1st public presentation of Orbex tech will be at the Royal Aeronautical Society President's Conference on 22/11/17
https://twitter.com/orbexspace/status/917006401867837440Quote1st public presentation of Orbex tech will be at the Royal Aeronautical Society President's Conference on 22/11/17
Chris Larmour, Orbex: developing a launch vehicle capable of delivering 165 kg into sun-synchronous orbit. Been working quietly last few years, in process of closing a 4th round of funding. #Space17
Larmour says this is the first time there’s been a public presentation on the company. Still holding some details close, like the fuel the vehicle uses or spaceport they’re considering. #Space17
Larmour: have a number of letters of intent, but hope to sign first launch contract for a 50-kg science payload, by year’s end. #Space17
Larmour: won’t name the fuel we’re using, but not RP-1 or methane; doesn’t freeze at LOX temperatures. #Space17
QuoteLarmour: won’t name the fuel we’re using, but not RP-1 or methane; doesn’t freeze at LOX temperatures. #Space17
https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/933344717223485440 (https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/933344717223485440)
Is there any reason to not disclose the propellants they are using? Seems like an unnecessary detail to keep secret.It's somewhat related to their tank structure, which (if the press release from July 11th is to be believed) has dry mass savings up to 30%, which is a big deal. If they're working with a novel process that relies on the fuel type, then keeping it secret might help keep the tank design secret as well.
Engine image from Twitter:-Is there any reason to not disclose the propellants they are using? Seems like an unnecessary detail to keep secret.It's somewhat related to their tank structure, which (if the press release from July 11th is to be believed) has dry mass savings up to 30%, which is a big deal. If they're working with a novel process that relies on the fuel type, then keeping it secret might help keep the tank design secret as well.
All baseless speculation, obviously, but that's par for the course when we have so few details
Copied over the high-res image if anyone wants a peek.Engine image from Twitter:-Is there any reason to not disclose the propellants they are using? Seems like an unnecessary detail to keep secret.It's somewhat related to their tank structure, which (if the press release from July 11th is to be believed) has dry mass savings up to 30%, which is a big deal. If they're working with a novel process that relies on the fuel type, then keeping it secret might help keep the tank design secret as well.
All baseless speculation, obviously, but that's par for the course when we have so few details
https://twitter.com/RAeSTimR/status/933344493612556288
Looks like a copper heat sink.
I'm guessing the copper is a housing for their cooling system (regen?) rather than an actual heat sink itself, but similar deal. Also, it could be a diffuser for testing vacuum engines, though I doubt it with that test setup.
Heatsink engines basically rely on the heat capacity of block of metal they are made out of, hence usually copper.
To me, it appears to be a solid heatsink with sets of thermocouples. Not a practical engine, but a good way of testing heat flows, ignition techniques, injectors and possibly combustion stability. A block that size that should be able to run for a couple of seconds.
There is no reason to put a cooling system in a housing, it just makes it heavier
Orbex Secures £30 Million Funding for UK Space Launch Vehicles
Rockets to Launch Small Satellites into Orbit from UK Spaceport Using Renewable Fuel
Farnborough, UK, July 16, 2018 – Orbex has announced that it has secured £30 million ($39.6 million) in public and private funding for the development of orbital space launch systems. Orbex will launch orbital vehicles from the newly-announced UK Vertical Launch spaceport in Sutherland in the Scottish Highlands as part of the main consortium.
Recently emerging from stealth mode, Orbex is a UK-based spaceflight company, with subsidiaries and production facilities in Denmark and Germany. The company has received funding from the UK Space Agency (UKSA), two of Europe's largest venture capital funds, Sunstone Technology Ventures and the High-Tech Gründerfonds, as well as private investors, the European Space Agency (ESA) and the European Commission Horizon 2020 programme.
Orbex is constructing a completely re-thought and re-designed orbital launch vehicle, called Prime, to deliver small satellites into Earth’s orbit. The Prime launcher has a novel architecture that eliminates the fundamental mass challenge of small launchers. Prime launchers are up to 30% lighter and 20% more efficient than any other vehicle in the small launcher category, packing more power per cubic litre than many heavy launchers. The Prime vehicle will launch satellites to altitudes up to 1,250km, inserting them into sun-synchronous or polar orbits.
“It is our ethos to invest in exceptional entrepreneurs with bold visions,” said Jimmy Fussing Nielsen, Managing Partner of Sunstone Technology Ventures. “Behind the scenes, Orbex has made huge strides forward over the past three years, reaching a level of technical and commercial sophistication that is surprising for a young company. This explains why Orbex has been able to attract such high-profile public and private backers, as well as experienced team members. Just out of stealth mode, Orbex is already well on its way to becoming the leading private space launch company in Europe.”
Minimising the environmental impact of launches was a key consideration in the rocket’s design. Prime is a low-mass and low-carbon launcher, using a single renewable fuel, bio-propane, that cuts carbon emissions by 90% compared to old-fashioned hydrocarbon fuels. The rocket uses a novel zero-shock staging system called Magic, which leaves zero orbital debris. It also features a novel reusability concept, with an innovative new low mass recovery and reflight system.
“It was clear to us from the start that Orbex had the potential to disrupt and fundamentally improve the satellite launch market in Europe and beyond,” said Yann Fiebig, Senior Investment Manager at the High-Tech Gründerfonds. “The company has made rapid progress, taking their innovations from concept to reality in short order. Their very strong management team deserves full credit for its ability to execute and we look forward to being part of their positive disruption over the coming months and years.”
