Generation Orbit

[Danderman]

http://www.generationorbit.com/

Generation Orbit Launch Services, Inc. (or GO) presents a fast, flexible, and dedicated nanosatellite (1-30 kg) orbital payload delivery service called GO Launcher, utilizing existing high speed jet aircraft and mostly existing rockets.

GO has offices in Atlanta, GA and Washington, DC. GO is privately held.

[A_M_Swallow]

Giving a company a common word as a name turns it into a joke.  Rename GO GOrbit.

[simonbp]

I love how their "Market Projection" plot takes a flat rate of nanosat launches and draws an ascending line through it. Data? Data? We don't need to fit no stinking data!

Also, since when can you buy an F-15 commercially?

[edkyle99]

I love how their "Market Projection" plot takes a flat rate of nanosat launches and draws an ascending line through it. Data? Data? We don't need to fit no stinking data!

Also, since when can you buy an F-15 commercially?

This is an interesting concept that, of course, harkens back to the flight-tested F-15 ASM-135 ASAT of the 1980s. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ASM-135_ASAT_5.jpg

One wonders if ASAT is a secondary, or even primary, objective of a proposed orbital effort. 

Their web site discusses other air launch platform possibilities, including an F-4, an SU-27, and a Gulfstream III, but since their primary (proposed) customer already owns many F-15 aircraft, availability might not be a problem!

BTW, given that we're living in the UAV "drone era", the next step should be obvious.

 - Ed Kyle

[edkyle99]

GO has offices in Atlanta, GA and Washington, DC. GO is privately held.

Note that at least one principal of GO was involved in the DARPA/USAF FALCON project.  Others worked on the recent DARPA/NASA Horizontal Launch Systems study, and/or worked with a team from Japan on a similar launch concept.

 - Ed Kyle

[kevin-rf]

Why not just use an additional solid to bring the payload up point that it would be release by the jet. Surely that would be cheaper than buying an maintaining a supersonic jet for what looks to me like 20 some odd payloads a year.

Also, considering that the envelope under the jet is more of a constraint than the weight, I wonder if hanging such a vehicle off of the center line of a retired F-14 would provide better clearance and a larger vehicle... The F-14 was designed to carry Phoenix AIM-54 after all.

[Robotbeat]

Why not just use an additional solid to bring the payload up point that it would be release by the jet. Surely that would be cheaper than buying an maintaining a supersonic jet for what looks to me like 20 some odd payloads a year.

Also, considering that the envelope under the jet is more of constraint than the weight, I wonder if hanging such a vehicle off of the center line of a retired F-14 would provide better clearance and a larger vehicle... The F-14 was designed to carry Phoenix AIM-54 after all.

A lot of supersonic fighter/bomber type jets that can do Mach 2 or better can be had for cheaper than many corporate jets. If you can get a really good deal ($5 million?) for a used one with a lot of exterior payload capacity (i.e. 5-10 tons), it may well be worth it. How much it costs to service and any modifications required is another matter. It's not the worst idea around, if there's a real market for lots of micro/nanosatellites that need their own launch, as is the whole point of this venture.

[simonbp]

A lot of supersonic fighter/bomber type jets that can do Mach 2 or better can be had for cheaper than many corporate jets.

Like what? MiG-25/31 is the only one that springs to mind as potentially commercially available for cheaper than a large-ish private jet...

[Robotbeat]

A lot of supersonic fighter/bomber type jets that can do Mach 2 or better can be had for cheaper than many corporate jets.

Like what? MiG-25/31 is the only one that springs to mind as potentially commercially available for cheaper than a large-ish private jet...

Corporate jets can go for up to $50 million (like for a Gulfstream G550). That's more than the unit costs for an F-15 (<$30 million in 1998 dollars), and a used F-15 without functional weapons systems may be much less than that. But yeah, I imagine a fighter from anywhere (if you have corporate backing and aren't just a private individual) may be available for this. Won't make it easy, but still doable if there's a business case.

[edkyle99]

Why not just use an additional solid to bring the payload up point that it would be release by the jet. Surely that would be cheaper than buying an maintaining a supersonic jet for what looks to me like 20 some odd payloads a year.

I can think of several answers to this question.

The first answer is that it wouldn't be just one solid, it would be "20-some" (or however many launches) solids.  Per year.  The cost of the aircraft would have to be compared to the total number of solids needed to replace it over the program life, plus any extra costs associated with one or two fixed launch sites, etc..   

The second answer is that a fixed launch site would not be as flexible or "responsive" as an airborne launch, in terms of orbit inclination, etc. 

A third answer would be that, in times of war, an airborne launch system should, or could, be less vulnerable to attack than a fixed ground launch site.

 - Ed Kyle

[kevin-rf]

I can think of several answers to this question.

The first answer is that it wouldn't be just one solid, it would be "20-some" (or however many launches) solids.  Per year.  The cost of the aircraft would have to be compared to the total number of solids needed to replace it over the program life, plus any extra costs associated with one or two fixed launch sites, etc..   

We are talking a very small launcher here, costs should be of the order of large solid sounding rockets. Unlike liquids, the only additional GSE you will need is a launch rail.

The second answer is that a fixed launch site would not be as flexible or "responsive" as an airborne launch, in terms of orbit inclination, etc. 

But does the cubesat market need that flexibility? Is the market large enough to cause jams at the launch site?

