIT:

This is really intriguing the more you look into it.

It is reasonably obvious this little company does not have a revolutionary offer or major technical advantage versus the dozens of others out there - it doesn't even have a head start. So perhaps the only rational way to look at it is to consider if there is another reason for this investment?
 
What if Airbus is sending a message? Is this perhaps a move to send a signal to OHB, who also announced developments a few weeks ago around their own launcher subsidiary?

On the face this is a bizarre investment by Airbus, but if you look upon it as a way to dilute investment into OHB's efforts, who until now would have been the only serious German effort, and who importantly rival Airbus for major satellite orders, it could be a very strategic "spoiler" development.

The location of this young company is one of the most important factors here - Germany. That is the key.

[john smith 19]

New Spectrum webpage with nice renderings: https://www.isaraerospace.com/spectrum.php

Length: 27 m
Diameter: 2 m
Fairing options (max. payload size): 1.8 x 4.9 and 2.5 x 5.3 m

1st stage engines: 9 x 75 kN, engine-out capability
2nd stage engine: 1 x 94 kN

1000 kg to LEO
700 kg to SSO (height?)

This is Firefly Alpha class.

Payload User's Guide available on request: https://www.isaraerospace.com/launch.php

Hiring: Sales Manager, Accountant, Propulsion Engineer, Propulsion Testing Engineer, Propulsion Testing Technician, Avionics Testing Engineer, Avionics Testing Technician, Electrical Engineer, Satellite Integration Engineer, Structural Engineer, Production Technician, Quality Assurance Engineer, IT Administrator, People Manager

Wow.

Yet another liquid fueled TSTO ELV running GG cycle engines. [EDIT and it's got 9 engines in the booster and 1 in the US. Dare I even whisper they might be trying to recover that booster at some later stage? ]

I can barely control my excitement at such cutting edge innovation. 

Truly it feels like I'm living in the future. Like 2010 or sometime like that.

[john smith 19]

Airbus, which owns 50% of ArianeGroup, buys into the very last startup to appear - and one that:

- competes directly with Vega

- has no discernable technical advantage

Actually the "competes with Vega" might be the key as well.

Vega is mostly Italian and AFAIK Airbus don't have that big a part of it.

OTOH it's SRB technology leverages A6 and the French ICBM programmes so it would be difficult to challenge it directly.

BTW AFAIK Vega is still the largest LV with an all electric TVC. That really has moved electric actuators for LV's up to TRL9

[edzieba]

The fact that they seem to have secured enough funding to get them through most or all of their development is definitely a point in their favor and puts them in a fairly small subset of the large number of launchers that have been claimed to be under development.  That said I have been through the info about this launcher and I am having trouble spotting anything about it which seems to stand out as a competitive advantage except for the fact that they are in Europe.  They are targeting somewhere between $16m and $17m per launch.  This gives them the following per kg pricing vs the vehicles they are most comparable to:

Isar Spectrum $16k-$17k
Firefly Alpha $15k
ABL RS1 $10k
Relativity Terran 1 $8k

For European payloads that want to fly specifically on a European launcher I suppose they might be able to compete, but that would likely mean they are strealing that payload from the Vega or Ariane 6.  I wonder what dynamics of the situation would be with ESA and Arianespace.  Things might get interesting if they suck the wind out of the sails on the Vega.

Does anyone see anything else about the vehicle or their stated plan that stands out?  Otherwise they just look like the weakest in their cohort of "launchers at the high end of the small launcher space who might actually reach a demo flight".

"Nothing stands out" is probably the attraction: a proven design with adequate funding should have no real issues producing a viable launcher.

[ringsider]

The fact that they seem to have secured enough funding to get them through most or all of their development

No. $17m is not enough for "most or all of their development" of a 1,000kg launcher, not even close.

More like $100m-$150m. This is seed stage money.
 

[john smith 19]

"Nothing stands out" is probably the attraction: a proven design with adequate funding should have no real issues producing a viable launcher.

It's only real advantage is if you want to use a European launcher. In which case I presume they would expect customers to pay any premium over LV's with equal performance but lower cost but from outside Europe.

[Blackjax]

The fact that they seem to have secured enough funding to get them through most or all of their development

No. $17m is not enough for "most or all of their development" of a 1,000kg launcher, not even close.

More like $100m-$150m. This is seed stage money.

Not that this changes much since the amount involved in the seed round was likely modest but the prior round was the seed round:
https://medium.com/uvc-partners-news/space-flight-company-isar-aerospace-receives-multi-million-euro-investment-b75e753868ca

This recent round was series A.  So this is probably the third infusion of money into the effort counting whatever they bootstrapped with prior to securing the seed money.

I think it is possible we are thinking of different things when we are discussing their 'development' if you believe the cost will be that amount.  FWIW I was envisioning reaching the point where they have a design ready for their prototype and have decent number of engine hot fires and interations.  Basically enough hardware and design to bring to bring to investors to get enough series B for test flights and early demo missions. That might be combined with things like government grants or other subsidies, debt, and advance revenue from contracts.  They pretty much say this in the article:

...Isar Aerospace’s $17 million Series A will fund the 30-person company through to a full-duration engine hot-fire, Metzler said...

I'm curious to know how their government and organizations like ESA will view them.  I think that could have a substantial impact on the likeliihood of resources being available.

[TrevorMonty]

They maybe able do demo LV for lot less than $100-150m. The factory etc to build 10-20 a year will need rest of $100-150m. To be successful need to build production line at same time as demo LV. Customers won't wait a year or two after demo mission while production facilities are built.

[Blackjax]

They maybe able do demo LV for lot less than $100-150m. The factory etc to build 10-20 a year will need rest of $100-150m. To be successful need to build production line at same time as demo LV. Customers won't wait a year or two after demo mission while production facilities are built.

I have not yet been able to spot any good reasons to believe they would be able to attract enough payloads to need to build that many per year.  Do you see where enough customers would come from to exceed the number of vehicles they could hand build per year without significant factory infrastructure? 

Even if you posit strong growth in the number of payloads needing launch by 2022 or 2023, every sign is that lhe growth in launcher options will outpace it.  In a highly competitive environment, why would this particular company win lots of contracts?

[ringsider]

The fact that they seem to have secured enough funding to get them through most or all of their development

No. $17m is not enough for "most or all of their development" of a 1,000kg launcher, not even close.

More like $100m-$150m. This is seed stage money.

...Isar Aerospace’s $17 million Series A will fund the 30-person company through to a full-duration engine hot-fire, Metzler said...

I'm curious to know how their government and organizations like ESA will view them.  I think that could have a substantial impact on the likeliihood of resources being available.

The European Vega rocket cost 710 million Euros, plus another 400 million for development flights - so more than 1.1 billion Euros, for a launcher capable of 1400kg.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vega_(rocket)#Costs

A direct compariable is Relativity, with a 1250kg launcher. They have raised $185m so far, and are probably 1-2 years ahead of this company. I am sure they will raise another $200m-$250m before long, so circa $400m in total.

Even Rocket Lab needed about $60m for the first small 150kg launcher, and then another $70m to scale the factory, and then another $140m for more scale. $270m.

This one may be able to do it cheaper, but 98% cheaper than Vega, or 90% cheaper than Relativity? No. A full duration engine burn for $17m? I direct you to Peter Beck's excellent quote "if they are showing engine tests you know they are miles away".

So for sure they will need a lot more money. Some of it may come from ESA or German govt, but that is exactly the real game here - this is Airbus spoiling the German landscape for OHB's ambitions, diluting their potential resources. I honestly don't think Airbus cares if this company is successful or not as long as it slows down OHB...

[TrevorMonty]

The fact that they seem to have secured enough funding to get them through most or all of their development

No. $17m is not enough for "most or all of their development" of a 1,000kg launcher, not even close.

More like $100m-$150m. This is seed stage money.

...Isar Aerospace’s $17 million Series A will fund the 30-person company through to a full-duration engine hot-fire, Metzler said...

I'm curious to know how their government and organizations like ESA will view them.  I think that could have a substantial impact on the likeliihood of resources being available.

The European Vega rocket cost 710 million Euros, plus another 400 million for development flights - so more than 1.1 billion Euros, for a launcher capable of 1400kg.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vega_(rocket)#Costs

A direct compariable is Relativity, with a 1250kg launcher. They have raised $185m so far, and are probably 1-2 years ahead of this company. I am sure they will raise another $200m-$250m before long, so circa $400m in total.

Even Rocket Lab needed about $60m for the first small 150kg launcher, and then another $70m to scale the factory, and then another $140m for more scale. $270m.

This one may be able to do it cheaper, but 98% cheaper than Vega, or 90% cheaper than Relativity? No. A full duration engine burn for $17m? I direct you to Peter Beck's excellent quote "if they are showing engine tests you know they are miles away".

So for sure they will need a lot more money. Some of it may come from ESA or German govt, but that is exactly the real game here - this is Airbus spoiling the German landscape for OHB's ambitions, diluting their potential resources. I honestly don't think Airbus cares if this company is successful or not as long as it slows down OHB...

Vega is 1400kg to SSO while 1000kg small LVs are 600kg (firefly Alpha). 

The 1000kg class LV busoness is going to be hotty contested, expect list prices to drop. My guess is around $10m.

RL will need to bring Electron back under $5m to compete, currently $7.5m which includes free gold medal. Reusing booster should help. I suspect RL are milking market while they can , with no direct competition and excellent record to boot.

[Blackjax]

So for sure they will need a lot more money. Some of it may come from ESA or German govt, but that is exactly the real game here - this is Airbus spoiling the German landscape for OHB's ambitions, diluting their potential resources. I honestly don't think Airbus cares if this company is successful or not as long as it slows down OHB...

For those who, like me, hadn't heard of OHB, their thread is here:
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48925.0

From what I am gleaning they are a large established satellite firm who is trying to setup a verticle (one stop shopping for the payload and the launch) very similar to RocketLabs, including a similarly sized vehicle.

What's interesting about a company like this doing it is that funding the development shouldn't be a problem and their motivations for doing it would seem to be somewhat different from many of the small launcher efforts:

OHB is committed to self funding the rocket.

“You lose control” of creating the rocket when government funds get involved, he said.

_{source https://spacenews.com/ohb-defends-self-funded-launcher-effort/}

What I don't understand is your reasoning for why Airbus might consider Isar to be a spoiler that is helpful to them.   How does that work?

