After more than 15 years intensive investigations on transpiration cooled CMC high performance rocket thrust chamber technology it can be stated, that transpiration cooled inner CMC liners can be operated damage free and under high pressure conditions in cryogenic stage propulsion. ...
A New Space companyInnovative Launcher technologies
Hypersonix from Australia. Spartan launch vehicle with Boomerang reusable first stage. 150 kg to SSO using expendable third stage. This scheme has been presented before by Heliaq as the Austral Launch Vehicle. Looks pretty complicated.http://hypersonix.space/http://heliaq.com/
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
Quote from: niwax on 04/12/2019 09:11 amI 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 padInteresting. We've had a couple of relative latecomers now announcing ~1ton to LEO launch vehicles, counting ABL and now Isar. I'm calling them "latecomers" to mean that they appear to not have made or tested much hardware, putting them well behind both Firefly and Relativity- but both of them intend to launch by 2021, so perhaps they've done more development than I know about, though my cynical side says those dates are not at all realistic. Looks like Isar's launch vehicle architecture is conceptual because although they do list the thrust of a single Ariel engine, they do not show the aft end of the vehicle and list its thrust as "plenty."Maybe these guys have an interesting angle with ITAR though.
I saw a comment a couple of days ago about the "great consolidation" now Rocket Lab is starting to fly regularly, and I do think that is an interesting topic. We certainly start to see some companies failing for various reasons e.g. Aphelion, ARCA, XCOR.I few months back I posted this list of potential winners/losers in the USA only:-Cream:Virgin Orbit (because they have stamina, massive money, commitment and will get there one way or another)Rocket Lab (because they have serious money and made very solid progress)Stratolauncher (because Paul Allen's dollars)Long shots:Firefly AerospaceRelativityVery long shots:AphelionABLInterorbitalGo LauncherVacuous Space Systems AKA VectorEXOSNew AscentOdyneRocketcraftersScorpiusStofiel AerospaceVentionsUP OrbitalWhittinghillLauncherspaceCloudixDOA:ARCACubeCabMishaalBagaveevRocketStarSpinlaunchVALTXCORbspaceI guess we could add some international names to that list as well like OneSpace, Landspace, PLD, Gilmour, Interorbital Japan and Orbex Space but I leave that area alone for now.What has changed? Who is going down in flames, who has risen like a pheonix?
Quote from: ringsider on 12/18/2018 04:55 pmI saw a comment a couple of days ago about the "great consolidation" now Rocket Lab is starting to fly regularly, and I do think that is an interesting topic. We certainly start to see some companies failing for various reasons e.g. Aphelion, ARCA, XCOR.I few months back I posted this list of potential winners/losers in the USA only:-Cream:Virgin Orbit (because they have stamina, massive money, commitment and will get there one way or another)Rocket Lab (because they have serious money and made very solid progress)Stratolauncher (because Paul Allen's dollars)Long shots:Firefly AerospaceRelativityVery long shots:AphelionABLInterorbitalGo LauncherVacuous Space Systems AKA VectorEXOSNew AscentOdyneRocketcraftersScorpiusStofiel AerospaceVentionsUP OrbitalWhittinghillLauncherspaceCloudixDOA:ARCACubeCabMishaalBagaveevRocketStarSpinlaunchVALTXCORbspaceI guess we could add some international names to that list as well like OneSpace, Landspace, PLD, Gilmour, Interorbital Japan and Orbex Space but I leave that area alone for now.What has changed? Who is going down in flames, who has risen like a pheonix?This topic again comes up in an interview with Peter Beck:-As he watches his competitors, Beck says he can get a good idea of how far the companies are coming along. "If they're making a big song-and-dance about engine tests, you know they’re miles away," he said. Even full stage tests, he says, is an indication that they're a long way away. https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/04/rocket-lab-widens-its-lead-in-small-launch-will-many-others-survive/He's right. I think in all these markets if you are just starting to test engines or haven't even got to that point you are basically dead unless your uncle is a billionaire.Everybody talks about consolidation, but actually the only companies that will really consolidate (i.e. die) are those that started too late to have any chance - most of the others who started 3-5 years ago are way behinf Rocket Lab but are far ahead of new groups. They have money, customers, technology, staff - such that when the new guys show up there is no investor money left available, all the customers are locked in, the key staff have jobs, lots of innovative tech has IP protection. But I don't see all the 100+ projects dying - many are just dreamers who will keep going, pretending they have a chance for decades with a website and a story but no money or real technology. There a few like that in every list.