Orbex has already secured commercial engagements with major aerospace organisations. The European Space Agency has contracted Orbex to study the development of a European micro launcher solution. Also, an engagement with a leading European aerospace company will be announced on Tuesday 17th July.
Jean-Jacques Dordain, the former Director General of the European Space Agency has joined Orbex as Chairman of the Advisory Board. He is joined by other notable figures from the space industry, including Jan Skolmli, Orbex’s recently-appointed Chief Commercial Officer, who was formerly Head of Launch at SSTL, the world’s leading small satellite manufacturer. Orbex staff members have professional backgrounds with NASA, ESA and several other commercial spaceflight organisations. Equipment developed by Orbex team members has flown on more than 50 deep space missions, and collectively they have developed more than 50 rocket engines and a wide range of orbital and suborbital launch vehicles.
“Orbex is one of the very few private spaceflight companies whose staff have credible, practical experience in the development of micro-launch vehicles and rocket engines,” commented Chris Larmour, Orbex CEO. “With our collective experience, we have developed a low mass, low carbon, high performance 21st century orbital launch vehicle, designed specifically to support the needs of the rapidly growing smallsat industry. There is a significant launch backlog for small satellites globally and Orbex is primed to give industry and science a cost-effective, reliable and responsive route into space, directly from Europe.”
Further technical and commercial announcements will follow during the Farnborough Airshow 2018.
Orbex is constructing a two-stage-to-orbit vertical micro-launch vehicle named Prime. Prime will use a new kind of coaxial tank solution to reduce vehicle mass by as much as 30% over traditional designs.
QuoteIt also features a novel reusability concept, with an innovative new low mass recovery and reflight system.
Are there advantages that propane would have over other propellants or is the "low carbon" descriptor the only reason they would have chosen to use it?
Would anyone have the knowledge to say what kind of picture it paints to have propane as a propellant in this vehicle and if we could begin to guess what the performance of the engines could be?
Propane is unusual in that it will not freeze solid if put in tanks in thermal
contact with LOX tanks; it has been proposed therefore to use sub-cooled
propane.
Sub-cooled propane (at LOX temperatures or slightly above to account for
imperfect chilling of propane by adjacent LOX tanks) is a winner, with a bulk
density nearly the same as that of RP-1, and a superior Isp.
Tank Fuel Bulk Vac.
Temp Formula MR Dens. Dens. Tc Isp
K O/F kg/m^3 kg/m^3 K 100:1
NON-HYDROCARBONS
hydrogen, NBP 20 H2 6.0 70 358 3610 455.9
ALKANES
methane, NBP 112 CH4 3.0 423 801 3589 368.3
propane, 100K 100 C3H8 2.7 782 1014 3734 361.9
RP-1, RT 298 C12H24 2.5 820 1026 3803 354.6
More details on their site (http://orbex.space).Emphasis mine.
http://orbex.space/news/orbex-secures-30-million-funding-for-uk-space-launch-vehiclesQuoteMinimising the environmental impact of launches was a key consideration in the rocket’s design. Prime is a low-mass and low-carbon launcher, using a single renewable fuel, bio-propane, that cuts carbon emissions by 90% compared to old-fashioned hydrocarbon fuels. The rocket uses a novel zero-shock staging system called Magic, which leaves zero orbital debris. It also features a novel reusability concept, with an innovative new low mass recovery and reflight system.
Would anyone have the knowledge to say what kind of picture it paints to have propane as a propellant in this vehicle and if we could begin to guess what the performance of the engines could be?
Comparison of kerolox, methalox and propalox.
Propellants MR dp (kg/L) ve (m/s) Id (Ns/L)
O2/CH4 3.6 0.8376 3656 3062
O2/C3H8 3.1 0.9304 3613 3362
O2/RP–1 2.8 1.0307 3554 3663
HTP/RP–1 7.3 1.3059 3223 4209
Propalox is basically between methalox and kerolox. Has better Isp than kerolox, but worse then methalox. Density is however better than methalox, but worse than kerolox. Impulse density is better than methalox, but worse than kerolox. I've also added my favourite combination, keroxide, which has the worst Isp, but the best impulse density, making it a great first stage propellant.
Most people are aware that Methane can be made through anaerobic digestion but AFAIK Propane is the only other short chain hydrocarbon that can be made with bacteria. I'm guessing it's good compatability with LOX (with some sub cooling) made it the fuel of choice.
Flexible cryogen bag tanks are apparently a thing, so tension anchoring the thing in the LOx tank is certainly doable.
Orbex and Elecnor Deimos Form Strategic Partnership for Satellite Launches
Elecnor Deimos Invests in Orbex; Orbex Selected as Preferred Supplier of Launch Services for Elecnor Deimos Satellites; Elecnor Deimos to Become Orbex’s Preferred Supplier of Critical Launch Systems Including GNC
Well the Twitter page disclosed it's LPG (Propane/Butane)It all depends on where you draw the dotted line that divides "igniter" from "igniter feed system". My personal guess is it is some form of acoustic resonance igniter, but I have nothing to back that up.
Interestingly, they are stating on their website that the ignition system has no moving parts or "electrics". Wonder how they would actuate valves without both of those.
...
In a July 16 interview during the Farnborough International Airshow, Orbex Chief Executive Chris Larmour declined to go into the terms of the investments, including how much funding came from the various sources. He said that the funding, which he described as roughly equivalent to a Series A round, covered more than half of the estimated $70–75 million cost to develop the company’s Prime small launch vehicle. “It gets us a good way along the track to first launch,” he said.
