-
#980
by
CharlieWildman
on 24 May, 2017 20:28
-
-
#981
by
billh
on 24 May, 2017 23:11
-
-
#982
by
Mader Levap
on 25 May, 2017 00:33
-
Please let us share the experience.
No chance. They do not want to stream potential launch failure. "Variability of the launch time" is pretty obvious and transparent excuse.
-
#983
by
Steven Pietrobon
on 25 May, 2017 06:26
-
Screen grabs from the launch animation. Had been saving these in case Rocket Lab tweeted these events during launch.
-
#984
by
savuporo
on 25 May, 2017 06:43
-
I'm betting they will make a first attempt in Q1. And the next one not more than 3 month after ..
MVR = minimum viable rocket
Off by around 2 months. Rocket does appear minimally viable.
I wish them well. My money is still on September.
Off by around 3 months. Hope they have more in store, soon.
-
#985
by
HVM
on 25 May, 2017 16:26
-
Animation(a) 1.test(t) [KiwiSpace Foundation vid]
Meco
a: 2:35 t: 2:28
Stage Sep
a: 2:37 t: 2:36
Second Stage Ignition
a: 2:40 t: 2:44
Fairing Sep
a: 3:07 t: 3:08
Seco
a: 7:20 t: ~4.53 (or before)
-
#986
by
TrevorMonty
on 26 May, 2017 00:50
-
Besides target payloads of cubesats and smallsats to LEO, Electron opens up a few other possibilities.
Moon Express lunar lander, which was probably last thing RL thought they would be launching when Electron was conceived.
With a earth escape stage (modified MX lander?) interplanetary missions using cubesats (12U- 24U) is another possibility.
Delivery of small payloads to ISS at short notice. This would require something like mini Cygnus or reentry vehicle if return of small payloads is required. A mini Cygnus with HIAD and mid air recovery might be one way to do it.
-
#987
by
koshvv
on 26 May, 2017 04:51
-
Delivery of small payloads to ISS at short notice. This would require something like mini Cygnus or reentry vehicle if return of small payloads is required.
Berthing mechanism alone will weigh close to 150 kg.
-
#988
by
Patchouli
on 26 May, 2017 04:56
-
A cargo canister sent up on Electron might be small enough to bring in through the airlock.
Though I figure the guidance,sensors, and propulsion hardware needed for rendezvous with ISS probably would eat up a good chunk of the payload.
One solution might be to have a small tug stationed at ISS that flies out and retrieves the container.
-
#989
by
TrevorMonty
on 26 May, 2017 05:39
-
A cargo canister sent up on Electron might be small enough to bring in through the airlock.
The Nanorack airlock may offer a simpler solution.
Once attached to Tranquility, the airlock would be pressurized to allow the hatch to be opened. The inside could then be configured by the crew for a variety of tasks. Once ready for deployment, the hatch would be closed and the airlock depressurized.
The robotic Canadarm2 would then grab the airlock and move it to a deployment angle away from the outpost. After satellite deployment, the arm would then return the airlock to its port on Tranquility.
Read more at
http://www.spaceflightinsider.com/missions/iss/nanoracks-proposed-airlock-paves-way-for-more-commercial-iss/#p5X2vOkP07M5qHqd.99The cargo vehicle would fly into airlock when deployed on end of Canadarm. This would lower risk to ISS, plus vehicle doesn't need airlock, just a bolted airtight plate. Once airlock is attached to ISS, crew has full access to cargo vehicle, could even be brought into ISS if small enough.
-
#990
by
Katana
on 26 May, 2017 06:09
-
A cargo canister sent up on Electron might be small enough to bring in through the airlock.
Though I figure the guidance,sensors, and propulsion hardware needed for rendezvous with ISS probably would eat up a good chunk of the payload.
One solution might be to have a small tug stationed at ISS that flies out and retrieves the container.
Even worse: cost of such systems does not scale down.
-
#991
by
jongoff
on 26 May, 2017 06:55
-
A cargo canister sent up on Electron might be small enough to bring in through the airlock.
Though I figure the guidance,sensors, and propulsion hardware needed for rendezvous with ISS probably would eat up a good chunk of the payload.
One solution might be to have a small tug stationed at ISS that flies out and retrieves the container.
Altius has had ideas for how to enable an upper stage to rendezvous with a space facility with minimal hardware mods, but a) I'm pretty skeptical ISS would ever go for it, even it was demonstrated elsewhere first, and b) we've been so cashflow constrained as a company that we still haven't had the money to really flesh this idea out even in simulation, let alone air-bearing work, etc. We're working on relate items that we think have nearer-term revenue potential, but I wouldn't count out the idea of a small sat launch vehicle been able to directly rendezvous with a non-ISS future space facility.
~Jon
-
#992
by
TrevorMonty
on 26 May, 2017 08:14
-
A cargo canister sent up on Electron might be small enough to bring in through the airlock.
Though I figure the guidance,sensors, and propulsion hardware needed for rendezvous with ISS probably would eat up a good chunk of the payload.
One solution might be to have a small tug stationed at ISS that flies out and retrieves the container.
Even worse: cost of such systems does not scale down.
If vehicle is disposable like Cygnus, removing expensive LIDAR systems inside ISS before it departs could be one option. I don't think needs it for departure especially if using Nanorack airlock. In case of reusable vehicle build cost is not as important.
