Vector Launch (formerly Vector Space Systems)

[Kryten]

 The address appears to be a UPS store-presumably some kind of forwarding address? Not a good sign when that's the listed corporate address.

[Jrcraft]

The address just got updated to Vector's facility in Arizona!

[trimeta]

A link I found in an old email from them redirects to https://www.vector-launch.com/home-old, which seems to have more information, but it very well might be outdated information they've simply forgotten to remove from the site.

[Jrcraft]

A link I found in an old email from them redirects to https://www.vector-launch.com/home-old, which seems to have more information, but it very well might be outdated information they've simply forgotten to remove from the site.

Yeah, I think the website is still being developed. Earlier today, the address on there was changed so it looks like someone is actively working on it.

[Steven Pietrobon]

I tried adding my email address, but got the following error!

"Oops, there was an error sending your message. Please try again later."

[Steven Pietrobon]

Propylene is a pretty rare choice as a fuel. If you'r OK with LOX then you're comfortable with cryogens in general so what's the attraction? I can't believe it's cheaper than methane and (as Steven Pietrobon would point out) they are all very similar in Isp except for propyne due to its triple bond.

I haven't simulated Propylene (C3H6), as that wasn't included on the ISP program database. I have simulated Cyclopropane (C3H6). At NBP, there are a number of propellants that have better Isp than methalox and with better density (so its a win-win). These are

Propellants  MR   dp (kg/L)  ve (m/s) Id (Ns/L)
O2/CH4       3.6   0.8376     3656     3062
O2/C2H4      2.7   0.9007     3678     3313
O2/C3H4      2.4   0.9666     3696     3573
O2/C3H6      2.7   0.9782     3681     3601

        MP     BP
O2    -218.3 -182.9 Oxygen
CH4   -182.5 -161.5 Methane
C2H4  -169.2 -103.7 Ethylene
C3H4  -102.7  -23.2 Methylacetylene (propyne)
C3H6  -129    -33   Cyclopropane

[john smith 19]

I haven't simulated Propylene (C3H6), as that wasn't included on the ISP program database. I have simulated Cyclopropane (C3H6). At NBP, there are a number of propellants that have better Isp than methalox and with better density (so its a win-win). These are

Propellants  MR   dp (kg/L)  ve (m/s) Id (Ns/L)
O2/CH4       3.6   0.8376     3656     3062
O2/C2H4      2.7   0.9007     3678     3313
O2/C3H4      2.4   0.9666     3696     3573
O2/C3H6      2.7   0.9782     3681     3601

        MP     BP
O2    -218.3 -182.9 Oxygen
CH4   -182.5 -161.5 Methane
C2H4  -169.2 -103.7 Ethylene
C3H4  -102.7  -23.2 Methylacetylene (propyne)
C3H6  -129    -33   Cyclopropane

Going from memory Cyclopropane is relatively expensive and is something of an explosion hazard. I think it used to be used as an anesthetic. 
They are all in the 3600-3700 m/s range which is a 2.7% spread in total. 
That said fuel selection is (in principal) the cheapest way to buy more Isp, with the ultimate choice being switching to LH2 of course.

As always the question is do all the knock on effects of that choice make it worth it?

[russianhalo117]

Sorry for the thread bump, but it appears that Vector has re-launched it's website. https://www.vector-launch.com/

Connecticut?

Sorry for the thread bump, but it appears that Vector has re-launched it's website. https://www.vector-launch.com/

May of found new backer. Here is hoping they fly.

First of all I have been told by a friend to be wary of the new site as the domain just changed hands.

Secondly, except for the name it would be starting over since LM acquired much more than they were originally planning as the stalking horse bidder since no ther qualified bidders placed a bid on the rest of the assets and IP. LM have to be involved to allow any relaunch per the court documents in the IP cases with old VL.

[Steven Pietrobon]

Going from memory Cyclopropane is relatively expensive and is something of an explosion hazard.

Wikipedia says "Due to its extreme reactivity, cyclopropane-oxygen mixtures may explode." That is also true for liquid oxygen and other fuels as well. Presumably they mean gaseous oxygen, so not a good idea to vent this into open air!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclopropane

[john smith 19]

Going from memory Cyclopropane is relatively expensive and is something of an explosion hazard.

Wikipedia says "Due to its extreme reactivity, cyclopropane-oxygen mixtures may explode." That is also true for liquid oxygen and other fuels as well. Presumably they mean gaseous oxygen, so not a good idea to vent this into open air!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclopropane

As always with these sorts of question is the improvement worth the trouble? I don't think so.   
Propyne was about the pick of the bunch. Of course there may be a higher performer lurking (or which could be added to) the isp database. 

Might make a fun little project for some graduate chemists end of course thesis.

