Launch vehicle designers with 10+ US launches 2025-2029

[deltaV]

Here's a draft of a poll. Please comment so I can refine the options and rules and I'll post the actual poll in a week or so.

Standard rules (https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36993.msg1983144#msg1983144):
- 30 days
- Votes are visible after voting.
- Voters cannot change votes once made

== Poll question ==

Which launch vehicle design organizations will have at least 10 successful orbital launches from US launch pads in the 5 year period 2025-2029 inclusive?

== Poll options (choose any number of options except only one "other organization" option) ==

ABL Space Systems (e.g. RS1)
Aevum (e.g. Ravn X)
Astra Space, Inc. (e.g. Rocket 4)
Blue Origin (e.g. New Glenn)
Firefly (excludes joint with Northrop Grumman) (e.g. Firefly Alpha)
Firefly & Northrop Grumman (e.g. Antares 300 / Firefly MLV)
iRocket (e.g. Shockwave)
Northrop Grumman (excludes SLS and joint with Firefly) (e.g. Pegasus)
Phantom Space (e.g. Daytona, Laguna)
Relativity Space (e.g. Terran R)
Rocket Lab (e.g. Electron, Neutron)
SpaceX (e.g. Falcon, Starship)
Stoke Space (e.g. Stoke Space Launch Vehicle)
ULA, Boeing, and/or Lockheed Martin (excludes SLS) (e.g. Atlas, Delta, Vulcan)
US government designed vehicles (e.g. SLS)
Vaya Space (e.g. Dauntless)
Vector Launch (e.g. Vector R)
0 other organizations (choose only one "other organization" option)
1 other organizations
2 other organizations
3-4 other organizations
5+ other organizations

[Edit: merged "3 other organizations" and "4 other organizations" to reduce the number of options.]

[Edit: added Atlas and Delta to ULA's launcher list.]

== About the poll options ==

Any organizations listed as US (or US/NZ) in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_orbital_launch_systems is included. Note that a non-US organizations that launches from US pads does count for the poll, it just doesn't seem likely enough to happen to include dedicated poll options for non-US companies.

The specific launch vehicles listed after "e.g." in most of the poll options are just FYI and aren't part of the rules.

== Rules and Definitions ==

Launch vehicle design organization: a launch only counts for the single organization that is most responsible for the overall design of the rocket, e.g. Vulcan launches count for ULA but NOT for Blue Origin or Aerojet Rocketdyne and SLS launches count for “US Government” but NOT for Northrop Grumman. The customer is irrelevant, e.g. a Vulcan launch carrying a NASA payload counts for ULA but NOT for “US Government”. A launch vehicle that is designed by Firefly and Northrop Grumman counts for the combined "Firefly & Northrop Grumman" option but NOT for Firefly or NG individually. For example if you think that Antares 300 (a F & NG vehicle) will launch 10+ times, Pegasus (a NG vehicle) will launch 10+ times, and Firefly Alpha (a F vehicle) will launch less than 10 times you should vote for "Firefly & Northrop Grumman" and "Northrop Grumman" but NOT for "Firefly".

Successful orbital launch: a launch where a launch vehicle stage and/or payload massing at least 1 gram achieves an altitude of at least 100 km and a semi-major axis at least the (equatorial) radius of the Earth at one instant of time. Success at reuse and at customer objectives are irrelevant to this definition. For example, an abort-once-around trajectory probably barely meets this definition.

US launch pads: this includes launches from pads in any land that is more controlled by the US government than by any other country. This includes the 50 states, US territories, and US overseas military bases. Launches from air or water instead of launch pads will count if the US is the primary regulator of the launch.

5 year period 2025-2029 inclusive: launches are counted if liftoff occurs in the 5 year period between Jan 1 2025 and Dec 31 2029 inclusive Eastern time zone.

[Edit: changed 5 year period from 2024-2028 to 2025-2029.]