A third answer would be that, in times of war, an airborne launch system should, or could, be less vulnerable to attack than a fixed ground launch site.

But can a payload of value to the war fighter be launched on a cubesat? If so, ULA has some splaining to do

[simonbp]

But can a payload of value to the war fighter be launched on a cubesat?

The Army seems to think so...

http://www.spacenews.com/military/100806-nanomissile-launch-the-smallest-satellites.html

[kevin-rf]

I love how their "Market Projection" plot takes a flat rate of nanosat launches and draws an ascending line through it. Data? Data? We don't need to fit no stinking data!

Also, since when can you buy an F-15 commercially?

I think they pulled that graph from here (page 7) :
http://www.sei.aero/eng/papers/uploads/archive/SpaceWorks_NanoMicrosat_Launch_22Nov2011_revA.pdf

The Army seems to think so...

Other than a few stowaways on the last Falcon 9 flight, how many nano satellites have they actually launched? The concept has not yet been proven.

[Robotbeat]

*shrug* I think nano/microsats are far more proven than the orbital space tourism market.

Nano/microsats benefit from continual improvements in electronics, etc. Orbcomm's satellites are only about 40kg (and some of their demo sats were only ~15kg). 44 of them are up there right now (that's just one company), they're planning on adding a bunch more (though the new ones will be more massive), and Orbcomm has about $35-40 million in yearly revenue.

There are other microsatellite constellation companies out there that have plans for many more satellites than Orbcomm's constellation and with higher bandwidth capabilities. COMMStellation is planning for a constellation containing a total of 84 microsatellites, though they're planning on launching them as bunches on conventional launch vehicles. If there was a really cheap nano/microsatellite launcher available, future projects may choose them instead (or even COMMStellation if it gets delayed... especially for launching replacement satellites). At 20 microsatellite launches per year, that's over four years of microsatellite launches just with this one constellation. That's really an opportunity to get the flight rate up to near-RLV ranges, especially if there's a couple of these constellations up there which need replacement or upgrading every 5 or so years.

Now, I think they should go for at least 100-150kg to LEO, since it would allow a lot more revenue options. But even 50kg would be useful (i.e. could orbit the first generation Orbcomm satellites... though they're kind of weirdly shaped for a nano/microsatellite launcher).

[Patchouli]

Corporate jets can go for up to $50 million (like for a Gulfstream G550). That's more than the unit costs for an F-15 (<$30 million in 1998 dollars), and a used F-15 without functional weapons systems may be much less than that. But yeah, I imagine a fighter from anywhere (if you have corporate backing and aren't just a private individual) may be available for this. Won't make it easy, but still doable if there's a business case.

The F-4 also could be a good candidate as it can reach mach 2.23 and has a center line tank mount that could be used to carry a small micro sat launcher.

Another plane that probably could be had for low cost  is the F-111 it has a large payload and a max speed of mach 2.5.

[Robotbeat]

There's going to be pretty strong forces pushing them to want to design for larger payloads... 150kg to orbit allows you to serve some pretty decent markets... Or launch a whole fleet of nanosatellites at once. Pegasus, if it weren't so expensive, is actually a pretty darned good size for something like this.

I'd like to see what sort of payload XCor's microlaunch concept could get to LEO.

[kkattula]

There's going to be pretty strong forces pushing them to want to design for larger payloads... 150kg to orbit allows you to serve some pretty decent markets... Or launch a whole fleet of nanosatellites at once. Pegasus, if it weren't so expensive, is actually a pretty darned good size for something like this.

I'd like to see what sort of payload XCor's microlaunch concept could get to LEO.

Which is a similar concept except it deploys the launcher at Mach 3+ and 120K+ feet, with near zero drag. Plus the carrier plane can also do sub-orbital science & tourist flights.

[kevin-rf]

Another plane that probably could be had for low cost  is the F-111 it has a large payload and a max speed of mach 2.5.

Anything flown on an F-111 center line will have to be stored internally, the F-111 does not have the necessary ground clearance to fly external stores on the center line. If stored externally it would have to be carried off center on one of the wings.

[Robotbeat]

There's going to be pretty strong forces pushing them to want to design for larger payloads... 150kg to orbit allows you to serve some pretty decent markets... Or launch a whole fleet of nanosatellites at once. Pegasus, if it weren't so expensive, is actually a pretty darned good size for something like this.

I'd like to see what sort of payload XCor's microlaunch concept could get to LEO.

Which is a similar concept except it deploys the launcher at Mach 3+ and 120K+ feet, with near zero drag. Plus the carrier plane can also do sub-orbital science & tourist flights.

I'm not sure XCor's concept could get a 30kg microsatellite up, though. And I think that even that may be a little too small.

[simonbp]

According to the brochure, Lynx Mk II has an external payload capacity of 650 kg. That should be enough for a >30 kg microsat.

[Robotbeat]

I still think that a 30kg microsat is a little optimistic for the Lynx MkII unless they use a high performance liquid rocket (instead of the much more likely solids). Scout G's 2nd, 3rd, and 4th stages (we're saying the Lynx acts as the first stage, which is probably optimistic) and payload add together to a mass of 6300kg for a payload of 210kg. For a 650kg rocket, proportionally that would leave only 22kg of payload, and that's not counting the really significant "minimum-gauge"-type issues you'd have with a rocket that small. But with a high-performance liquid rocket engine, perhaps even a methane or hydrogen one (hydrogen pretty unlikely, but they're working on it for ULA), they may well get to a 30kg microsatellite, if minimum-gauge issues don't kill them (i.e. where do you get aerospace-weight, LOx-compatible valves of that size?).