That funding, he said, allows Orbex to stand out from the dozens of small launch vehicle efforts underway worldwide. “There are about 80 projects out there talking about building a small launcher,” he said. “But when you filter them on who has assets to do something, who has experience and understanding of the problem, who’s making progress, it’s a much smaller number: a handful of companies. I think Orbex, with this announcement, has joined that family.”
...
One key aspect of propane is that it remains liquid at cryogenic temperatures. That enabled a “coaxial tank” design for Prime where a central tube of propane is surrounded by an outer tank of liquid oxygen, creating structural mass savings in the rocket. The specific impulse — a measure of efficiency — of propane is also slightly higher than RP-1, he added. “That’s a good combination for this class of launcher.”
Orbex has been testing engines that use that propellant combination while working on the overall design of the rocket and other subsystems, like avionics. The company has about 15 employees now, but Larmour said he expects that headcount to double in three to four months and reach 40 or more by early 2019. The company plans to construct a factory for Prime in Scotland that will eventually employ 150.
...
Other than the Elecnor Deimos announcement, Orbex has not announced any customers for Prime, whose first launch from Scotland is expected in the second half of 2021. Larmour said he thinks the business case for Prime will focus more on providing convenience to European customers rather than on low price.
“One of the core differentiators for our company is that we’re based geographically in Europe,” he said. That should be attractive, he believed, to European satellite developers, who would not have to deal with logistical and regulatory hassles with launching their satellites outside Europe. “There’s willingness to look at solutions that are a little bit easier to access in time and space, and the price point may not be as sensitive an issue.” Larmour declined to give an estimated launch price for the vehicle.
He added in a July 18 presentation at a U.K. Space Agency launch workshop held at the air show that he was not interested in competing head-to-head with U.S.-based launch vehicles. “Perhaps unusually, we’re focused on a very international market,” he said. “There are a lot of competitors in the United States of America. We’re happy for them to compete with each other, and we’ll focus on Europe.”
Private spaceflight company Orbex has bought a vacant building on Forres Enterprise Park and started a recruitment drive for highly specialised engineers.Presumably this is the 7th February event they've be teasing on Twitter
[...]
The Forres facility, which will be Orbex’s headquarters, is due to be officially opened next month at an event attended by Graham Turnock, head of the UK Space Agency.
https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/moray/1663847/rocket-manufacturing-soon-to-take-off-in-moray/?utm_source=twitterIt's interesting how these guys just stay mostly silent but apparently still make progress - in this story purchasing a factory etc. - but even in this news piece the management declined to comment. It's the complete opposite of most others out there. They really keep fairly silent on tech developments, which is either suspicious or clever - not yet sure which.QuotePrivate spaceflight company Orbex has bought a vacant building on Forres Enterprise Park and started a recruitment drive for highly specialised engineers.Presumably this is the 7th February event they've be teasing on Twitter
[...]
The Forres facility, which will be Orbex’s headquarters, is due to be officially opened next month at an event attended by Graham Turnock, head of the UK Space Agency.
It's interesting how these guys just stay mostly silent but apparently still make progress - in this story purchasing a factory etc. - but even in this news piece the management declined to comment. It's the complete opposite of most others out there. They really keep fairly silent on tech developments, which is either suspicious or clever - not yet sure which.
https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/moray/1663847/rocket-manufacturing-soon-to-take-off-in-moray/?utm_source=twitterQuotePrivate spaceflight company Orbex has bought a vacant building on Forres Enterprise Park and started a recruitment drive for highly specialised engineers.Presumably this is the 7th February event they've be teasing on Twitter
[...]
The Forres facility, which will be Orbex’s headquarters, is due to be officially opened next month at an event attended by Graham Turnock, head of the UK Space Agency.
Astra, maybe ABL.... Who else?It's interesting how these guys just stay mostly silent but apparently still make progress - in this story purchasing a factory etc. - but even in this news piece the management declined to comment. It's the complete opposite of most others out there. They really keep fairly silent on tech developments, which is either suspicious or clever - not yet sure which.
There are a bunch of companies acting like this (in both launcher and satellite development), we just tend to focus on the ones that are being vocal.
As per presentation from December, 2nd stage is pressure fed.
Nozzle extension to 3d printed chamber looks welded.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Astro_Jonny/status/1093559574697779200
One of the most impressive things about this is that the TVC actuators are holding up the engine on one side and the rest of the stage on the other. These guys have been busy doing real work.
Orbex has also confirmed that it will launch an upcoming satellite in SSTL’s line of demonstrators by 2023. “We are extremely excited about the development of a sovereign UK satellite launch capability,” commented Sarah Parker, Managing Director of SSTL. “This is something SSTL has been advocating for many years, and it will benefit the entire UK space industry. We have been impressed with the rapid progress Orbex has made in a short time, and we look forward to working with them towards the first launch in 2021 and beyond.”
I read "coaxial" as a sort of tank-in-tank design with, say, a 1x-metre propane tank enclosed by a 1.5x metre LOX tank. I think that would explain why they need a fuel that won't freeze at LOX temps.
If only the outer LOX tank needed to bear structural loads and the inner propane tank just needed nothing more than to physically separate that fuel from the LOX with no thought to insulation, might that account for the 30% mass savings?
If the inner tank was even inflatable like a bladder or balloon within the LOX, might a single pressurization system suffice for both propellants?
I'm probably way out in left field, but it would certainly be "different". ;-)
This is how it began:Interesting. IIRC Furfuryl Alcohol was mentioned in John Clarkes "Ignition" as a (potential) propellant that was (at the time) a by product of the mfg of "Quaker Oats." However I think there some concerns that it was a suspected carcinogen.