What makes you think that this is Airbus' primary reason for involvement rather than some other motivation?

[john smith 19]

The 1000kg class LV busoness is going to be hotty contested, expect list prices to drop. My guess is around $10m.

RL will need to bring Electron back under $5m to compete, currently $7.5m which includes free gold medal. Reusing booster should help. I suspect RL are milking market while they can , with no direct competition and excellent record to boot.

Just like every other LV mfg/operator in fact.

No one should be at all surprised at this.

Actual direct competition (same payload to same orbit, not limited what foreign country the supplier is based in) lowers prices.

Nothing else really works. 

It's the 2nd decade of the 21st century and the level of "innovation" I keep seeing in this stuff is massively underwhelming. 

One imagines fine minds with expensive engineering educations yet all they come up with is so much more of the same.

It's like the last time the Germans actually did something truly innovative was OTRAG in the 70's. 

[gmbnz]

It's the 2nd decade of the 21st century and the level of "innovation" I keep seeing in this stuff is massively underwhelming. 

One imagines fine minds with expensive engineering educations yet all they come up with is so much more of the same.

It's like the last time the Germans actually did something truly innovative was OTRAG in the 70's. 

I guess that's the downside of the commercialisation trend.
Blame Reagan and his presidential decree in '82 for the government to focus on "encouraging the private sector development of commercial launch operations" On the other hand thank him for starting the ball rolling on the (new) space race!

The commercialisation certainly worked, but no company is going to do the blue sky research needed to break out of the 'optimum' TSTO or similar design. There certainly could be the return in the long run but it would cost far more than any venture capitalist is ever going to put up at the moment.

So for sure they will need a lot more money. Some of it may come from ESA or German govt, but that is exactly the real game here - this is Airbus spoiling the German landscape for OHB's ambitions, diluting their potential resources. I honestly don't think Airbus cares if this company is successful or not as long as it slows down OHB...

Which is an odd strategy since as far as I know OHB haven't ever said anything about finding other funding sources - I got the impression they've just shifted some engineering over to designing a small LV. I guess in terms of attracting talent and things perhaps?

[Rik ISS-fan]

Let's make the European micro launcher developments even more complicated.
I'm confused. The plot thickens.

'AQUILA' I've seen that name before.
VLM    VLX/Aquila


I think we have only seen the tip of the iceberg.

[ringsider]

Looks like something changed - OHB-owned Rocket Factory Augsburg are raising external money by selling 50% of their firm:-

https://latamsatelital.com/rocket-factory-augsburg-busca-financiacion/

The timing, a few weeks after the news from a few miles down the road at Isar Aerospace (also in Germany), is quite interesting. Also the % amount is a lot - almost like somebody decided to step away from vehicle...

[bavariablue]

Looks like Isar Aerospace is getting into trouble regarding their gas generator test site.
There is an online petition against gas generator tests done by Isar Aerospace because they do tests next to an resort and tourists / neighbors get annoyed:

https://www.petitionen.com/nein_zu_raketentriebwerkstest_in_reischach?u=5530478&fbclid=IwAR2hf19iRHEqBS0s06LnVNPN-lxqRTquT4dl8yjLYvuj76sKPI6U3IvzRIY

https://www.pnp.de/lokales/landkreis-altoetting/neuoetting-toeging/Zu-laut-Streit-um-Gasgeneratoren-Tests-fuer-Raketen-3699759.html

Looks like they are testing at a farm :

https://www.google.com/maps/place/48.282901,+12.702001/@48.2829959,12.7019979,20z/data=!3m1!1e3

[Rik ISS-fan]

And then we are surprised developing rocket technology in Europe is difficult.  ... 

[ringsider]

And then we are surprised developing rocket technology in Europe is difficult.  ... 

America really has the sweet spot of entrepreneurship, a large pot of risk money, strong legacy and history - and therefore skills and infrastructure - and lots of wide open spaces where you can do whatever you want. Isar Aerospace were at one point saying they may move to America as it is so constrained / underfunded in Europe - it's in a parliamentary proceeding in Germany if you Google them a bit. Europe needs a Spaceport America thing but they are too fragmented over there to get that together.

[bavariablue]

some insights from their test-site:

[Rik ISS-fan]

NSF has missed it, but funding is most likely not something they are worrying about.
Has someone more details about the ISAR Aerospace Aquila engines. Their specs are nearly the same as the specs for the Myra engine specs (Vega-E). Does someone know what the differences and commonalities are.


Still there is the problem of about ten (European) companies trying to fish in the same pond. ...

Lets also share this...

[TorenAltair]

About the funding: Bavarias Prime Minister Söder initiated a program called Bavaria One in 2018 to push space-related tech forward but included expenses for Munich Technical University as well. The budget was 700 million Euros for 4 years. It included a contract with Isar Aerospace to launch a Bavarian sat within 7 years.

[ParabolicSnark]

Looks like they're starting to put that Series A funding round to work and building up some new in-house manufacturing capability. Looks pretty large, particularly to use a crane like that for unloading options.

More machines!
Our team is ramping up in-house production at an incredible pace, giving our engineers freedom to iterate and optimize quickly while ramping up towards serial production capabilities.
#newspace #rocketproduction

[ParabolicSnark]

Isar shared a video of a turbine test earlier today on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/isaraerospace_aquila-turbine-test-activity-6706114974957215744-4Pw8

We like to push the limits on our systems, especially our rocket engine. Check out the turbine tests of our turbopack we did earlier this year to ensure high perfomance and safety while validating our software design tools, moving closer to integrated tests and first launch.
#rocketengine #testing #highperformance

Given they're calling it a "turbine test of our turbopack" I'm assuming the pumps aren't ready yet and they're trying to generate power/efficiency curves on just the turbine. It looks like they could be using the gas generator mentioned in previous testing because of the faint grey exhaust.

Looks like a positive incremental step towards an integrated engine test.

[TorenAltair]

In German news today:
- 1200 kg to LEO
- half a dozen launch locations under investigation, including launches from the North Sea
- 100 employees
- last round financing in Dec 2019 was €15 million
- another round financing planned this year
- first launch planned for 2021
- company sees their advantage to the competitors in low costs and flexibility. Customers should get launches weeks to months after ordering

[ParabolicSnark]

That's a lot of employees for their stage in development and establishes a high burn rate. 100 people is probably in the neighborhood of $25-30M/year. Assuming a linear ramp during that year, you can cut that in half for Dec-2019 through Dec-2020 which matches well with their goal for another funding round this year.

I think they're going to be in and out of funding rounds and hope they can produce enough results to keep those investors interested.

A 2021 launch is also a lot to ask for a company that's only done a gas generator and a turbine test. They need to complete their turbopump, hotfire a chamber, integrate those two, and then run the complete engine with the stage. On top of that, there's permitting issues they need to resolve. Perhaps someone more familiar with European launch regulations can chime in on how they compare to NASA/AF/FAA/range qualification.

[ringsider]

That's a lot of employees for their stage in development and establishes a high burn rate. 100 people is probably in the neighborhood of $25-30M/year. Assuming a linear ramp during that year, you can cut that in half for Dec-2019 through Dec-2020 which matches well with their goal for another funding round this year.

I think they're going to be in and out of funding rounds and hope they can produce enough results to keep those investors interested.

A 2021 launch is also a lot to ask for a company that's only done a gas generator and a turbine test. They need to complete their turbopump, hotfire a chamber, integrate those two, and then run the complete engine with the stage. On top of that, there's permitting issues they need to resolve. Perhaps someone more familiar with European launch regulations can chime in on how they compare to NASA/AF/FAA/range qualification.

Not a European expert but just looking at what others have done, like Rocket Lab, Firefly and Virgin, that date is laughable from this early status.

[TorenAltair]

About the regulations: basically impossible in Germany to get a flight permission with existing laws, but that‘s one of the reasons they might more easily get one - just a special exemption solution. Why should they get such a special permission?
All of the following since about 2018:
First, Bavaria strongly supports new high tech industry. Second, German politics shifted to a more „self-confident“ posture, for example German minister of economy - Altmaier - stated that space and spaceflight is the coming and important business. Third, the BDI (association of German industry) massively calls for broad investions into space and spaceflight, for example calling for a German launch center or requesting from the German government that a German woman flies to the Moon with Americans in 2024.

My gut feeling: I was quite confused about the very direct statements since 2018 and would still rate it as only double-talk. I still don‘t see any significant funding increase in the related areas. But in my life I was - on rare occasions but still - surprised from time to time.

[ParabolicSnark]

A 2021 launch is also a lot to ask for a company that's only done a gas generator and a turbine test. They need to complete their turbopump, hotfire a chamber, integrate those two, and then run the complete engine with the stage. On top of that, there's permitting issues they need to resolve. Perhaps someone more familiar with European launch regulations can chime in on how they compare to NASA/AF/FAA/range qualification.

Not a European expert but just looking at what others have done, like Rocket Lab, Firefly and Virgin, that date is laughable from this early status.

I think Firefly is the best comparison here. Rocket Lab had a lot of experience with sounding rockets so they had opportunities to get avionics, GNC, and facilities setup to support and potentially expedite their development timeline. Virgin on the other hand had botched management with the number of configurations pursued in the beginning (ALASA, WhiteKnightTwo, NewtonOne, NewtonTwo) and a moving goal post on launch criteria when Dan Hart came on board. I think 3-5 year turn around is the goal where 3 is attainable by a dead-simple or derivative design and most new companies will land around the 5-year mark. That puts Isar launching probably closer to 2023.

[Bananas_on_Mars]

That's a lot of employees for their stage in development and establishes a high burn rate. 100 people is probably in the neighborhood of $25-30M/year. Assuming a linear ramp during that year, you can cut that in half for Dec-2019 through Dec-2020 which matches well with their goal for another funding round this year.

I wouldn‘t expect their expenditures for personnel to be that high. It‘s about 100k € for a young engineer/year including overhead costs.

I don’t know how much technology transfer there is between TUM and Isar Aerospace. Since Isar Aerospace somehow is a spin-off from TUM and they have access to that knowledge base, they might have more of a head start than currently attributed to them.

There‘s also a competition for a german smallsat launcher by DLR for a total price money of 25 mio. € where they are one of the competitors.