Another idea is deploying a small tug (cubesat) on end of tether which grab the vehicle at a distance of 100-500m, then real it in slowly. Both tug and vehicle can provide braking thrust under direction from ISS.
There a few cubesat and smallsat inert propulsion systems that use gas and water. This would solve safety issues when bring it inside ISS. Deep space industries have steam thruster, low ISP but cheap and safe.
-
#993
by
ChrisWilson68
on 26 May, 2017 09:17
-
Delivery of small payloads to ISS at short notice. This would require something like mini Cygnus or reentry vehicle if return of small payloads is required. A mini Cygnus with HIAD and mid air recovery might be one way to do it.
Sounds like a solution in search of a problem to me.
The cost per kg of this sort of delivery would be horrible compared to the existing commercial delivery systems. It's already pretty expensive to deliver a kg of cargo using those systems. What could possibly justify an even more expensive delivery system just to get some deliveries in between the existing delivery runs? It's not worth it just to get some fresh fruit to the astronauts more often. In a medical emergency, they'd evacuate the crewmember.
-
#994
by
TrevorMonty
on 26 May, 2017 09:51
-
There is demand from pharmaceutical companies for fast turn around on experiments. Which is why reusable vehicle is more important. Cost may not be that far off current vehicles, 100kg for $7.5-$10m is $75-100k/kg compared to Dragon $50k/kg.
When comes to science experiments it more about number per launch that $/kg, these are high value items compared to ISS supplies.
-
#995
by
ChrisWilson68
on 26 May, 2017 11:16
-
There is demand from pharmaceutical companies for fast turn around on experiments. Which is why reusable vehicle is more important. Cost may not be that far off current vehicles, 100kg for $7.5-$10m is $75-100k/kg compared to Dragon $50k/kg.
When comes to science experiments it more about number per launch that $/kg, these are high value items compared to ISS supplies.
Right, pharmaceutical companies. Proponents of all sorts of space-related ventures love to claim that pharmaceutical companies will pay for it. But where's the evidence? Where is an actual pharmaceutical company saying that they would pay the high dollar amounts it would actually cost to get something to ISS faster than Dragon or Cygnus would deliver it?
Also, your cost comparison is completely wrong. You're taking the total payload of an Electron launch vehicle divided by Electron launch cost and comparing it to the cost of pressurized cargo delivered by Dragon. That's nuts. Compare apples to apples. Compare the raw cargo to orbit cost of Electron to the raw cost of cargo to orbit of Falcon 9. That's the only fair comparison. Yes, there's a huge mark-up from raw cargo to orbit with Falcon 9 to pressurized cargo delivered to ISS. Guess what? The mark up on a much smaller-scale delivery of cargo to ISS from Electron will be even more. Larger scale means lower costs per kg. Even in the very best-case scenario, Electron couldn't deliver cargo inside the ISS for less than 10 times the cost per kg of sending the cargo on Dragon.
-
#996
by
Steven Pietrobon
on 28 May, 2017 06:54
-
Rocket Lab is hiring!
"Looking to make history? Rocket Lab is hiring in Auckland, Los Angeles and Mahia!"
https://twitter.com/RocketLabUSAPositions are
Avionics Manufacturing Technician, NZ
Communications Advisor, NZ
Communications Assistant, NZ
Structural Analyst, NZ
Test Technician, LA
Software Intern Opportunity, NZ
Electromechanical Technician, LA
Launch Range Technician, NZ
Propulsion Assembly Technician, LA
Propulsion Precision Cleaner, LA
Propulsion QA Technician, LA
General Applicants, NZ
Vehicle Design Engineer, NZ
RF/Communications Engineer, NZ
Composite Apprentice, NZ
Composite Builder, NZ
https://www.rocketlabusa.com/careers/positions/
-
#997
by
Eerie
on 28 May, 2017 09:38
-
There is demand from pharmaceutical companies for fast turn around on experiments. Which is why reusable vehicle is more important. Cost may not be that far off current vehicles, 100kg for $7.5-$10m is $75-100k/kg compared to Dragon $50k/kg.
What demand? Links! Quotes! Anything!
Pharmaceutical companies, if they wanted to, have enough money to fund several SpaceX-scale companies.
-
#998
by
TrevorMonty
on 28 May, 2017 10:43
-
There is demand from pharmaceutical companies for fast turn around on experiments. Which is why reusable vehicle is more important. Cost may not be that far off current vehicles, 100kg for $7.5-$10m is $75-100k/kg compared to Dragon $50k/kg.
What demand? Links! Quotes! Anything!
Pharmaceutical companies, if they wanted to, have enough money to fund several SpaceX-scale companies.
From a conference panel about commercial space, it was NASA ISS payload person. Could remember which conference or video.
-
#999
by
Eerie
on 28 May, 2017 11:08
-
There is demand from pharmaceutical companies for fast turn around on experiments. Which is why reusable vehicle is more important. Cost may not be that far off current vehicles, 100kg for $7.5-$10m is $75-100k/kg compared to Dragon $50k/kg.
What demand? Links! Quotes! Anything!
Pharmaceutical companies, if they wanted to, have enough money to fund several SpaceX-scale companies.
From a conference panel about commercial space, it was NASA ISS payload person. Could remember which conference or video.
So it was wishful thinking, basically.
Look, protein crystals in micro-gravity is in the same realm as Helium-3 mining on the Moon. There is no demand for it. Space tourism has much more demand.