[trimeta]

Why limit this to launches from US pads? I feel like "US-based launch companies" probably gets across your message a little more clearly. Of course, this mostly affects Rocket Lab...but ABL has an agreement to launch from SaxaVord, so in theory they could also see some launches not count towards this "US pad only" total.

I could also list off some additional US-based launch companies, but honestly they probably do belong in the "other organizations" catch-all, so I can't fault your choices there.

[Zed_Noir]

Should omit the Falcon 9 and Electron options from the poll, since they will fly 10+ flights just in 2024 alone. The poll should focus on current and future launch vehicles that have less than 4 orbital launch attempts so far.

[Zed_Noir]

Why limit this to launches from US pads? I feel like "US-based launch companies" probably gets across your message a little more clearly. Of course, this mostly affects Rocket Lab...but ABL has an agreement to launch from SaxaVord, so in theory they could also see some launches not count towards this "US pad only" total.
<snip>

AIUI the New Zealand Mahir pads and the UK SaxaVord pad are consider to be US territory for the purposes of ITAR.

It will likely to be the same for any non-US launch pad launching an US launch vehicle in the future.

[DeimosDream]

Should omit the Falcon 9 and Electron options from the poll, since they will fly 10+ flights just in 2024 alone. The poll should focus on current and future launch vehicles that have less than 4 orbital launch attempts so far.

Zed has a good point.

Is the intent to poll for crowd wisdom on emerging LV companies who make it to orbit or about companies who survive the emerging competition? If we are only interested in new successes then LV companies who have already succeeded in the past should be excluded. If we are interested in who survives the rush of new LVs and hypothetical dominance of Starship then the year 2024 should be excluded leaving 8+ orbital flights in 2025-2028 (or 10+ in 2025-2029).

[deltaV]

Why limit this to launches from US pads? I feel like "US-based launch companies" probably gets across your message a little more clearly. Of course, this mostly affects Rocket Lab...but ABL has an agreement to launch from SaxaVord, so in theory they could also see some launches not count towards this "US pad only" total.

The downside of corporate nationality is it can be very ambiguous. For example if a European company starts a US subsidiary to build and sell rockets to the US Government do the launches by the subsidiary count and what about the launches by the parent in Europe? Though I guess if I decide up front if Rocket Lab counts (it should I think) the theoretical ambiguity probably won't matter in practice.

I'll switch the poll to use corporate nationality instead of launch pad location if the number of posts and likes about this change suggest popular support.

[trimeta]

Why limit this to launches from US pads? I feel like "US-based launch companies" probably gets across your message a little more clearly. Of course, this mostly affects Rocket Lab...but ABL has an agreement to launch from SaxaVord, so in theory they could also see some launches not count towards this "US pad only" total.

The downside of corporate nationality is it can be very ambiguous. For example if a European company starts a US subsidiary to build and sell rockets to the US Government do the launches by the subsidiary count and what about the launches by the parent in Europe? Though I guess if I decide up front if Rocket Lab counts (it should I think) the theoretical ambiguity probably won't matter in practice.

I'll switch the poll to use corporate nationality instead of launch pad location if the number of posts and likes about this change suggest popular support.

Zed_Noir also inspires an alternate suggestion: launches that are licensed by the FAA. I think that should cover launches by US-based companies at non-US pads, while generally excluding purely European, Indian, Japanese, Chinese, etc. launches.

[deltaV]

Is the intent to poll for crowd wisdom on emerging LV companies who make it to orbit or about companies who survive the emerging competition? If we are only interested in new successes then LV companies who have already succeeded in the past should be excluded. If we are interested in who survives the rush of new LVs and hypothetical dominance of Starship then the year 2024 should be excluded leaving 8+ orbital flights in 2025-2028 (or 10+ in 2025-2029).

I'm more interested in who survives the emerging competition so I like your option of 10+ orbital launches in 2025-2029. I'll make that change soon.

[Edit: 5 year period in original post changed from 2024-2028 to 2025-2029.]