[playadelmars]

I wonder how much talent quality matters to speed of execution IE early SpaceX was able to hire the very best people anywhere that wanted to work on commercial space launch. Does that same talent pool and drive exist in Europe? I imagine it has to, but curious if that affects possible timelines at all vs the US.

[ParabolicSnark]

I wouldn‘t expect their expenditures for personnel to be that high. It‘s about 100k € for a young engineer/year including overhead costs.

My burn rate estimate included hardware costs, which tends to track reasonably well with head count.

[SciNews]

"Start-up begins rocket production: German start-up Isar Aerospace kicked off production on Monday with ambitions to send a 27-metre-long rocket into orbit next year." https://www.deutschland.de/en/news/start-up-begins-rocket-production
Thread about the spaceport in the North Sea https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=51894.0

[ParabolicSnark]

New article about Isar on Sueddeutsche Zeritung (South Germany Newspaper).

A competition organized by the German Aerospace Center shows how important politicians rate the development of German small rockets. The jury is chaired by Thomas Jarzombek, the German government's space coordinator. A total of 25 million euros have been awarded to two start-ups in particular for developing and qualifying their rockets.

Jarzombek even called for more money to be given to start-ups in the budget negotiations at the ESA Ministerial Conference in 2022 than to invest another million euros in the further development of the large European Ariane launcher . "We don't need Ariane 7".

Seems like there's a lot of political pressure in Germany to foster the new space environment. Isar is most notable, but they made mention of Rocket Factory Augsburg and HyImpulse, neither of which I've heard of before.

Edit: Rocket Factory Augsburg thread, HyImpulse thread

Isar Aerospace has 100 employees, which are to be increased to 160 in 2021.

With where they're at, they seem to be ramping faster than Relativity.

[Pueo]

Surprised this wasn't posted here when it came out: https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/09/a-german-rocket-startup-seeks-to-disrupt-the-european-launch-industry/

Probably the most significant part is the confirmation that Isar intends to use propane/lox as their fuel choice. 
The business case as described by the article seems to be: be the cheapest European option for customers who don't want to go to Russia / US / India and use significant German government support to get to that point.

I'm a big fan of using cryogenic propane, I think its high density when sub-cooled, low coking properties, and higher ISP than RP-1 make propane an ideal choice if one had to build a clean sheet small-medium lift partially-reusable launch vehicle.

[Asteroza]

I'm a big fan of using cryogenic propane, I think its high density when sub-cooled, low coking properties, and higher ISP than RP-1 make propane an ideal choice if one had to build a clean sheet small-medium lift partially-reusable launch vehicle.

Wasn't HMXHMX always saying if he had another go at it, he would pick LOx/Propane?

Seems like there's a lot of political pressure in Germany to foster the new space environment. Isar is most notable, but they made mention of Rocket Factory Augsburg and HyImpulse, neither of which I've heard of before.

Would this suggest Germany is hedging against EU/ESA problems?

[Pueo]

I'm a big fan of using cryogenic propane, I think its high density when sub-cooled, low coking properties, and higher ISP than RP-1 make propane an ideal choice if one had to build a clean sheet small-medium lift partially-reusable launch vehicle.

Wasn't HMXHMX always saying if he had another go at it, he would pick LOx/Propane?

Seems like there's a lot of political pressure in Germany to foster the new space environment. Isar is most notable, but they made mention of Rocket Factory Augsburg and HyImpulse, neither of which I've heard of before.

Would this suggest Germany is hedging against EU/ESA problems?

Unfortunately I'm a relative newcomer to the forum, what's HMXHMX's background?

Germany has a long history of pursuing export-led growth through generous subsidies to high value added industries, often to the chagrin of its EU neighbors.  Launching a foreign company's satellite from Germany is an export, specifically a mode 2 service export.  Now that there appears to be an exploding commercial new-space market it's practically second nature for Germany to subsidize small launch companies in the hopes of capturing launch services exports.

[Steven Pietrobon]

Unfortunately I'm a relative newcomer to the forum, what's HMXHMX's background?

https://flight.nasa.gov/events/tgir/2001/session_speakers/hudson2.htm

[CorvusCorax]

crosspost:  plan for a polar launch corridor over the north sea - using ship based sea-launches

https://www.heise.de/news/Bundesregierung-prueft-Konzept-fuer-Raketenstartplatz-in-der-Nordsee-4932590.html

[Balticskipper]

it seems likely that they will launch from Esrange in Northern Sweden, it looks like they will test their engines there and it is the only launch site in the EU. ceeping all their operation with in the EU would simplify logistics (no need to get groundcrews visas, and within the same customs union ect) and they can ship things there by truck or rail.

Sweden have launched sounding rockets from Esrange since the 60s and they have gotten approval to launch orbital rockets from 2022.

https://www.sscspace.com/ssc-to-launch-satellites-esrange-space-center/

[MiqBos]

They want to launch from Kourou: https://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Isar_Aerospace_prepares_the_launch_of_its_rockets_from_space_centre_CSG_999.html

They also posted a render video:

[Mighty-T]

Great news!

https://twitter.com/isaraerospace/status/1336571091804938240

[gmbnz]

https://techcrunch.com/2020/12/08/germanys-isar-aerospace-raises-91m-to-get-its-satellite-launch-vehicle-off-the-ground/

Isar Aerospace, which is building a micro-satellite launcher significantly smaller and thus lower in price than bigger launchers on the market today, has picked up €75 million ($91 million) in funding. It plans to use the money to continue its research, development and production en route to its first commercial launches, planned for early 2022.
The round, a Series B, is being led by Lakestar,  with previous backers Earlybird and Vsquared Ventures also contributing significantly, the company said. Earlybird and strategic backer Airbus Ventures led Isar’s previous round of $17 million in December 2019.

That's quite a bit of money and should see them well through development - with a pinch maybe to first launch (but I'd expect they'll probably need a topup)
And it comes basically a year after their $17m round, so presumably they've made good progress in that time.

Ever since OHB came on the scene with RFA I assumed they would be the first European small launch vehicle... but perhaps I'm wrong.

Comparing to Rocket Lab (assuming crunchbase is correct), RL had a $75m D series in early 2017 just a few months before their first launch.

_{https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/rocket-lab/company_financials}

[J-B]

https://spacenews.com/isar-aerospace-beat-out-competitors-to-win-dlr-microlauncher-competition/


Isar Aerospace has won the first of two main rounds of the DLR microlauncher competition beating out Rocket Factory Augsburg and HyImpulse Technologies. Isar Aerospace wins 11 millions d'€.

[TorenAltair]

Just in German news: Porsche buys a single digit share of Isar Aerospace.

[trimeta]

Just in German news: Porsche buys a single digit share of Isar Aerospace.

A total of $75 million in this round of funding, bringing their total to date up to $180 million.

[ringsider]

Just in German news: Porsche buys a single digit share of Isar Aerospace.

A total of $75 million in this round of funding, bringing their total to date up to $180 million.

Isar Aerospace seem to be focusing on a German-centric consortium of investors / industrials, which is an interesting development in Europe with all the French and Italian interests (Italian in particular in 1-2 ton light launch class).

But Germany hasn't had a launch site since either WW2, or perhaps the OTRAG-era in Zaire, has it? Also, do they have a legal framework today to allow a German rocket to be licensed to launch, apart from the standard (minimalist) UN OST adherence everybody has?

Just reading around it seems like the founders came straight out of building small model rockets at the University of Munich, founding the company in March 2018. They seem to be on a similar track to Relativity Space in terms a) founder background,  b) scale of vehicle, c) fluffy lets-go-Mars-and-build-a-city high-concept marketing, d) high-visibility investors e) financing and lofty valuations etc., but at least Jordan Noone and Tim Ellis had done some work at Masten and Blue Origin prior to founding Relativity. 

$180m is a decent amount of money. However, the lesson from Virgin Orbit, ABL, Astra, Firefly, Relativity et al is they will need a large amount more and a decently long amount of time to complete a rocket intended to carry 1,000kg to orbit, and they started very late compared to those five (VO was circa 2015 as part of SC/Galactic, Astra 2016 coming out of Ventions, Firefly January 2014 originally, Relativity 2015, ABL 2017 - and only the first 2 have launched to date). Have Isar Aerospace actually done anything significant in the 3.5 years since founding e.g. built any significant hardware like engines, tanks, guidance systems, or has it been mostly hiring and buying stuff?

On the surface it looks a little like another German firm, Lilium, which was also founded by students, which also raised a lot of money behind a big idea, but has struggled to deliver the technology so far.

[trimeta]

But Germany hasn't had a launch site since either WW2, or perhaps the OTRAG-era in Zaire, has it? Also, do they have a legal framework today to allow a German rocket to be licensed to launch, apart from the standard (minimalist) UN OST adherence everybody has?

For what it's worth, Isar plans to launch from Andøya Space Center in Norway, not from German soil. Since Andøya has hosted suborbital launches for decades, I'd think they'd be in a good place to understand the licensing requirements necessary to upgrade to orbital services.

[ringsider]

But Germany hasn't had a launch site since either WW2, or perhaps the OTRAG-era in Zaire, has it? Also, do they have a legal framework today to allow a German rocket to be licensed to launch, apart from the standard (minimalist) UN OST adherence everybody has?

For what it's worth, Isar plans to launch from Andøya Space Center in Norway, not from German soil. Since Andøya has hosted suborbital launches for decades, I'd think they'd be in a good place to understand the licensing requirements necessary to upgrade to orbital services.

Does Norway already have laws that can permit an orbital launch, or only suborbital?

Also, can a German orbital launcher company fly a vehicle from Norway on a Norwegian license, or does it still need a license from the government of it's own country?

Not sure how that works. It must be related to who holds the liability; normally the launching state holds the full liability e.g. with a US vehicle there is zero confusion about who is licensing and thus liable.

But this situation potentially blurs lines. For example, why would Norway accept the unlimited liability under UN OST of a German vehicle going wrong, when all it provides is the concrete launch pad?

Equally why would Germany let a private company head off to Norway and potentially create an unlimited risk to the carefully-managed German budget without some direct oversight?

Might it be that both countries need to permit the launch?

[Notaris]

But Germany hasn't had a launch site since either WW2, or perhaps the OTRAG-era in Zaire, has it? Also, do they have a legal framework today to allow a German rocket to be licensed to launch, apart from the standard (minimalist) UN OST adherence everybody has?

