NASASpaceFlight.com Forum
Commercial and US Government Launch Vehicles => Rocket Lab => Topic started by: Galactic Penguin SST on 05/18/2017 05:09 pm
-
Dedicated thread for RocketLab Electron's 1st flight seeing that it is finally about to happen. ;)
Feature Article - by Chris Gebhardt:
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/05/rocket-labs-electron-inaugural-flight-new-zealand/
The launch is scheduled not earlier than 21:00 UTC on May 21 (9 am on May 22 in NZ)
-
http://gisborneherald.co.nz/localnews/2796358-135/rocket-lab-test-launch-in-sight
"...Rocket Lab today revealed it planned to send a test rocket into orbit from its launch facility on Onenui Station during a 10-day launch window, starting from 9am on May 22. "
-
This is nice to see:
Good luck to our colleagues at @RocketLabUSA as they launch 'It's a Test' in the coming days. Their success will be good for all of us!
https://twitter.com/virgin_orbit/status/865645924663439360 (https://twitter.com/virgin_orbit/status/865645924663439360)
-
'It's a Test' - Media Advisory on Viewing a Launch of Rocket Lab's Electron Vehicle
https://www.rocketlabusa.com/latest/advisory-on-viewing-a-launch-of-rocket-labs-electron-vehicle/
WHERE CAN I VIEW A LAUNCH FROM?
As Rocket Lab’s top priority during the test launch is public safety, there are safety zones in place during a launch and no access will be permitted to the Onenui Station. As a result, Launch Complex 1 will not be visible during a launch from any publicly-accessible point on the Mahia Peninsula during the test window of May 22nd to June 3rd.
WILL THE LAUNCH BE LIVE STREAMED?
Due to the likelihood of postponements, test launch attempts will not be live streamed, but video footage of a launch and other press materials will be made available as quickly as possible following the launch attempt.
WHEN WILL THE LAUNCH TAKE PLACE?
The launch process is complex. It’s likely the launch could be postponed, or “scrubbed”, multiple times to allow for small, technical modifications. Weather can also cause scrubs - winds and heavy rain will likely result in a postponement. As a result, we can’t pin point the day or time of launch. We value your time and wouldn’t want to keep you waiting during the 10-day period. Rocket Lab will announce the decision to scrub a launch as soon as possible but this could be as late as 0.1 seconds before lift-off. For this reason, and as the executive team will be based in Auckland during the launch, Rocket Lab suggests there may not be sufficient value for press in traveling to the site.
Wairoa District Council is evaluating the location of possible viewing areas for the commercial phase but these will not be in place for the test phase. Please check our website www.rocketlab.co.nz/mahia for updates on future launches.
WHAT ARE THE SAFTEY ZONE RESTRICTIONS?
ROAD ACCESS
The Public Exclusion Zone (PEZ) on land is contained within the boundaries of privately-owned Onenui Station (Figure 1), including Portland Island (Waikawa). A strictly controlled predefined group of authorised mission personnel are permitted within the PEZ during launch activities.
Temporary road closures will be in place for traffic management and to ensure the safety of vehicles on the Mahia East Coast Road, and the unformed Tawapata Road, on launch attempt days. The narrow, unsealed and winding roads are unsuited to high-levels of traffic and authorities anticipate an increase in vehicles on the Peninsula. Road closures and traffic management will take effect six hours before scheduled lift-off.
For the latest, and most specific, updates around road closures please visit www.rocketlab.co.nz/mahia
AIR ACCESS
In order to facilitate the safety of air navigation during the launch, temporary Restricted and Danger Areas are prescribed surrounding the launch area. The Civil Aviation Authority designates the appropriate special use airspace that is used for events such as the Rocket Lab launch. The exact date and time the special use airspace becomes active will be advised via a notice to airmen (NOTAM). Rocket Lab will complete this notiffication at
least 24 hours prior to the active time.
The temporary restrictions also apply to drones. The launch tracking systems could interfere with drone systems and potentially cause significant damage to equipment. Therefore, we ask that all members of the press refrain from the use of drones.
Pilots are advised of any airspace changes in the Aeronautical Information Publication Supplement – available online at www.aip.net.nz/Home.aspx.
MARINE ACCESS
Three ship hazard areas have been identified for this launch; one at the launch site and two planned jettison impact areas downrange. All ship hazard areas are the subject of a temporary Notice to Mariners, Coastal Navigational Warnings, and NAVAREA warnings issued by LINZ and RCCNZ.
The launch site hazard area (figure 3) is precautionary and during a nominal flight will have no debris fall there. The area is up to 24km wide and extends approximately 90 km south of the launch site. The area within New Zealand territorial waters is declared a Marine Reserve Area and closed to unauthorised vessel traffic during launch attempt activities.
IF I CANNOT ACCESS THE SITE, WHAT ARE MY OPTIONS?
For real time updates regarding the launch, we recommend following the Rocket Lab Twitter page twitter.com/RocketLabUSA or contacting the media team:
Catherine Moreau Hammond +64 27 538 9039 [email protected]
Chloe Tonkin +64 20 414 30668 [email protected]
Video footage of a successful launch and other press materials will be made available as quickly as possible following the launch attempt. Peter Beck, CEO and founder of Rocket Lab, will be based in Auckland for the duration of the launch and available for interviews and press comments.
As previously mentioned, the Wairoa District Council is evaluating the location of possible viewing areas for the commercial phase once testing phases are complete. Updates about this can be found on our website.
-
According to https://spaceflightnow.com/launch-schedule/ (https://spaceflightnow.com/launch-schedule/) the launch is scheduled not earlier than 21:00 UTC on May 21 (9 am on May 22 in NZ if I got the time zones right). Does someone know what is the source of that?
http://gisborneherald.co.nz/localnews/2796358-135/rocket-lab-test-launch-in-sight
"...Rocket Lab today revealed it planned to send a test rocket into orbit from its launch facility on Onenui Station during a 10-day launch window, starting from 9am on May 22. "
It's kinda looks like a miniature Falcon 9 from that angle.
-
WILL THE LAUNCH BE LIVE STREAMED?
Due to the likelihood of postponements, test launch attempts will not be live streamed,...
That's got to be the lamest excuse ever, unless internet is so expensive in New Zealand that even Rocketlab can't afford it! This will be a historic moment for New Zealand. People who want to experience this won't mind waiting 10 days (or more) for it to happen. They're about to send a payload into space!
Been trying to find any New Zealand live streams that might be covering the launch. So far only found a radio channel that is live streaming. Don't know if they'll be covering the launch.
http://www.radiolive.co.nz/home.html
-
WILL THE LAUNCH BE LIVE STREAMED?
Due to the likelihood of postponements, test launch attempts will not be live streamed,...
That's got to be the lamest excuse ever, unless internet is so expensive in New Zealand that even Rocketlab can't afford it! This will be a historic moment for New Zealand. People who want to experience this won't mind waiting 10 days (or more) for it to happen. They're about to send a payload into space!
Been trying to find any New Zealand live streams that might be covering the launch. So far only found a radio channel that is live streaming. Don't know if they'll be covering the launch.
http://www.radiolive.co.nz/home.html
Well, just about every person in the world that would appreciate that fully is a member of this forum. While there are massively more people who would be complaining that nothing is happening, or call them amateurs for having to scrub plenty of times. Plus, it does take some organising to have a decent livestream. They'll have plenty of things to do already.
-
There is a chance of failure and RL don't want that video footage going public. Besides they are private company, they have no obligation to provide a webcast.
If launch is success then video will be released ASAP.
-
Attempt #1 - May 22, 0030-0530 UTC.
-
Here is weather map, looks showery in morning, clearing in afternoon.
http://www.metservice.com/maps-radar/rain-forecast/rain-forecast-3-day
-
.. Plus, it does take some organising to have a decent livestream. They'll have plenty of things to do already.
I think it's just a matter of trying to maintain laser focus. Anyone in the team worrying about appearances instead of performing their job increases the likelihood of screwing up. Even if that's a tiny part of the team, just not doing it will take a part of the pressure off.
-
Feature Article - by Chris Gebhardt:
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/05/rocket-labs-electron-inaugural-flight-new-zealand/
-
Attempt #1 NOTAM has been deleted.
-
I think it's just a matter of trying to maintain laser focus. Anyone in the team worrying about appearances instead of performing their job increases the likelihood of screwing up. Even if that's a tiny part of the team, just not doing it will take a part of the pressure off.
Oh come on! They will have video cameras pointed at the rocket recording the launch. Someone has to monitor this and that someone could easily live stream it. SpaceX did it with their first launches. If something goes wrong and you don't want to be embarrassed, just put in a delay and then punch the button when it goes kablooey!
-
Attempt #1 NOTAM has been deleted.
Thanks. I entered NZZO into the link below to check.
https://pilotweb.nas.faa.gov/PilotWeb/
-
I think it's just a matter of trying to maintain laser focus. Anyone in the team worrying about appearances instead of performing their job increases the likelihood of screwing up. Even if that's a tiny part of the team, just not doing it will take a part of the pressure off.
Oh come on! They will have video cameras pointed at the rocket recording the launch. Someone has to monitor this and that someone could easily live stream it. SpaceX did it with their first launches. If something goes wrong and you don't want to be embarrassed, just put in a delay and then punch the button when it goes kablooey!
Yeah, SpaceX did it, and they got a lot of flack for crappy livestreams, streams they took years to make what they are today (with thousands of employees, but people also still complain).
They are under ZERO - I repeat ZERO - obligation to provide a livestream, and the small crew have more important things to do.
-
Attempt #1 NOTAM has been deleted.
And here's the reason:
Rocket Lab @RocketLabUSA
High winds have prevented vehicle rollout and launch preparation. Launch for Monday May 22 delayed a day to Tuesday May 23 (NZST). #ItsaTest
https://www.twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/866198795326967809 (https://www.twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/866198795326967809)
-
Peter, our CEO, checking out the wind. Don't worry - we also have a weather station out there! Weather is set to improve soon. #ItsaTest
https://twitter.com/rocketlabusa/status/866200524634247168 (https://twitter.com/rocketlabusa/status/866200524634247168)
See for yourself in the attached ...
-
Feature Article - by Chris Gebhardt:
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/05/rocket-labs-electron-inaugural-flight-new-zealand/
The flow chart is quite bad, Rutherford have clearly two electric motors, one for each pump. And such thing as "electric engine" doesn't exist.
img: (c) Phil Walter
-
That's got to be the lamest excuse ever, unless internet is so expensive in New Zealand that even Rocketlab can't afford it!
Given this is a pretty remote site with apparently no other tenants I'm guessing setting up a link means actual cable laying. I'm guessing most of that bandwidth will be reserved for comms with their other offices in NZ and the US.
And why can I hear the voice of Ryan Reynolds in my head talking about "Australia Day?" :)
This will be a historic moment for New Zealand. People who want to experience this won't mind waiting 10 days (or more) for it to happen. They're about to send a payload into space!
Absolutely true. It's an amazing feat. I doubt many who've never tried to set up a company to do orbital launch will understand quite how impressive this is, especially given that unlike Musk they didn't start with a (fairly) large bag of cash to begin with.
Been trying to find any New Zealand live streams that might be covering the launch. So far only found a radio channel that is live streaming. Don't know if they'll be covering the launch.
http://www.radiolive.co.nz/home.html
Yeah, SpaceX did it, and they got a lot of flack for crappy livestreams, streams they took years to make what they are today (with thousands of employees, but people also still complain).
An excellent point.
How quickly people forget SX have not always done everything perfectly from day one. They've evolved over the years.
They are under ZERO - I repeat ZERO - obligation to provide a livestream, and the small crew have more important things to do.
I'd say their media policy is rather more Blue Origin or Reaction Engines than SpaceX.
-
Feature Article - by Chris Gebhardt:
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/05/rocket-labs-electron-inaugural-flight-new-zealand/
The flow chart is quite bad, Rutherford have clearly two electric motors, one for each pump. And such thing as "electric engine" doesn't exist.
img: (c) Phil Walter
The company's own website calls it an "electric Rutherford engine."
-
WESTERN SOUTH PACIFIC.
NEW ZEALAND-NORTHEAST COAST.
DNC 06.
1. HAZARDOUS OPERATIONS, ROCKET LAUNCHING
0030Z TO 0530Z DAILY 22 MAY THRU 03 JUN
IN AREAS BOUND BY:
A. 39-11.55S 177-46.67E, 39-11.55S 178-04.93E,
40-02.91S 178-04.85E, 40-03.46S 177-57.27E.
B. 44-20.42S 177-49.33E, 44-13.44S 179-22.06E,
48-01.00S 179-34.04W, 48-19.73S 178-50.20E.
2. CANCEL THIS MSG 030630Z JUN 17.//
Authority: CNW 123/17 170515Z MAY 17.
Date: 170619Z MAY 17
Cancel: 03063000 Jun 17
SOUTH PACIFIC.
DNC 06, DNC 29.
1. HAZARDOUS OPERATIONS SPACE DEBRIS
0030Z TO 0530Z DAILY 22 MAY THRU 03 JUN
IN AREAS BOUND BY:
A. 44-13S 179-22E, 48-01S 179-34W,
48-20S 178-50E, 44-20S 177-49E.
B. 58-28S 176-32W, 62-52S 173-58W,
63-10S 175-50W, 58-41S 178-28W.
2. CANCEL THIS MSG 030630Z JUN 17.//
Authority: NAVAREA XIV 43/17 162130Z MAY 17.
Date: 162136Z MAY 17
Cancel: 03063000 Jun 17
-
Even if this first flight is unsuccessful, this looks a lot better than the fake Vector "not-the-real-rocket" launch a few weeks ago. I hope this design succeeds.
-
Update on the delay plus a press kit!
Rocket Lab Testing Update ― 22 May 2017
Rocket Lab delays roll out of test launch attempt from Launch Complex 1
Rocket Lab, an American-New Zealand aerospace company, has delayed the roll out of the launch vehicle called Electron, titled ‘It’s a Test’, by one day at Launch Complex 1 due to weather conditions. The planned launch attempt will now take place on Tuesday, May 23, 2017.