- Copenhagen Suborbitals (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copenhagen_Suborbitals) by Danish Peter Madsen (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Madsen) and Kristian von Bengtson (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristian_von_Bengtson)
- Project 'Moonspike' (https://www.space.com/30712-moonspike-private-moon-rocket-kickstarter-campaign.html) by Chris Larmour and Kristian von Bengtson. They planned a crowdfunded two-stage alcohol-fueled rocket that should crash a capsule into the Moon. (Crowdfunding failed (http://www.moonspike.com/).)
Chris Larmour now is Orbex CEO, von Bengtson is CTO. Prime engines still developed and tested in Denmark.
=> New German WP article: Prime (Rakete) (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_(Rakete))
Btw, there is some confusion where the engines are manufactured. Some sources say Denmark, others Germany or both countries. It's true that the 3D Printer - an SLM-800 (https://slm-solutions.com/en/products/machines/slmr800/) - is made in Germany, but I can hardly beleive that SLM also makes the engine parts. Sounds like a confusion of printer and engine manufacturers. Does someone know it for sure?
Orbex unveils the world's largest rocket factory sofa.
“We thought about how to solve this problem by re-architecting the vehicle and decided to use propane as the fuel. Propane has some unique properties that allow us to build a vehicle that is about 30 percent lower mass than anyone else in this category, which makes Orbex less costly while offering higher performance,” said Larmour. “We’re also able to use bio-propane, which is chemically equivalent, but is also a clean, renewable fuel that helps makes our Prime launchers up to 30 percent lighter and 20 percent more efficient than any other vehicle in the small launcher category, packing more power per cubic liter than many heavy launchers. It also cuts carbon emissions by 90 percent compared to fossil hydrocarbon fuels.”
Another issue that Orbex has been looking at is the growing issue of space debris/junk. “We certainly didn’t want our launcher to be dropping litter in space. So, we deliberately set out to architect the vehicle so it would not leave any debris on orbit. We deliberately designed features into the Stage 2 to de-orbit very rapidly, so it burns up on re-entry. We created a new zero-shock staging system, which leaves zero orbital debris. It also features a novel reusability concept, with a new low mass recovery and re-flight system, which is now patent-pending,” Larmour said.
A visual tour of the Launch Operations Control Centre (LOCC) at the proposed spaceport in Sutherland. Orbex Prime vehicles will be commanded from the right hand side of this centre & operated post-launch from... more on that topic in a couple of weeks ;o)
https://vimeo.com/368758304
Also I might be reading this wrong but there is some implication that their engine has a Thrust-to-Weight ratio of around 450 :o
Really it depends on what the definition of engine mass includes. I'd believe the TWR of 450 for just the combustion chamber, maybe even including the instrumentation & sensors. But if you consider TVCs part of it, or control avionics, or turbopumps (which surely ought to be) then it would drop to something more sane.Well....
My instinct is a) The engine is pressure fed, which raises the tank mass substantially (unless it's a flometrix style reciprocating pump driven by a smallish high pressure third tank) b) It's a typo.
Occams razor says it's b) pending confirmation that the company is serious about that T/W ratio.
Here's what the page said:IIRC the T/W ratio for the Gamma engines on Black Arrow were around 45:1
"Weighing just 7.5 kilos, this engine can lift 3.5 tonnes."
That's a thrust to weight ratio of 467. Not sure where the typo could be.
Pressure feds have some attractions for upper stages. OTOH 3.5tonnes is well over the line where turbo machinery is a good choice (rather than reciprocating pumps)My instinct is a) The engine is pressure fed, which raises the tank mass substantially (unless it's a flometrix style reciprocating pump driven by a smallish high pressure third tank) b) It's a typo.
Occams razor says it's b) pending confirmation that the company is serious about that T/W ratio.
From this recruitment notice of theirs from last year (only the google cache available sorry) it looks like we can rule out option (a)!
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:k4NSoCLQvyMJ:https://orbex.space/assets/uploads/documents/Orbex-TPA2018-Job-Specification.pdf
Launch integrator TriSept Corp. announced plans Jan. 14 to purchase an Orbex Prime launch vehicle for a dedicated rideshare mission to fly from Scotland’s Sutherland Spaceport in 2022.
Pressure feds have some attractions for upper stages. OTOH 3.5tonnes is well over the line where turbo machinery is a good choice (rather than reciprocating pumps)My instinct is a) The engine is pressure fed, which raises the tank mass substantially (unless it's a flometrix style reciprocating pump driven by a smallish high pressure third tank) b) It's a typo.
Occams razor says it's b) pending confirmation that the company is serious about that T/W ratio.
From this recruitment notice of theirs from last year (only the google cache available sorry) it looks like we can rule out option (a)!
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:k4NSoCLQvyMJ:https://orbex.space/assets/uploads/documents/Orbex-TPA2018-Job-Specification.pdf
Firstly welcome to the site.Pressure feds have some attractions for upper stages. OTOH 3.5tonnes is well over the line where turbo machinery is a good choice (rather than reciprocating pumps)My instinct is a) The engine is pressure fed, which raises the tank mass substantially (unless it's a flometrix style reciprocating pump driven by a smallish high pressure third tank) b) It's a typo.
Occams razor says it's b) pending confirmation that the company is serious about that T/W ratio.
From this recruitment notice of theirs from last year (only the google cache available sorry) it looks like we can rule out option (a)!
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:k4NSoCLQvyMJ:https://orbex.space/assets/uploads/documents/Orbex-TPA2018-Job-Specification.pdf
It is and you're right. Orbex has been recruiting Turbomachinery engineers for years, and I have it on good authority that they've recently "finished" their assembly- at least to the point where they're ready to begin testing.