Sorry for the slightly-offtopicness of this post.

[Patchouli]

Another plane that probably could be had for low cost  is the F-111 it has a large payload and a max speed of mach 2.5.

Anything flown on an F-111 center line will have to be stored internally, the F-111 does not have the necessary ground clearance to fly external stores on the center line. If stored externally it would have to be carried off center on one of the wings.

Yah it lacks an external center line mount but the wing hard points can carry about 2300kg each which should still be enough for a good sized micro launcher and there is good ground clearance as shown in this pic.

With a rocket sized for the hard points it should be capable of putting 50 to 80kg into orbit.

ISP will be a huge driver here and a high performance liquid rocket such as NOFBX will yeild much better numbers then a solid.

[Robotbeat]

Only if the NOFBX rocket is pump-fed would it be much higher performance than a solid (seems dangerous to me).

[jongoff]

I still think that a 30kg microsat is a little optimistic for the Lynx MkII unless they use a high performance liquid rocket (instead of the much more likely solids).

You think solids would be likely with the XCOR crowd? You don't know them very well...

~Jon

[Robotbeat]

I still think that a 30kg microsat is a little optimistic for the Lynx MkII unless they use a high performance liquid rocket (instead of the much more likely solids).

You think solids would be likely with the XCOR crowd? You don't know them very well...

~Jon

Ah, true...

[sdsds]

The customer interested in operationally responsive capability might be willing to support this effort even without purchasing any launches.  Somewhat like EELV, it is partially the capability to launch which is of value.

[jongoff]

Man, if only those Generation Orbit guys had been smart enough to consult with NSF's resident experts, they could've saved themselves so much embarrassment...

;-)

~Jon

[edkyle99]

Here's a very interesting paper from 2003 that hints at the possibilities.
http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA428105

The author suggests that 6.5 kg to 400 km orbit is possible using a single-stage rocket, GLOW 2 tonnes (air launched). 

My back of the envelope suggests that a solid motor two stage air-launched rocket weighing 2 tonnes using optimized stage masses could lift perhaps 50 kg to 400 km LEO.  This with existing mass ratios and ISP more conservative than Maj Lawrence's assumptions. 

GO wants to use existing motors, which would likely mean less-than-optimal results using more than two stages, but still good for 30 kg.

Compare with state of the art ground launch, 1956-58-ish.  The Vanguard rocket weighed about 10 tonnes but could only lift 23 kg into LEO.  Or compare with Japan's rail-launched (unguided initial stages) Lambda 4S, circa 1966, which weighed 9.2 tonnes (four stages) and could orbit 56 kg.

So, this thing looks do-able.  Cost is, of course, the key.  Maj. Lawrence suggested that it might be possible to orbit a small payload for roughly the same as it costs to use certain GPS guided bombs or missiles.

 - Ed Kyle

[edkyle99]

http://www.generationorbit.com/

Generation Orbit Launch Services, Inc. (or GO) presents a fast, flexible, and dedicated nanosatellite (1-30 kg) orbital payload delivery service called GO Launcher, utilizing existing high speed jet aircraft and mostly existing rockets.

GO has offices in Atlanta, GA and Washington, DC. GO is privately held.

This sure does look like what DARPA is asking for with ALASA, doesn't it?

http://www.darpa.mil/NewsEvents/Releases/2011/11/10.aspx

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3A27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3Abe5304f4-1881-4067-b2e8-ef38541a0e77

 - Ed Kyle

[HMXHMX]

http://www.generationorbit.com/

Generation Orbit Launch Services, Inc. (or GO) presents a fast, flexible, and dedicated nanosatellite (1-30 kg) orbital payload delivery service called GO Launcher, utilizing existing high speed jet aircraft and mostly existing rockets.

GO has offices in Atlanta, GA and Washington, DC. GO is privately held.

This sure does look like what DARPA is asking for with ALASA, doesn't it?

http://www.darpa.mil/NewsEvents/Releases/2011/11/10.aspx

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3A27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3Abe5304f4-1881-4067-b2e8-ef38541a0e77

 - Ed Kyle

It seems to miss both payload mass requirement (100 lbm) and cost target ($1M or less).

[edkyle99]

It seems to miss both payload mass requirement (100 lbm) and cost target ($1M or less).

The GO-2 section does mention the possibility of future performance upgrades, and only 15 kg or so more is needed, so there's that.  As for the cost, I'm not sure I can imagine anyone making the $1 million per launch mark.  It's a nice goal, but let's be realistic.

 - Ed Kyle

[HMXHMX]

It seems to miss both payload mass requirement (100 lbm) and cost target ($1M or less).

The GO-2 section does mention the possibility of future performance upgrades, and only 15 kg or so more is needed, so there's that.  As for the cost, I'm not sure I can imagine anyone making the $1 million per launch mark.  It's a nice goal, but let's be realistic.

 - Ed Kyle

A good way to lose a proposal submitted to even DARPA is to begin by saying I can't achieve a stated requirement.  From the Q&A for ALASA, Dec 1, 2011:

Q11: How strict is the $1M total cost per flight goal?

A11: The $1M per flight cost is a firm requirement, and it is incumbent on the proposer to determine how that will be achieved. The BAA will be amended to clarify the $1M per flight cost is a firm requirement.