Peter Beck, CEO and founder of Rocket Lab, says “Safety is Rocket Lab’s number one priority. Unfortunately, yesterday’s high winds in Mahia prevented our team from rolling the rocket out to the launch pad in preparations for launch. We are keeping a close eye on the weather and will roll out the rocket later today as the weather has improved, with the goal of a launch attempt tomorrow.”
During the test phase, it’s common for planned launches to be postponed to ensure ideal conditions.The launch attempt will now occur on Tuesday 23 May 2017.
For updates from Rocket Lab, follow us on Twitter http://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA
-
NOTAMs are out. Window opening is now 00:30 UTC (12:30 pm local). That's quite a bit later than the previous time of 9 am local.
B2339/17 - TEMPO DANGER AREA NZD028 (EAST AUCKLAND OCEANIC FIR) IS
PRESCRIBED AS FLW:
ALL THAT AIRSPACE BOUNDED BY COORDINATES:
S 41 10 00.0, E 178 52 00.0
S 43 44 27.2, E 179 27 48.0
S 53 11 30.0, W 178 18 00.0
S 57 44 00.0, W 176 54 00.0
S 66 11 20.0, W 172 00 00.0
S 66 31 05.0, W 174 35 50.0
S 58 02 00.0, W 178 56 00.0
S 53 22 59.0, E 179 50 30.0
S 49 36 00.0, E 178 58 00.0
S 46 36 00.0, E 178 16 30.0
S 43 54 00.0, E 177 46 30.0
S 41 10 00.0, E 177 41 00.0
ACTIVITY: ROCKETRY
ADMINISTERING AUTHORITY: ROCKET LAB LTD, TEL +64 21 0829 2217.
PRESCRIBED PURSUANT TO CIVIL AVIATION RULE PART 71 UNDER A DELEGATED
AUTHORITY ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR OF CIVIL AVIATION. SFC - FL999, 23 MAY 00:30
2017 UNTIL 23 MAY 05:30 2017. CREATED: 21 MAY 12:25 2017
B2338/17 (Issued for NZZC NZZO) - DANGER AREA NZD492 (MAHIA, HAWKE'S BAY) ACT.
REF AIP SUP 12/17. SFC - FL999, 23 MAY 00:30 2017 UNTIL 23 MAY 05:30 2017. CREATED:
21 MAY 12:21 2017
-
Just a reminder:
As with any new rocket, there are a lot of factors that come together ahead of a test and we’re not going to fly unless we’re ready. It's highly possible we will scrub multiple attempts as we fine tune and wait for favorable weather conditions.
https://www.rocketlabusa.com/latest/electron-test-window/
-
Peter, our CEO, checking out the wind. Don't worry - we also have a weather station out there! Weather is set to improve soon. #ItsaTest
https://twitter.com/rocketlabusa/status/866200524634247168 (https://twitter.com/rocketlabusa/status/866200524634247168)
See for yourself in the attached ...
Yep, as I understand the launch site location can get a bit windy.
Still worth it for the view alone..
-
Peter, our CEO, checking out the wind. Don't worry - we also have a weather station out there! Weather is set to improve soon. #ItsaTest
https://twitter.com/rocketlabusa/status/866200524634247168 (https://twitter.com/rocketlabusa/status/866200524634247168)
See for yourself in the attached ...
Yep, as I understand the launch site location can get a bit windy.
Still worth it for the view alone..
That really does look like a long way from anywhere, including the nearest cell tower.
Should anyone be too surprised live streaming is not a priority with them?
-
Peter, our CEO, checking out the wind. Don't worry - we also have a weather station out there! Weather is set to improve soon. #ItsaTest
https://twitter.com/rocketlabusa/status/866200524634247168 (https://twitter.com/rocketlabusa/status/866200524634247168)
See for yourself in the attached ...
Yep, as I understand the launch site location can get a bit windy.
Still worth it for the view alone..
That really does look like a long way from anywhere, including the nearest cell tower.
Should anyone be too surprised live streaming is not a priority with them?
Well...
The Mission Control Center for Electron and Rocket Lab is centered in Auckland, New Zealand – approximately 500 km (310 mi) to the northwest – and will allows the Rocket Lab teams to monitor more than 25,000 data channels during the countdown and launch.
Doesn't sound like bandwidth is an issue.
-
I really respect their decision not to livestream, as much as I'd like to be watching.
Given the sheer number of new things going on (new vehicle, some new engine technologies, new launch site, etc.) the freedom to just work things through without feeling like anyone was "watching over your shoulder," second guessing on forums, etc. Even if it is just a psychological effect, knowing that you have the freedom to swear over the launch net, get a hammer out and bang on something if that's what it takes, recycle the count again and again and again...
-
Feature Article - by Chris Gebhardt:
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/05/rocket-labs-electron-inaugural-flight-new-zealand/
Thanks for the article! Is it normal to convert Isp numbers in seconds into minutes+seconds? Struck me as odd :)
-
Thanks for the article! Is it normal to convert Isp numbers in seconds into minutes+seconds? Struck me as odd :)
I don't think I have ever seen this.
-
Discussion here.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35300.msg1681197#msg1681197
-
It's 9:27 am Tuesday morning in NZ. No Twitter update from Electron yet.
Good luck!
-
Here are links to live New Zealand Radio and TV. Probably of not much use, but we might get lucky.
http://www.radio.org.nz/
http://streema.com/tv/country/New_Zealand
-
Rocket LabVerified account @RocketLabUSA 2m2 minutes ago
Launch currently on hold due to weather - high clouds causing risk of triboelectrification. Updates to follow #ItsaTest
https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/866792255339634688
-
Some update from the NZ Herald: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11861219
-
https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/866792255339634688
Hold for weather.
-
Some update from the NZ Herald: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11861219
That says there is a Hawke's Bay Today reporter and photographer near Mahia. I found a link to their newspaper. Click on the top left of the page to read the article.
http://apnregionalnz.newspaperdirect.com/epaper/viewer.aspx
-
Latest sat. 11am local. Marked launch site.
-
Since I did not see it posted anywhere on here I figured i would post the weather site/data for New Zealand. Now that we have to keep an eye on launch weather for this launch site ;D
http://www.metservice.com/national/home
EDIT: And with that, there is a large, thick looking cloud area heading for the launch site currently.
-
Weather forecast for next 10 days. A nice 13.3 C now! Winds are gusting to 21.9 km/h. If there is a delay, a Wednesday attempt is probably out due to rain. Thursday afternoon is looks better.
https://www.wunderground.com/cgi-bin/findweather/getForecast?query=pws:IHKBMAHI2
-
SCRUB, per the Twitter feed. Try again tomorrow.
-
Here's the full tweet. Reason is triboelectrification.
"Launch postponed for the day due to risk of triboelectrification. Will try again tomorrow! #ItsaTest"
https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/866808841337307139
-
Here's the web update.
https://www.rocketlabusa.com/latest/its-a-test-live-news-updates-2/
Rocket Lab Testing Update ― 23 May 2017
Rocket Lab scrubs test launch attempt from Launch Complex 1
Rocket Lab has postponed the test launch of its Electron vehicle today due to weather conditions. The planned launch attempt will now take place on Wednesday, May 24, 2017.
Peter Beck, CEO and founder of Rocket Lab, says poor weather is delaying the launch attempt of Rocket Lab’s first test rocket titled ‘It’s a Test’.
“We’ve been able to roll the rocket out to the launch pad, but now we’re waiting for the high altitude cloud to clear.
“Safety is Rocket Lab’s number one priority and we are following guidelines set by the FAA and NASA around weather and launch safety.
“Current weather conditions put us at risk of what’s called Triboelectrification. This is the build up of static charge through friction. Ice and other particles in high cloud strike the rocket transferring electrons (the atomic kind) and build up charge on the surface of the vehicle. This can lead to large voltage potential and encourage electric discharges or lightning which may affect the avionics onboard,” says Beck.
During the test phase, it’s common for planned launches to be postponed to ensure ideal conditions. The launch attempt will now occur on Wednesday, May 24, 2017.
For updates from Rocket Lab, follow us on Twitter http://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA
-
Here's the full tweet. Reason is triboelectrification.
"Launch postponed for the day due to risk of triboelectrification. Will try again tomorrow! #ItsaTest"
https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/866808841337307139
Memories of Ares I-X, anyone?
-
Here's the full tweet. Reason is triboelectrification.
"Launch postponed for the day due to risk of triboelectrification. Will try again tomorrow! #ItsaTest"
https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/866808841337307139
Memories of Ares I-X, anyone?
Hang on a sec.. isn't this rocket made from (conductive) carbon fibre? Are they trying to say they've designed it, built it, tested it and they didn't check for surface conductivity and electrostatic bonding?!? Seriously?!?? Oh, boy.. ::)
-
What are you on about? ??? If I missed the joke, nevermind. 8)
-
Here's the full tweet. Reason is triboelectrification.
"Launch postponed for the day due to risk of triboelectrification. Will try again tomorrow! #ItsaTest"
https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/866808841337307139
Memories of Ares I-X, anyone?
Huh, this one has an instrumented mass simulator on top too!
The similarities end there, though, as RocketLab claim to have figured out how to air-light an engine, which NASA hasn't done on an orbital launch vehicle in more than 40 years ;D
-
What are you on about? ??? If I missed the joke, nevermind. 8)
Not a joke. Triboelectricity (basically static electricity) and it's effects is something that is well quantified and also something that can be prevented by design by ensuring the outside surface of the rocket is conductive.
This article (related to Ares I-X) explains it all fairly clearly:
https://ams.confex.com/ams/14Meso15ARAM/webprogram/Handout/Paper190923/091_winters.pdf
The only other explanation I can think of is that they're being extra, super, almost ridiculously, cautious - but then why not blame the delay on telemetry issues or something a little more understandable?
EDIT: Reading their updates, it does seem they are being extra, super, careful in waiting for "ideal conditions" since "it's a test" and there is a lot of both money and credibility on the line.. so I'll back off and give them a break. Like everyone else I suppose, I just wish they'd light the blue touch-paper and get it over with already.. so hopefully they'll get those "ideal" conditions soon.
-
Tweet explaining that Rocket Lab uses weather balloons.
"Before launch, we use weather balloons to check atmospheric conditions - wind speed, direction, humidity, temperature and pressure #ItsaTest"
https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/866830752389804032
Added balloon launch video.
-
Weather forecast for next 10 days. A nice 13.3 C now! Winds are gusting to 21.9 km/h. If there is a delay, a Wednesday attempt is probably out due to rain. Thursday afternoon is looks better.
https://www.wunderground.com/cgi-bin/findweather/getForecast?query=pws:IHKBMAHI2
Last thing you want to do is launching an electric rocket in the rain... Like wearing a sweater on the Hindenburg.... :)
-
Here's the full tweet. Reason is triboelectrification.
"Launch postponed for the day due to risk of triboelectrification. Will try again tomorrow! #ItsaTest"
https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/866808841337307139
Memories of Ares I-X, anyone?
Hang on a sec.. isn't this rocket made from (conductive) carbon fibre? Are they trying to say they've designed it, built it, tested it and they didn't check for surface conductivity and electrostatic bonding?!? Seriously?!?? Oh, boy.. ::)
Carbon fiber is conductive. The epoxy that encases it, not so much. Boeing had to add a layer of bronze mesh to the 787 material for lightning strikes.
-
New NOTAMs for 24 May attempt. Same launch window of 00:30 to 05:30 UTC.
B2384/17 (Issued for NZZC NZZO) - DANGER AREA NZD492 (MAHIA, HAWKE'S BAY) ACT.
REF AIP SUP 12/17. SFC - FL999, 24 MAY 00:30 2017 UNTIL 24 MAY 05:30 2017. CREATED:
23 MAY 04:47 2017
B2383/17 - TEMPO DANGER AREA NZD028 (EAST AUCKLAND OCEANIC FIR) IS
PRESCRIBED AS FLW:
ALL THAT AIRSPACE BOUNDED BY COORDINATES:
S 41 10 00.0, E 178 52 00.0
S 43 44 27.2, E 179 27 48.0
S 53 11 30.0, W 178 18 00.0
S 57 44 00.0, W 176 54 00.0
S 66 11 20.0, W 172 00 00.0
S 66 31 05.0, W 174 35 50.0
S 58 02 00.0, W 178 56 00.0
S 53 22 59.0, E 179 50 30.0
S 49 36 00.0, E 178 58 00.0
S 46 36 00.0, E 178 16 30.0
S 43 54 00.0, E 177 46 30.0
S 41 10 00.0, E 177 41 00.0
ACTIVITY: ROCKETRY
ADMINISTERING AUTHORITY: ROCKET LAB LTD, TEL +64 21 0829 2217.
PRESCRIBED PURSUANT TO CIVIL AVIATION RULE PART 71 UNDER A DELEGATED
AUTHORITY ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR OF CIVIL AVIATION. SFC - FL999, 24 MAY 00:30
2017 UNTIL 24 MAY 05:30 2017. CREATED: 23 MAY 04:43 2017
-
Launch attempt could be any time between 1pm - 5pm, May 24 - June 2 (NZST). Weather and operational factors can impact exact time. #ItsaTest
https://twitter.com/rocketlabusa/status/866893286920691712 (https://twitter.com/rocketlabusa/status/866893286920691712)
Edit to add video from tweet
-
Rocket LabVerified account @RocketLabUSA 2m2 minutes ago
Launch currently on hold due to weather - high clouds causing risk of triboelectrification. Updates to follow #ItsaTest
https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/866792255339634688
It's a 9 day launch window and they did warn it'd be very unlikely to launch right at the start of the window. :(
To actually get to having an orbital launch window is still a very impressive achievement.
Small historical point. Australia launched the UK's Black Arrow ELV in the 60's and was planned to be a launch base for IIRC both Beal and Kistler.
I'm not entirely sure but I don't think Australia has ever launched an LV of its own, either built in country or by a company based there.
-
All these scrubs do raise the question of whether they will be able to fly as often as they have been claiming. They chose this spot in NZ because of the lack of marine and air traffic but that doesn't help much if the weather is crap all the time.