For what it's worth, Isar plans to launch from Andøya Space Center in Norway, not from German soil. Since Andøya has hosted suborbital launches for decades, I'd think they'd be in a good place to understand the licensing requirements necessary to upgrade to orbital services.

Does Norway already have laws that can permit an orbital launch, or only suborbital?

AFAIK, Norway is working on an update of their space legislation, but has a workable intermediate solution for orbital launches for the time being.

Also, can a German orbital launcher company fly a vehicle from Norway on a Norwegian license, or does it still need a license from the government of it's own country?

They will have to obey all applicable laws, both of Norway and Germany. The issue is, that a comprehensive space law is still not yet decided in Germany, thus it is unclear which German rules need to be followed currently. Likely little or no rules (besides export control, if and whenever applicable) for the time being.

Not sure how that works. It must be related to who holds the liability; normally the launching state holds the full liability e.g. with a US vehicle there is zero confusion about who is licensing and thus liable.

There can be more than one launching state for a single launch event. Each launching state is individually fully liable towards a potential victim. Thus the need to have inter-governmental agreements to decide on how such liability will be shared a posteriori.

But this situation potentially blurs lines. For example, why would Norway accept the unlimited liability under UN OST of a German vehicle going wrong, when all it provides is the concrete launch pad?

....because they want to have a space port. However, they will likely insist on an Intergovernmental Agreement with Germany before letting a German launch service provider launch from Norway.

Equally why would Germany let a private company head off to Norway and potentially create an unlimited risk to the carefully-managed German budget without some direct oversight?

Because of neglicence, as there is still no space law allowing the German state to have a say towards a private endeavour

Might it be that both countries need to permit the launch?

As above, depending on the national space law (once it exists).

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer and it is my interpretation of the legal situation

[Yiosie]

Announcement of Opportunity for the Launch of Satellites on the Spectrum Demonstration Flights

As participation condition of the German micro launcher competition, Isar Aerospace will offer
launch opportunities for institutional payloads of up to 150 kg total mass including adapters
and/or dispensers on each of their two demonstration flights of the Spectrum launch vehicle. The
number of payloads per flight is not pre-defined. The selection of payloads will be done by the
German Space Agency at DLR in consultation with Isar Aerospace and ESA.

<snip>

The maiden flight is currently planned for Q3 2022, the followup flight in 2023.

<snip>

The maximum aggregated mass of the spacecrafts/payloads eligible under this Announcement of
Opportunity is 150 kg.

<snip>

The reference orbit for the maiden flight is a low altitude polar orbit (< 400 km). Other polar orbits
might be considered within the Spectrum launch system capabilities and in line with achievable
orbits from the Andøya Spaceport. The altitude may change for the second Spectrum flight.

<snip>

The applications of all potential payload providers are to be delivered to the German Space Agency
at DLR by October 31st, 2021.

[Yiosie]

Isar Aerospace to launch OroraTech wildfire monitoring cubesat constellation

JOHANNESBURG — German launch startup Isar Aerospace has signed a contract with OroraTech to launch the company’s wildfire monitoring cubesat constellation.

Isar Aerospace is developing its two-stage Spectrum rocket to launch payloads of up to 700 kilograms to sun-synchronous orbit. The maiden flight of Spectrum is currently slated for the second half of 2022.

Under the contract announced Sept. 7, Isar Aerospace will conduct multiple Spectrum launches to deploy more than 10 OroraTech cubesats into sun-synchronous orbit between 2022 and 2026. OroraTech will also retain the option for additional flights to launch its full constellation of several hundred cubesats aboard Spectrum missions.

[PM3]

As of August 2021: 139 M€ series B funding, and first rocket is in production.

https://www.munich-startup.de/74903/isar-aerospace-erhoeht-series-b-finanzierung-auf-ueber-139-millionen-euro/

[Yggdrasill]

To try to avoid derailing this thread too much, I removed a couple of posts about Andøya Space and instead made a new thread: https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=54946.0

[Hortense]

Isar Aerospace Technologies GMBH is moving launch forecast by app. one month for each month elapsing.

So first launch is always app. 1 year in future.

September 2020 forecast: "end 2021"
[https://www.ft.com/content/6b2b4127-51ce-4a7f-a593-c34ac8198e07]

Decembre 2020 forecast: "early 2022"
[https://techcrunch.com/2020/12/08/germanys-isar-aerospace-raises-91m-to-get-its-satellite-launch-vehicle-off-the-ground/]

Februar 2021 forecast: "end 2021 or beginning 2022"
[https://www-nwzonline-de.translate.goog/die-wirtschaft/unternehmen/rocket-factory-ohb_a_51,0,722140337.html?_x_tr_sl=de&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=nui,sc]

April 2021 forecast: "second half of 2022"
[https://www.startbase.com/news/abflug-ins-all/]

July 2021 forecast: "late 2022"
[https://sifted.eu/articles/isar-aerospace-exclusive-deal/]

Septembre 2021 forecast: "Q3 2022"
[https://www.dlr.de/rd/PortalData/28/Resources/dokumente/rr/CSTS_Announcement.pdf]

[Yggdrasill]

April 2021 forecast: "second half of 2022"
[https://www.startbase.com/news/abflug-ins-all/]

July 2021 forecast: "late 2022"
[https://sifted.eu/articles/isar-aerospace-exclusive-deal/]

Septembre 2021 forecast: "Q3 2022"
[https://www.dlr.de/rd/PortalData/28/Resources/dokumente/rr/CSTS_Announcement.pdf]

These are basically the same, though.  "Late 2022" might be considered to be Q4, so you could say they moved the launch up going from july to september.

[Hortense]

Maybe your comment is true. It is possible.

But: Q3 2022 = Jul, August, Sept 2022.

So: Isar Aerospace Technologies GMBH Launch #1 < 11 month?

 

Money ≠ time.

Money ≠ experience.

A very large rocket for a very young company.

Soon: a dark cold arctic winter.

Probability is not zero.

But is close to zero.

[Yggdrasill]

I agree Q3 seems rather optimistic. And getting the launch pad ready in under a year also seems difficult. But it doesn't seem they are doing quite as bad as slipping one month for every month.

Andøya is relatively temperate, so I think construction can continue right through winter.

BTW, I read in an article they expect to start construction in approximately two months. Before they start construction, they intend to revise some contracts with partners. So, it's looking like construction can start around early december.

[Hortense]

Video: engine test from open road beside site Germany:



Safety: 

[Hortense]

Location: Isar Aerospace Technologies GMBH centre for engine test:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/84571+Reischach/@48.2828679,12.7011249,136m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x4775c70286063be3:0x6714e7183e50f121!8m2!3d48.2919886!4d12.7259351

Traffic: 

[Hortense]

Video: tanks carbon fibre Stage 2 (21.09.2021).

https://www.br.de/mediathek/video/isar-aerospace-von-der-isar-ins-all-av:6149a8da30cc160008e24fbf

Scale: Small-Medium.

Technique: Naive. Construction very heavy.

Leader: 1st role post-university.

Status: Early prototype / model. "Marketing rocket".

Conjecture: Out-source production? No in-house capability / expertise in carbon? Learning "on the job"?

P(Isar Aerospace Technologies GMBH launch #1 < 11 months):

[Hortense]

<move from wrong forum>

Data: ESRANGE safety notice
[https://sscspace.com/news-activities/safety/]

Note: Only warn for VTS-1 (Vertical Test Stand 1)

Data: ESRANGE Safety Manual pp 64 + public source fotos
[https://sscspace.com/wp-content/uploads/Esrange-Safety-Manual.pdf]

Data: Danger Area 7 / VTS-1 Rocket Factory Augsburg AG
[https://www.wiwo.de/images/hot_test_picture/27302356/2-format1001.jpg]

Data: Danger Area 8 / VTS-2 Isar Aerospace Technologies GMBH
[https://www.innsalzach24.de/bilder/2021/10/08/91043309/27260829-isar-aerospace-in-bildern-Qza7.jpg]

So: no engine test for Isar Aerospace Technologies GMBH at ESRANGE.

Consider: Isar Aerospace Technologies GMBH Launch #1 forecast < 11 month
[https://www.dlr.de/rd/PortalData/28/Resources/dokumente/rr/CSTS_Announcement.pdf]

Conclusion:

[Hortense]

Data: "1st engine rolls off the production line", April 2021

https://sifted.eu/articles/isar-aerospace-exclusive-deal/

Data: ESRANGE safety information, Novembre 2021

https://sscspace.com/news-activities/safety/

Note: zero activitie.

So: Still no engine test for Isar Aerospace Technologues GMBH at ESRANGE.

Consider: Isar Aerospace Technologies GMBH Launch #1 forecast Q3-2022, <10 month

Conclusion:

[SciNews]

23/11/2021 ESA - ESA Boost! contract for flight demonstration of Spectrum launch vehicle
https://www.esa.int/Enabling_Support/Space_Transportation/Boost/ESA_Boost!_contract_for_flight_demonstration_of_Spectrum_launch_vehicle

ESA will support Isar Aerospace with activities covering mission management, customer interactions and preparation to conduct two demonstration flights of Spectrum planned in 2022 and 2023.

[gongora]

ESA Commercial Space Transportation Services Program: Isar Aerospace and German Space Agency at DLR announce payloads for first test flight of Spectrum launch vehicle

[Yiosie]

ESA Commercial Space Transportation Services Program: Isar Aerospace and German Space Agency at DLR announce payloads for first test flight of Spectrum launch vehicle

This article from DLR gives details on the payloads for the first Spectrum launch:

Microlauncher competition - winners of the first payload places have been determined [dated Dec. 13]

Google translate (bolds mine, edited for clarity):

Here is an overview of the winners of the first payload tender:

The DLR Responsive Space Cluster Competence Center, RSC³, based in the AeroSpace Park at the DLR site in Trauen (Lower Saxony) with its MSAE-OTTERS mission: The primary goal is to develop a small satellite within just nine months. For this, the typical development and provision processes need to be accelerated, from which future satellite developments should benefit.

The Technical University Berlin with the CyBEEsat mission: It is a technology demonstration for a miniaturized transceiver that was developed for newly defined frequency bands.