[Robotbeat]

I like those sort of goals... They seem just out of reach. If it was a "practical" goal, then it wouldn't be a good goal for a prize-type contest. It's good for stretching the bounds of what is then understood as "practical."

$1 million is a good goal. They don't need just another Scout or Minotaur or Falcon 1 launch vehicle, they want something considerably cheaper. And a $1 million per launch for a microsatellite of ~50kg is pretty enabling for small-business-scale (and even concerted hobbyist/amateur group) projects, perhaps even cheaper than flying as a secondary payload. Actually, that brings up a good question:

Exactly how much does it typically cost for a 100lbm microsatellite to launch as a secondary payload?

[HMXHMX]

I like those sort of goals... They seem just out of reach. If it was a "practical" goal, then it wouldn't be a good goal for a prize-type contest. It's good for stretching the bounds of what is then understood as "practical."

$1 million is a good goal. They don't need just another Scout or Minotaur or Falcon 1 launch vehicle, they want something considerably cheaper. And a $1 million per launch for a microsatellite of ~50kg is pretty enabling for small-business-scale (and even concerted hobbyist/amateur group) projects, perhaps even cheaper than flying as a secondary payload. Actually, that brings up a good question:

Exactly how much does it typically cost for a 100lbm microsatellite to launch as a secondary payload?

The answer is usually "how much do you have?" 

[Moe Grills]

  GO is a small startup aerospace company.
Based in Atlanta.
Successfully tested a flight article on July 31.
Plan to airlaunch payloads to LEO or SO using a 'Pegasus' type booster.
That's all I know.

Could someone fill in more details?
Is GO planning something more ambitious than run-of-the-mill payload launches?

[Danderman]

http://www.generationorbit.com/blog/category/news/

Generation Orbit Hires Zack Rubin as Structures Lead Engineer

Generation Orbit Launch Services, Inc. (GO) is pleased to welcome Mr. Zack Rubin to the team as the Lead Engineer of the Engineering Team’s Structures Division. Mr. Rubin will be responsible for leading the design, prototyping, integration and testing of flight structures, mechanisms, and separation systems for the GOLauncher family of vehicles. Mr. Rubin began his position with GO in early August.

Previously, he worked as a Structures Engineer and Dynamic Environments Engineer at SpaceX. Mr. Rubin contributed flight hardware design and analysis to Falcon 1, Falcon 9 v1.0 and v1.1, Grasshopper, Falcon Heavy and Dragon. He developed in-house shock testing facilities for rapid hardware qualification, and was also responsible for dynamic environments, instrumentation and sound suppression modifications at the Cape Canaveral and Vandenberg launch pads and the McGregor Texas test site. Mr. Rubin holds a Master of Science in Aerospace Engineering focused from California Institute of Technology, and a Bachelor of Science in Engineering from Harvey Mudd College.

Mr. Rubin commented on the start of his tenure at GO. “Dedication to creating new technology for a rapidly evolving aerospace market is what sets companies like GO apart. We are going to build and fly amazing hardware and I am so happy to have a contributing role.”

“Through his hands-on experience as a Responsible Engineer on multiple projects, Zack has demonstrated not only his engineering skills, but also his leadership characteristics,” commented GO’s COO A.J. Piplica. “We are confident in his abilities to make him a huge impact on our company’s success.”

[Danderman]

http://www.generationorbit.com/blog/generation-orbit-awarded-phase-i-sbir-grant-with-afrl-for-golauncher-1-hypersonic-testbed/

Generation Orbit Awarded Phase I SBIR with AFRL for GOLauncher 1 Hypersonic Testbed

July 9, 2014
Atlanta, GA

Generation Orbit Launch Services, Inc. (GO) has been awarded a Phase I Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) contract from the Air Force Research Laboratory, Aerospace Systems Directorate (AFRL/RQ) for development of a GOLauncher 1, a single-stage air launched liquid rocket vehicle designed to fly suppressed trajectories for hypersonic flight research applications. Booster systems capable of flying suppressed trajectories increase flexibility for experimental payloads to high Mach number, high dynamic pressure test environments. The nine-month effort worth $150,000 will focus on requirements definition, configuration trade studies, and trajectory design space exploration.

“Rooted in the success of the HIFiRE program’s philosophy, we believe GOLauncher 1 will provide longer duration testing with the flexibility to maximize accessibility to flight conditions of interest to the hypersonic research and development community at an affordable cost,” commented A.J. Piplica, the Principal Investigator on the effort. “Generation Orbit’s solution to improving access to test windows of interest for hypersonic flight testing calls for a novel air launched liquid rocket booster system specifically designed for flying suppressed trajectories. We expect a large amount of traceability, in terms of both technology and operations, between GOLauncher 1 and the GOLauncher family.”

AFRL project manager, Barry Hellman, also commented on the program. “As the Air Force works toward next-generation hypersonic systems, flexible and affordable flight testing stands as a key enabler for technology development and operational demonstrations. The combination of air launch and liquid-fueled rockets has the potential to open the diversity of trajectories we can fly.”

For additional details contact:

A.J. Piplica
Chief Operating Officer
Generation Orbit Launch Services, Inc.
1040 Crown Pointe Parkway, Suite 950
Atlanta, GA 30338
[email protected]

About Generation Orbit Launch Services, Inc.