Firstly welcome to the site.Pressure feds have some attractions for upper stages. OTOH 3.5tonnes is well over the line where turbo machinery is a good choice (rather than reciprocating pumps)My instinct is a) The engine is pressure fed, which raises the tank mass substantially (unless it's a flometrix style reciprocating pump driven by a smallish high pressure third tank) b) It's a typo.
Occams razor says it's b) pending confirmation that the company is serious about that T/W ratio.
From this recruitment notice of theirs from last year (only the google cache available sorry) it looks like we can rule out option (a)!
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:k4NSoCLQvyMJ:https://orbex.space/assets/uploads/documents/Orbex-TPA2018-Job-Specification.pdf
It is and you're right. Orbex has been recruiting Turbomachinery engineers for years, and I have it on good authority that they've recently "finished" their assembly- at least to the point where they're ready to begin testing.
I think what's impressed various posters is the claim on the Orbex website of a 7.5Kg engine that can lift a 3.5tonne stage. which is phenomenal . Even with the the ability to run a very large nozzle on an upper stage due to near vacuum exhaust conditions, that's still very big, in fact it's a T/W ratio of 466:1
Can you shed any light on this apparent paradox?
Hey thanks! I spend so much time lurking here figured it was time to make an account.That makes more sense but is considerably less impressive. A T/W ratio of about 46:1 is not very impressive for an expendable launch vehicle.
Not sure about that claim. But the image they use next to the 7.5 kg figure is their 2nd stage engine...so maybe a 7.5 kg engine can propel 3.5 tonnes...in microgravity? That, or the first stage engine's actually 75 kg!
While our home spaceport at Sutherland moves rapidly ahead, we're busy building the launch vehicle. This is a full-scale main stage mandrel for Europe's 1st linerless carbon fibre LOX tanks, a technology we spent 4 years developing in-house with support from @H2020SME @spacegovuk
https://youtu.be/3kYXPeUsBmQ
Presser:
· Orbex is 1st UK space-sector company to win prestigious Horizon 2020 funding
The funding round is completed by a €2.5 million grant from the European Horizon 2020 SME Instrument programme – the first for a UK space-sector company – to support the development of patented coaxial tanking technology. Orbex previously won £5.5 million in grant funding from the UK Space Agency’s Launch UK programme in 2018.
AFAIK, because the UK is leaving the EU, they can't participate any longer.
The CEO of Scottish rocket company Orbex, Chris Larmour, praised the ruling, saying it was good news for both the UK’s space sector and the local economy.
“This is extremely positive news for a wide variety of communities and businesses and paves the way for the Pathfinder launch of small satellites from Sutherland Spaceport in Scotland.
“We’re especially pleased for the crofters of the Melness Crofters Estate, who will be able to protect and develop their community with modern jobs. Sutherland is still the only UK spaceport with planning permission and now, with this ruling, the countdown to space launch from the UK can begin.”
Rocket builder takes on more space for its growing Forres workforce
Rocket builder Orbex is expanding its operations in Moray, with a move into a building close to its headquarters.
The company’s chief executive, Chris Larmour, said it needed the extra space to accommodate its growing workforce and house new equipment.
The firm is also working on a detailed planning application for a new factory that could create hundreds of new jobs.
Orbex, which is aiming to start launching its Prime mini-satellite carrying rockets from the planned Space Hub Sutherland spaceport next year, opened its base on Forres Enterprise Park in 2019.
Study reveals green credentials of Orbex biofuel rocket
The carbon footprint of launching the new Orbex Prime space rocket will be up to 95% lower than comparable space launch programmes, a new study has revealed.
Orbex has submitted its application to the UK’s Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) for a launch licence, the latest stage on its roadmap to beginning commercial space launches from the UK.
Test launch pad not the actual launch pad or site. See Dec21 post.
Still big achievement to have LV on a pad. Not sure if flight HW or test article.
Sent from my SM-G570Y using Tapatalk
Test launch pad not the actual launch pad or site. See Dec21 post.I was wondering that as well if it’s just a test article. I cannot see any accompanying press release or anything of the sort.
Still big achievement to have LV on a pad. Not sure if flight HW or test article.
Sent from my SM-G570Y using Tapatalk
Monumental day for our partners @orbexspace with the unveil of the Prime rocket on the test launch pad at Kinloss. Not every day you see the @HIEScotland logo ready to go into #Space . Countdown to launch starts now at @SpaceSutherland . Here we go #ScotlandIsNow @spacegovuk
Orbex announces £40.4 million Series C funding round
By Andrew Parsonson - October 18, 2022
UK-based launch startup Orbex has announced the successful closing of a £40.4 million (approximately €46.5 million) Series C funding round.
JUST IN: @orbexspace has announced that it is moving forward with plans to build and operate its own vertical launch site.
The company signed a lease with the Highlands and Islands Enterprise (HIE) for the spaceport location on community-owned land on the A’ Mhoine peninsula in northwest Sutherland.
Orbex to lead Construction and Operational Management of Sutherland Spaceport.
Orbex granted a fifty-year lease on UK´s 1st mainland vertical launch spaceport site.
Spaceport specialist Jacobs contracted to deliver £20m construction project.
01 November 2022
Orbex to Lead Construction and Operational Management of Sutherland Spaceport
Forres, UK, November 1, 2022 – A Scottish rocket manufacturer and orbital launch services provider is to build and operate the first vertical launch site for satellites on the UK mainland.