The ZfT - Center for Telematics eV from Würzburg with a scientific study of volcanic ash clouds with three small satellites that fly in formation and can thus measure the spatial extent of the clouds.

The "Norwegian University of Science and Technology" (NTNU) from Trondheim with the mission "FRAMSat-1": A technology demonstration for a small satellite developed by students with a new star sensor from a Norwegian SME.

The "University of Maribor" (Slovenia) with the mission "TRISAT-S", a technology demonstration for a miniaturized transceiver that will enable encrypted communication with several ground stations around the world.

All of these seem to be CubeSats based on the award images in the article.

The three ZfT satellites belong to the Telematics International Mission & Telematics Earth Observation Mission (TIM & TOM); specifically, they are the three TOM satellites according to this article:

TIM & TOM [dated Mar. 3, 2020]

The aim of the TOM project is to monitor volcanic eruptions which affect daily life on earth in various ways (health, harvest or air traffic safety). The main objective is to measure the spatial extent of volcanic ash clouds. For this purpose 3 satellites map the cloud simultaneously from different angles. By post-processing and merging the observations, a 3-dimensional image is generated which provides information about the spatial distribution, height above ground, etc.

[Steven Pietrobon]

Why anyone would take at best a 50% chance of hitting their expensive satellite with a sledge hammer is beyond me! :-)

[edzieba]

Why anyone would take at best a 50% chance of hitting their expensive satellite with a sledge hammer is beyond me! :-)

They're all university cubesats, likely built with the assumption that they would be unlikely to ever actually see space (built as an exercise in building satellites) due to not having the funding for launch ready before starting the project. If you have a discount high-risk launch available that you can actually afford, risking maybe smashing your satellite into teeny bits for a chance at launching it and testing it in space is attractive vs. sitting it on a shelf to gather dust after you've finished ground testing.

[Hortense]

Data: Another month have passed. "Winter is coming."

Data: https://ritspace.se/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/Josef-Fleischmann.pdf

Data: Nobody have discovered the market except Isar Aerospace Technologies GMBH. No Astra, no Virgin Orbit, no Relativity, no ABL, no HyImpuls, no Skyrora, no PLD Space, no Avio, no Orbex, no Rocket Factory Augsburg AG. 



Data: "Testrig run-in".



Data: "1st engine rolls off the production line", April 2021

https://sifted.eu/articles/isar-aerospace-exclusive-deal/

So: Still no main engine test for Isar Aerospace Technologues GMBH at ESRANGE 8 month after engine "roll off production line".

Consider: Isar Aerospace Technologies GMBH Launch #1 forecast Q3-2022, <9 month

 

[Hortense]

Data: Bonne Année.

Data: European Commission select three small launcher for big prize.

https://twitter.com/defis_eu/status/1483399262142672899

Data: No safety warning for Isar Aerospace Technologies GMBH at ESRANGE, latest update Novembre 2021.

https://sscspace.com/news-activities/safety/

Data: "1st engine rolls off the production line", April 2021

https://sifted.eu/articles/isar-aerospace-exclusive-deal/

So: No engine test for Isar Aerospace Technologues GMBH at ESRANGE 10 month after engine "roll off production line".

Consider: Isar Aerospace Technologies GMBH Launch #1 forecast Q3-2022, <8 month

 

[eeergo]

Data: Bonne Année.

Data: European Commission select three small launcher for big prize.

https://twitter.com/defis_eu/status/1483399262142672899

Data: No safety warning for Isar Aerospace Technologies GMBH at ESRANGE, latest update Novembre 2021.

https://sscspace.com/news-activities/safety/

Data: "1st engine rolls off the production line", April 2021

https://sifted.eu/articles/isar-aerospace-exclusive-deal/

So: No engine test for Isar Aerospace Technologues GMBH at ESRANGE 10 month after engine "roll off production line".

Consider: Isar Aerospace Technologies GMBH Launch #1 forecast Q3-2022, <8 month

 

Won the prize, over the other two advanced finalists, the co-national German Rocket Factory Ausburg (RFA) and the Spanish PLD Space:

https://twitter.com/isaraerospace/status/1485945945711857669

[Hortense]

Data: now completing year 4 of working for Isar Aerospace Technologies GMBH:

https://www.northdata.com/Isar+Aerospace+Technologies+GmbH,+Ottobrunn/Amtsgericht+M%C3%BCnchen+HRB+239766

Data: 80 people and spendings of ca. €10.8 millions in 2020:

https://www.northdata.com/Isar+Aerospace+Technologies+GmbH,+Ottobrunn/Amtsgericht+M%C3%BCnchen+HRB+239766

Data: Encore, no engine test at ESRANGE:

https://sscspace.com/news-activities/safety/

Première launch:

End Q3 2022, <7 months.

[zubenelgenubi]

Member:
Ok, Hortense, we understand that you don't like Isar.

Is your focus on monthly updates demonstrating what you regard as their continuing failure necessary?  All but one of your posts on the forum are about Isar.

[Hortense]

Posting what interest me. Some people focus only SpaceX. I focus on Isar Aerospace Technologies GMBH.

I notice (above) Isar Aerospace Technologies GMBH change launch data to stay one year away. "Constant drift".

I post data I find about the company as well as a "countdown clock" against launch date announcement. Public information.

What is the problem? If they change date, I am not allowed to post? If find interesting information, not allowed to post?

Just tracking progress against public statements in specific company forum, once per month. Regular, sure, but only one post per months.

What rule is being broken please?

[zubenelgenubi]

What rule is being broken please?

Ok, I'll speak as a moderator.

I suggest an "update" once a quarter, or when news about Isar is published.

Posting more often gives the appearance that your only purpose here is to harm the target of your sole "interest."

The forum serves to inform its readers, not as a vehicle for harassment.

[Fmedici]

Not sure about where to publish this but EnduroSat will fly one of its satellites on an Isar Aerospace rocket. The press release mentions "ISAR 2", which I assume refers to their second launch of the Spectrum rocket.

Press release: https://www.endurosat.com/news/no-crash-boom-bang-in-space/

[Tywin]

https://twitter.com/isaraerospace/status/1626129388487032832

The engine is coming...

[Daniels30]

Isar Aerospace raises $165 million to bring more sovereign launch to Europe
https://techcrunch.com/2023/03/28/isar-aerospace-raises-165-million-to-bring-more-sovereign-launch-to-europe/

[ringsider]

Isar Aerospace have published a patent (WO2023057606) about their reusability concept featuring this diagram:



A Zeppelin?

[DeimosDream]

A Zeppelin?

Blimp. Zeppelins are ridged bodies. 

Looks like a drogue chute pulls open a side hatch and out pops an inflatable blimp envelop with some sort of small propeller popping out at figure 13. Seems a lot more expensive in both $helium and mass overhead than ocean recovery, but I've never heard of a similar system even in science fiction, so congrats on a possibly novel patent.

[Asteroza]

A Zeppelin?

Blimp. Zeppelins are ridged bodies. 

Looks like a drogue chute pulls open a side hatch and out pops an inflatable blimp envelop with some sort of small propeller popping out at figure 13. Seems a lot more expensive in both $helium and mass overhead than ocean recovery, but I've never heard of a similar system even in science fiction, so congrats on a possibly novel patent.

Kinda similar to the HAVOC balloon system for that manned venus descender NASA design to be honest.

I mean, if you're gonna use helium pressurant anyways, I suppose a balloon makes some sense...

[trimeta]

I've attached the full patent document.

[Mahurora]

https://www.isaraerospace.com/press/isar-aerospace-selected-to-be-first-privately-funded-launch-services-company-flying-satellites-from-guiana-space-centre

Seems like the news went under the radar, that Isar will be able to launch their rockets from Guiana apart from their existing contract with Andøya Space. CNES allocated them the Diamant launch pad east to the ELA-3. I'd say that's one major advantage they've secured against their German, British and Spanish competitors.

[trimeta]

https://www.isaraerospace.com/press/isar-aerospace-selected-to-be-first-privately-funded-launch-services-company-flying-satellites-from-guiana-space-centre

Seems like the news went under the radar, that Isar will be able to launch their rockets from Guiana apart from their existing contract with Andøya Space. CNES allocated them the Diamant launch pad east to the ELA-3. I'd say that's one major advantage they've secured against their German, British and Spanish competitors.

RFA also claimed to have plans to launch from the Diamant pad at Guiana, so that wouldn't be a unique property of Isar. Then again, that announcement is from 2020, and so may no longer be in effect.

[russianhalo117]

https://www.isaraerospace.com/press/isar-aerospace-selected-to-be-first-privately-funded-launch-services-company-flying-satellites-from-guiana-space-centre

Seems like the news went under the radar, that Isar will be able to launch their rockets from Guiana apart from their existing contract with Andøya Space. CNES allocated them the Diamant launch pad east to the ELA-3. I'd say that's one major advantage they've secured against their German, British and Spanish competitors.

RFA also claimed to have plans to launch from the Diamant pad at Guiana, so that wouldn't be a unique property of Isar. Then again, that announcement is from 2020, and so may no longer be in effect.

ELD - Ensemblé de Lancement Diamant is being converted to a multiple user small launcher complex. There is additional unused land in and around the ELD complex which is available for projects and commercial companies.

[Mahurora]

https://www.isaraerospace.com/press/isar-aerospace-selected-to-be-first-privately-funded-launch-services-company-flying-satellites-from-guiana-space-centre

Seems like the news went under the radar, that Isar will be able to launch their rockets from Guiana apart from their existing contract with Andøya Space. CNES allocated them the Diamant launch pad east to the ELA-3. I'd say that's one major advantage they've secured against their German, British and Spanish competitors.

RFA also claimed to have plans to launch from the Diamant pad at Guiana, so that wouldn't be a unique property of Isar. Then again, that announcement is from 2020, and so may no longer be in effect.

ELD - Ensemblé de Lancement Diamant is being converted to a multiple user small launcher complex. There is additional unused land in and around the ELD complex which is available for projects and commercial companies.

Oh, I see. Thanks for letting me know. So it'll be safe to assume that ELD will become the future primary launch site for large European private launch service providers.

[FutureSpaceTourist]

Our team has achieved a significant milestone of running integrated engine hotfires for 260 seconds with our in-house developed Aquila engine in multiple firings, representing significantly longer time than the engine needs to endure during flight. We exceeded the planned test objectives hotfiring one of the engines six times without any refurbishment.