Atlanta-based Generation Orbit Launch Services, Inc. (GO) focuses on providing fast, flexible, and dedicated space transportation services for small payloads. GOLauncher 2 supplies microsatellite, nanosatellite, and CubeSat customers with reliable and affordable access to space. The unique air launch approach developed by GO and its development partners offers flexible launch capabilities, poised to reduce fixed infrastructure needs, launch costs, and the time from contract signature to launch. Air launch system experience at GO dates back over 10 years, providing a distinct advantage throughout the design and analysis process. As a systems integrator, GO compiles multiple aspects of the launch architecture to provide a streamlined service to scientists, researchers, and industry customers alike.

For more information, visit GO on the web at

www.generationorbit.com

 and follow GO on Twitter @generationorbit.

[russianhalo117]

BUMP: Due to so many un-posted Generation Orbit updates and the start of various types of post PDR testing on GOLauncher-1 its time to update this thread.

The following is this threads backlog of un-posted updates:

2014:
April 15, 2014 – Updates from the GO Workshop (http://generationorbit.com/april-15th-2014-updates-from-the-go-workshop/)
July 9, 2014 – Generation Orbit Awarded Phase I SBIR with AFRL for GOLauncher 1 Hypersonic Testbed (http://generationorbit.com/generation-orbit-awarded-phase-i-sbir-with-afrl-for-golauncher-1-hypersonic-testbed/)
July 21, 2014 – Leaving the Nest and Learning to Fly (http://generationorbit.com/july-21st-2014-leaving-the-nest-and-learning-to-fly/)
July 31, 2014 – Generation Orbit Completes First Flight Test (http://generationorbit.com/generation-orbit-completes-first-flight-test/)
August 22, 2014 – GO FET Internal Environment Data Analysis (http://generationorbit.com/august-22-2014-go-fet-internal-environment-data-analysis/)
August 28, 2014 – Generation Orbit Hires Zack Rubin as Structures Lead Engineer (http://generationorbit.com/generation-orbit-hires-zack-rubin-as-structures-lead-engineer/)
December 8, 2014 – Congratulations Orion! (http://generationorbit.com/december-8-2014-congratulations-orion/)

2015:
January 16, 2015 – Hardware Prototyping (http://generationorbit.com/january-16-2015-hardware-prototyping/)
February 6, 2015 – Flow Boldly. (http://generationorbit.com/february-6-2015-flow-boldly/)
March 3, 2015 – Successful Hot Fire Tests (http://generationorbit.com/march-3-2015-successful-hot-fire-tests/)
July 16, 2015 – Generation Orbit Completes Second Flight Test (http://generationorbit.com/generation-orbit-completes-second-flight-test/)
August 4, 2015 – Generation Orbit Awarded Phase II SBIR Contract with AFRL for GOLauncher 1 Hypersonic Testbed Design and Prototype (http://generationorbit.com/generation-orbit-awarded-phase-ii-sbir-contract-with-afrl-for-golauncher-1-hypersonic-testbed-design-and-prototype/)
August 24, 2015 – Generation Orbit Hires Glenn Case as Senior Engineer (http://generationorbit.com/generation-orbit-hires-glenn-case-as-senior-engineer/)
August 24, 2015 – Generation Orbit Hires Skyler Shuford as Lead Guidance, Navigation, and Control Engineer (http://generationorbit.com/generation-orbit-hires-skyler-shuford-as-lead-guidance-navigation-and-control-engineer/)
December 8, 2015 – Generation Orbit Completes 3rd Successful Flight of GO-FET Flight Testbed (http://generationorbit.com/generation-orbit-completes-3rd-successful-flight-of-go-fet-flight-testbed/)

2016:
February 9, 2016 – SpaceWorks Family of Companies Awarded the Georgia Small Business of the Year Award by National Defense Industrial Association – Georgia Chapter (http://generationorbit.com/spaceworks-family-of-companies-awarded-the-georgia-small-business-of-the-year-award-by-national-defense-industrial-association-georgia-chapter/)
April 11, 2016 – Generation Orbit Signs Space Act Agreement with NASA Langley Research Center to Advance the Design and Manufacture of Cryogenic Propellant Tanks for Air Launched Liquid Rockets (http://generationorbit.com/generation-orbit-signs-space-act-agreement-with-nasa-langley-research-center-to-advance-the-design-and-manufacture-of-cryogenic-propellant-tanks-for-air-launched-liquid-rockets/)
April 28, 2016 – Generation Orbit Celebrates Five Year Anniversary (http://generationorbit.com/generation-orbit-celebrates-five-year-anniversary/)
May 2, 2016 – Generation Orbit Signs Space Act Agreement with NASA Armstrong Flight Research Center for Flight Testing of GOLauncher 1 (http://generationorbit.com/nasa-armstrong-flight-research-center-selects-generation-orbit-for-space-act-agreement-to-conduct-flight-testing-of-golauncher-1/)
June 22, 2016 – Generation Orbit Completes GOLauncher 1 Preliminary Design Review (http://generationorbit.com/generation-orbit-completes-golauncher-1-preliminary-design-review/)
October 27, 2016 – Generation Orbit Prepares for GO1 Wind Tunnel and Hot Fire Testing (http://generationorbit.com/generation-orbit-prepares-for-go1-wind-tunnel-and-hot-fire-testing/)
December 13, 2016 – Generation Orbit Names A.J. Piplica as CEO (http://generationorbit.com/generation-orbit-names-a-j-piplica-as-ceo/)