Orbex, based in Forres, Moray, has signed a lease with development agency Highlands and Islands Enterprise (HIE) for the spaceport location on community-owned land on the A’ Mhoine peninsula in north-west Sutherland.
HIE has been developing launch plans for several years and leases the site from Melness Crofters’ Estate. The sub-lease with Orbex will run for 50 years, with an option to extend for a further 25 years.
Orbex will oversee the construction and assume full operational management of the new facility. The 10-acre launch site will become the long-term ‘home’ spaceport of Orbex and will see the launch of up to 12 orbital rockets per year, carrying satellites into low Earth orbit.
Orbex’s role in the spaceport will stimulate significant private investment that will benefit the local community through job creation, supply chain opportunities and other associated economic benefits. Total private investment over the initial three-year period is expected to reach £20 million.
In addition to increased opportunities for local businesses and contractors as part of the spaceport’s construction, Orbex expects to create up to 40 technical and non-technical FTE jobs to support the operation and maintenance of the site. The roles will span a number of areas including facilities and operational management, security, general administration and finance, marketing, stakeholder engagement and launch campaign-related roles. Employment opportunities will be advertised locally when recruitment commences.
HIE identified the potential for the Highlands and Islands to play a significant role in the UK’s growing space sector several years ago, recognising that rural locations that are close to coasts and have a northern latitude can make ideal satellite launch sites.
With the backing of the UK Space Agency, HIE set to work developing plans for the Sutherland spaceport in 2018, with specialist input from architects NORR and construction consultants Gardiner and Theobald.
At the same time, HIE commissioned detailed environmental studies to inform a broad range of protection measures around the site.
Planning permission was granted by the Highland Council in August 2020. A separate development application to the Scottish Land Court – which was required as the launch site is on crofting land – was also successful.
Following its recent participation in Orbex’s Series C funding round, it has been confirmed that global technology-forward solutions company, Jacobs, will assume the role of prime construction contractor on behalf of Orbex. Jacobs will collaborate with Orbex to provide spaceport operations support, operations consultancy, and engineering services, drawing on its experience of managing and operating complex, highly regulated sites such as Cape Canaveral in the United States. Jacobs is NASA's largest services provider, delivering mission-tailored solutions and full lifecycle aerospace capabilities including the Mars Perseverance Rover and the Artemis deep space human exploration program.
Overseeing the construction and operational management of the new spaceport will allow Orbex to streamline the development of the state-of-the-art facility, drafting in industry experts such as Jacobs to help meet its objectives. Sutherland Spaceport is intended to become the world’s greenest spaceport, both in terms of its construction and its operation. One illustration of this is how peat lifted during the construction will be re-used to repair large areas of peatland that have degraded over centuries.
Uniquely, the new Orbex Prime rocket is powered by a renewable biofuel, Futuria Liquid Gas, supplied by Calor. This fuel allows the rocket to reduce carbon emissions significantly compared to other similarly sized rockets being developed elsewhere around the world. A study by the University of Exeter showed that a single launch of the Orbex Prime rocket will produce 96 per cent lower carbon emissions than comparable space launch systems using fossil fuels. Prime is also a re-usable rocket which has been engineered to leave zero debris on Earth and in orbit. Orbex has already received a great deal of interest from commercial satellite manufacturers and has signed launch contracts with a number of customers.
The spaceport is being constructed on the A’Mhoine peninsula in Sutherland, on land owned and managed by the Melness Crofters’ Estate (MCE) who have worked closely with HIE to bring the spaceport project to fruition and deliver local economic benefits.
Chris Larmour, CEO, Orbex:
“We are very grateful for the work that HIE and the Melness Crofters Estate have done, in getting us to the point where we can take the baton and start construction. We have collaborated closely with them over the past few years, and we are completely aligned in our vision of delivering a sustainable spaceport that will bring jobs and prosperity to the region. Orbex is the first European launcher company to also manage a dedicated spaceport. It is an important competitive advantage to the company, which will make it really easy for us to work with customers as we scale up our operations.”
David Oxley, Director of Strategic Projects, Highlands and Islands Enterprise:
“The space industry represents a huge economic opportunity for the Highlands and Islands and for Scotland. The steps we’ve taken to establish launch capability in Sutherland have already delivered a significant economic impact as a key factor in attracting Orbex to establish their manufacturing facility and test site in Moray, creating dozens of skilled jobs, with many more in the pipeline.
“We believe the spaceport has the capacity to generate around 250 jobs in our region, including 40 on site, plus opportunities in manufacturing, supply chain, research and service provision.
“With Orbex now set to build and operate the spaceport, we’ve reached a key stage in our partnership that will not only see launches happening from Sutherland but a whole range of wider economic benefits delivered for the Highlands and Islands.”
Comments from Partners:
Jacobs:
“The Orbex Prime rocket promises to be a game changer for small satellite developers and operators, enabling them to launch light satellites much more efficiently and cost-effectively. Sutherland Spaceport is an important development for the European space industry and will bring major economic and social benefits to North Highland and Moray, where our business has been active for decades in supporting operations, decommissioning and remediation at the Dounreay nuclear site.” - Karen Wiemelt, Senior Vice President, Jacobs Energy, Security and Technology
Melness Crofters’ Estate:
“The Moine is a beautiful part of our estate that deserves to be respected, and we know it is in extremely good hands with Orbex managing the operation of the spaceport. Since the very beginning of our relationship with Orbex, our mutual focus has been very much on safety, the environment and the creation of job opportunities for the local community. We have seen massive population decline in the area over the past few years and our community is being starved of its lifeblood, young people. This is our way - perhaps a less-than-obvious way - of bringing new life back to our area. We are excited for the positive impact this will have on our community over the coming years.” - Dorothy Pritchard, Chair
Scottish Government:
“This announcement brings us another step closer to becoming Europe’s leading space nation through the provision of sustainable launch.