Sent from my LGL44VL using Tapatalk
-
Weather forecast for next 10 days. A nice 13.3 C now! Winds are gusting to 21.9 km/h. If there is a delay, a Wednesday attempt is probably out due to rain. Thursday afternoon is looks better.
https://www.wunderground.com/cgi-bin/findweather/getForecast?query=pws:IHKBMAHI2
Last thing you want to do is launching an electric rocket in the rain... Like wearing a sweater on the Hindenburg.... :)
I know you're making a joke, but it'd be fine. Rain is just fine. Saltwater may be a different story.
-
All these scrubs do raise the question of whether they will be able to fly as often as they have been claiming. They chose this spot in NZ because of the lack of marine and air traffic but that doesn't help much if the weather is crap all the time.
Sent from my LGL44VL using Tapatalk
Well, this is the height of winter down in the southern hemisphere so the weather is especially bad. I'm pretty sure the weather will be better most of the year.
-
Small historical point. Australia launched the UK's Black Arrow ELV in the 60's and was planned to be a launch base for IIRC both Beal and Kistler.
I'm not entirely sure but I don't think Australia has ever launched an LV of its own, either built in country or by a company based there.
Australia also launched WRESAT on a Sparta (modified surplus Redstone, with 2 upper stages) in 1967.
-
Small historical point. Australia launched the UK's Black Arrow ELV in the 60's and was planned to be a launch base for IIRC both Beal and Kistler.
I'm not entirely sure but I don't think Australia has ever launched an LV of its own, either built in country or by a company based there.
Australia also launched WRESAT on a Sparta (modified surplus Redstone, with 2 upper stages) in 1967.
The Sparta was completely an US design.
-
Good luck and godspeed to them !
-
Small historical point. Australia launched the UK's Black Arrow ELV in the 60's and was planned to be a launch base for IIRC both Beal and Kistler.
I'm not entirely sure but I don't think Australia has ever launched an LV of its own, either built in country or by a company based there.
Australia also launched WRESAT on a Sparta (modified surplus Redstone, with 2 upper stages) in 1967.
The Sparta was completely an US design.
Not to split hairs :)
but the two LV's in question, Black Arrow [designed and built in the UK] and Sparta [designed and built in the US] were both launched from Woomera and while Prospero was designed and built in the UK, WREsat was designed and built in Australia.
Carl
-
Our range team is making preparations ahead of a launch attempt from Rocket Lab Launch Complex 1, Mahia NZ. #ItsaTest
https://twitter.com/rocketlabusa/status/867106745390292992 (https://twitter.com/rocketlabusa/status/867106745390292992)
-
Not to split hairs :)
but the two LV's in question, Black Arrow [designed and built in the UK] and Sparta [designed and built in the US] were both launched from Woomera and while Prospero was designed and built in the UK, WREsat was designed and built in Australia.
Carl
That was my point (although I did not know about SPARTA). It appears Australia has never built an orbital LV.
-
That was my point (although I did not know about SPARTA). It appears Australia has never built an orbital LV.
That's right, but a company here called Gilmour Space Technologies is planning to build the hybrid ERIS launch vehicle with first launch in 2020.
NZ Herald article on the launch delay. It has an interview with Beck who gives some more information on the triboelectrification criteria.
"If the cloud is below -10C there's a possibility of ice particles and if we travel through that cloud at greater than 3000 feet per second then we can generate a static charge and that's enough to cause damage to the electronics of the vehicle," he said.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11861622
-
Jeff Foust @jeff_foust 38s38 seconds ago
Jeff Foust Retweeted Rocket Lab
Spoke with Rocket Lab’s Peter Beck earlier today. Optimistic weather will be good for today’s launch; no technical issues with the vehicle.
https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/867153780286124033 (https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/867153780286124033)
-
The live feed is great in 540 but awful in 1080. Trans- Pacific data bottleneck:-
https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/867154521050329088?s=09
-
Yes - our broadband is a bit slow...
-
The live feed is great in 540 but awful in 1080. Trans- Pacific data bottleneck:-
https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/867154521050329088?s=09
Could you point me to this live stream? That link only takes me to a flight animation posted by RocketLab's Twitter feed.
-
Launch Animation.
"Rocket Lab's goal is to make space accessible using our Electron launch vehicle #ItsaTest"
https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/867154521050329088
-
26 minutes to opening of NOTAM window, but reports indicate that launch window opens at 1 pm local, which is 56 minutes away. LOX loading should have started over one hour ago if that's the case, at 11 am local.
-
Jeff Foust (@jeff_foust) tweeted at 11:02 AM on Wed, May 24, 2017:
Spoke with Rocket Lab’s Peter Beck earlier today. Optimistic weather will be good for today’s launch; no technical… https://t.co/sUoLJhPz78
The latest rain forecast weather map doesn't look good for today, very patchy. Thursday looks better and Friday looks to be perfect.
-
I wonder how visible this will be from Napier, down at the south end of Hawke's Bay. Spent a lovely week there last month, just by bad luck I might have missed out on some space tourism!
-
A longer version of the tweet animation video posted on Youtube. Only 360p though.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-XoApuyzTc
-
10 minutes to opening of NOTAM window.
-
Rocket Lab official live stream. Currently offline.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJXwjoDBE4o
-
Weather is 15.8 C with winds gusting to 17.4 km/h.
-
NOTAM window is open. 30 minutes to launch window opening.
-
Latest from the Hawke's Bay Gazette: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/hawkes-bay-today/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503462&objectid=11862153
Weather doesn't look good but some interesting details on the support/range infrastructure.
-
10 minutes from opening of launch window. Twitter silent. 23 people waiting on the Youtube feed!
-
https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/867183126488809476
-
A Tweet!
Launch preparations progressing well. #ItsaTest
https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/867183126488809476
Added video.
-
Beautiful view of the launch complex from a drone...
(From a video in the most recent tweet)
-
Launch window is now open.
-
Helicopter (drone?) shot of the pad up on twitter: https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/867183126488809476.
This could rival Tanegashima for picturesque launch sites!
-
Five minutes into window. I've posted the drone video in my post above, in case you missed it.
-
10 minutes into window. 47 people waiting on Youtube.
-
They just ended the livestream..
-
New Youtube link. Currently offline.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBEQWSqoeFc
-
20 minutes into launch window.
-
Youtube link has died again! It has been made private.
-
Youtube link has died again!
They've already said they weren't livestreaming the launch, and I can totally understand why.
-
30 minutes into launch window.
-
40 minutes into launch window.
-
50 minutes into launch window. Twitter is silent.
-
...you do realise they said any time between 1 and 5pm, right?
-
Some locals trying to catch the launch!
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/hawkes-bay-today/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503462&objectid=11862153
-
1 hour into launch window.
-
Any news on the live-stream were they just testing it out or are they going to stream the launch when it happens?
-
Any news on the live-stream were they just testing it out or are they going to stream the launch when it happens?
There's a Rocket Lab official Youtube livestream, but it is private only. Presumably, this is to allow Rocketlab's customers and employees around the world to watch the launch. Us plebs get a tweet every now and again.
-
Apparently this is a livestream from 30 klicks away. Though at this point it looks mostly like static: https://www.facebook.com/wairoadistrictcouncil/videos/666384696879159/
-
1 hour 15 minutes into launch window.
-
SCRUB per Twitter feed.
-
Scrub!
Launch scrubbed for the day due to triboelectrification. Weather set to worsen throughout the day. Will attempt again tomorrow! #ItsaTest
https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/867203883814100992
-
Web site update.
https://www.rocketlabusa.com/latest/its-a-test-live-news-updates-4/
Rocket Lab Testing Update ― 24 May 2017
Rocket Lab scrubs test launch attempt from Launch Complex 1
Rocket Lab, an American-New Zealand aerospace company, has postponed the test launch of its Electron vehicle today due to weather conditions. The planned launch attempt will now take place on Thursday, May 25, 2017.
Peter Beck, CEO and founder of Rocket Lab, says poor weather is delaying the launch attempt of Rocket Lab’s first test rocket titled ‘It’s a Test’.
“Similar to yesterday, high altitude cloud created a risk of triboelectrification. Our team were able to fuel the vehicle and prepare it for flight, but worsening weather conditions meant we were forced to delay. We’ll have another go tomorrow. The team did a great job today, and our operations are running smoothly.
“We were targeting a 2pm launch where there was a window clear of triboelectrification, but a front quickly moved up the country and closed the window of opportunity to launch.
“We have weather scientists on site who advise us in real time about changing conditions, as well as using weather balloons and satellite data to assess if launch criteria is met.
“We’d like to thank local residents, supporters and emergency services for their patience.
“Because this is a test launch, our weather constraints are more restrictive than they will be during commercial operations. We are focussed on the best possible weather conditions for launch. This is so we can focus on testing the rocket as a priority, rather than its ability to deal with adverse weather conditions.
“Safety is Rocket Lab’s number one priority and we are following guidelines set by the FAA and NASA around weather and launch safety.”
During the test phase, it’s common for planned launches to be postponed to ensure ideal conditions. The launch attempt will now occur on Thursday, May 25, 2017.
For updates from Rocket Lab, follow us on Twitter http://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA
-
Satellite photo of launch site.
Our friends @DigitalGlobe took an image of Launch Complex 1 using WorldView-2 as it passed by! Taken from 770km (478 miles) #ItsaTest
https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/867221704799662080
-
At least the ground crew are getting lots of practice.
The only issue with trying for launches on days with less than ideal conditions is disruption they cause locals. Local road closures, emergency services being put on alert. In case of coast guard or police,patrolling sea making sure there are no vessels in exclusion zone.
-
The windiest weather in NZ tends to come in the spring and autumn, the Hawks Bay's climate is less interesting than that in many other parts of the country.
The 100 flights a year would be more dependent on how quickly they can follow one launch with another than the weather, if they can launch 7 times a week when the weather is cooperating there's probably good enough weather to launch 280 times a year.
-
RL hope of 100 launches a year would be based on multiple launch sites. It is not just weather they need to considered but loss of launch pad due to accident or natural disaster.
-
Still no NOTAMs for tomorrow. Considering the bad weather that is expected, they might be delaying the next attempt to Friday.
-
Yes - our broadband is a bit slow...
I suspected that was part of the reason they were reluctant to tie up the bandwidth. The site looks pretty isolated. Literally in the middle of nowhere. :(
That's right, but a company here called Gilmour Space Technologies is planning to build the hybrid ERIS launch vehicle with first launch in 2020.
Thanks for that. I've not heard of them before. Perspex and HTP sounds quite robust, either pressure stabilized or with a steam driven turbopump.
NZ Herald article on the launch delay. It has an interview with Beck who gives some more information on the triboelectrification criteria.
"If the cloud is below -10C there's a possibility of ice particles and if we travel through that cloud at greater than 3000 feet per second then we can generate a static charge and that's enough to cause damage to the electronics of the vehicle," he said.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11861622
People often forget that about half the Shuttle scrubs were due to weather. Since this is there very first launch ever it makes sense to wait a bit longer unless they're sure of a long enough period of clear skies.
I think what's often misses is how fast high altitude winds can be, so you need to what a large patch of sky to make sure by the time you're ready some cloud is not parked right in the path of the rocket.
-
SpaceNews report: http://spacenews.com/rocket-lab-waits-out-weather-delays/ (http://spacenews.com/rocket-lab-waits-out-weather-delays/)
It has more quotes from Peter Beck, including:
The company has faced some criticism for lack of coverage of the launch. There are no nearby public viewing areas, and the company elected not to provide a live webcast. “We’re groaning at the seams for bandwidth with our own telemetry and equipment,” he said.
“As much as I’d like to livestream this one, I just wanted the team, without that additional pressure, get on with their jobs,” he said, acknowledging that the lack of a webcast was the “number one asked question” about the flight. Beck said that future Electron launches would be webcast.
-
Yesterday, we had to hold at T-12 minutes due to the weather closing in. Trying again today! #ItsaTest
https://twitter.com/rocketlabusa/status/867466459600924679 (https://twitter.com/rocketlabusa/status/867466459600924679)
-
It's a nice day out there.
https://www.google.co.nz/search?client=opera&q=weather+rotorua&sourceid=opera&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8#q=weather+hastings
-
NOTAM #: B2408/17 Class: International Start Date UTC: 05/25/2017 0030 End Date UTC: 05/25/2017 0530 Status: Active
B2408/17 NOTAMN
Q) NZXX/QRDCA/IV/BO /W /000/999/4008S17813E071
A) NZZC NZZO B) 1705250030 C) 1705250530
E) DANGER AREA NZD492 (MAHIA, HAWKE'S BAY) ACT.
REF AIP SUP 67/17
F) SFC G) FL999
(missing the human-readable sections, but same danger area and times as the previous NOTAMs)
-
There are NOTAMs for today and tomorrow!
B2427/17 (Issued for NZZC NZZO) - DANGER AREA NZD492 (MAHIA, HAWKE'S BAY) ACT.
REF AIP SUP 67/17. SFC - FL999, 26 MAY 00:30 2017 UNTIL 26 MAY 05:30 2017. CREATED:
24 MAY 22:27 2017
B2408/17 (Issued for NZZC NZZO) - DANGER AREA NZD492 (MAHIA, HAWKE'S BAY) ACT.
REF AIP SUP 67/17. SFC - FL999, 25 MAY 00:30 2017 UNTIL 25 MAY 05:30 2017. CREATED:
24 MAY 16:09 2017
-
While I hope they go earlier my instinct is they will sit tight for Friday. Looking for nearly perfect weather. That way if something does go wrong they can discount weather.
IIRC new LV designs still have a 50/50 chance of failure on the first launch, although obviously I'm sure they will have studied all previous launch failure reports to see what they can avoid.
The next few days will be very exciting.
-
Hawke's Bay article. They say you can see the rocket on the pad with binoculars. The location is Blucks Pit, Nuhaka. That is about 27 km from the launch site.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/hawkes-bay-today/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503462&objectid=11862446
-
Weather is currently 12.6 C with winds gusting to 31.1 km/h. There's a 47% chance of rain now, decreasing to about 30% at the end of the day. Chance of rain for tomorrow afternoon is only about 5%.
-
Hawke's Bay article. They say you can see the rocket on the pad with binoculars. The location is Blucks Pit, Nuhaka. That is about 27 km from the launch site.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/hawkes-bay-today/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503462&objectid=11862446
OK These people out watching are as hard core rocket enthusiasts as any of us.