Quote from: ringsider on 04/12/2019 08:02 pmThis topic again comes up in an interview with Peter Beck:-As he watches his competitors, Beck says he can get a good idea of how far the companies are coming along. "If they're making a big song-and-dance about engine tests, you know they’re miles away," he said. Even full stage tests, he says, is an indication that they're a long way away. https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/04/rocket-lab-widens-its-lead-in-small-launch-will-many-others-survive/He's right. I think in all these markets if you are just starting to test engines or haven't even got to that point you are basically dead unless your uncle is a billionaire.Everybody talks about consolidation, but actually the only companies that will really consolidate (i.e. die) are those that started too late to have any chance - most of the others who started 3-5 years ago are way behinf Rocket Lab but are far ahead of new groups. They have money, customers, technology, staff - such that when the new guys show up there is no investor money left available, all the customers are locked in, the key staff have jobs, lots of innovative tech has IP protection. But I don't see all the 100+ projects dying - many are just dreamers who will keep going, pretending they have a chance for decades with a website and a story but no money or real technology. There a few like that in every list.I used to say "If there company is talking about how they are going after suborbital flights or the "sounding rocket market" then they are years away from getting to orbit..."
This topic again comes up in an interview with Peter Beck:-As he watches his competitors, Beck says he can get a good idea of how far the companies are coming along. "If they're making a big song-and-dance about engine tests, you know they’re miles away," he said. Even full stage tests, he says, is an indication that they're a long way away. https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/04/rocket-lab-widens-its-lead-in-small-launch-will-many-others-survive/He's right. I think in all these markets if you are just starting to test engines or haven't even got to that point you are basically dead unless your uncle is a billionaire.Everybody talks about consolidation, but actually the only companies that will really consolidate (i.e. die) are those that started too late to have any chance - most of the others who started 3-5 years ago are way behinf Rocket Lab but are far ahead of new groups. They have money, customers, technology, staff - such that when the new guys show up there is no investor money left available, all the customers are locked in, the key staff have jobs, lots of innovative tech has IP protection. But I don't see all the 100+ projects dying - many are just dreamers who will keep going, pretending they have a chance for decades with a website and a story but no money or real technology. There a few like that in every list.
LOL "circumventing ITAR". Nothing gets the USG in a tizzy much more than someone pointing out how they are circumventing the USA's global reach.
Quote from: ringsider on 04/12/2019 07:54 pmLOL "circumventing ITAR". Nothing gets the USG in a tizzy much more than someone pointing out how they are circumventing the USA's global reach.Let's be completely clear.No one in the West wants to "circumvent ITAR"What they mean is circumvent the American interpretation of ITAR rules which is very expensive and very US-centric. XCOR's Congressional Liaison called the closest thing they've ever seen to a protection racket, with it's prior restraint of free speech.
I think the point that PB is making is that we have a plethora of rocket companies acting like they are in a race to reach orbit, but really, they are in a race to own a market. Arguably, the distance from a company that has one orbital launch to launch provider is greater than the distance from startup to company with one orbital launch- especially in terms of man hours and in terms of dollars.
No company stays in the gap between "reaching orbit" and "becoming launch provider".
Maybe it's impossible to reach orbit without being prepared as a launch provider, technically, financially, and in terms of team and management.
Quote from: Katana on 04/13/2019 09:01 pmNo company stays in the gap between "reaching orbit" and "becoming launch provider". Ok, sure, at least not historically. Not on purpose. But when you have a hoard of companies with minimal funding racing to get to orbit with whatever the hell vehicle they can throw together, you might have some of them unable to progress even after success reaching orbit. Even if not, as others have pointed out, there's a serious time lag between getting a single vehicle up and actually being able to sell a reliable product. If you're rocketlab, looking back over your shoulder at 100 different companies that claim to have the same goal as you, it's good to know that you're that far ahead. Whether or not that's the easy part is kind of immaterial to whether it's expensive or time consuming.Quote from: Katana on 04/13/2019 09:01 pmMaybe it's impossible to reach orbit without being prepared as a launch provider, technically, financially, and in terms of team and management.I think this is just a weird concept. There are technical barriers that could potentially exist between these two states- say you've got a stage sep sytem that works 50% of the time- sure you get to space but how often? And financially it makes perhaps even less sense, as it's easy to imagine a vehicle that just isn't that competitive economically getting pushed out of the market without selling much at all.Despite not seeing why that would be the case, I'll still hope that you're right- would be a shame to see someone fly and then go home without doing what they came to do.
Skyroot, founded by former Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) scientists Pawan Kumar Chandana, Naga Bharath Daka and Vasudevan Gnanagandhi, expects to demonstrate its first rocket by 2021, which it says could potentially reduce launch costs by a third.
Skyroot Aerospace Private Limited incorporated with MCA on 12 June 2018.
Vikram, named after Dr. Vikram Sarabhai, the father of Indian Space Program, is a series of launch vehicles especially crafted for the small satellite market. Built on common architecture and covering a wide range of payloads, they offer the most affordable and on demand ride to space.