“Innovative companies like Orbex are vital to achieving the aims of our National Strategy for Economic Transformation, that strives for Scotland to be a nation of entrepreneurs and innovators with resilient supply chains.” - Ivan McKee, Business Minister
UK Space Agency:
“The 50-year lease is fantastic news for Orbex and the wider UK space sector.
“Construction of Sutherland Spaceport will mark a major step forward for Scotland’s vertical launch capability and lead to the creation of a range of new jobs in the local community and beyond.
“We’ve provided funding to support the development of Orbex’s Prime rocket and the spaceport, and I’m confident that this new agreement will allow Orbex to strengthen the UK’s position as the leading destination in Europe for commercial spaceflight services and international investment.” - Ian Annett, Deputy CEO
Orbex Media Enquiries
Sonus PR for Orbex
Martin Smith
+44 7413 028 935
[email protected]
Is there any reliable indication that Orbex has produced anything else but mockup hardware? E.g. any videos of successful engine runs?
Big news just in: @orbexspace has announced that CEO Chris Larmour will be stepping down. The press release doesn't give a lot of detail stating simply that the change of leadership will allow the company to "prepare for the next stage of growth."
There's no indication of who will be the new CEO, either. According to the Chairman of the board of directors Bart Markus the company will be "making further announcements about the new leadership team in due course."
Interesting move: Orbex signs collaboration deal with Arianespace:
Interesting move: Orbex signs collaboration deal with Arianespace:
There is no commitment to do anything other than talk.
Orbex was founded in 2015, and eight years later there is no indication that they have produced anything but talk, mock-up hardware and SpaceX-bashing. A "memorandum of understanding to explore some possibility" fits into this history of loudly doing nothing. It is as vague as a cooperation can be.SpaceX rideshare will likely put Orbex out of business before they are able to launch along with a lot of other small LV startups.
I would not be surprised if Orbex goes bankrupt within a few years without having built a working rocket.
That prediction has been made regularly since before even SSO-A back in 2018. Since 'cheaper' is only a single aspect among many that customers use to choose what vehicle to launch with (more often than not cost isn't the sole, or even primary, factor), it will still be just as accurate a prediction in the years to come as it has been previously.Orbex was founded in 2015, and eight years later there is no indication that they have produced anything but talk, mock-up hardware and SpaceX-bashing. A "memorandum of understanding to explore some possibility" fits into this history of loudly doing nothing. It is as vague as a cooperation can be.SpaceX rideshare will likely put Orbex out of business before they are able to launch along with a lot of other small LV startups.
I would not be surprised if Orbex goes bankrupt within a few years without having built a working rocket.
How about "Rocket Lab dedicated rides will likely put Orbex out of business before they are able to launch," then? Orbex Prime has less payload than Electron, so they can't compete on dedicated rides that can't go with Rocket Lab. They could try capturing the "cannot launch on a US-affiliated rocket" market, but I'm a little skeptical that the UK opens up spaceflight to a significantly wider group of countries. The intersection of those two is relevant, too: while there are payloads which would prefer to launch on a non-ITARed rocket, even though they're capable of launching from a US(-ish) one, there are many companies internationally which plan on providing that, and the ones which have a payload advantage vs. Electron would seem to be much better positioned in the international market too.That prediction has been made regularly since before even SSO-A back in 2018. Since 'cheaper' is only a single aspect among many that customers use to choose what vehicle to launch with (more often than not cost isn't the sole, or even primary, factor), it will still be just as accurate a prediction in the years to come as it has been previously.Orbex was founded in 2015, and eight years later there is no indication that they have produced anything but talk, mock-up hardware and SpaceX-bashing. A "memorandum of understanding to explore some possibility" fits into this history of loudly doing nothing. It is as vague as a cooperation can be.SpaceX rideshare will likely put Orbex out of business before they are able to launch along with a lot of other small LV startups.
I would not be surprised if Orbex goes bankrupt within a few years without having built a working rocket.
I don't think SpaceX or Rocket Lab or Skyrora will be the thing that does Orbex in. ABL Space though...Because their mobile launch hardware allows them to launch from SaxaVord, and thus have a "UK" launch (much like how Virgin Orbit's Start Me Up mission was a "UK" launch -- which is to say, basically not at all)?
And because they have already been contracted to do exactly that, by Lockheed Martin.I don't think SpaceX or Rocket Lab or Skyrora will be the thing that does Orbex in. ABL Space though...Because their mobile launch hardware allows them to launch from SaxaVord, and thus have a "UK" launch (much like how Virgin Orbit's Start Me Up mission was a "UK" launch -- which is to say, basically not at all)?
whatever pain is reduced by not shipping the payload itself out of the UK is surely much less than the pain of shipping the whole rocket and launch infrastructure into the UK.When shipping a launch vehicle to the UK, the overhead is borne by the launch provider who need to fold that cost into their offered launch price (whilst still remaining competitive with any domestic providers), whereas when shipping a satellite to NZ/US/etc that export overhead is borne by the customer.