[PM3]

ISAR Aerospace is the European Relativity: Tons of money and tons of expensive PR. Except that Relativity does innovate - like many European launcher companies - while ISAR does not.

HyImpulse builds hybrid engines.
RFA builds the only small launcher with full flow staged combustion engines.
Orbex builds radial tanks with propane fuel.
PLD Space builds a microlauncher with a resuable first stage

And Isar Aerospace builds ... just a plain vanilla rocket.

[TheKutKu]

ISAR Aerospace is the European Relativity: Tons of money and tons of expensive PR. Except that Relativity does innovate - like many European launcher companies - while ISAR does not.

HyImpulse builds hybrid engines.
RFA builds the only small launcher with full flow staged combustion engines.
Orbex builds radial tanks with propane fuel.
PLD Space builds a microlauncher with a resuable first stage

And Isar Aerospace builds ... just a plain vanilla rocket.

First PropaLox rocket to reach orbit? Wouldn't that be at least noteworthy.

-Hybrid engine are not used for orbital launchers for a reason
-oxygen-rich Staged combustion*
-Not sure if it's revolutionary compared to just a common bulkhead, also Orbex Prime is really small.
-Miura's 5 two different engines type do not exist yet.

Europe is in a launcher crisis, it needs more operational launchers in absolute priority, not more technology demonstration programs.

[trimeta]

ISAR Aerospace is the European Relativity: Tons of money and tons of expensive PR. Except that Relativity does innovate - like many European launcher companies - while ISAR does not.

HyImpulse builds hybrid engines.
RFA builds the only small launcher with full flow staged combustion engines.
Orbex builds radial tanks with propane fuel.
PLD Space builds a microlauncher with a resuable first stage

And Isar Aerospace builds ... just a plain vanilla rocket.

First PropaLox rocket to reach orbit? Wouldn't that be at least noteworthy.

-Hybrid engine are not used for orbital launchers for a reason
-oxygen-rich Staged combustion*
-Not sure if it's revolutionary compared to just a common bulkhead, also Orbex Prime is really small.
-Miura's 5 two different engines type do not exist yet.

Europe is in a launcher crisis, it needs more operational launchers in absolute priority, not more technology demonstration programs.

Orbex also uses propalox, although admittedly Isar is probably closer to launch. Still, that means Orbex has one more innovation than Isar. One can debate whether concentric tanks are actually a positive thing, I suppose; for some reason Scottish engineers love the concept (the other Scottish company, Skyrora, uses keroxide in concentric tanks).

[JEF_300]

And Isar Aerospace builds ... just a plain vanilla rocket.

I know this was supposed to be a critical comment, but I can't help but see it as a good thing. I like vanilla, and I also like a launch vehicle design with no showstoppers.

[PM3]

And Isar Aerospace builds ... just a plain vanilla rocket.

I know this was supposed to be a critical comment, but I can't help but see it as a good thing. I like vanilla, and I also like a launch vehicle design with no showstoppers.

The critical part is that they don't have a competitive advantage. Rocket business is hard, and you need some competitive edge to survive. E. g. RFA builds the largest, most fuel-efficient rocket in this class, and probably at lower cost than Isar. Or look at ABL, who also build a "vanilla" rocket - but at lowest cost and as a highly responsive launcher (and with those nice integrated cubesat deployers in stage 2 :-). And with that surprising new dual engine.

I make my living from analyzing and valuing companies, and I can't help but sensing some bad smell about Isar. It smells like too much cashburn, too shiny PR, and way too optimistic planning, which on the bottom line means some management problem. My guess is that there will be maximum one launch of Spectrum.

[ringsider]

One can debate whether concentric tanks are actually a positive thing, I suppose; for some reason Scottish engineers love the concept (the other Scottish company, Skyrora, uses keroxide in concentric tanks).

The argument OrbEx make in their patent is that this technique a) subcools the propane and thus gives similar Isp to kerosene and b) removes a lot of dead mass needed when the fuels have different thermal regimes:
 https://worldwide.espacenet.com/patent/search/family/057796256/publication/CA3050033A1?q=Orbital%20express%20launch

Filed January 2018.

Interesting that a nearby competitor had the same idea. Coincidence probably.

[TheKutKu]

One can debate whether concentric tanks are actually a positive thing, I suppose; for some reason Scottish engineers love the concept (the other Scottish company, Skyrora, uses keroxide in concentric tanks).

The argument OrbEx make in their patent is that this technique a) subcools the propane and thus gives similar Isp to kerosene and b) removes a lot of dead mass needed when the fuels have different thermal regimes:
 https://worldwide.espacenet.com/patent/search/family/057796256/publication/CA3050033A1?q=Orbital%20express%20launch

Filed January 2018.

Interesting that a nearby competitor had the same idea. Coincidence probably.

Well Europe has little to no heritage in Hydrocarbon large propulsion, and when you’re starting from scratch you may as well use the best propellant, and subcooled PropaLox has better volumetric efficiency than MethaLox and KeroLox

[PM3]

The Spectrum launch site at Andøya has been inaugurated today. Falsely claiming that ...

Today, the launch site operator Andøya Spaceport celebrated the opening of the first operational spaceport in continental Europe ...

which actually is Esrange, opened in January 2023.

... which will become the first launch site of the European launch service company Isar Aerospace. The spaceport is located at Nordmela on the Norwegian island of Andøya and is in the final stages towards operating capability. In an official ceremony, H.R.H. Crown Prince Haakon inaugurated the spaceport, an event which also marks a crucial milestone on Isar Aerospace’s path to its first test flight.

Fully constructed, the spaceport will host several launch pads. Isar Aerospace has exclusive access to the first launch site, which was built to Isar’s specifications, including a launch pad, payload integration facilities as well as a mission control center. This set-up guarantees greatest flexibility and planning security for Isar Aerospace and its clients in bringing small- and medium-sized satellites to space. The launch site will support the two-stage launch vehicle Spectrum, which is set to carry out final stage testing.

...

Isar Aerospace is in the final stages of preparation towards its first test flight of Spectrum: After having completed the system designs of its launch vehicle Spectrum, it currently is in the production phase of all parts of the rocket, including the flight engines. The rocket stages will then have to undergo acceptance testing, a series of tests that will verify that the systems meet all necessary requirements for flight.

https://andoyaspace.no/news-articles/andoya-spaceport-officially-opened/

This confirms that Isar Aerosoace is years away from a launch. The only thing completed is the systems design of the rocket. Now they have started producing parts, and need to learn how to build a rocket stage (2024). Then begin stage testing (2025), learn from failures, iterate (2026), and finally integrate and launch (NET late 2026).

Now we need to know their cash reserves and burn rate. They have become very lazy in publishing their financial reports (see unternehmensregister.de):

2018 report was published after 13 months
2019 report after 10 months, as it should be
2020 report after 13 months
2021 report after 21 months
2022 report not published yet

Net loss in 2021 was 21 M€ after 10 M€ in 2020, with 95 M€ cash at end of 2021.

[Yggdrasill]

The Spectrum launch site at Andøya has been inaugurated today. Falsely claiming that ...

Today, the launch site operator Andøya Spaceport celebrated the opening of the first operational spaceport in continental Europe ...

which actually is Esrange, opened in January 2023.

It's just written a bit poorly. If you look at the rest of the press release, they are saying they will become the first operational spaceport, by launching a rocket to orbit. Or in other words, they expect to beat Esrange to the first launch.

[PM3]

There is a lot more written poorly here. Have a look at https://www.isaraerospace.com/. A collection of pure PR blurb:

Enabling the future of technology.
Driving the European commercial space push.
We are disrupting the space industry.
We are using leading technologies to disrupt traditional manufacturing processes.
We achieve maximum flexibility, unrivaled speed and high autonomy.
The most versatile small launch vehicle.
Our in-house value creation enables maximum flexibility, unrivaled speed and highest autonomy to be at the forefront of the NewSpace industry.

Space flight will shape how humans will live, work and travel tomorrow.

This is on level with the most dubious newspace startups. The company is hiding behind a big show.

"Unrivaled speed" - mentioned multiple times on ther website - translates to "slowest progress of all German rocket builders." RFA has done a full duration second stage hotfire and started building stage 1. HyImpulse - funded with just a few million Euros - is sending their suborbital demonstrator for launch to Australia. And ISAR ... has run an engine for two minutes and started producing other rocket parts. All three companies were founded in 2018.

They even don't manage to revise their 2023 launch date, which has still been reported in German media a few months ago. Even ARCA Space managed to admit that they actually don't know when they will launch. ISAR (and btw. Orbex) just went silent.

[ringsider]

Startup of the Year 2023:-

https://spacenews.com/the-2023-spacenews-icon-awards-winners/

[PM3]

Isar Aerospace has filed the plan to change its legal status from a GmbH to AG and then to SE. Which means they will make their shares tradable and could go public.

[Yggdrasill]

The Norwegian minister of defence visited Isars facility in Ottobrunn.

https://e24-no.translate.goog/internasjonal-oekonomi/i/8JePAx/denne-raketten-er-starten-paa-et-norsk-rom-eventyr?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp

The first Spectrum test rocket is supposed to leave for Andøya Spaceport in two weeks.

[Tywin]

The Norwegian minister of defence visited Isars facility in Ottobrunn.

https://e24-no.translate.goog/internasjonal-oekonomi/i/8JePAx/denne-raketten-er-starten-paa-et-norsk-rom-eventyr?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp

The first Spectrum test rocket is supposed to leave for Andøya Spaceport in two weeks.

Fly this year or next?

[ringsider]

Photo opp of an assembled rocket on the pad to help with fundraising, but not ready for flight. They are still approx. 1-2 years away from a flight attempt, mainly because they need more money to get there.

Isar broadly stay totally silent unless they are fundraising, when they do a big PR push, which they have been doing since approx. mid-December 2023 - lots of proactive press articles, events like the Munich Security Conference, notable ministerial visitors, pictures of progress etc.