2017:
April 7, 2017 – Generation Orbit Awarded Contract for GO1 Flight Testing (http://generationorbit.com/generation-orbit-awarded-contract-for-go1-flight-testing/)

2018:
January 8, 2018 – Generation Orbit and NASA Complete GO1-ITA Captive Carry Flight Test Program (http://generationorbit.com/generation-orbit-and-nasa-complete-go1-ita-captive-carry-flight-test-program/)
June 28, 2018 – Generation Orbit Completes Hot Fire Test of GO1 Hypersonic Testbed Prototype at Cecil Spaceport (http://generationorbit.com/generation-orbit-completes-hot-fire-test-of-go1-hypersonic-testbed-prototype-at-cecil-spaceport/)

[savuporo]

http://generationorbit.com/generation-orbit-awarded-contract-for-go1-flight-testing/

Generation Orbit Launch Services, Inc. (GO) is pleased to announce the award of a Follow-On Phase II SBIR (Small Business Innovative Research) contract from the Air Force Research Laboratory, Aerospace Systems Directorate, High Speed Systems Division (AFRL/RQH) for development and flight testing of the GOLauncher 1 (GO1). The single stage liquid rocket, launched from a Gulfstream III business jet, will conduct its inaugural flight test in 2019, reaching Mach 6 within the atmospher

[gongora]

Tweets from Jeff Foust[/url]:
AJ Piplica, Generation Orbit: still interested in doing air-launch for smallsats down the road; focus for now is hypersonics work.
Piplica: planning captive carry tests of GO1 test article on a Gulfstream III at NASA Armstrong next month.
Piplica: flight tests of GO1 scheduled for 1st quarter of 2019, flying out of Cecil Field spaceport in Jacksonville, Fla.

[Robotbeat]

Generation Missile.

[Olaf]

https://twitter.com/jrolds/status/938571435517280261

We're in the air! Congratulations @generationorbit for today's captive carry flight test of our GOLauncher 1 system at @NASAArmstrong. Today's ITA test was a good step toward our GOLauncher 1 hypersonic testbed and suborbital launcher.

[russianhalo117]

https://twitter.com/jrolds/status/938571435517280261

We're in the air! Congratulations @generationorbit for today's captive carry flight test of our GOLauncher 1 system at @NASAArmstrong. Today's ITA test was a good step toward our GOLauncher 1 hypersonic testbed and suborbital launcher.

Accompanying video shorts of the CC test (hopefully b-roll another day):

C 20 GO1 Taxi 5Dec2017



C 20 GO1 TakeOff 6Dec2017



C 20 GO1 Landing 6Dec2017



GoITAflight

[whitelancer64]

That livery is an awful lot like Air Force One.

[russianhalo117]

That livery is an awful lot like Air Force One.

It is a newer livery rolling out on more and more government aircraft every year. The only difference is the agency logo and number on the tail.

[Yeknom-Ecaps]

A press release from Generation Orbit Launch Services mentions that there are THREE test flights. Anyone know the dates of the other two (assuming Dec 6 photos above are from one of the three)?

Did the test take place at Edwards AFB (Armstrong Research Center) or somewhere else?

Thanks.

[Yeknom-Ecaps]

Flight tests on 12/6, 12/11 & 12/12

[FutureSpaceTourist]

Posted last week I believe:

Generation Orbit Completes Hot Fire Test of GO1 Hypersonic Testbed Prototype at Cecil Spaceport

Generation Orbit Launch Services, Inc. (GO) has completed an initial integrated engine firing of a full-scale, functional prototype of the GOLauncher1 (GO1) hypersonic flight test booster. Under contract to the Air Force Research Laboratory, Aerospace Systems Directorate, High Speed Systems Division (AFRL/RQH), GO is developing GO1 to be an affordable and flexible hypersonic testbed to flight test a wide range of hypersonic vehicle technologies. The test was the first of its kind to be conducted at Cecil Spaceport in Jacksonville, FL. This is also GO’s first test campaign to include Ursa Major Technologies’ “Hadley” liquid rocket engine. The 5,000 lbf-class oxygen-rich staged combustion engine performed as expected through the tests.

GO1 is a single-stage liquid rocket, launched from a Gulfstream III carrier aircraft, primarily designed for hypersonic flight testing. The rocket vehicle propulsion system utilizes liquid oxygen and kerosene propellants. The system is designed to provide affordable and regular access to high dynamic pressure flight conditions between Mach 5 and Mach 8 to a wide range of payloads for fundamental research, technology development, and risk reduction. The first flight of GO1 is planned for late 2019.

Building up a series of cold flows and engine development tests, this test demonstrated integration of the engine with flight like propellant tanks, valves, pressurization system, and flight controls. Further, the test demonstrated the throttling capabilities of the system necessary to meet the thrust levels for Mach 6 cruise at 80,000 to 90,000 ft. This feature is a key enabler of GO1’s next-generation hypersonic flight testing capabilities for fundamental research and technology maturation.

GO CEO, AJ Piplica, commented on the program: “The culmination of several years of work in the successful testing of this GO1 prototype is a huge milestone in the product’s development. Completing a full end-to-end integrated system iteration prior to the completion of the vehicle design has allowed us to learn a massive amount, not only about how the system works, but also on the manufacturing and operations fronts. Completing this campaign at Cecil Spaceport also demonstrates the readiness of the facility to support near-term launch operations. We very much appreciate the opportunity and afforded us by AFRL to drive the development of GO1 as we continue to move toward ushering a revolution in hypersonic flight testing capabilities.”

