This has always looked somewhat puzzling. Why would they use LiPO when primary lithium batteries could deliver better specific energy and power ?
Could be just easy availability of off the shelf power electronics
LiPO probably offers the best compromise in peak current capacity.
Plus they can use off the shelf batteries from the EV market vs using custom built cells.
Even on an expendable LV the ability to recharge the batteries is still useful in that the vehicle can be recharged if the launch is delayed or aborted.
LiPO probably offers the best compromise in peak current capacity.
Definitely not, lipos generally cant be discharged as high as even LiFEPo4 cells - which come in at slightly less specific energy. And i haven't worked too much with primary lithium cells in large stacks but you should be able to draw very high pulse currents from LiSO2 and LiSOCl2 packs.
Plus they can use off the shelf batteries from the EV market vs using custom built cells.
Even on an expendable LV the ability to recharge the batteries is still useful in that the vehicle can be recharged if the launch is delayed or aborted.
Off the shelf electronics, battery packs and ability to re-charge for testing and delays is probably the real deciding factor.
EDIT: what i wrote above is bogus, that was true for early cobalt oxide cathode pouch cells, but not anymore. There are various polymer electrolyte cells with different cathodes around these days, i have lost track.
So Moon Express now claims they booked a ride with RocketLab.
http://www.geekwire.com/2015/moon-express-and-rocket-lab-make-deal-for-lunar-landings-in-2017/
Which is odd, as RocketLab lists these as they payload specs on their web page
How do you get 150kg from SSO to the surface of the moon ..
A small lander, some solar panels, ion propulsion to get to LLO. The alternative would be to try to engineer a tiny hydrolox stage but that seems like madness. You'd still need a storable propellant descent and landing stage.
How do you get 150kg from SSO to the surface of the moon ..
A small lander, some solar panels, ion propulsion to get to LLO.
They dont do ion propulsion, last they talked about hydrogen peroxide prop. LADEE weighed 400kg at launch and
orbited the moon, but it was boosted by Minotaur V
So Moon Express now claims they booked a ride with RocketLab.
http://www.geekwire.com/2015/moon-express-and-rocket-lab-make-deal-for-lunar-landings-in-2017/
Which is odd, as RocketLab lists these as they payload specs on their web page
How do you get 150kg from SSO to the surface of the moon ..
Launching due east will buy them a few more kg to LEO. The difference between SSO and low inclination LEO is often a good amount. For the Delta II 7320 the difference is 2,865 kg to LEO and 1,651 to SSO. No clue what the difference is for the Electron. I doubt it alone can explain their quotes performance to the lunar surface.
This is a shrunk MX1 (600kg) which has been designed specifically for Electron and its competing LVs.
Besides being a lander it also space craft eg lunar orbiter and can also act as a 3rd stage.
MoonExpress could actually make money on the XPrize, $25M (-$5M for LV) would go along way to paying for MX development and build costs.
This is a shrunk MX1 (600kg) which has been designed specifically for Electron and its competing LVs.
Its 200kg according to Alan Boyle. And it's not designed to do anything else than meet the X-Prize launch contract deadline to get the extension. Moon Express found a way to get a 'launch contract'
"In an Oct. 1 interview, Bob Richards, co-founder and chief executive of Moon Express, said that Electron will be able to send “something under” 10 kilograms to the surface of the moon.
Zero is something under 10.
Being the first scheduled to launch of the new small LVs has paid off for RocketLab. MoonExpress specifically design this lander for Electron. If Firefly was flying first the lander would have been designed for larger Alpha and may have been to small for Electron.
This combination of low cost dedicated LV and lander maybe a winner for MoonExpress. Besides their XPrize mission which may turn a profit given low launch costs, they have another two missions for customers. They have allowed themselves 3 attempts at XPrize, if successful on 1st the other 2 booked launches will be for customers.
Celestis will apparently include a capsule with ashes on one of these lunar missions, as today a new flight appeared in their schedule
Mission Scheduled Launch Date Service Launch Site
Tribute Flight November 6, 2015 Earth Rise Spaceport America, New Mexico
Heritage Flight Q4 2015 Earth Orbit Cape Canaveral, Florida
Earth Rise 08 Q2 2016 Earth Rise Spaceport America, New Mexico
Earth Orbit 08 Q3 2016 Earth Orbit Cape Canaveral, Florida
Earth Rise 09 Q2 2017 Earth Rise Spaceport America, New Mexico
Earth Orbit 09 Q3 2017 Earth Orbit Cape Canaveral, Florida
Voyager 01* Q3 2017 Voyager Cape Canaveral, Florida
Luna 02 Q4 2017 Luna Cape Canaveral, Florida or New Zealandhttp://www.celestis.com/manifest.asp
This is a shrunk MX1 (600kg) which has been designed specifically for Electron and its competing LVs.
Besides being a lander it also space craft eg lunar orbiter and can also act as a 3rd stage.