They were presenting at a Deutsche Bank funding seminar recently, and invitations to present only go to those who have a "relationship" with the bank i.e. have hired Deutsche Bank (or may hire) as a fundraising advisor:



Also the switch to a "Societas Europaea" public company format recently implies readying for an IPO, as reported by Space Intel Report:

https://www.spaceintelreport.com/europes-showcase-new-space-launch-startup-isar-aerospace-changes-legal-status-is-an-ipo-on-the-way/

Why do they need money? With 400+ staff they are burning money at ca. €40m-50m a year on staff alone, double or triple that with development costs on top, so circa €80m-120m annually.

The €155m raise from March 2023 will be gone by late summer 2024 at that burn rate, so they need more money in 2024, and a reasonable amount - another €150-200m raise (at least) to see the job through to launch.

They can depend on existing investors for some of that but they stepped up in the C round in 2023 (there was only one new investor to lead, a private fund who paid in €18m - all the rest was existing investors) so they may be tapped out or limited in how much more portfolio capacity they have for a single investment, hence the need for an investment bank to find new money.

Lastly they have ambitious plans for a new 270,000sqm factory and the CEO has been complaining about lack of state support for such facilities on LinkedIn:

[catdlr]

https://twitter.com/Erdayastronaut/status/1778546466501328963

Everyday Astronaut
@Erdayastronaut
Almost 7 hours of footage and hundreds of cuts, all to help answer one important question. How will Europe compete in this modern spaceflight era? I had the honor of visiting @rfa_space and @isaraerospace last year to answer this question, this video is going to be incredible!

[trimeta]

New video from Tim Dodd with factory tours of RFA and Isar Aerospace, comparing and contrasting the two companies' philosophies.

[PM3]

This report confirms my impression of ISAR:

- They are slow.
- They don't have a comprehensible competitive advantage.
- They compensate for this by PR blurb.

RFA looks like driven by smart engineers with unique development methods, while ISAR looks like some MBA's business plan that accidentially became a rocket company.

Note that ISAR is the only of the three German rocket builders that never updated the specs of their rocket. Which is very unusual. You never know where you will end up when developing an orbital rocket, therefore the specs of allmost all new rockets change during development process. But not for ISAR's Spectrum. Which IMHO is another indication that they are stuck in an early stage of development.

[Rik ISS-fan]

This report confirms my impression of ISAR: ...

To what report are you referring? The Every day astronaut video?

I think you are really harsh.
If I'm not mistaken, ISAR aerospace started with the basis of the engine DLR developed to compare with the L75 engine. This means they started with a very solid basis for their engine. They changed from LOx Ethanol to LOx Propane.

- They are slow.

Look at 50min into the video; ISAR requires one week to produce a new iteration of their engine.

- They don't have a comprehensible competitive advantage.

LOx Propane; both autogenus pressurizing propellant's. Propane can be stored without temperature control. But it's still liquid at the temprature of LOx. So no thermal insulation between the tanks is required. So you have the same advantages as with methane, without the drawback of cryogenic stowage.
There composite tank structures are extremely light weight. Leading to a low structural mass for the rocket.
The industrialization of ISAR is more centralized than that of RFA. ...

- They compensate for this by PR blurb.

ISAR is using PR less than RFA. Have you seen them showing their launch site ...

My impression is that ISAR went for Deutsche deutlichkeit (Germen reliability) while RFA is going for the cheapest route.
Both are at roughly the same progress in their rocket development. Both are at the stage of integrated stage static firing tests. And construction of the launch site. This is where both companies are AFAIK working on this year.

I'm astonished NSF mist two news items from ISAR the last week.

[PM3]

RFA has done a full duration upper stage hot-fire test a year ago, and is just now preparing a first stage for testing in SaxaVord. ISAR has not even started to integrate a stage. They also don't have a launch schedule any more. ISAR's last published launch date was 2023, and that passed without notice.

Look at 50min into the video; ISAR requires one week to produce a new iteration of their engine.

That's the PR blurb section of the video. Tim Dodd tries to find out if they have some competitive edge in their development philosophy, and the answer is: blurb. That's business plan stuff, not real engineering stuff.

[Rik ISS-fan]

There was a NOTAM around the Andoya orbital launch site May 4 or 5 if I remember correctly.
ISAR build a engine test stand at Esrange. At their launch site they are nearly finished building a stage test stand.
The flame trance for the launch pad is ready, but the launch structure still needs to be delivered to Andoya.
If the upperstage test didn't happen last week, it's going to happen soon.

RFA one build a much less complicate engine test stand at Esrange, that could also perform the upperstage tests.
The current facility at Saxavord is a test stand for the RFA one first stage. To finish the launch site they require to build more facilities.

I think for both ISAR aerospace Spectrum and RFA One the maiden launch could take place in 2025.

Still no post about the other news from ISAR aerospace. ...

[Galactic Penguin SST]

Still no post about the other news from ISAR aerospace. ...

Well maybe you can post it...
Not this one I guess?
https://twitter.com/isaraerospace/status/1785932797640613956

@isaraerospace has found a new home and signed a contract with VGP to develop our new company HQ in Vaterstetten near Munich, GER. Our scalable series production will be one of the world's most advanced production facilities for orbital LVs.

More: https://ow.ly/nbKH50RucF2

[Rik ISS-fan]

@Galactic Penguin SST: Yes that one.

[JEF_300]

Look at 50min into the video; ISAR requires one week to produce a new iteration of their engine.

That's the PR blurb section of the video. Tim Dodd tries to find out if they have some competitive edge in their development philosophy, and the answer is: blurb.

Ok, so tell me if I have this correct; you've been saying since at least October that Isar has no competitive advantage, and then when one of the founders of Isar directly says what their competitive advantage is, you call it PR?

That's business plan stuff, not real engineering stuff.

Good! Competitive advantage isn't necessarily an engineering problem, but it is the core of any business plan!

What's their competitive advantage? It's automated production, lack of reliance on outside suppliers, and their potential speed of iteration.

That's a perfectly clear and rational answer to the question.

[bavariablue]

unclear why they get so much funding. Checkout the new NATO collaboration.

[trimeta]

unclear why they get so much funding. Checkout the new NATO collaboration.

Context: Isar Aerospace raises $70 million (including participation from the NATO Innovation Fund).

This brings the total amount raised by Isar to over 400 million euros (>$425M). For reference, it took SpaceX and Rocket Lab $100-200M to reach first launch of their small-launch vehicles.

[Steven Pietrobon]

This brings the total amount raised by Isar to over 400 million euros (>$425M). For reference, it took SpaceX and Rocket Lab $100-200M to reach first launch of their small-launch vehicles.

Virgin Orbit spent over $1.2B and went bust! Having lots of money is not a guarantee for success.

[Rik ISS-fan]

It's true that a lot of funding isn't a guarantee for succes.
Virgin Orbit tried to develop a air-launched rocket. They required a Boeing 747 for this. They developed four different engines.
ISAR aerospace has developed a single engine, in a sealevel and vacuum optimized version, the Aquilla. The out of the ordinary thing about this is the fuel, propane. Tank structure material is mainly composite, Rocketlabs showed this can work.

I think the 70mln is already for the large factory that will enable ISAR aerospace to produce up to 40 launchers annually.
So this isn't required for the maiden launch, it's required for serial production at high rate.
AFAIK ISAR has permission to launch up to 10 launches annually from their launch site at Andoya, Norway.
And they also one selected by CNES as operator for one of the (ELM) Diamond small launcher zones.

edit to add: SpaceX Hawthorne facility roughly has the same area as the new facility for ISAR aerospace.
Their current facility has an area of ~8000m², the new facility will be 40.000m².

[TrevorMonty]

I think they are getting ahead of themselves by overestimating demand and underestimating how long it takes to get operational LV ie 5-10 launches a year.

F9 and Electron took quite afews to reach 10 launches a year. LauncherOne was getting close to 5 before it went bankrupt.  Alpha is another couple years at least from 10 launches per year.

To many startups over capitalise to soon which is partly why VO went bankrupt and RL bought $100m factory for $16m.  Astra are all but bankrupt for similar reasons.

Rough rule of thumb is 1, 3, 6 launches over 3 years. RL with all their Electron are still working to this plan with Neutron.

[JEF_300]

I think they are getting ahead of themselves by overestimating demand and underestimating how long it takes to get operational LV ie 5-10 launches a year.

F9 and Electron took quite afews to reach 10 launches a year. LauncherOne was getting close to 5 before it went bankrupt.  Alpha is another couple years at least from 10 launches per year.

To many startups over capitalise to soon which is partly why VO went bankrupt and RL bought $100m factory for $16m.  Astra are all but bankrupt for similar reasons.

Rough rule of thumb is 1, 3, 6 launches over 3 years. RL with all their Electron are still working to this plan with Neutron.

I mostly agree with this, but Isar has a similarly absurd amount of money as VO did, while having (hopefully) far less overhead, so I'm optimistic it will work out for them.

Also, we should note that both Starship and Vulcan are making an effort to buck that trend this year, so maybe that rule of thumb won't be so significant this time next year. We'll see.

An interesting approach would be to just fly regardless of whether or not you have payload. It would allow the company to build up experience with it's team and with the vehicle, to work out any kinks early, and to build up a record of successful flights. All of which will, presumably, make them more attractive to customers. The cost of the flights without payload could effectively be rolled into the overall R&D cost. No idea if that would be worth it in practice, but it seems better than just continuing blindly down the same path as Virgin Orbit.

[c4fusion]

Also, we should note that both Starship and Vulcan are making an effort to buck that trend this year, so maybe that rule of thumb won't be so significant this time next year. We'll see.

That is true, but both companies have significant launch experience and one of them is designed to be a dependable workhorse designed to slot right in. The other holds the record for most launches in a year by a country mile even if their vehicle is ambitious and audacious.

[JEF_300]

Also, we should note that both Starship and Vulcan are making an effort to buck that trend this year, so maybe that rule of thumb won't be so significant this time next year. We'll see.

That is true, but both companies have significant launch experience and one of them is designed to be a dependable workhorse designed to slot right in. The other holds the record for most launches in a year by a country mile even if their vehicle is ambitious and audacious.

Agreed.

When the big players redefine what's possible, the little guys often take years to catch up. But there are also occasions when they instead seem to go "oh, so that's how it's done", and are there shockingly fast.

I don't have any reason to expect this situation to go one way or the other, so I'm just throwing out the possibility.