AFRL/RQH’s Program Manager for GOLauncher1, Barry Hellman, expressed his confidence in the program: “The rapid prototyping of a new hypersonic flight test capability being done by Generation Orbit has been exemplary. It will provide AFRL with a capability to conduct routine hypersonic testing with a system that can be tailored to many technologies. The success of GO1 wouldn’t be possible without the opportunity provided by the Air Force Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) program. Further, the facilities and support personnel at Cecil Spaceport have been outstanding hosts for this tests and are invaluable to the future success of the program.”

Also, Cecil Spaceport Director, Todd Lindner, stated “The successful completion of the Hadley liquid rocket engine test by Generation Orbit and the Air Force Research Lab (AFRL) serves as a milestone for Cecil Spaceport and demonstrates the validity and capabilities of the Cecil facilities and Generation Orbit.” Lindner concluded, “We look forward to continuing our support of this important program.”

For additional details about the GOLauncher1 program please contact:
88th Air Base Wing Public Affairs (88ABW/PA)
937-522-3252
[email protected].

http://generationorbit.com/generation-orbit-completes-hot-fire-test-of-go1-hypersonic-test...

[FutureSpaceTourist]

[Images] @GenerationOrbit's first hotfire of 'GOLauncher1' (GO1) hypersonic testbed prototype, with @ursamajortech's ox-rich staged combustion engine, 'Hadley' @ 5000 lbf thrust using Kerosene+LOX 🔥 #americanmade instagram.com/p/Bkn12PvgEFC/…

https://twitter.com/megsylhydrazine/status/1012938339928797184

[Yeknom-Ecaps]

What date did the test actually take place? Thanks.

[russianhalo117]

What date did the test actually take place? Thanks.

June 28, 2018 – Generation Orbit Completes Hot Fire Test of GO1 Hypersonic Testbed Prototype at Cecil Spaceport (http://generationorbit.com/generation-orbit-completes-hot-fire-test-of-go1-hypersonic-testbed-prototype-at-cecil-spaceport/)

[russianhalo117]

GO1 EDU Hot Fire Test 01

[Davidthefat]

GO1 EDU Hot Fire Test 01

Oh wow, does this mean they are closer to getting to space than Vector is? It seems they at least have flight-like or actual flight propellant tanks and an engine controller working.

We have yet to see even engineering units of tanks from Vector holding cryogenic propellants.

[russianhalo117]

GO1 EDU Hot Fire Test 01

Oh wow, does this mean they are closer to getting to space than Vector is? It seems they at least have flight-like or actual flight propellant tanks and an engine controller working.

We have yet to see even engineering units of tanks from Vector holding cryogenic propellants.

GO1 is Suborbital. The large GO2 launcher is orbital and GO3 Mini and Heavy (use a DC10 for launch) is in design work. They are working on a Phantom Express like launch system too, but one advancement at a time.

[seruriermarshal]

GO1 is Suborbital. The large GO2 launcher is orbital and GO3 Mini and Heavy (use a DC10 for launch) is in design work. They are working on a Phantom Express like launch system too, but one advancement at a time.

Phantom Express from Boeing ?

[ethan829]

http://generationorbit.com/u-s-air-force-designates-go1-hypersonic-flight-research-vehicle-as-x-60a/

U.S. Air Force Designates GO1 Hypersonic Flight Research Vehicle as X-60A

October 4, 2018

WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE, Ohio – The Air Force has designated the GOLauncher1 (GO1) hypersonic flight research vehicle as X-60A.  The vehicle is being developed by Generation Orbit Launch Services, Inc. under contract to the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL), Aerospace Systems Directorate, High Speed Systems Division.

It is an air-dropped liquid rocket, specifically designed for hypersonic flight research to mature technologies including scramjet propulsion, high temperature materials and autonomous control.

“The X-60A is like a flying wind tunnel to capture data that complements our current ground test capability,” said Col. Colin Tucker, Military Deputy, office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Science, Technology, and Engineering. “We’ve long needed this type of test vehicle to better understand how materials and other technologies behave while flying at more than 5 times the speed of sound. It enables faster development of both our current hypersonic weapon rapid prototypes and evolving future systems.”

AFRL’s motivation for the X-60A program is to increase the frequency of flight testing while lowering the cost of maturing hypersonic technologies in relevant flight conditions. While hypersonic ground test facilities are vital in technology development, we must also test those technologies with actual hypersonic flight conditions.

Utilizing new space commercial development, licensing, and operations practices, X-60A is envisioned to provide the Air Force, other U.S. Government agencies, and industry with a platform to more rapidly mature technologies.

The X-60A rocket vehicle propulsion system is the Hadley liquid rocket engine, which utilizes liquid oxygen and kerosene propellants. The system is designed to provide affordable and regular access to high dynamic pressure flight conditions between Mach 5 and Mach 8.

This is the first Air Force Small Business Innovative Research program to receive an experimental “X” designation.