Does it really matter whether the shipping costs are directly paid by the customer, or indirectly paid through the launch price increasing? My point with comparing ABL and Rocket Lab was that on net, I would expect the total shipping cost to be lower for Rocket Lab, since a much smaller thing is being shipped. Now, the benefit of Orbex is that nothing needs to be shipped into or out of the UK: both payload and rocket can stay in the country until they're launched. But if we're comparing Orbex to foreign companies, I don't think it matters whether the shipping costs are a separate line item or rolled into the launch price: a customer will see that this is an additional cost over doing things domestically. And if they were choosing between foreign providers, I don't think "one of them ships their rocket here (thus making it more expensive)" would inherently be appealing, thus make that one more competitive with the domestic company than the foreign provider which requires the payload to be shipped.whatever pain is reduced by not shipping the payload itself out of the UK is surely much less than the pain of shipping the whole rocket and launch infrastructure into the UK.When shipping a launch vehicle to the UK, the overhead is borne by the launch provider who need to fold that cost into their offered launch price (whilst still remaining competitive with any domestic providers), whereas when shipping a satellite to NZ/US/etc that export overhead is borne by the customer.
i.e. ABL's launch-from-UK sticker-price needs to be competitive with Orbex's launch-from-UK sticker price, but ABL have to eat the overhead cost of importing the rocket (both physical shipment and paperwork) as part of that pricing whilst Orbex do not.
Yes. If you're looking at two quotes, both of roughly the same price, but one requires you to handle international shipping of your satellite (and ensuring it arrives undamaged), deal with export and import law (and potentially ITAR issues), possibly requiring you to hire a whole new member of staff just to handle those international logistics and legal challenges, and do so all at your own expense; and the other is a few hours drive away with a rent-a-van, that second option looks a lot more attractive. Even if that option costs more, you have to weight it up vs the other price plus your best estimate of those extra costs (and time cost!) of what it will take for the international option, along with some fudge factor for when things inevitably turn out to be more complicated and slower than you expect.Does it really matter whether the shipping costs are directly paid by the customer, or indirectly paid through the launch price increasing?whatever pain is reduced by not shipping the payload itself out of the UK is surely much less than the pain of shipping the whole rocket and launch infrastructure into the UK.When shipping a launch vehicle to the UK, the overhead is borne by the launch provider who need to fold that cost into their offered launch price (whilst still remaining competitive with any domestic providers), whereas when shipping a satellite to NZ/US/etc that export overhead is borne by the customer.
i.e. ABL's launch-from-UK sticker-price needs to be competitive with Orbex's launch-from-UK sticker price, but ABL have to eat the overhead cost of importing the rocket (both physical shipment and paperwork) as part of that pricing whilst Orbex do not.
Yes. If you're looking at two quotes, both of roughly the same price...Can you explain to me how ABL is incurring significant extra internal costs (ones greater than all the extra costs you go on to describe later in your comment) without passing those onto the customer, leading to a higher price? Is it because they've decided to accept a much lower profit margin? Because if so, this comparison isn't about whether a customer wants to go with the company that ships their rocket into the UK vs. the company that requires shipping the payload out of the UK; it's whether the customer wants to go with the company that has a 10% profit margin vs. a 50% profit margin (or whatever, these numbers are made up). Obviously, from the customer's point of view, you'd prefer the company with a significantly lower profit margin, and that may outweigh other factors. But that certainly doesn't tell us anything about the relative value to the customer of those other factors.
The propellant of choice for the rocket ("bio-propane") actually also goes by the name "naphtha"
I'm not sure what the substance referred to as 'naphtha' in Russia is exactly but it's not a cryogen so it definitely isn't propane. For whatever reason names of hydrocarbon derivatives vary drastically between languages and regions (is the stuff that goes in my car petrol, gas, or benzin?).The propellant of choice for the rocket ("bio-propane") actually also goes by the name "naphtha"
Propane = naphtha? Why then do they have different market prices and chemical formulae?
Similar to Kerosene: US Kerosene can mean an aviation fuel (JP-8 and RP-1) or for the refined lamp/heating fuel. In the UK, the aviation fuel is still Kerosene but the lamp/heating fuel is Paraffin. In the US, Paraffin would be understood as liquid Paraffin oil (a refined mineral oil) rather than the lamp fuel.I'm not sure what the substance referred to as 'naphtha' in Russia is exactly but it's not a cryogen so it definitely isn't propane. For whatever reason names of hydrocarbon derivatives very drastically between languages and regions (is the stuff that goes in my car petrol, gas, or benzine?).The propellant of choice for the rocket ("bio-propane") actually also goes by the name "naphtha"
Propane = naphtha? Why then do they have different market prices and chemical formulae?
In case you missed it, I published issue 78 of the newsletter yesterday. In this issue, I looked at Orbex, its 2022 financials, and how the company is progressing with the construction of Sutherland Spaceport in Scotland.
How does the coaxial tank (fuel tank within the oxidizer tank) save on tank mass? I'm confused.I guess in theory, if you would want to sub-chill the fuel, this approach means the oxidizer is acting like an insulator keeping the fuel cold? Orbex uses propane/LOX.
I think the technology allows for a propallent tank with higher diameter over length ratio.You've got a good point about fineness ratio, that may make concentric-tank rockets more capable of handling aerodynamic loads and thus launching in a wider range of weather.
The most optimal pressure vessel form factor is a sphere, afterwards come cilinders.
But you require tanks for both fuel and oxidizer, so you require two spheres or cilinders.
With the Orbex patented technology a cylindrical fuel tank can be enclosed inside a spherical oxidizer tank.
This allows a very stubby propellent tank structure
No one does prior art searches anymore: http://www.astronautix.com/p/phoenixc.html
Phoenix C/E design used LOX, Propane (sub cooled) and LH2 in concentric low pressure tanks.