[Yggdrasill]

It seems likely that Isar will start doing some sort of stage testing at the orbital launch site at Andøya, Norway, potentially starting tomorrow. https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=54946.msg2619783#msg2619783

It *might* just be testing of the GSE, but the road closure seems too big, in my opinion. They're closing the road approximately where they would close it for an orbital launch.

[Yggdrasill]

Some new information about what's going on at Andøya. Source in google translate: https://www-nrk-no.translate.goog/nordland/klart-for-historisk-rakett-test-pa-andoya-_-ekspert-mener-norge-er-i-ferd-med-a-vinne-romkapplopet-1.17025666?_x_tr_sl=sv&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp

In an email, Daniel Metzler said "We are in the final phase before our first test launch. Right now we are preparing a so-called "hot fire" test of the stages of the rocket."

And "If successful, we will go ahead with the launch as quickly as possible."

(I've translated it from Norwegian to English, and it was probably originally in English, so it's been translated from English to Norwegian to English. This isn't ideal for conveying the original meaning intended. Something may be lost in translation.)

[Yggdrasill]

According to the text alert, they closed the road past the orbital launch site at 12:36 CET. So they should be into testing right now.

Edit: Road reopened at 15:24 CET.

[Yggdrasill]

On Wednesday I got a text saying they are planning on testing on Thursday September 5th, Friday September 6th and Monday September 9th, between 12:00 and 20:00.

There was no road closure text on Thursday, but I got one just now. The road past the orbital launch site closed at 12:54 CET, Friday September 6th. That should mean they are back into testing.

Edit: Road reopened at 17:25 CET.

[Yggdrasill]

Road was closed 12:27-18:37 CET September 9th.

[Yggdrasill]

I got another text message they are also planning test activity with road closures on the 12th, 13th and 16th. Same (tentative) times, 12:00 - 20:00.

[Rik ISS-fan]

Andoya space posted another notice. A second period of temporary road closures has been announced for september 16th to 30th September. Possible road closures between 12:00 and 20:00.
https://andoyaspace.no/info-messages/periodevis-stenging-av-fv-7698-2/
I've not found any information on what exactly they are using the road closures for. 
Let's assume that no news is good news, no mishap has occurred. ISAR Aerospace will most likely make an announcement when they have (successfully) completed the test campaign.

[Yggdrasill]

No road closure on the 12th occurred, but the road was closed 12:00-17:12 CET on September 13th.

The road closures don't say all that much, but it is interesting to see if they deviate from the pattern at some point.

[Yggdrasill]

- There was no road closure on the 16th.
- On the 16th they sent out a notice that they intended to perform tests on the 18th, 19th and 20th, 12:00-20:00.
- I just got a message that the road is closed, 12:28 CET today, September 18th. Edit: And it's reopened at 17:13 CET.

[Yggdrasill]

- There was no road closure on September 19th.
- There was no road closure on September 20th.
- They are now planning new road closures on the 23rd, the 24th and the 25th, 12:00-20:00 CET.

[TheKutKu]

https://europeanspaceflight.com/isar-confirms-hot-fire-testing-has-commenced-at-andoya/

Some good news.

German rocket builder Isar Aerospace has told European Spaceflight that the company is “currently performing hot fire tests of the first and second stages” that will be used for the inaugural flight of its Spectrum rocket.

[...]

“All components of our launch vehicle Spectrum have arrived in Andøya and the final preparations for the first test flight of Spectrum are in full swing,” an Isar Aerospace spokesperson said. “We are currently performing hot fire tests of the first and second stages. These tests will determine whether the systems meet all the necessary requirements for the first test flight.”

[...]

On September 19, SpaceNews reported that during a World Space Business Week panel, Isar COO Stella Guillen stated that the company was “targeting for sure this year” for the inaugural flight of Spectrum. However, the spokesperson talking to European Spaceflight was less inclined to make that prediction.

“Depending on the results of these tests, and when we will receive the NCAA license, we will carry out the first test flight as soon as possible.”

Although I hope they'll be a bit more transparent with these tests, whether they succeed or fail.

[Yggdrasill]

There was a road closure today, September 23rd. The road was closed 12:02-16:56 CET.

[Yggdrasill]

- There was no road closure on the 24th.
- There was no road closure on the 25th.
- There's been no update on further road closures. Given the silence, it's possible they are taking a break from testing, or that they have performed the tests they want. Or that something went a bit wrong on the 23rd. Really hard to say, but it's looking like they won't be doing any more tests right now.

[Rik ISS-fan]

And the intermittend road closure period has been extended to Oktober 14th.

[Yggdrasill]

They texted me today about planned activites, so it's looking like they are back at it again.  If I understand correctly, there are possible road closures:

- October 9th, 10:00-24:00
- October 10th, 17:30-24:00
- October 11th, 00:00-04:00 and 17:30-24:00
- October 12th, 00:00-04:00 and 17:30-24:00
- October 13th, 00:00-04:00 and 17:30-24:00
- October 14th, 00:00-04:00 and 17:30-24:00
- October 15th, 00:00-04:00 and 17:30-24:00
- October 16th, 00:00-04:00 and 17:30-24:00
- October 17th, 00:00-04:00 and 17:30-24:00
- October 18th, 00:00-04:00 and 17:30-24:00
- October 19th, 00:00-04:00 and 17:30-24:00
- October 20th, 00:00-04:00

It seems like these closures will be more intermittent, the website says 40 minutes at a time. And it's interesting that they are now avoiding regular working hours.

Also, this time they seem to have added a danger zone in the waters off the launch site. Maybe the previous tests were just tanking tests, and this time they are going to light the stages? So just in case there is an event like the not-so-static test firing in China, the area is clear.

[Yggdrasill]

The road closed 20:33 CET today, October 10th. 40 minute road closure doesn't seem to be the case. It's still closed 2.5 hours later.

Edit: The road reopened at 00:25 CET, October 11th.

[Oumuamua]

There is a nice article from a few weeks ago that gives a good overview of what ISAR is doing here , it's in German but it should be easy enough to translate webpages these days.

The article is written for a newspaper, so explains a lot for people not familiar with spaceflight, but they have quotes from people in the company and some interesting background here and there.
-The goal is not the first flight, but the 100th flight
-About three-quarters of the engine is manufactured using a 3D printing process
-First flight as soon as possible, doing last tests, if then the launch permit from Norway is available, it will move fast.

[PM3]

ISAR CEO Daniel Metzler has poor knowledge of gobal spaceflight.

Bisher ist noch keine einzige erste Rakete eines privaten Unternehmens bis in den Orbit gekommen

(So far not a single first rocket of a private company reached orbit)

The first rockets of the Chinese companies iSpace, Galactic Energy, Space Pioneer and Orienspace (Hyperbola-1, Ceres-1, Tianlong-2 and Yinli-1) actually made it to orbit.

[TheKutKu]

https://www.iafastro.org/events/iac/international-astronautical-congress-2024/technical-programme/symposium-keynotes/d22-how-isar-scales-rocket-production.html

There will be a Isar keynote at the IAC on tuesday

ISAR CEO Daniel Metzler has poor knowledge of gobal spaceflight.

Bisher ist noch keine einzige erste Rakete eines privaten Unternehmens bis in den Orbit gekommen

(So far not a single first rocket of a private company reached orbit)

The first rockets of the Chinese companies iSpace, Galactic Energy, Space Pioneer and Orienspace (Hyperbola-1, Ceres-1, Tianlong-2 and Yinli-1) actually made it to orbit.

To be fair, all of these partially used government/legacy-company-provided engines on some of their stages (CASC upper liquid stage on Hyperbola 1st launch, CASC-AALPT YF-102 on Tianlong S1, CASC-AASPT SRBs on Yinlin and Ceres), by that standard, the private Pegasus also succesfully launched the first time in 1990.

[Yggdrasill]

The road closed past the launch site at 18:12 CET, October 14th. Currently closed.

Edit: And reopened at 22:18 CET.

[Yggdrasill]

Road past the launch site was closed 22:00 CET to 22:59 CET on October 15th.

Edit: Oh, and just noticed they've enacted flight restrictions for UAVs in a 2.7 Nautical Mile radius around the launch site, going up 2500 ft from October 14th through December 31st 2024. Maybe they've had issues with people flying drones.

https://luftfartstilsynet.no/aktorer/regelverk/kommende-endringer/2024/restriksjonsomrade-for-ubemanna-luftfart-i-luftrommet-over-borvagen-i-andoy/

[Yggdrasill]

It's been quiet. It doesn't seem like they've performed any more tests.

Though they have added two new test periods. Current possible test times are:

October 24th, 12:00-20:00 CET
October 27th, 12:00-20:00 CET
October 28th, 12:00-20:00 CET
October 29th, 12:00-20:00 CET
October 30th, 12:00-20:00 CET
October 31th, 12:00-20:00 CET
November 1st, 12:00-20:00 CET
November 2nd, 12:00-20:00 CET
November 3rd, 12:00-20:00 CET
November 4th, 12:00-20:00 CET
November 5th, 12:00-20:00 CET
November 6th, 12:00-20:00 CET
November 7th, 12:00-20:00 CET
November 8th, 12:00-20:00 CET
November 9th, 12:00-20:00 CET
November 10th, 12:00-20:00 CET
November 11th, 12:00-20:00 CET

https://andoyaspace.no/info-messages/periodevis-stenging-av-fv-7698-2/

Now there doesn't seem like there's a hazard area off the coast, and they have also added a notice that bystanders can expect up to a few minutes per day of heightened sound levels, perceived as "rumbling interspaced with crackling sounds". So stuff is progressing, it seems.

Given that the sound notice is new, maybe they've only done tanking tests and the like thus far, and only now they are getting into engine firings. Or maybe they got complaints/questions and added the additional information. Either way, they are at least now definitely into engine firing tests.

[Yggdrasill]

They didn't use a single one of the closure opportunities. The current ones are:

November 15th, 12:00-20:00 CET
November 16th, 12:00-20:00 CET
November 17th, 12:00-20:00 CET
November 18th, 12:00-20:00 CET
November 19th, 12:00-20:00 CET
November 20th, 12:00-20:00 CET
November 21th, 12:00-20:00 CET
November 22th, 12:00-20:00 CET
November 23th, 12:00-20:00 CET
November 24th, 12:00-20:00 CET
November 25th, 12:00-20:00 CET
November 26th, 12:00-20:00 CET

Hopefully something happens soon.