Good for them! Best of luck!
Somebody went to a good deal of trouble to set this up with the flags and the porta-potty and the shade tent.
-
Steven Pietrobon, what weather station is that forecast from? The one's I can find for Napier Wairoa and Gisborne look a lot better.
-
Why black?
"Why a black rocket? Carbon composite materials are black! Paint is heavy & adds another process. Plus, doesn't it look beautiful! #ItsaTest"
https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/867523393624522753
-
Steven Pietrobon, what weather station is that forecast from? The one's I can find for Napier and Gisborne look a lot better.
I used this link. This is at 39.11 °S, 177.92 °E, which is about 17.5 km from the launch site. That appears to be the closest station to the launch site.
https://www.wunderground.com/cgi-bin/findweather/getForecast?query=pws:IHKBMAHI2
-
http://www.metservice.com/maps-radar/rain-radar/gisborne-hawkes-bay
-
Here are some screen grabs from Blucks Pit from yesterday. Unfortunately, the camera operator suffers from VVS (Vertical Video Syndrome).
-
Five minutes from opening of NOTAM window.
-
NOTAM window open (12:30 pm local time). The nominal launch window is 1 to 5 pm. Rocket Lab could launch at any time during then.
-
10 minutes from opening of launch window. New tweet!
Day progressing well. #ItsaTest
https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/867543004705202176
-
Launch window is now open.
-
10 minutes into launch window.
-
It's a long launch window, so let's keep this on updates as a lot of people have this thread on notification (including myself). We can work out how long we're into the window via the start of it :)
-
On the Reddit thread michaelcpg (who has a friend in the government that gives the go ahead for launches) says they called a hold. That was 20 minutes ago.
https://www.reddit.com/r/RocketLab/comments/6cmfj2/its_a_test_launch_attempt_1_23may17/
Sorry about the time into window posts. I had no idea that they were annoying people.
-
Video from Wairoa District Council. They've had a number of requests to do a live stream, but the weather is not favourable today.
https://www.facebook.com/wairoadistrictcouncil/videos/vb.254112204773079/666819643502331/?type=2&theater
-
As it has been for most of the North Island. Auckland International Airport operations have been effected by bad fog, too. Thanks to Steve for his excellent work.
-
Hawke's Bay report.
Weather poor but rocket launch still possible
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/hawkes-bay-today/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503462&objectid=11863044
-
Launch success!
Rocket LabVerified account @RocketLabUSA 18s18 seconds ago
Made it to space. Team delighted. More to follow! #ItsaTest
https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/867598469581504512
-
Hawkes Bay article.
Rocket lift-off creates history
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/hawkes-bay-today/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503462&objectid=11863177
-
Wairoa District Council
Wairoa District Council was unable to take video of the test launch this afternoon, but we have confirmation that lift-off was around 4.20pm.
https://www.facebook.com/wairoadistrictcouncil/photos/a.255911127926520.1073741828.254112204773079/666868003497495/?type=3&theater
-
Anyone heard if Rocket Labs themselves will be providing at least Engineering footage of the launch for new service purposes?
-
Anyone heard if Rocket Labs themselves will be providing at least Engineering footage of the launch for new service purposes?
Of course they will. See the twitter link a few posts above mine. More is coming, I'm sure.
-
Here's that launch video from the tweet.
-
Anyone heard if Rocket Labs themselves will be providing at least Engineering footage of the launch for new service purposes?
Of course they will. See the twitter link a few posts above mine. More is coming, I'm sure.
I have a radio interview to do about it in an hour - this feed has been valuable as other sources are rare!
-
Launch success!
Rocket LabVerified account @RocketLabUSA 18s18 seconds ago
Made it to space. Team delighted. More to follow! #ItsaTest
https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/867598469581504512
Did they reach the target orbit???
-
Screen grabs! Sorry, its VVS.
-
Anyone heard if Rocket Labs themselves will be providing at least Engineering footage of the launch for new service purposes?
Of course they will. See the twitter link a few posts above mine. More is coming, I'm sure.
I have a radio interview to do about it in an hour - this feed has been valuable as other sources are rare!
Don't forget to mention Vector in the same breath - NOT!
-
Launch at 16:20, tweet at 16:29. Nominal SECO T+7m30s. Good sign?
-
NZ Herald article.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11862250
-
Launch success!
Rocket LabVerified account @RocketLabUSA 18s18 seconds ago
Made it to space. Team delighted. More to follow! #ItsaTest
https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/867598469581504512
Did they reach the target orbit???
That's what I'm wondering too... I mean, technically the second Falcon 1 launch "made it to space", but it still failed. If they hit their target orbit (or even made orbit at all!) that's pretty impressive for a first launch. Either way, congrats to their team and I look forward to watching them grow!
-
Launch at 16:20, tweet at 16:29. Nominal SECO T+7m30s. Good sign?
I would say so. That implies a good first stage burn, staging, and several minutes of upper stage burn. Even if they did not reach orbit, that is VERY impressive for a first launch for any organization.
-
NZ Herald article.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11862250
The article says it reached orbit...
The 17m tall rocket - with a silver fern on its nose and a US flag near its tail - lifted slowly from the launch pad before accelerating to speeds of more than 27,000kph to slip Earth's gravity and reach orbit during the two-and-a-half minute flight into orbit.
-
I don't trust non-space journalists to understand the difference between space and orbit.
-
The article says it reached orbit...
The 17m tall rocket - with a silver fern on its nose and a US flag near its tail - lifted slowly from the launch pad before accelerating to speeds of more than 27,000kph to slip Earth's gravity and reach orbit during the two-and-a-half minute flight into orbit.
Article also says the flight took 2.5 minutes! From the screen grabs, the launch time was pretty close to 16:20 local time, leaving only 40 minutes left in the window.
-
The 17m tall rocket - with a silver fern on its nose and a US flag near its tail - lifted slowly from the launch pad before accelerating to speeds of more than 27,000kph to slip Earth's gravity and reach orbit during the two-and-a-half minute flight into orbit.
2m30s flight to orbit... :P
-
Latest from Twitter-
Emily Calandrelli @TheSpaceGal
For those asking, not sure if it went orbital. Survived max Q. Vid feed cut out shortly after.
-
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/hawkes-bay-today/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503462&objectid=11863177
Rocket Lab's electron rocket launches off Mahia Peninsula at about 4.24pm today. Photo Warren Buckland
-
I don't trust non-space journalists to understand the difference between space and orbit.
Especially given the reference to a "two-and-a-half minute flight into orbit"
Congratulations to Rocket Lab in any case, getting to the Karman line on the first flight would already be an impressive accomplishment regardless of what happened after that.
-
The first stage burn is 2.5 minutes.
-
Latest from Twitter-
Emily Calandrelli @TheSpaceGal
For those asking, not sure if it went orbital. Survived max Q. Vid feed cut out shortly after.
I'm glad that someone who knows what they're talking about was there.
She posted another video where the video seems to cut out just after MECO. :-X
-
Latest from Twitter-
Emily Calandrelli @TheSpaceGal
For those asking, not sure if it went orbital. Survived max Q. Vid feed cut out shortly after.
Her latest video shows MECO with a 15°/s roll. Then feed cuts at stage separation.
Take that what you will. Maybe a F1 flight 3...
-
Nice, congratulations to Rocket Lab and look forward to seeing more from them.
-
Here's the new video.
https://twitter.com/TheSpaceGal/status/867608512196526080
-
Screen grabs.
Speed is 6 m/s and 0.2 km altitude?
-
Latest from Twitter-
Emily Calandrelli @TheSpaceGal
For those asking, not sure if it went orbital. Survived max Q. Vid feed cut out shortly after.
Her latest video shows MECO with a 15°/s roll. Then feed cuts at stage separation.
Take that what you will. Maybe a F1 flight 3...
"Made it to space" as opposed to "made it to orbit".
Still though. very nice.
-
Official video!
Rocket LabVerified account @RocketLabUSA 1m1 minute ago
#ItsaTest
https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/867612663764762624
-
Screen Grabs. Launch time was 16:20:00 local.
-
Main umbilical seemed to be just 'yanked out' by the launch?!
-
Main umbilical seemed to be just 'yanked out' by the launch?!
It looks to me like there's a cable that goes taut when the larger umbilical still has some slack.
-
Main umbilical seemed to be just 'yanked out' by the launch?!
It looks to me like there's a cable that goes taut when the larger umbilical still has some slack.
It drops clear - see the video:-
https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/867612663764762624?s=09
-
New launch video.
https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/867619797021859840
-
Screen grabs.
-
Rocket Lab press release. Vehicle failed to reach orbit. :-(
https://www.rocketlabusa.com/latest/rocket-lab-successfully-makes-it-to-space-2/
Rocket Lab broke new ground today when its Electron rocket reached space at 16:23 NZST.
Electron lifted-off at 16:20 NZST from Rocket Lab Launch Complex 1 on the Mahia Peninsula in New Zealand. It was the first orbital-class rocket launched from from a private launch site in the world.
“It has been an incredible day and I’m immensely proud of our talented team,” said Peter Beck, CEO and founder of Rocket Lab. “We’re one of a few companies to ever develop a rocket from scratch and we did it in under four years. We’ve worked tirelessly to get to this point. We’ve developed everything in house, built the world’s first private orbital launch range, and we’ve done it with a small team.
“It was a great flight. We had a great first stage burn, stage separation, second stage ignition and fairing separation. We didn’t quite reach orbit and we’ll be investigating why, however reaching space in our first test puts us in an incredibly strong position to accelerate the commercial phase of our programme, deliver our customers to orbit and make space open for business,” says Beck.
Over the coming weeks, Rocket Lab’s engineers in Los Angeles and Auckland, New Zealand will work through the 25,000 data channels that were collected during. The results will inform measures taken to optimize the vehicle.
“We have learnt so much through this test launch and will learn even more in the weeks to come. We’re committed to making space accessible and this is a phenomenal milestone in that journey. The applications doing this will open up are endless. Known applications include improved weather reporting, Internet from space, natural disaster prediction, up-to-date maritime data as well as search and rescue services,” says Beck.
Today’s launch was the first of three test flights scheduled for this year. Rocket Lab will target getting to orbit on the second test and look to maximize the payload the rocket can carry.
At full production, Rocket Lab expects to launch more than 50 times a year, and is regulated to launch up to 120 times a year. In comparison, there were 22 launches last year from the United States, and 82 internationally.
Rocket Lab’s commercial phase will see Electron fly already-signed customers including NASA, Spire, Planet, Moon Express and Spaceflight.
-
Launch photo.
-
Still really impressive for a first attempt. Many congratulations to RocketLabs, definitely ahead of the small sat pack now :)
-
Electron rocket first flight https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxg4CHXRDy0
-
Although Electron failed to reach orbit, the fact that it reached space on its first flight is quite impressive. Let's remind that the first Falcon 1 rocket failed to reach space in 2006.
-
We had a great first stage burn, stage separation, second stage ignition and fairing separation.
That is quite an impressive first flight.
-
Congratulations.
Maybe not 100% successful but far from a failure.
-
Man, second stage ignition and fairing sep - that's a lot to go right on a first orbital attempt! Sure, we could always wish for more, but I think this was a fantastic first step for Rocket Lab.
Congratulations to everyone involved in today's launch, and I look forward to the next one! (after a thorough failure investigation, of course)
-
GO GET-UM' KIWI's!!
Rocket Labs.... (http://"https://www.rocketlabusa.com/latest/rocket-lab-successfully-makes-it-to-space-2/")
Rocket Lab broke new ground today when its Electron rocket reached space at 16:23 NZST.
Electron lifted-off at 16:20 NZST from Rocket Lab Launch Complex 1 on the Mahia Peninsula in New Zealand. It was the first orbital-class rocket launched from from a private launch site in the world.
It has been an incredible day and Im immensely proud of our talented team, said Peter Beck, CEO and founder of Rocket Lab. Were one of a few companies to ever develop a rocket from scratch and we did it in under four years. Weve worked tirelessly to get to this point. Weve developed everything in house, built the worlds first private orbital launch range, and weve done it with a small team.
It was a great flight. We had a great first stage burn, stage separation, second stage ignition and fairing separation. We didnt quite reach orbit and well be investigating why, however reaching space in our first test puts us in an incredibly strong position to accelerate the commercial phase of our programme, deliver our customers to orbit and make space open for business, says Beck.
Over the coming weeks, Rocket Labs engineers in Los Angeles and Auckland, New Zealand will work through the 25,000 data channels that were collected during. The results will inform measures taken to optimize the vehicle.
We have learnt so much through this test launch and will learn even more in the weeks to come. Were committed to making space accessible and this is a phenomenal milestone in that journey. The applications doing this will open up are endless. Known applications include improved weather reporting, Internet from space, natural disaster prediction, up-to-date maritime data as well as search and rescue services, says Beck.
Todays launch was the first of three test flights scheduled for this year. Rocket Lab will target getting to orbit on the second test and look to maximize the payload the rocket can carry.
At full production, Rocket Lab expects to launch more than 50 times a year, and is regulated to launch up to 120 times a year. In comparison, there were 22 launches last year from the United States, and 82 internationally.
Rocket Labs commercial phase will see Electron fly already-signed customers including NASA, Spire, Planet, Moon Express and Spaceflight.
-
Congrats - good progress!
BBC News article:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-39971843
-
Man, second stage ignition and fairing sep - that's a lot to go right on a first orbital attempt! Sure, we could always wish for more, but I think this was a fantastic first step for Rocket Lab.
Congratulations to everyone involved in today's launch, and I look forward to the next one! (after a thorough failure investigation, of course)
Indeed.
A flight like this touches most of the major stumbling points, exercises all the major systems required for a successful flight. Retires a huge amount of risk over the entire vehicle. Whatever didn't work, I'd guess they're likely to have telemetry to get a root cause. This is worth much more than if it had failed a few seconds into the flight.
-
The spin rate at stage separation is the obvious symptom, but that occurred/started during first stage burn, correct?
-
Great job for a first try and clearly did better than what SpaceX managed on their very first attempt :)
Now about that launch video... SpaceX has showed their oopsies (well, except for the F9R one, but we have third party video of that). You should too. If you want to wait until success to manage the moronic mainstream press, that's okay - just don't hide the videos of the learning curve forever.