MoonExpress could actually make money on the XPrize, $25M (-$5M for LV) would go along way to paying for MX development and build costs.
Where did you hear about shrinking the MX1 down ?
Would like to watch and follow this.
This is a shrunk MX1 (600kg) which has been designed specifically for Electron and its competing LVs.
Besides being a lander it also space craft eg lunar orbiter and can also act as a 3rd stage.
MoonExpress could actually make money on the XPrize, $25M (-$5M for LV) would go along way to paying for MX development and build costs.
Where did you hear about shrinking the MX1 down ?
Would like to watch and follow this.
It's implied by the fact that we know Electron can't carry the mass of the originally-planned 600 kg MX-1.
It's also explicitly stated in the article linked to a few posts back:
Meanwhile, Silicon Valley-based Moon Express is building and testing versions of its MX-1 lander – which Richards said is being scaled down to a mass of 200 kilograms (440 pounds), including fuel.
http://www.geekwire.com/2015/moon-express-and-rocket-lab-make-deal-for-lunar-landings-in-2017/
This is a shrunk MX1 (600kg) which has been designed specifically for Electron and its competing LVs.
Its 200kg according to Alan Boyle. And it's not designed to do anything else than meet the X-Prize launch contract deadline to get the extension. Moon Express found a way to get a 'launch contract'
As i was saying:
http://spaceref.biz/commercial-space/moon-express-launch-contract-to-be-verified-by-google-lunar-xprize.htmlYesterday Moon Express became the first Google Lunar XPRIZE participant to sign a launch contract with a launch service provider, albeit one who has yet to launch a rocket.
...
Should the Google Lunar XPRIZE verify the contract, then the competition deadline will be extended beyond the current deadline of December 31st of this year to the end of 2017. However, any other team who wish to remain in the competition would have to announce and have their contract verified by December 31st, 2016.
In other news, anyone here know any other X-prize teams that need a ride for the extension ? I have one available for a low price
Here are two more articles on it. We have name for it MX-1E (E for Electron??).
Made up of 2 small (identical??) landers first one acts as booster to get it out of LEO.
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/10/01/moon-express-rockets-closer-to-planned-lunar-landing.html
http://www.nbr.co.nz/opinion/nzs-rocket-lab-signs-contract-company-planning-moonshots-2017
I posted this on MoonExpress thread, trying stop Rocket lab becoming about MX-1E. Think carefully about thread you use to reply.
"Moon Express wants to launch two moonshots in 2017 using one of Rocket Lab's low-cost Electron Rockets, with a third at a later date."
'Rocket Lab’s manifest in 2017 and has contracted for a third launch at a time to be determined, with options for a fourth and fifth launch. The launches would accommodate Moon Express’ commercial payloads – and also give the venture more than one crack at winning the X Prize.
“Hopefully we nail it on the first time,” Richards said. “But as you know, space is hard.”
Looking like RocketLab is being operated by some serious management. The launch market is also taking them seriously.
Here are two more articles on it. We have name for it MX-1E (E for Electron??).
Made up of 2 small (identical??) landers first one acts as booster to get it out of LEO.
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/10/01/moon-express-rockets-closer-to-planned-lunar-landing.html
http://www.nbr.co.nz/opinion/nzs-rocket-lab-signs-contract-company-planning-moonshots-2017
I posted this on MoonExpress thread, trying stop Rocket lab becoming about MX-1E. Think carefully about thread you use to reply.
"Moon Express wants to launch two moonshots in 2017 using one of Rocket Lab's low-cost Electron Rockets, with a third at a later date."
'Rocket Lab’s manifest in 2017 and has contracted for a third launch at a time to be determined, with options for a fourth and fifth launch. The launches would accommodate Moon Express’ commercial payloads – and also give the venture more than one crack at winning the X Prize.
“Hopefully we nail it on the first time,” Richards said. “But as you know, space is hard.”
Looking like RocketLab is being operated by some serious management. The launch market is also taking them seriously.
This contract doesn't give evidence of either of these things.
Google Lunar X-Prize contestants are desperately scrambling right now. None of their announced plans for launches have been materializing. The original deadline to win was 2014. All the contestants were clearly going to fail to meet that deadline, so it was extended to the end of 2015. And it's still clear nobody is going to meet the extended deadline. So the deadline is being extended again, by two more years, but only if the contestants can show an actual launch contract by the end of 2015.
So, you have contestants who have been working on their projects for years and who are going to die in a few months unless they can produce a launch contract.
On the other hand, you have RocketLab, who has never launched anything and little evidence they have any customers. So RocketLab is clearly also in desperate need of a customer to show off.
It's no surprise that a desperate would-be customer would sign with a desperate would-be launch provider. Neither of them has anything to lose, and a lot to gain, just by signing the contract, even if there's little chance Moon Express can actually pay for the launch and little chance RocketLab can actually execute the launch.
So, I don't think this demonstrates "serious management" on the part of RocketLab or that the "launch market" is taking them seriously.
