Stratolaunch: General Company and Development Updates and Discussions

[su27k]

Reusability of conventional rockets was a doubtful hypothetical when this thing was first proposed. IF Stratolaunch is limited to solid disposable launchers, I'm wondering how well it can compete financially with partially and even fully reusable liquid fueled rockets. Now if the first stage of the air-launched rocket was liquid, could glide to a landing on skids, and be reused, I wonder if that could make a difference.

Maybe they can talk to Boeing about air launch XS-1, the GLOW seems to fit well.

[FutureSpaceTourist]

Good article by Doug Messier on the history and issues facing Stratolaunch:

Mojave Journal: Good Rockets are Hard to Find

http://www.parabolicarc.com/2017/06/02/questions-persist-paul-allen-rolls-stratolaunch/

[Comga]

Good article by Doug Messier on the history and issues facing Stratolaunch:

Mojave Journal: Good Rockets are Hard to Find

http://www.parabolicarc.com/2017/06/02/questions-persist-paul-allen-rolls-stratolaunch/

He said it:"Glomar Explorer"
However, that presumes that someone has a fleshed it concept that they could get approved by some committee, as opposed to one guy with an incomplete concept and virtually unlimited funds.

[Kabloona]

Good article by Doug Messier on the history and issues facing Stratolaunch:

Mojave Journal: Good Rockets are Hard to Find

http://www.parabolicarc.com/2017/06/02/questions-persist-paul-allen-rolls-stratolaunch/

He said it:"Glomar Explorer"
However, that presumes that someone has a fleshed it concept that they could get approved by some committee, as opposed to one guy with an incomplete concept and virtually unlimited funds.

'
The "Glomar Explorer" comparison is at least 5 years old:

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2198/1

The explanation that started to circulate in space circles was that the official story is a cover for a classified mission launching covert satellites into secret orbits. It’s akin to the Glomar Explorer, the very public “mining ship” that was actually funded by the CIA in the mid-1970s to secretly recover a Soviet submarine on the bottom of the ocean floor. The problem with this theory that it makes no sense, and the recent split with SpaceX is further proof of that.

And several more years of floundering in search of a launcher after this article was written seem to support his last sentence.

[Rik ISS-fan]

Let me speculate on rockets that can be developed to launch from Stratolaunch.
It has been announced that one to three Pegasus(XL) rockets can launch from Stratolaunch, so that's the first rocket.
Pegasus is build by Orbital ATK, they also build Castor stages. I think two other launchers can be developed in cooperation with Orbital ATK.
1) An air launched, Minotour IVC; Castor 120, Castor 30B, ? STARXX / LOx-Hydrocarbon 3th stage.
2) Airlaunched NGL derivative; Castor 300; BE-3UEN upperstage (most likely same diameter as Castor 300)

I think another option is teaming up with Virgin Orbital. Cosmic girl can launch one (or after modifications two) LauncherOne's. Stratolaunch can be used to launch one to three LauncherOne's.
StratoLaunch and VirginOrbital can also team up an jointly develop a heavier rocket that uses multiple NewtonThree engines on the first stage and one NewtonThree on the second stage. For example:
LauncherFour: 4xNewtonThree, NewtonThree;   LauncherFive or LauncherSeven.

In my oppinion there are three drawbacks to the principle of air-launched rockets.
1] Once the rocket is released, there is no way to save a payload in case of an engine startup goes wrong.
2] If you look at launcher design studies and comparison's, the air-launched systems tend to be more expensive in cost per lb (or kg) off payload, than ground launched systems.
3] The architecture for ground tracking stations has to be evaluated for all launch trajectories. I think, this is an expect that is often overlooked by non-experts, like me.
(I didn't mention the complications of accounting for the load situations of carried flight, and release)

The benefit of air-launched is a gain in payload weight to take of weight fraction. On the order of 25-40% according to a CNES lecture from 2008. And more flexibility in orbital destinations and points to launch from.
My non expert judgment leads me to prefer ground launch. But I hope the best for StratoLaunch and Virgin Orbital.

[FutureSpaceTourist]

Stratolaunch Systems Corporation Names Jeff Thornburg Vice President of Propulsion
6/8/2017

At Stratolaunch Systems Corp., we galvanize and enable smart people to tackle challenges head-on. I have named Jeff Thornburg as Stratolaunch’s new Vice President of Propulsion. Jeff joined Stratolaunch on May 22. I look forward to working with Jeff to explore new approaches to making access to space more convenient, reliable, and routine.