-
The spin rate at stage separation is the obvious symptom, but that occurred/started during first stage burn, correct?
Yup, one of the videos shows the spin before MECO.
It's possibly they had stage 1 underperformance and stage 2 couldn't make it.
-
Chris Gebhardt's article updated now they've launched:
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/05/rocket-labs-electron-inaugural-flight-new-zealand/
Many thanks to Steven for really keeping a really close eye on news for this maiden flight!
-
Congrats to RocketLab on a great first attempt! It looks like they have an excellent chance of making it to orbit in the next one or two flights.
-
Thanks to Stephen for the coverage, and here's looking forward to the next attempt!
-
Chris Gebhardt's article updated now they've launched:
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/05/rocket-labs-electron-inaugural-flight-new-zealand/
Many thanks to Steven for really keeping a really close eye on news for this maiden flight!
Slight editing alteration for that article Chris (or Chris!) - times are NZST (NZ Standard Time) at the moment, not NZDT. NZST is UTC+12, DT is UTC+13.
-
That is excellent for the maiden launch from a new launch site. Not quite there yet, but a massive achievement nonetheless.
-
As a New Zealander, it's beyond awesome to watch a rocket reach space from our shores! Like others have said, getting to MECO, 2nd stage sep and ignition is amazing, and further than I thought they'd be by now. Congratulations, and can't wait to see them improve!
-
Some screen grabs from the YouTube video.
-
Peter Beck is being interviewed by the AM Show on channel Three tomorrow morning. I will post a link here if there's one on their website after the interview. Though Dr Pietrobon might beat me to it! ;)
-
Congratulations RocketLab for getting to space! As others have mentioned, this reduces a lot of risk and shows that this is not a paper rocket at all!
Thanks NSF for the reporting and the collection of footage. I am sure RocketLab will put out a slick video as they seem to be pretty savvy in that department. Looking forward to it!
-
Rocket Lab
@RocketLabUSA
Space - as seen by Electron. #ItsaTest
https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/867658524087603200 (https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/867658524087603200)
-
Rocket Lab
@RocketLabUSA
Space - as seen by Electron. #ItsaTest
https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/867658524087603200 (https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/867658524087603200)
Video attached
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vE2AnwJ2Qs
The roll was way too fast to my liking during 1st stage flight and if I intrepret correctly the 2nd stage (?) tumbled quite a bit before stabilizing - and I'm not sure that's the right direction!
The engine team will have something to celebrate for, but the GNC team will have quite a bit of work to do. :-X
-
The roll was way too fast to my liking during 1st stage flight and if I intrepret correctly the 2nd stage (?) tumbled quite a bit before stabilizing - and I'm not sure that's the right direction!
The engine team will have something to celebrate for, but the GNC team will have quite a bit of work to do. :-X
Its rolling/cork screwing right from the start, not a transonic effect. Very consistent roll rate as well, but apart from that the first stage looks pretty stable.
-
A few congrats coming in from ...
Moon Express, waiting for their ride
https://twitter.com/Bob_Richards/status/867713905212182530
Chris Hadfield
https://twitter.com/Cmdr_Hadfield/status/867704625004150785
Congratulations New Zealand on the first launch! The sky is not the limit. Well done everyone @RocketLabUSA! http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11862250 …
PLD Space, a bit of a hopeful future competitor
https://twitter.com/PLD_Space/status/867711858228301825
Dava Newman
https://twitter.com/DavaExplorer/status/867663564865142785
-
And some quotes from Peter Beck from a phone interview couple hours ago
http://spacenews.com/rocket-lab-reaches-space-but-not-orbit-on-first-electron-launch/
The launch carried only a test payload, including instrumentation to collect data on the launch environment. “It’ll probably take us a couple of months to work through the data,” he said in the interview, before performing another launch. That second Electron vehicle, he said, is already built and sitting in the company’s factory.
“There were a lot of firsts today: building the range and having all that infrastructure work, a great first stage burn,” he said. “We validated and ticked off an awful lot today.”
Rocket Lab is planning three test launches of the Electron before beginning commercial flights. Beck said in a May 23 interview that the company was considering flying some commercial payloads on those later test flights, depending on the performance of the vehicle and instrumentation needs.
-
Congrats to Rocket Lab for getting close on the first attempt!
The roll of the first stage was odd. It was seemingly not some uncompensated torque, since it was neither accelerating nor decelerating. That means the net torque was near zero, once it acquired its initial rotation. There was no sense, at least to me, of a rocket struggling to remain stable in roll while fighting some external torque. Instead it looked like it was stably driving itself to that particular roll rate, for some reason that only the guidance system knows for sure. It's almost as if it did an intentional roll to the the right heading, and after that zero'd the derivative of the roll rate, instead of the roll rate itself.
-
I like when the 1S flame make similar shape as F9 (but smaller). Roll rate was too high(?), and lot of attitude movement during staging. How long was the 2S powered flight before it starts tumbling (freeze frames)?
-
Congratulations to them that's a pretty impressive achievement for a first test launch even if it didn't quite achieve all its goals.
-
Congratulations Rocket Lab! A great success for a first flight. Looking forward to their next launch as I am confident they will learn a lot from this one.
Nice to see one of the many small sat launch companies achieve something significant. Will be interesting to see if they can ramp up to the cadence they project.
-
Didn't the Falcon 1 have a similar roll problem in one of its first flights? How was that solved?
-
Congrats! This rocket proved out some significant tech and other achievements. Carbon composite LOX tanks on an Orbital launcher. All carbon composite structure of first stage. Electric pump driven engines whose capability (ISP) can rival that of the more complex SC RP1 engines. Management and operation of a private orbital space launch range and site.
Welded aluminum days are numbered in rocket bodies. To be replaced by the stronger and lighter carbon composites structures/tanks.
-
Congrats! This rocket proved out some significant tech and other achievements....
.. plus largely additive manufactured engines
EDIT: I think there is a good article to be written for a side by side comparison with Falcon 1, to illustrate how much technology has actually come forward in the last 10 years. People keep saying that rocketry is not changing and it's all same old same old, but this one is a pretty substantial set of new developments.
-
@2:06 or so in the video, ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vE2AnwJ2Qs ) , there seems to be a dramatic throttle back, which persists for some seconds.
I wonder if this is intentional, or an indication of battery fade in the pumps.
Could the rotation of the first stage be to load level over the batteries/ESCs/motors?
Not something you care about with a conventional turbopump, but AIUI gimballing won't take out all of the second order thrust differentials.
-
It looks like roll started at liftoff.
-
Congrats from Vector Space CEO:
Jim Cantrell @jamesncantrell 11s12 seconds ago
Jim Cantrell Retweeted Rocket Lab
Congratulations to Peyer [sic] Beck and @RocketLabUSA on a success and job well done
https://twitter.com/jamesncantrell/status/867759538623045632 (https://twitter.com/jamesncantrell/status/867759538623045632)
Edit to add:
VECTOR @vectorspacesys 44s44 seconds ago
Congrats to Rocket Lab on the launch! We know how tough it is to build and fly these rockets. Together we'll change how space is accessed!
https://twitter.com/vectorspacesys/status/867762690592317441 (https://twitter.com/vectorspacesys/status/867762690592317441)
-
Didn't the Falcon 1 have a similar roll problem in one of its first flights? How was that solved?
Yes, in the 2nd flight during the second stage. It was an oscillation rather than a simple roll.
-
Congrats! This rocket proved out some significant tech and other achievements....
.. plus largely additive manufactured engines
EDIT: I think there is a good article to be written for a side by side comparison with Falcon 1, to illustrate how much technology has actually come forward in the last 10 years. People keep saying that rocketry is not changing and it's all same old same old, but this one is a pretty substantial set of new developments.
Could RocketLab become the next gen SpaceX? In that they could in 10 years develop an all carbon composite Lifting Body 1st stage and Lifting Body US for a fully reusable small/medium launcher?
They have all the pieces except the Lifting body tech experience. Maybe a partnering with SNC to create an all carbon composite fully reusable personnel and cargo vehicle to LEO. Potentially with a 24 hr turnaround and very very low per launch price <$10M. Say a personnel to LEO seat price of $1.5M.
As far as carbon composite cryo tanks, Boeing's new spaceplane design also uses carbon composites. So metal rocket structures for small LV's at least has become an obsolete design. This with other tech advances puts RocketLab at the forefront of the tech innovations in LV design. With others now following in their footsteps.
-
Didn't the Falcon 1 have a similar roll problem in one of its first flights? How was that solved?
I think that was an upper stage of an early Falcon 9 flight, caused by the failure of the gas generator exhaust vectoring system. For Electron they should have been able to control roll by vectoring the first stage engines.
-
Could RocketLab become the next gen SpaceX? In that they could in 10 years develop an all carbon composite Lifting Body 1st stage and Lifting Body US for a fully reusable small/medium launcher?
Hey boss, we found these engines are actually really easy to print, and accidentally did 11000, what do you want to do with them?
.
(not an actual quote)
-
Didn't the Falcon 1 have a similar roll problem in one of its first flights? How was that solved?
I think that was an upper stage of an early Falcon 9 flight, caused by the failure of the gas generator exhaust vectoring system. For Electron they should have been able to control roll by vectoring the first stage engines.
and lack of baffles to keep sloshing of fuel down...
jb
-
So, the first real orbital attempt in this sector and overall they have to be very happy with that outcome. Lots of good stuff, a few key issues, but the hidden one of power to deliver orbital dV is the crucial issue to be solved. I would not be surprised to see the battery pack section grow in length.
This is sub-orbital, so where/when will the debris return?
-
(fan) The traditional congratulatory post: Congrats to RocketLab for showing that electric pumps work, and for generally running a great launch campaign. Getting as far as RL did on the first try? Pretty impressive. I expect even more progress next time. And I'm sure there will be a next time! This is great news for space in general as well as for RL.
Thanks to Steven and all the other intrepid NSF folk for the updates. You guys rock! Also those folks at the viewing location are just charming! Go Kiwis!
(mod) We didn't separate this thread into Update/Discussion but if it's general commentary please consider using the general RL thread. Thanks!
-
Kudos to RocketLab !!
-
Did umbilical getting hung up on release impart the roll rate apparent at liftoff?
-
Rocketlab released a new promo video on the launch.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VA_8HPsua0c&ab_channel=RocketLab (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VA_8HPsua0c&ab_channel=RocketLab)
-
Good work RocketLab and Electron, congratulations!
How close did Electron come to making orbital velocity?
-
@2:06 or so in the video, there seems to be a dramatic throttle back, which persists for some seconds.
I wonder if this is intentional, or an indication of battery fade in the pumps.
I don't think this is a throttleback, it has just reached the altitude where there is no more atmospheric oxygen to support continued combustion in the fuel-rich exhaust plume. You see the same thing in every F9 flight. Except on CRS-7 when the lox leak on the second stage brightened up the plume before the total failure.
You can still see the gray plume a little bit against the clouds but it is difficult because the video is heavily compressed.
-
Good work RocketLab and Electron, congratulations!
How close did Electron come to making orbital velocity?
According to Jeff Foust, they've yet to release any details on the trajectory of this flight.
https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/867765190925979648 (https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/867765190925979648)
Jeff Foust
@jeff_foust
Replying to @Jon_Berkemeyer
The company has not disclosed trajectory details.
-
Chris Gebhardt's article updated now they've launched:
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/05/rocket-labs-electron-inaugural-flight-new-zealand/
Many thanks to Steven for really keeping a really close eye on news for this maiden flight!
Its a minor point but the section on the 2009 Altea 1 launch says it was launched on 20 Nov.
This is incorrect.
The video of the Altea-1 launch on the rocketlabs webpage says it was launched on 30 Nov, 2009
and that is consistent with the reports in 2009, which also say launched 30 Nov 2009.
I'll also echo Chris's thanks to Steven.
Carl
-
Here is to a quick identification and resolution of the problem.
H/W
Quality based - devising a test to protect against the problem. Also add code to mitigate the problem if possible if the problem occurs again in flight.
Design based - redesign to remove failure mode. Maybe add code to mitigate the problem if possible if the problem occurs again in flight. This is also probably the longest duration case before a next flight.
S/W
Flight control model error - Update flight control model and the flight control software. This would probably be done whether there was a problem or not with the model causing the flight results because until now there was no real flight data.
Software bug - fix bug!
-
Congrats on the test flight, keep at it! :)
-
Congrats to RocketLab and thanks to Steven. "It's a Test" went a long way, moving the company forward. Anxiously awaiting the details of what went right and not-so-right!
-
Chris Gebhardt's article updated now they've launched:
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/05/rocket-labs-electron-inaugural-flight-new-zealand/
Many thanks to Steven for really keeping a really close eye on news for this maiden flight!
Its a minor point but the section on the 2009 Altea 1 launch says it was launched on 20 Nov.
This is incorrect.
The video of the Altea-1 launch on the rocketlabs webpage says it was launched on 30 Nov, 2009
and that is consistent with the reports in 2009, which also say launched 30 Nov 2009.
I'll also echo Chris's thanks to Steven.
Carl
Great article, I hadn't kept up on RocketLab and I feel like this brought me back up to speed.
I was bemused, though, by the description of the engines has having a specific impulse of "300 sec (5 min)". In 40 years in this business I've never seen specific impulse given in minutes. Are we going to start converting velocities to furlongs/fortnight? :-)
-
@2:06 or so in the video, ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vE2AnwJ2Qs ) , there seems to be a dramatic throttle back, which persists for some seconds.
I wonder if this is intentional, or an indication of battery fade in the pumps.
Could the rotation of the first stage be to load level over the batteries/ESCs/motors?
Not something you care about with a conventional turbopump, but AIUI gimballing won't take out all of the second order thrust differentials.
So that's what Middle Earth looks like from space...
-
Peter Beck interview on the AM Show on Three:
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2017/05/new-zealand-officially-joins-the-space-race-peter-beck-full-interview.html
And other videos: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VA_8HPsua0c
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vE2AnwJ2Qs
Did anyone else spot the burst of gas?
