Published on 28 May 2021For 50% off your first month of any subscription crate from KiwiCo (available in 40 countries!) head to https://kiwico.com/everydayastronautToday I wanted to do a comparison of some key players in the small sat launch industry. With a handful of new launchers getting hardware out on the launch pad, launching and even some getting to orbit, I think now’s a good time to give you a rundown on some of these exciting new rockets and compare them to the Falcon 1 to see if the industry has caught up to what SpaceX was doing 12 years ago!TIMESTAMPS:00:00 - Intro03:45 - What is a Small Sat Launcher?06:45 - Rockets too cool to not mention10:15 - Rocket Lab's Electron13:20 - Virgin Orbit's LauncherOne16:30 - Astra's Rocket19:10 - Firefly's Alpha21:00 - ABL's RS122:30 - Relativity's Terran-124:30 - Comparison28:30 - ConclusionCheck out our article version of this video for sources and easy searching! https://everydayastronaut.com/small-sat-launcher-comparison/
Given that the Electron has had over 30 launches in contrast to Rocket 3 being launched seven times and LauncherOne having six launches, along with the Terran 1 and RS1 having made one flight each as well as the Firefly Alpha being launched twice, the Electron definitely holds the title as king of the new-generation smallsat launchers. It should be noted, however, that the Pegasus has been launched over 40 times, making it the true king of all smallsat launchers developed throughout history.
it's kinda sad, out of the 6 main rockets named in this video only 3 are still active (electron,rs1, and alpha) with only one of them launching regularly
Quote from: the_big_boot on 06/11/2023 07:00 pmit's kinda sad, out of the 6 main rockets named in this video only 3 are still active (electron,rs1, and alpha) with only one of them launching regularly I agree, but Rocket 3 being retired was more than expected. So much so, Astra actually gave Tim payload figures for what was then expected to be the next iteration of the rocket which is misleading given he still used a render for R3 on the comparison chart. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know R3 cant do 335 kg to SSO lol. Astra not launching any rockets at the moment and the longevity of the company is a different story though.
Astra actually gave Tim payload figures for what was then expected to be the next iteration of the rocket which is misleading given he still used a render for R3
also if this payload figure was for the next iteration (rocket 4) that would mean that rocket 4 started at 335kg to SSO and then shrunk down to 300kg to LEO to only grow to a whopping 600kg to orbit
Is the topic "small sat-launcher" or "small-sat launcher"?If it is the latter then clearly F9 is king.
I think Stoke might have a significantly lower marginal launch cost than Starship. But even Stoke’s vehicle will be technically medium lift launch by NASA’s definition. I think it’s likely that these <1ton vehicles will almost entirely disappear except for military applications, things like hypersonic research etc.
Quote from: Robotbeat on 06/12/2023 12:40 pmI think Stoke might have a significantly lower marginal launch cost than Starship. But even Stoke’s vehicle will be technically medium lift launch by NASA’s definition. I think it’s likely that these <1ton vehicles will almost entirely disappear except for military applications, things like hypersonic research etc.Prediction: The Stoke hype will fizzle out like most of the others.
Quote from: M.E.T. on 06/12/2023 12:43 pmQuote from: Robotbeat on 06/12/2023 12:40 pmI think Stoke might have a significantly lower marginal launch cost than Starship. But even Stoke’s vehicle will be technically medium lift launch by NASA’s definition. I think it’s likely that these <1ton vehicles will almost entirely disappear except for military applications, things like hypersonic research etc.Prediction: The Stoke hype will fizzle out like most of the others.I don’t think it’s hype. The only way to make small/medium launch have an even slightly competitive offering is full, rapid reuse. No one else is doing that yet, only SpaceX right now.Stoke might fail. Maybe even greater than 50% chance of failing. But it’s a far better bet than yet another expendable launcher.Also, I would NOT be surprised if it grows substantially in the future. If the technology works as intended, you’d get the most value out of it in a larger, say, medium/heavy lift size.
Quote from: greybeardengineer on 06/11/2023 10:05 pmIs the topic "small sat-launcher" or "small-sat launcher"?If it is the latter then clearly F9 is king.As the video makes clear, this topic deals with small-lift launch vehicles and is therefore "small sat-launcher". NASA defines a small-lift launch vehicle as capable of lifting a payload mass of 4,400 lb (2,000 kg) or less to orbit but small-lift launch vehicles are characterized by Roscosmos as capable of carrying a 11,000 lb (5,000 kg) payload mass to orbit. Although the Falcon 9 has the capability to orbit small satellites, it is not a small-lift launch vehicle because it carries more than 20,000 pounds of payload into orbit.
That's cool but the thing about artificial market segmentation is that overall market forces don't respect them. Remember the RISC based engineering workstation segment? Pretty much no one under 40 does now....
Quote from: greybeardengineer on 06/12/2023 02:01 pmThat's cool but the thing about artificial market segmentation is that overall market forces don't respect them. Remember the RISC based engineering workstation segment? Pretty much no one under 40 does now....Fixed that. Sans "engineering workstation" it is alive and well. Different conversation not for this thread.
Quote from: Robotbeat on 06/12/2023 12:52 pmQuote from: M.E.T. on 06/12/2023 12:43 pmQuote from: Robotbeat on 06/12/2023 12:40 pmI think Stoke might have a significantly lower marginal launch cost than Starship. But even Stoke’s vehicle will be technically medium lift launch by NASA’s definition. I think it’s likely that these <1ton vehicles will almost entirely disappear except for military applications, things like hypersonic research etc.Prediction: The Stoke hype will fizzle out like most of the others.I don’t think it’s hype. The only way to make small/medium launch have an even slightly competitive offering is full, rapid reuse. No one else is doing that yet, only SpaceX right now.Stoke might fail. Maybe even greater than 50% chance of failing. But it’s a far better bet than yet another expendable launcher.Also, I would NOT be surprised if it grows substantially in the future. If the technology works as intended, you’d get the most value out of it in a larger, say, medium/heavy lift size.Well, as Elon said somewhere, ideas are a dime a dozen. He has more ideas than he can implement in a lifetime. It's producing something efficiently and at scale to turn that idea into a financially viable reality that is the important leap.My prediction isn't worth more than anyone else's. But it remains my honestly held view at this point in time.