Jeff is an outstanding engineer and leader who brings a wealth of valuable experience to the team. Prior to joining Stratolaunch, Jeff was founder and President of Interstellar Technologies LLC, an engineering technology development and consulting company focused on technology development, advanced R&D, manufacturing, testing, production and operations for spacecraft, launch vehicles, and propulsion systems.

Prior to forming Interstellar, Jeff was the Senior Director of Propulsion Engineering at SpaceX in Hawthorne, CA, and served as the lead engineer and manager of methane engine systems including the Raptor engine development program. Jeff was responsible for the development of the propulsion hardware and facilities used in next generation vehicles and propulsion systems capable of missions beyond Earth orbit, with an eye toward Mars. Jeff also served as the Vice President of Propulsion Engineering at SpaceX overseeing flight, test, development and research operations while also supporting customer interactions, including those with NASA and the U.S. Air Force.

Jeff was also a lead propulsion engineer and turbomachinery technical project manager for the J-2X engine development program at the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center. Recently, the J-2X project has successfully tested both Engine 10001 and 10002, which utilized turbomachinery designed and built during Jeff’s tenure on the J-2X program. Jeff also spent 4 years working for Aerojet as an engineering director for their liquid engine turbomachinery group and served as the site manager for the Aerojet-Woodland Hills engineering office in Woodland Hills, CA.

Jeff started his career in the U.S. Air Force as a flight commander and aircraft maintenance officer on KC-135R tanker aircraft at MacDill AFB, FL. He was selected to attend the Air Force Institute of Technology and earned his Master’s degree in Aeronautical Engineering. Jeff was then stationed at Edwards AFB, CA, where he joined the liquid rocket engine branch at the Air Force Research Laboratory where he worked on several component and engine technology programs. His experience there included leadership of the joint Air Force-NASA Integrated Powerhead Demonstration engine. This program performed the world’s first hydrogen full-flow staged combustion cycle engine demonstration. Since his first assignment to Edwards AFB, Jeff has been very fortunate to have built his career working on nearly all liquid engine technology development programs since the Space Shuttle Main Engine.

Jeff has received numerous Air Force and NASA awards including a NASA Space Flight Awareness award, the NASA Made It Happen award, the NASA Stennis Space Center Propulsion Test Director’s Leadership Award, and was an Air Force Research Laboratory Technical Program Manager of the Year.

In addition to his master’s degree, he has a Bachelor of Science in Aerospace Engineering from the University of Missouri-Rolla.

I’m proud of the progress the Stratolaunch team has made and I look forward to sharing our progress in the future. We’re excited to have Jeff join our team!

http://www.stratolaunch.com/news/JeffThornburg.html

[FutureSpaceTourist]

Thornburg previous worked on engine programs at SpaceX and NASA, so one wonders if Stratolaunch wants to develop its own launch vehicle…

https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/872853688502681601

This may be their only choice.

https://twitter.com/sciguyspace/status/872855798979981315

[envy887]

Building thier own main propulsion seems like a heafty investment, on the order of 2x to 4x what building Stratolauncher cost.

Since they have lots of experience with composite airframes, it would seem simpler to buy propulsion and integrate it into their own vehicle. If they want a methane vehicle, 1x BE-4U for the booster and 1x Broadsword for an upper stage would be perfectly sized for Stratolaunch.

[Dante80]

I really, really wish they stay out of hybrids and cryogenics and go for the kerosene/peroxide route.

[Space Ghost 1962]

Building thier own main propulsion seems like a heafty investment, on the order of 2x to 4x what building Stratolauncher cost.

Since they have lots of experience with composite airframes, it would seem simpler to buy propulsion and integrate it into their own vehicle. If they want a methane vehicle, 1x BE-4U for the booster and 1x Broadsword for an upper stage would be perfectly sized for Stratolaunch.

Autogenous pressurization with a pump-fed engine could avoid certain issues with an air-launched LRE vehicle, because the liquid can recondense in the tanks with chilling. So yes likely propellants like methalox which have near BP's. It's still part of propulsion engineering.

Having the ability also to do in house propulsion is a means to encourage vendors to sell you engines, because having another to compete in an already crowding up market might be less advantageous to having another revenue source flying/buying your engine.