At 1:52 there is a sudden burst on the left of the engine bay, maybe one or more engines let go?
-
How much of an impact on performance would all that frozen condensation have? Water isn't light and it carried that for quite a ways.
Sent from my LGL44VL using Tapatalk
-
How much of an impact on performance would all that frozen condensation have? Water isn't light and it carried that for quite a ways.
Maybe part of the reason they didn't reach their target?
-
Calling a failure a success. Is this what they call "fake news"? I wish we could start with the facts (a decent liftoff and climb out, etc., by a very innovative rocket, but a failed orbital attempt). The facts, limited though they are by Rocket Lab's partial news blackout in this case, are interesting enough, in my opinion.
"ALASKA AEROSPACE CORPORATION CONGRATULATES ROCKET LAB ON SUCCESSFUL LAUNCH OF THE NEW ELECTRON ROCKET"
http://akaerospace.com/news/alaska-aerospace-corporation-congratulates-rocket-lab-successful-launch-new-electron-rocket
"Test rocket makes successful launch into space from New Zealand"
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/25/test-rocket-makes-successful-launch-space-new-zealand/
- Ed Kyle
-
Hanging a rocket by a rope and igniting the engine is considered a launch by the FAA, and if you're conducting a test the only way to fail is to not launch :)
-
Calling a failure a success. Is this what they call "fake news"? I wish we could start with the facts (a good liftoff and climb out, etc., by a very innovative rocket). The facts, limited though they are by Rocket Lab's partial news blackout in this case, are interesting enough, in my opinion.
"ALASKA AEROSPACE CORPORATION CONGRATULATES ROCKET LAB ON SUCCESSFUL LAUNCH OF THE NEW ELECTRON ROCKET"
http://akaerospace.com/news/alaska-aerospace-corporation-congratulates-rocket-lab-successful-launch-new-electron-rocket
"Test rocket makes successful launch into space from New Zealand"
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/25/test-rocket-makes-successful-launch-space-new-zealand/
- Ed Kyle
Most people don't see this as binary success/failure as you do. This was going to be classed as a failure in your book no matter what happened. You need to understand that before you do any kind of writing about this kind of flight.
-
Most people don't see this as binary success/failure as you do. This was going to be classed as a failure in your book no matter what happened.
If it reached an orbit generally as planned, I would have logged it a success. Just because it failed doesn't make it a "failure", but please don't write a headline calling it a "success".
- Ed Kyle
-
I think saying it was "a successful test" instead of "a successful launch" is more honest.
-
I guess ideally there are some success criteria... if it blew up on the pad it probably wouldn't even be a successful test, despite the fact that even such a disastrous outcome could be quite informative etc.
Certainly this must qualify as at least somewhat successful... max q, stage sep, s2 ignition, fairing sep etc.
-
Is a "near miss" a hit?
-
Most people don't see this as binary success/failure as you do. This was going to be classed as a failure in your book no matter what happened.
If it reached an orbit generally as planned, I would have logged it a success. Just because it failed doesn't make it a "failure", but please don't write a headline calling it a "success".
- Ed Kyle
So your threshold isn't 100% either. "Generally as planned"... what if the orbit was 20 miles too low? What if it lasted only 2 days? 3 hours?
Given that there was no commercial payload, this was successful just like an experimental static fire can be successful. The goals were to test as many things as possible and get as far as possible.
So it didn't explode, it flew for full duration S1, separated, and probably spiraled into oblivion. As a first-time launcher, I'd have signed up for that outcome if that was an option.
Calling it a failure is way more misleading.
-
It got all the way through successful second stage ignition and fairing sep. that's better than I expected for a first launch. I'm not super excited about small launchers, especially expendable ones, and I think RocketLab is overvalued, but I definitely look on them better now than I did a week ago.
-
So your threshold isn't 100% either. "Generally as planned"... what if the orbit was 20 miles too low? What if it lasted only 2 days? 3 hours?
Given that there was no commercial payload, this was successful just like an experimental static fire can be successful. The goals were to test as many things as possible and get as far as possible.
So it didn't explode, it flew for full duration S1, separated, and probably spiraled into oblivion. As a first-time launcher, I'd have signed up for that outcome if that was an option.
Calling it a failure is way more misleading.
Agreed it did pretty good for a first launch especially one using a novel engine design.
-
Most people don't see this as binary success/failure as you do. This was going to be classed as a failure in your book no matter what happened.
If it reached an orbit generally as planned, I would have logged it a success. Just because it failed doesn't make it a "failure", but please don't write a headline calling it a "success".
- Ed Kyle
After writing about how success is not just a binary true/false, do you really think I would do that? I think you are projecting your own value judgement on me instead of understanding what I write.
But on the spectrum of total failure to total success, it certainly falls closer to the latter. They had a liftoff, full first stage flight (roll aside), staging (however imperfect), upper stage ignition, fairing separation, and several minutes of upper stage burn, and finally reaching space. That's a LOT better than what could have happened.
-
Peter Beck is being interviewed by the AM Show on channel Three tomorrow morning. I will post a link here if there's one on their website after the interview. Though Dr Pietrobon might beat me to it! ;)
Been too busy catching up on work. My head was spinning after covering this. That comes from staring at Rocketlab's twitter page for over four hours waiting for news! Finally been able to do some work and fix a bug in my own design.
As to whether this is a success or failure, as an engineer who designs and builds stuff, this flight was not a success. It was a test failure. The vehicle failed to meet its primary objective of orbiting a satellite. As a test flight though, valuable data has been gathered that should lead to the bug or bugs that caused the failure to be found and fixed. I commend Rocket Lab though for not carrying a customer satellite payload.
From the roll in the first stage, there are obvious guidance problems with the vehicle. These problems should have been found in ground simulations, where the flight avionics are tested with simulated inputs. Perhaps the tug from the umbilical imparted an unexpected roll, which the avionics was not able to correct. Not ground testing the avionics was a contributing factor in the first Ariane 5 launch failure, so even the big guys can get this wrong. Not saying this is the cause though. We'll have to wait for Rocket Lab to give that information.
-
It got all the way through successful second stage ignition and fairing sep. that's better than I expected for a first launch. I'm not super excited about small launchers, especially expendable ones, and I think RocketLab is overvalued, but I definitely look on them better now than I did a week ago.
With that, I agree. the idea of single-shot nanosat launches, at a huge per-lb cost, looks like it ignores the new price realities of medium-heavy lift.
To me, this was an innovative technology demo. Maybe this is the future of turbo performance for deep space missions. Who knows.
-
AW&ST reporting that the vehicle reached an altitude of at least 250 km.
http://aviationweek.com/space/rocket-lab-well-ahead-after-initial-launch-test
-
As to whether this is a success or failure, as an engineer who designs and builds stuff, this flight was not a success. It was a test failure. The vehicle failed to meet its primary objective of orbiting a satellite. As a test flight though, valuable data has been gathered that should lead to the bug or bugs that caused the failure to be found and fixed. I commend Rocket Lab though for not carrying a customer satellite payload.
The launch failed, but it's not a failure. Let me explain:
A mission is a success if it meets its pre-announced goals. The main goal, as specified by Rocket Lab, is three missions to qualify the launcher for commercial operation. On this scale the mission is a success, as it retired a lot of risk factors. The stretch goal was to achieve a nominal orbit, but even Rocket Labs was not expecting this (no customer payload, for example). And why have a 3 launch campaign if you are expecting it to work nominally?
Think of this in work terms. Your boss asks you for an estimate of how long something will take. You say three weeks, but tell him/her that if everything goes perfectly it could be done in one. So the company makes plans on the three week schedule. In the first week you run some tests on your handiwork and they go wrong. Is this a failure? Well, your test failed, but it's not a failure, since you were not expecting it to succeed.
So on this scale of meeting goals announced in advance, I'd rate this a success. If had reached orbit, it would be a huge success. Of course we won't really know until later, when we see if this flight told them everything they need to meet their objective of commercial service on the fourth flight.
-
It got all the way through successful second stage ignition and fairing sep. that's better than I expected for a first launch. I'm not super excited about small launchers, especially expendable ones, and I think RocketLab is overvalued, but I definitely look on them better now than I did a week ago.
With that, I agree. the idea of single-shot nanosat launches, at a huge per-lb cost, looks like it ignores the new price realities of medium-heavy lift.
To me, this was an innovative technology demo. Maybe this is the future of turbo performance for deep space missions. Who knows.
Comparing small sat LVs to Med LV is like comparing Airfreight to sea freight. The likes of DHL and FedEx seem to do OK compared to considerably cheaper and lot slower sea freight. Smallsat businesses can't afford to wait 2yrs for cheaper ride that may kick them off in last minute.
-
Except a fully reusable rocket could actually be cheaper even for a dedicated launch and with more launch opportunities. Anyway, enough said about that in this thread.
-
Most people don't see this as binary success/failure as you do. This was going to be classed as a failure in your book no matter what happened.
If it reached an orbit generally as planned, I would have logged it a success. Just because it failed doesn't make it a "failure", but please don't write a headline calling it a "success".
- Ed Kyle
After writing about how success is not just a binary true/false, do you really think I would do that? I think you are projecting your own value judgement on me instead of understanding what I write.
I was talking about the word "success" written in the headlines that I presented in my original message. I did not intend to suggest that you were using the word. Apologies for lack of clarity!
But on the spectrum of total failure to total success, it certainly falls closer to the latter. They had a liftoff, full first stage flight (roll aside), staging (however imperfect), upper stage ignition, fairing separation, and several minutes of upper stage burn, and finally reaching space. That's a LOT better than what could have happened.
Yes. Rocket Lab gained knowledge from this failed orbital attempt. It was a good test.
- Ed Kyle
-
A question, did Electron conduct a Static-fire before launch?
-
A question, did Electron conduct a Static-fire before launch?
No, but they tested the igniters.
https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/864238091472486401
-
A question, did Electron conduct a Static-fire before launch?
No, but they tested the igniters.
https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/864238091472486401
Thank you
Maybe battery-powered pumps are more reliable than common turbine pumps
-
Perhaps the tug from the umbilical imparted an unexpected roll, which the avionics was not able to correct.
Looking at this again: https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/867903552429056000
There is a bit of clockwise roll even before umbilical drops.
-
A question, did Electron conduct a Static-fire before launch?
No, but they tested the igniters.
https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/864238091472486401
Thank you
Maybe battery-powered pumps are more reliable than common turbine pumps
I was thinking about this and the combination of using an electric pump driven engine with a close to SC performance ISP (300 sec SL) is high, and a supper light weight structure of carbon composite creates a very high performer for its small size. The combination of a high PF (propellant factor [ratio of propellant to dry weight for a stage]) and a high engine ISP could give them many options for a second generation vehicle that is larger (a possible 1st stage VTHL). They have retired many technical risks as mentioned just by this first flight. And so far they have done with very light spending what seemingly larger organizations or other startups spending a lot more could not. They are in many ways similar to the start of SpaceX in their vertical integration, innovations, and concentration on the controlling of costs. It is their management team and the engineering team professionalism and focus which has gotten them this far this fast with so little actual spending.
That last is what they are truly should be congratulated on, since its this last that is the hardest thing to do for a startup.
-
Perhaps the tug from the umbilical imparted an unexpected roll, which the avionics was not able to correct.
Looking at this again: https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/867903552429056000
There is a bit of clockwise roll even before umbilical drops.
This suggests that they failed to model the rotational energy imparted by the engines rotational machinery which is oriented on the roll axis. Accelerating the flow of fluids will cause a slight roll because of the placement and orientation of the machinery. If all 9 engines are oriented in just the right way it can compound the effect. Enough that it may have overcome the ability to correct.
-
Perhaps the tug from the umbilical imparted an unexpected roll, which the avionics was not able to correct.
Looking at this again: https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/867903552429056000
There is a bit of clockwise roll even before umbilical drops.
This suggests that they failed to model the rotational energy imparted by the engines rotational machinery which is oriented on the roll axis. Accelerating the flow of fluids will cause a slight roll because of the placement and orientation of the machinery. If all 9 engines are oriented in just the right way it can compound the effect. Enough that it may have overcome the ability to correct.
Similar to F9 flight 1, I suppose. (Initial roll caused by 9 engines starting up)
-
Congrats to Rocket Lab.
My initial reaction to the launch video was "that's a lot of ice?". I definitely noticed some roll in S1 and it's interesting to read about the other factors people are discussing in this thread. My question is if this is a small sat launcher designed for 150kg payloads wouldn't the orbital performance be dramatically affected by carrying ice that high? I don't recall seeing that much ice hold onto other LVs, they usually shed any buildup at low altitudes.
Rough #s: 3in (75mm) ring of ice on 1.2m rocket over 3.3 ft (1m) of tank ~300lbs (135kg)
-
My initial reaction to the launch video was "that's a lot of ice?". I definitely noticed some roll in S1 and it's interesting to read about the other factors people are discussing in this thread. My question is if this is a small sat launcher designed for 150kg payloads wouldn't the orbital performance be dramatically affected by carrying ice that high? I don't recall seeing that much ice hold onto other LVs, they usually shed any buildup at low altitudes.
Seems to me that it is more likely to be a lower density frost, not pure ice. And extra mass on S1 has much less payload penalty than S2... not an expert but doesn't seem like a major problem to me. Could have some impact I guess.
-
And so far they have done with very light spending what seemingly larger organizations or other startups spending a lot more could not. They are in many ways similar to the start of SpaceX in their vertical integration, innovations, and concentration on the controlling of costs. It is their management team and the engineering team professionalism and focus which has gotten them this far this fast with so little actual spending.
That last is what they are truly should be congratulated on, since its this last that is the hardest thing to do for a startup.
They've raised $148M so far. That's a lot of money and I would imagine more than most/all of their competitors.
-
Perhaps the tug from the umbilical imparted an unexpected roll, which the avionics was not able to correct.
Looking at this again: https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/867903552429056000
There is a bit of clockwise roll even before umbilical drops.
This suggests that they failed to model the rotational energy imparted by the engines rotational machinery which is oriented on the roll axis. Accelerating the flow of fluids will cause a slight roll because of the placement and orientation of the machinery. If all 9 engines are oriented in just the right way it can compound the effect. Enough that it may have overcome the ability to correct.