[Tywin]

clink, clink $$$ 

I hope this contract is one step into this 

[Asteroza]

http://generationorbit.com/u-s-air-force-designates-go1-hypersonic-flight-research-vehicle-as-x-60a/

U.S. Air Force Designates GO1 Hypersonic Flight Research Vehicle as X-60A

October 4, 2018

WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE, Ohio – The Air Force has designated the GOLauncher1 (GO1) hypersonic flight research vehicle as X-60A.  The vehicle is being developed by Generation Orbit Launch Services, Inc. under contract to the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL), Aerospace Systems Directorate, High Speed Systems Division.

It is an air-dropped liquid rocket, specifically designed for hypersonic flight research to mature technologies including scramjet propulsion, high temperature materials and autonomous control.

“The X-60A is like a flying wind tunnel to capture data that complements our current ground test capability,” said Col. Colin Tucker, Military Deputy, office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Science, Technology, and Engineering. “We’ve long needed this type of test vehicle to better understand how materials and other technologies behave while flying at more than 5 times the speed of sound. It enables faster development of both our current hypersonic weapon rapid prototypes and evolving future systems.”

AFRL’s motivation for the X-60A program is to increase the frequency of flight testing while lowering the cost of maturing hypersonic technologies in relevant flight conditions. While hypersonic ground test facilities are vital in technology development, we must also test those technologies with actual hypersonic flight conditions.

Utilizing new space commercial development, licensing, and operations practices, X-60A is envisioned to provide the Air Force, other U.S. Government agencies, and industry with a platform to more rapidly mature technologies.

The X-60A rocket vehicle propulsion system is the Hadley liquid rocket engine, which utilizes liquid oxygen and kerosene propellants. The system is designed to provide affordable and regular access to high dynamic pressure flight conditions between Mach 5 and Mach 8.

This is the first Air Force Small Business Innovative Research program to receive an experimental “X” designation.

baby Pegasus now?


and the requisite meme

Rocket salesman slaps Roc rocket hardpoint
 "this bad boy can fit so many smallsat launchers on it"

[Tywin]

New info about the X-60A:

https://twitter.com/AFResearchLab/status/1103359347361497089

[Star One]

New info about the X-60A:

https://twitter.com/AFResearchLab/status/1103359347361497089

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?PHPSESSID=qb9nn0ftp4qfbkmedrt24ifb52;topic=11281.msg1919133#msg1919133

[catdlr]

Hypersonic Dreams - Fire and Noise (X-60A)

Generation Orbit
Published on Mar 12, 2019

X-60A is a small high-speed flight testbed for conducting research and development of future hypersonic systems. Hypersonics is the next great frontier of atmospheric flight, and Generation Orbit’s experienced team of engineers and developers is helping the U.S. close the technology gap in this critical flight regime.

[russianhalo117]

The GO Launcher Family and it's orbital launch plans have been quietly shelved via a website refresh. GO Launcher 1 and 2 now form the X-60 hypersonics research launcher family with X-60A presently approved and a tentative X-60B follow on from other sources.

The reason why they have become quiet lately is everything they post now has to be submitted for multiagency review for authorization to release. DARPA seems to be one of the primaries and approvals could be via them.

Reference at bottom of page (http://generationorbit.com/x-60a/) is:
Cleared for Public Release: 88-ABW-2018-6091. Distribution Unlimited

[Asteroza]

Wonder what will become of their larger GO Launcher 3 design then, their DC-10 airdrop design. Though the smallsat launchers are facing competitive pressures at this point that makes a late entry hazardous...

[Galactic Penguin SST]

The GO Launcher Family and it's orbital launch plans have been quietly shelved via a website refresh. GO Launcher 1 and 2 now form the X-60 hypersonics research launcher family with X-60A presently approved and a tentative X-60B follow on from other sources.

The reason why they have become quiet lately is everything they post now has to be submitted for multiagency review for authorization to release. DARPA seems to be one of the primaries and approvals could be via them.

Reference at bottom of page (http://generationorbit.com/x-60a/) is:
Cleared for Public Release: 88-ABW-2018-6091. Distribution Unlimited

Didn't they have a launch order for cubesats from NASA?

[russianhalo117]

The GO Launcher Family and it's orbital launch plans have been quietly shelved via a website refresh. GO Launcher 1 and 2 now form the X-60 hypersonics research launcher family with X-60A presently approved and a tentative X-60B follow on from other sources.

The reason why they have become quiet lately is everything they post now has to be submitted for multiagency review for authorization to release. DARPA seems to be one of the primaries and approvals could be via them.

Reference at bottom of page (http://generationorbit.com/x-60a/) is:
Cleared for Public Release: 88-ABW-2018-6091. Distribution Unlimited

Didn't they have a launch order for cubesats from NASA?

NASA Payloads were shifted larger VCLS class because there payload form factor grew out of the original class range.
Reason referenced here: https://space.skyrocket.de/doc_lau/golauncher.htm

[russianhalo117]

X-60 Family (X-60, A, B and C):



X-60 Family (X-60, A, B and C):
X-60A page: https://www.spaceworks.aero/flight/x-60a/
X-60B page: https://www.spaceworks.aero/flight/x-60b/
X-60C page: https://www.spaceworks.aero/flight/x-60c/

Hellcat AKA Hellcat Multirole Missile System (HMMS): https://www.spaceworks.aero/flight/hellcat/

Other company products:
https://www.spaceworks.aero/flight/
https://www.spaceworks.aero/orbital/
https://www.spaceworks.aero/commercial/
https://www.spaceworks.aero/software/
https://www.spaceworks.aero/studios/

Main page: https://www.spaceworks.aero/