Whatever Stratolaunch ends up launching, the market will be highly constrained in terms of net profit and availability of payloads. There are too many potential vendors on the small/medium side.

For example, if you had a microlaunch system of the Vector kind with a vehicle like the Electron, many of the advantages of air launch would be lost, because they'd just find a place to launch from and move the launcher, and the payload while being smaller than a Pegasus would be "good enough" for such needs. There are reasons that Pegasus does not fly often.

And if you have 24hr "gas-n-go" with a F9R+/NG-like vehicle, the top end of your payloads will definitely be constrained.

This moves you into the XS-1 payload market quickly, and to accomplish that here you'd likely need mostly LRE performance. And as they found already with SX, the vehicle offers no advantage to an existing vendor to be built by that vendor, just cost and distraction.

[Archibald]

I really, really wish they stay out of hybrids and cryogenics and go for the kerosene/peroxide route.

Seconded, I love keroxide.

[Star One]

I really, really wish they stay out of hybrids and cryogenics and go for the kerosene/peroxide route.

Seconded, I love keroxide.

It sounds strange when you say it like that.

[Star One]

Jeff Foust @jeff_foust

Preisser: Stratolaunch in discussions with FAA and launch ranges about issues linked to doing 3 Pegasus XL launches on a single flight.

https://mobile.twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/875062765643325441

[Lars-J]

Jeff Foust @jeff_foust

Preisser: Stratolaunch in discussions with FAA and launch ranges about issues linked to doing 3 Pegasus XL launches on a single flight.

https://mobile.twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/875062765643325441

Such a ... dumb ... idea. Orbital ATK can barely scrape together one Pegasus XL customer in several years. And they think they will be able to do three in one go? 

[matthewkantar]

Such a ... dumb ... idea. Orbital ATK can barely scrape together one Pegasus XL customer in several years. And they think they will be able to do three in one go? 

There are permits filed for 20,000+ LEO sats, just in the US. There will be plenty of work if those plans pan out.

Matthew

[ChrisWilson68]

Such a ... dumb ... idea. Orbital ATK can barely scrape together one Pegasus XL customer in several years. And they think they will be able to do three in one go?  :o ;D

There are permits filed for 20,000+ LEO sats, just in the US. There will be plenty of work if those plans pan out.

The question isn't whether there will be launches.  The question is whether there will be Pegasus launches.

I'd say the huge LEO constellations are the last launches that Pegasus would ever be able to win.  Pegasus is too expensive to put up those constellations.  They need to ride in large numbers on large launchers.  See Iridium's current deployment, where they are doing ten per Falcon 9.

[FutureSpaceTourist]

Other tweets from Jeff yesterday:

Melanie Preisser, Stratolaunch: first 2 Pegasus XL rockets under long-term agreement w/Orbital ATK to be delivered in 2018; launching 2019.

https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/875050639973371905

Preisser: rolled back aircraft into hangar after completing fueling tests last week; “lot more work” to do before first flight in 2018.

https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/875051169885954048

[Star One]

Jeff Foust @jeff_foust

Steve Nixon, Stratolaunch: think there might be interest in natl security community in launching 3 Pegasus rockets at a time from our plane.

https://mobile.twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/877612831155335169

[gongora]

More Tweets from Jeff Foust

Nixon: for ~1% of what we spend on nat’l security space today, can add a layer a resiliency to space systems with smallsats and launchers.
Nixon: Stratolaunch may end up costing more than some foreign providers, but we will make up for that in terms of convenience.
Nixon: we think as we bring the launch rate up, we can get Pegasus price down to a “very competitive” level.

Good luck with that.

[SweetWater]

Jeff Foust @jeff_foust

Steve Nixon, Stratolaunch: think there might be interest in natl security community in launching 3 Pegasus rockets at a time from our plane.

https://mobile.twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/877612831155335169

If for some reason these national security payloads for said rockets need to be air launched, it stands to reason that it would be cheaper to use Pegasus LVs launching from Orbital's L-1011 than the custom one-off Stratolaunch plane. If all three need to be launched separately, you could do one a piece from the L-1011 and the others from the wing pylons on B-52s, as was done with the first few Pegasus launches.

If these payloads could be launched together on a single vehicle, Pegasus makes even less sense. ICON, which is supposed to launch on a Pegasus in November, has a launch cost of $56.3 million. If there are three Pegasus' worth of satellites that are going up at the same time, it would be cheaper to use an Atlas V.