The other less likely explanation is the small cable or wire next to umbilical. There is one that has slack, other one is taut.
-
Congrats to Rocket Lab.
My initial reaction to the launch video was "that's a lot of ice?". I definitely noticed some roll in S1 and it's interesting to read about the other factors people are discussing in this thread. My question is if this is a small sat launcher designed for 150kg payloads wouldn't the orbital performance be dramatically affected by carrying ice that high? I don't recall seeing that much ice hold onto other LVs, they usually shed any buildup at low altitudes.
Rough #s: 3in (75mm) ring of ice on 1.2m rocket over 3.3 ft (1m) of tank ~300lbs (135kg)
Judging by the video, looks like the ice detaches from the rocket in the first seconds of the flight.
-
Judging by the video, looks like the ice detaches from the rocket in the first seconds of the flight.
Most of the large patches yes, but there is a small band that remains on the first stage all the way through the burnout.
http://bit.ly/2qX5xfH
-
Judging by the video, looks like the ice detaches from the rocket in the first seconds of the flight.
Most of the large patches yes, but there is a small band that remains on the first stage all the way through the burnout.
http://bit.ly/2qX5xfH
Many rockets carry ice pretty far... F9 seems to carry a thin layer all the way to MECO, which explains the soot not adhering to some parts. I think the smaller scale of Electron makes it look worse. But perhaps some tweaking of the outer paint will create a surface where less ice adheres.
-
.. But perhaps some tweaking of the outer paint will create a surface where less ice adheres.
I'm pretty sure they said there is no paint on it at all.
-
Judging by the video, looks like the ice detaches from the rocket in the first seconds of the flight.
Most of the large patches yes, but there is a small band that remains on the first stage all the way through the burnout.
http://bit.ly/2qX5xfH
Many rockets carry ice pretty far... F9 seems to carry a thin layer all the way to MECO, which explains the soot not adhering to some parts. I think the smaller scale of Electron makes it look worse. But perhaps some tweaking of the outer paint will create a surface where less ice adheres.
Yes. Is this white band actually ice buildup? I was curious about this being the first composite tank with an unpainted exterior used under actual flight cryogenic conditions. It seems possible that the extend of ice buildup and adhesion on a composite surface could have easily been overlooked. Could be a result of scaling effects that larger LVs don't experience, where a smaller LV with a higher SA/V ratio might build more ice and/or have less shedding force.
-
It seems possible that the extend of ice buildup and adhesion on a composite surface could have easily been overlooked.
Ice effects are unlikely to have been overlooked. Ice mass is accounted for in standard launch vehicle models. In addition, Rocket Lab performed first stage "stack tests", firing its engines while using what appeared to be shortened tank sections to hold the propellant, so there would have been opportunity to observe icing and icing shake-off effects. You can see ice hanging onto the test tank in the video below.
https://www.rocketlabusa.com/latest/rocket-lab-completes-final-major-technical-milestone-before-first-test-launches/
- ED Kyle
-
But in this case the rocket was sitting there on the launch pad (fueled?) for quite some time into the launch window, wasn't it?
I do wonder if they thought all the ice would slough off quickly due to vibrations as it does on painted, aluminum skinned rockets, but something about the bare carbon composites at cryogenic temperarures caused it to adhere more firmly. If this is the case, they might rethink their position on keeping the rocket black (which amounted only to "one less step in manufacturing and looks cooler.")
-
But in this case the rocket was sitting there on the launch pad (fueled?) for quite some time into the launch window, wasn't it?
I do wonder if they thought all the ice would slough off quickly due to vibrations as it does on painted, aluminum skinned rockets, but something about the bare carbon composites at cryogenic temperarures caused it to adhere more firmly. If this is the case, they might rethink their position on keeping the rocket black (which amounted only to "one less step in manufacturing and looks cooler.")
Paint weighs extra. This rocket has low weight margins as it is.
-
extra video segments not seen on the previous version.....
Rocket Lab - Test Flight 1 - Flight Video (Long)
KiwiSpace Foundation
Published on May 26, 2017
https://youtu.be/6e-DYRb5bDI?t=001
https://youtu.be/6e-DYRb5bDI
-
A shorter version of the above:
Rocket Lab - Test Flight 1 - Flight Video (Short)
KiwiSpace Foundation
Published on May 26, 2017
https://youtu.be/nveOh0yqXyg?t=001
https://youtu.be/nveOh0yqXyg
-
Screen grabs. Shiny!
-
New camera angle taken during yesterday's launch - includes sound. More to come! #ItsaTest
https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSA/status/867903552429056000
-
That looks like a lot of ice to me and, while most of it falls off at launch there must still be a not so thin layer remaining attached to the LOX tanks of both stages to turn black into white. Close to 30 square meters of it, if it's 2 mm thick and solid it'd weigh around 50 kg. Which is quite a lot if they assumed it was all going to fall off at launch.
-
The first stage's roll rate isn't constant, it's accelerates whole time and jumps just before MECO. Maybe roll rate is high enough to centrifuge propellants? There is a clear power reduction just before MECO and its few seconds (~7) early compared to animation times. How electric pump react to cavitations (I guess better that turbopump)?
Stage separation, second stage ignition and fairing separation are all in time. Second stage burn is several minutes' too short for unknown reasons.
That looks like a lot of ice to me and, while most of it falls off at launch there must still be a not so thin layer remaining attached to the LOX tanks of both stages to turn black into white. Close to 30 square meters of it, if it's 2 mm thick and solid it'd weigh around 50 kg. Which is quite a lot if they assumed it was all going to fall off at launch.
Extra mass can't really shorten burn times.
-
Could easily be a planned throttle down to keep loads on the airframe down (or perhaps to prolong the battery life a bit).
-
Hard to tell from just the video, but there are GNC suggestive artifacts from start to finish on the video.
Never seems to establish a stable inertial frame. You can waste considerable kinetic energy "wandering" in flight path that way, all essential to reach orbit.
Also hard to tell the booster engine performance/combustion stability, although US does not appear to have any issues assuming an adequate acceleration profile. It is harder to resolve US propulsion issues than booster ones, so this suggests a faster development rate for successive flight tests.
More progress than expected, but far from out of the woods for a lunar x-prize launch before end of year.
add:
It seems possible that the extend of ice buildup and adhesion on a composite surface could have easily been overlooked.
You can see ice hanging onto the test tank in the video below.
Unsealed carbon composites tend to be hygroscopic, which yields surface "lands" for ice buildup - we learned a lot about this back in the 1970's with early composites on flight structures. The lightest composites that have empty lattices can also have shear failure from this as well. And, there are nonlinear aspects to this that depend on surface area ...
-
Hard to tell from just the video, but there are GNC suggestive artifacts from start to finish on the video.
Never seems to establish a stable inertial frame. You can waste considerable kinetic energy "wandering" in flight path that way, all essential to reach orbit.
Also hard to tell the booster engine performance/combustion stability, although US does not appear to have any issues assuming an adequate acceleration profile. It is harder to resolve US propulsion issues than booster ones, so this suggests a faster development rate for successive flight tests.
More progress than expected, but far from out of the woods for a lunar x-prize launch before end of year.
add:
It seems possible that the extend of ice buildup and adhesion on a composite surface could have easily been overlooked.
You can see ice hanging onto the test tank in the video below.
Unsealed carbon composites tend to be hygroscopic, which yields surface "lands" for ice buildup - we learned a lot about this back in the 1970's with early composites on flight structures. The lightest composites that have empty lattices can also have shear failure from this as well. And, there are nonlinear aspects to this that depend on surface area ...
Feedback digital flight control is considered a fine art. Especially when H/W is at margins in the control loop. If the actuators are just a little bit too slow the vehicle flight attitude will wander about the ideal. The error being the lack of correction in time to keep the errors small. The best is to have fast actuators and a low latency loop between sense and correction by actuator movement. The computer use to be the problem with this now it is the actuators. But it can also be the programmers fault. The use of a nonRTOS as if it was an RTOS can cause problems. The specific problem is a highly variable response time in the sense to actuator action. This also can cause significant stability problems.
-
I think RL will be doing a trade on slippery paint (or composite surface sealant, which is a fancier name for a kind of paint :) ) mass vs ice mass... at some point the mass of the ice retained most of the way up outweighs the mass of the paint and ice that shakes off quickly.
-
I think RL will be doing a trade on slippery paint (or composite surface sealant, which is a fancier name for a kind of paint :) ) mass vs ice mass... at some point the mass of the ice retained most of the way up outweighs the mass of the paint and ice that shakes off quickly.
You hit a point that is a very different trade study than conducted by Gov developed LVs vs those solely by private companies. The trades have very different goals and priorities. Gov add the paint to get the improved performance no mater that it is not worth the cost to regain the required payload specification vs a private company to not add paint because its cost is not worth the benefit of more payload. If you gain 10kg in payload (for 150kg nominal payload capability) then sure do it because the gain is greater than the cost of painting but if you gain 2kg in payload probably not.
-
Or use one of those flexible blanket things that come off on lift-off, like on some early American rockets.
-
Just oil the skin ..
-
Just oil the skin ..
For this size of rocket, a low-pressurised 'tent' of dry N2 over the rocket would be quite simple.
-
So where is the RL S2 and dummy payload now?
Did they de-orbit or is it in contact with ground stations?
Never reached orbit so they would have fallen into the ocean shortly after the launch...
-
"I have a fundamental policy that we don't fly meat."!
http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000625516
-
Hi first time here. Moving from the dead reddit rocket lab forum.
I'm utterly stunned at the very likely success of RL once they sort the gremlins out. These tests are actual hardware use, rather than the many simultations done. I'm guessing that the rocket lost guidance control and hence went way off course, which is a good explanation of the possible termination event on the 2nd stage. Look at the 4:39 min:sec frame in the 1st stage on board camera and you see it flying past the west coast of the north island, or else it was just a narrow high magnification camera (doubtful).
Definitely not impressed with any competition in the small space sector, which looks to become a large chunk of the 200 billion annual customer bleed. Good luck to all, but the nearest competitor seems to be in the suborbital stage, which was where RL was TEN years back. As for launcher one, $10 million for what Pegasus were doing for $40million (with a half size plane) that's completion for ya, if they can earn a profit.
However I am worried about US taking the outfit out of NZ as an ITAR consequence. Although RL was Beck's dream, he has sold out to the biggy venture capitalists who will extract the most nationalist outcome.
-
I'm convinced this is a flyby, say 100km high and not 400km away if it were on track. The riddle will be solved after another launch with more photos.
Now if this did go where I'm guessing at, it shows a great advantage of NZ launch out of Mahia.
Nobody cares where it went! Imagine if a rocket went 90 degrees from its track out of the cape for four minutes before terminated, New York perhaps. The population is so sparse and the media have little interest.
https://m.imgur.com/a/gouyY. The on board photo of Taranaki (west coast of the north island NZ) is the third image in the load more of the first image presented.
-
However I am worried about US taking the outfit out of NZ as an ITAR consequence. Although RL was Beck's dream, he has sold out to the biggy venture capitalists who will extract the most nationalist outcome.
I thought having the headquarters in LA and being considered a US company would mitigate that? But I also wouldn't like to see it happen. I'd love to go work for RocketLab in Auckland, not LA!
-
However I am worried about US taking the outfit out of NZ as an ITAR consequence. Although RL was Beck's dream, he has sold out to the biggy venture capitalists who will extract the most nationalist outcome.
I thought having the headquarters in LA and being considered a US company would mitigate that? But I also wouldn't like to see it happen. I'd love to go work for RocketLab in Auckland, not LA!
Well you could always end up in Scotland instead if they do set up over here in the U.K. as well.
-
However I am worried about US taking the outfit out of NZ as an ITAR consequence. Although RL was Beck's dream, he has sold out to the biggy venture capitalists who will extract the most nationalist outcome.
I thought having the headquarters in LA and being considered a US company would mitigate that? But I also wouldn't like to see it happen. I'd love to go work for RocketLab in Auckland, not LA!
Moving Peter Beck & RocketLab out of NZ would be like moving Peter Jackson & Weta Workshop out of NZ... the end result would be so meaningless it simply ain't going to happen.
-
Well you could always end up in Scotland instead if they do set up over here in the U.K. as well.
I heard a rumor that Lockheed was going to fly Electron from Scotland a while back.
Then I read this article - crucial part underlined in bold:-
===
Highlands give Scotland a boost into the space race
Lockheed Martin consortium backs a site in Sutherland as Britain’s first base for launching rockets into orbit
A remote peninsula on Scotland’s north coast could be the launchpad for Britain’s space ambitions after plans emerged for a rocket base in Sutherland.
A consortium that includes Lockheed Martin, the US aerospace firm, believes that the A’Mhoine peninsula, between Dounreay and Cape Wrath, is the best location in Britain for a facility from which satellites can be cata- pulted into orbit on the back of 20m rockets.
A detailed proposal has been submitted to the UK Space Agency (UKSA), which has met the Highland council and Highlands and Islands Enterprise (HIE).
The HIE raised the idea of the rocket base last year.
The UKSA is understood to support the A’Mhoine proposal and believes that satellite technology can boost the economy amid a thirst for improved communication that can only be provided from space. The space agency boldly aims to capture 10% of the global space market, which is expected to be worth £400bn by 2030.
The Scottish facility — which would be the first to launch a rocket into orbit from the UK — could be operational by 2020 and generate more than £1bn over a decade.
Paul Davey, of the Lockheed Martin UK space programme, said: “We have submitted a proposal for grant funding into the UKSA satellite launch programme, the outcome of which will be known this summer. This follows more than two years of dialogue with the relevant Scottish agencies.”
The Space Industry Bill, recently introduced into the House of Lords, will be debated this week. It aims to license space activities and offer grants totalling £10m for consortia that want to launch satellites — or even manned space flights — from British soil.
While several sites are under consideration as space tourism hubs, including Prestwick in Ayrshire and Virgin Galactic’s Machrihanish in Argyll, launching satellites on behalf of the military, government and private industry offers the quickest, cheapest way to kick-start the country’s space ambitions.
The UKSA confirmed that the government “is not selecting a single national spaceport”.
“Our aim is to grow new markets in the UK for small satellite launch and sub- orbital flight, that might support multiple service providers or spaceports.”
The plan is reminiscent of the 1957 film Rockets Galore, in which a British military commander is tasked with investigating a launch base on a Scottish island.
Sources claim the A’Mhoine base would have a “modest” impact on the environment and pose no threat to public safety as spacecraft would be launched vertically over the Pentland Firth.
Up to eight rocket launches could be made a year, with each capable of carrying a 150kg payload. This could include many as 12 small cube satellites that could be dropped into a 575-mile orbit above Earth.
It is envisaged that as the number of satellites grows, they can be linked to form powerful data-gathering “constellations” to aid scientific research and boost telecommunications.
The proposal is, however, likely to meet opposition, especially as an access road would have to be built across iconic wild land.
Helen McDade, head of policy at John Muir Trust, the conservation charity, pointed out that land around the proposed facility was designated as a national scenic area and noted for rare species such as greenshank and eagles.
HIE said the rocket proposal would involve “widespread public consultation” and be scrutinised.
The Scottish government said: “Scotland has a proud history in the design and building of satellites and we will consider all opportunities to expand this further.”
==
Now, as far as I know LM doesn't have an orbital launcher that takes only 150kg to 575 miles with 12 smallsats on board... but they do own a share of Rocket Lab USA, and that vehicle is almost exactly that specification....
-
As someone who has spent a winter in the Outer Hebrides... there was some concern earlier about winter weather holding up launches from Mahia, and I can't imagine this site being very different from that point of view.
-
post mortem for the failure
https://www.rocketlabusa.com/latest/rocket-lab-completes-post-flight-analysis/
tl;dr misconfigured ground equipment
edit: hm, doesn't mention the roll
-
The roll might have been intentional. It is not unusual for smaller rockets to be spin stabilized.
-
Tweets:-
#ItsaTest launch had to be terminated due to misconfigured ground equipment owned and operated by a third-party contractor.
#ItsaTest Electron rocket was following a nominal trajectory and was performing as planned at the time of termination. The fix is simple.
-
The review found the launch had to be terminated due to an independent contractor’s ground equipment issue, rather than an issue with the rocket.
Wow, that's a whopper. The rocket was blown to bits because third party range safety had a link drop ..
“We have demonstrated Electron was following its nominal trajectory and was on course to reach orbit,” said Peter Beck, Rocket Lab CEO. “While it was disappointing to see the flight terminated in essence due to an incorrect tick box. We can say we tested nearly everything, including the flight termination system. We were delighted with the amount of data we were able to collect during an exceptional first test launch.
Rocket Lab’s telemetry systems provided data verifying Electrons capabilities and providing us with high confidence ahead of our second test flight. The call to terminate a launch would be tough for anyone, and we appreciated the professionalism of the flight safety officials involved.”
The telemetry data loss that led to the termination of the flight has been directly linked to a key piece of equipment responsible for translating radio signals into data used by safety officials to track the vehicle performance. It was discovered a contractor failed to enable forward error correction on this third-party device causing extensive corruption of received position data. The failure was first indicated by the fact that Rocket Lab’s own equipment did not suffer similar data loss during launch. Further confirmation of the cause was demonstrated when replaying raw radio-frequency data - recorded on launch day - through correctly configured equipment also resolved the problem.
-
The name of Rocket Lab’s second Electron vehicle – Still Testing.
https://twitter.com/rocketlab/status/894449577490759680
-
The roll might have been intentional. It is not unusual for smaller rockets to be spin stabilized.
https://twitter.com/RocketLab/status/894451092884410368
The roll was within limits - we're updating parameters and tightening our bounds ahead of flight two.
-
Forward error correction (FEC) is where I earn a living. From the sounds of it, it looks like they were using a systematic code. This is where you transmit the data along with some parity bits. At the receiver, if you turn off FEC all you output is the received data without doing any decoding. At the launch site, the signal to noise ratio (SNR) from the rocket is very high, which means you hardly get any errors. As the rocket gets further away, the SNR drops and the error rate goes up, until basically you end with garbage coming out of the receiver. With FEC on, the decoder uses the received data from the parity bits to correct the errors.
If you have a non-systematic code (such as your typical convolutional code) then none of your coded data is the same as your input data. Typically, one data bit gives you two coded bits, for a rate 1/2 code. You can use a simple non-FEC decoder to get the data at the receiver, but if you have a single bit error, the output is completely scrambled.
I think its a major design flaw to have a switch that turns off FEC that way, as it is difficult to detect that the switch is in the wrong position. The switch should be UNC/FEC. If the switch is UNC, this is uncoded data without any parity or coding. If you're transmitting coded data, setting the switch to UNC would give garbage out, since the parity bits would be included with the received data. The same would happen if transmitting uncoded data and setting the switch to FEC. You would also get garbage out, allowing you to detect the incorrect switch position.
-
..If you have a non-systematic code (such as your typical convolutional code) then none of your coded data is the same as your input data. Typically, one data bit gives you two coded bits, for a rate 1/2 code. You can use a simple non-FEC decoder to get the data at the receiver, but if you have a single bit error, the output is completely scrambled.
Usage of a block code like Reed-Solomon alone without inner convolutional code is actually kind of rare these days, isn't it ?
I think its a major design flaw to have a switch that turns off FEC that way...
Certainly, just important to note that the fault appears to be in the third party range safety system, according to RL description, not in their own links.
-
The roll might have been intentional. It is not unusual for smaller rockets to be spin stabilized.
https://twitter.com/RocketLab/status/894451092884410368
The roll was within limits - we're updating parameters and tightening our bounds ahead of flight two.
I don't buy that the roll was intentional. This is a liquid propellant launch vehicle with gimballing engines. It doesn't need spin stabilization. It will be interesting to see what the roll will be like on the next flight.
-
The name of Rocket Lab’s second Electron vehicle – Still Testing.
https://twitter.com/rocketlab/status/894449577490759680
And one more update:
https://twitter.com/RocketLab/status/894466730059104256
We're looking to roll the rocket out to the pad in around eight weeks!
-
The roll might have been intentional. It is not unusual for smaller rockets to be spin stabilized.
https://twitter.com/RocketLab/status/894451092884410368
The roll was within limits - we're updating parameters and tightening our bounds ahead of flight two.
I don't buy that the roll was intentional. This is a liquid propellant launch vehicle with gimballing engines. It doesn't need spin stabilization. It will be interesting to see what the roll will be like on the next flight.
They didn't say that it was necessarily intentional, only that it was within limits and that they are attempting to either correct or reduce it. This most likely means the roll was not designed to happen, but wasn't significant enough to cause a failure
-
The roll might have been intentional. It is not unusual for smaller rockets to be spin stabilized.
https://twitter.com/RocketLab/status/894451092884410368
The roll was within limits - we're updating parameters and tightening our bounds ahead of flight two.
I don't buy that the roll was intentional. This is a liquid propellant launch vehicle with gimballing engines. It doesn't need spin stabilization. It will be interesting to see what the roll will be like on the next flight.
They didn't say that it was necessarily intentional, only that it was within limits and that they are attempting to either correct or reduce it. This most likely means the roll was not designed to happen, but wasn't significant enough to cause a failure
I agree with that. My post was responding to Lars_J's point.
EDIT Add: Other launch vehicles have had uncontrolled roll rates and been at least partially successful. The first F9 launch comes to mind.
-
Usage of a block code like Reed-Solomon alone without inner convolutional code is actually kind of rare these days, isn't it ?
There are other types of systematic codes, like turbo codes and low density parity check codes (LDPC). Your normal convolutional code can also be used in systematic form. The IRIG 106 telemetry standard specifies an LDPC code.
http://www.wsmr.army.mil/RCCsite/Documents/106-15_Telemetry_Standards/appendixr.pdf
-
And one more update:
https://twitter.com/RocketLab/status/894466730059104256
We're looking to roll the rocket out to the pad in around eight weeks!
That would imply launch no earlier than October.
-
I think its a major design flaw to have a switch that turns off FEC that way, as it is difficult to detect that the switch is in the wrong position. The switch should be UNC/FEC. If the switch is UNC, this is uncoded data without any parity or coding. If you're transmitting coded data, setting the switch to UNC would give garbage out, since the parity bits would be included with the received data. The same would happen if transmitting uncoded data and setting the switch to FEC. You would also get garbage out, allowing you to detect the incorrect switch position.
What a nasty mistake. :(
Everything looks OK as the system compensates at close range but falls apart as the test proceeds.
On the upside they are saying all the other telemetry looks OK and the fix is basically another item to the pre-launch check list (provided as always no one ticks it off until it's actually been checked of course, the bane of all very long check lists :( )
While nothing is ever certain this suggests the big unknowns for the next launch will be stage separation and high altitude engine start, with perhaps more effort to stop it rolling, even slowly.
I think historically tank pressurization has been an issue with early launches of new LV's but Electron seems OK in that area.
Q417 looks to be quite an exciting time for the launch business. :)
-
Stage separation and US engines start were successful.
-
Stage separation and US engines start were successful.
I had not realized the first test had gotten that far before termination. :)
That does suggest they have a very strong chance of putting a payload in orbit. For a small company on its second launch this is excellent progress.
-
Come along to the #SmallSat launch session at 11:30 am today to hear our CEO, Peter Beck, speak about Rocket Lab and our recent test launch.
https://twitter.com/rocketlab/status/894894351402258432
No live stream but hopefully there'll be write-ups.
-
Beck: all 9 Rutherford engines in Electron 1st stage performed above targets. Second stage engine also worked normally. #smallsat
https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/894974725658624000
Beck: estimated rocket would have reached 508x290 km orbit if not terminated; goal was 500x300 km. #smallsat
https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/894975064629624832
-
"...engines in Electron 1st stage performed above targets..."
Would this mean shorter burn time? (even ~7 seconds short)
-
I wonder if it was these guys RL threw under the bus?
Rocket Lab USA 2017 Contract Update
The Range Safety Telemetry System has been shipped to New Zealand with non-state funds.
Unfortunately, for Rocket Lab they did not have any launches in 2016 so it pushed all the launches to 2017. The 2017 contract is to do what we would have done in 2016, to support them with the RSTS. Eventually they will operate from Mahia by themselves.
KING said AAC has four people on site, getting antennas set up and ready to support the launch vehicle by March 4.
CAMPBELL confirmed Rocket Lab has selected Pacific Spaceport Complex – Alaska as their U.S. polar launch site. He is currently negotiating a contract for launches starting in 2018.
http://akaerospace.com/sites/default/files/minutes/2017%2002%2023%20Board%20of%20Directors%20Minutes.pdf
-
I wonder if it was these guys RL threw under the bus?
Rocket Lab USA 2017 Contract Update
http://akaerospace.com/news/alaska-aerospace-corporation-congratulates-rocket-lab-successful-launch-new-electron-rocket
AAC operates the Pacific Spaceport Complex – Alaska (PSCA) located on Kodiak Island. AAC provided operational support to Rocket Lab, deploying their Range Safety and Telemetry System (RSTS) and personnel to New Zealand for the launch. “The experience of operating from a foreign launch complex provided a number of challenges for our team,” claimed Todd Leitheiser, AAC Instrumentation Systems Manager. “However, it also provided us with the ability to expand our capabilities which will prove beneficial in supporting future commercial launches from PSCA,” he concluded.
EDIT: also
http://akaerospace.com/capabilities/mobile-range-instrumentation
PSCA’s organic range is provided by the Honeywell Inc. designed Range Safety and Telemetry System that supports telemetry receiving and command destruct functions.
AAC has two RSTSs, one for use at PSCA and another for use at an off axis site chosen to assure communications in the event of plume attenuation.
https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/advisory_committee/meeting_news/media/FAA_LOSWG_Meeting_051707.ppt
Unrelated side note from googling:
http://www.militaryaerospace.com/bg/curtisswright-defense-solutions/pressrelease/curtisswright-selected-by-rocket-lab-to-provide-data-acquisition-systems-for-the-electron-launch-vehicle.html
-
Usage of a block code like Reed-Solomon alone without inner convolutional code is actually kind of rare these days, isn't it ?
There are other types of systematic codes, like turbo codes and low density parity check codes (LDPC). Your normal convolutional code can also be used in systematic form. The IRIG 106 telemetry standard specifies an LDPC code.
I'm not at all familiar with IRIG or CCSDS, apart from browsing the specs and ref implementation a few times. But looks like switching FEC modes should change the sync markers and thus the receiver shouldn't lock at all ?
-
I'm not at all familiar with IRIG or CCSDS, apart from browsing the specs and ref implementation a few times. But looks like switching FEC modes should change the sync markers and thus the receiver shouldn't lock at all ?
That's right. However, it looks like they designed the software not to operate that way.
-
I wonder if it was these guys RL threw under the bus?
Rocket Lab USA 2017 Contract Update
http://akaerospace.com/news/alaska-aerospace-corporation-congratulates-rocket-lab-successful-launch-new-electron-rocket
AAC operates the Pacific Spaceport Complex – Alaska (PSCA) located on Kodiak Island. AAC provided operational support to Rocket Lab, deploying their Range Safety and Telemetry System (RSTS) and personnel to New Zealand for the launch. “The experience of operating from a foreign launch complex provided a number of challenges for our team,” claimed Todd Leitheiser, AAC Instrumentation Systems Manager. “However, it also provided us with the ability to expand our capabilities which will prove beneficial in supporting future commercial launches from PSCA,” he concluded.
EDIT: also
http://akaerospace.com/capabilities/mobile-range-instrumentation
PSCA’s organic range is provided by the Honeywell Inc. designed Range Safety and Telemetry System that supports telemetry receiving and command destruct functions.
AAC has two RSTSs, one for use at PSCA and another for use at an off axis site chosen to assure communications in the event of plume attenuation.
https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/advisory_committee/meeting_news/media/FAA_LOSWG_Meeting_051707.ppt
Unrelated side note from googling:
http://www.militaryaerospace.com/bg/curtisswright-defense-solutions/pressrelease/curtisswright-selected-by-rocket-lab-to-provide-data-acquisition-systems-for-the-electron-launch-vehicle.html
So much information on the internet for people with a small set of Google skills. People publish all kinds of stuff with so much detail. The things I have found but not posted here....