[Jrcraft]

Vector Launch just published a new video on their website. They are re-launching and are "focused on suborbital, and eventually orbital flights." So it looks like Vector is back.
(https://www.vector-launch.com/)

[TrevorMonty]

Vector Launch just published a new video on their website. They are re-launching and are "focused on suborbital, and eventually orbital flights." So it looks like Vector is back.
(https://www.vector-launch.com/)

Will they use a RLV for suborbital?

[Sam Ho]

Vector Launch just published a new video on their website. They are re-launching and are "focused on suborbital, and eventually orbital flights." So it looks like Vector is back.
(https://www.vector-launch.com/)

Transcription of the video (it's only 35 seconds):

Hi, I'm Rob Spalding.  Welcome to Vector.  Vector was founded in March of 2016, aimed at the low-cost satellite market.  Today, Vector is reborn.  We are focused on suborbital, and eventually orbital flight, and we are focused on government and commercial clients.  Come join us as we launch into the future.

[FormerVector]

Going from memory Cyclopropane is relatively expensive and is something of an explosion hazard.

Wikipedia says "Due to its extreme reactivity, cyclopropane-oxygen mixtures may explode." That is also true for liquid oxygen and other fuels as well. Presumably they mean gaseous oxygen, so not a good idea to vent this into open air!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclopropane

As always with these sorts of question is the improvement worth the trouble? I don't think so.   
Propyne was about the pick of the bunch. Of course there may be a higher performer lurking (or which could be added to) the isp database. 

Might make a fun little project for some graduate chemists end of course thesis.

We used propene, since it's readily available from all of the usual industrial gas/liquid vendors. Before all of the recent development with methane/LNG, the top contenders (excluding hypergols) were LH2 and RP-1. LH2 has an entirely new set of problems to solve compared to LO2 (to use your words, "is the improvement worth the trouble"). The intent was to find a fuel with improvements over standard RP-1. Methane and propene/propylene were the two alternatives considered compared to RP-1. Like previously mentioned, the Isp for all three of these is fairly close, however propene/propylene can be sub-cooled to reach significantly higher densities than methane (~600 kg/m3 compared to ~400 kg/m3), which for Vector's use-case the reduced tank mass offset the higher Isp. Propene/propylene can also be stored as a liquid at room temperature and "reasonable" pressure, which helped with storage at the test site and any future launch site. There's also advantages to using gaseous propene/propylene to pressurize the fuel tank compared to gaseous methane - I'll be honest I didn't spend the time to really look into the details and just took the arguments presented on faith, but something to do with pressurizing a liquid tank to 300-400 psi that was sketchy with methane but not propylene.

[john smith 19]

We used propene, since it's readily available from all of the usual industrial gas/liquid vendors. Before all of the recent development with methane/LNG, the top contenders (excluding hypergols) were LH2 and RP-1. LH2 has an entirely new set of problems to solve compared to LO2 (to use your words, "is the improvement worth the trouble"). The intent was to find a fuel with improvements over standard RP-1. Methane and propene/propylene were the two alternatives considered compared to RP-1. Like previously mentioned, the Isp for all three of these is fairly close, however propene/propylene can be sub-cooled to reach significantly higher densities than methane (~600 kg/m3 compared to ~400 kg/m3), which for Vector's use-case the reduced tank mass offset the higher Isp. Propene/propylene can also be stored as a liquid at room temperature and "reasonable" pressure, which helped with storage at the test site and any future launch site. There's also advantages to using gaseous propene/propylene to pressurize the fuel tank compared to gaseous methane - I'll be honest I didn't spend the time to really look into the details and just took the arguments presented on faith, but something to do with pressurizing a liquid tank to 300-400 psi that was sketchy with methane but not propylene.

Finally. Someone with a chemical education from this century. 

On that basis Propyne would have been even better as it has a triple bond. The joker in the pack is I'm not sure how readily available it is. I think it's a fairly common chemical feedstock but Propene is used for a lot of plastics synthesis so bulk pricing is quite good.

Obviously once you eliminate the requirement "Must be capable of ready synthesis on mars" from the selection criteria the field opens up quite a bit.

I had not realizes the concept was basically a pressure fed.

[Sam Ho]

Jeff Foust has an interview with the new management of Vector, over at SpaceNews.

The owners are John Moran, who runs a third-party logistics company in Pennsylvania, and an unidentified "gentleman from New York."  The CEO is retired General Robert Spalding, and chief rocket scientist is Chris Barker, from Earth to Sky, a small launch provider which was one of the early-round competitors in the DARPA launch challenge.

In the near term, they want to use the basic Vector-R airframe, but replace the propene engines with a kerolox engine, presumably from Earth to Sky, and possibly replace some composite structures with aluminum.

They paid $1.175 million for the launch assets, are focusing on the suborbital market, and hope to have a first launch in 12 to 15 months.

https://spacenews.com/vector-restarting-operations-under-new-ownership/

[TrevorMonty]

Here is Earth to Sky webpage. They are developing 1200kg LV, no info on engines.

https://earthtosky.com/

[trimeta]

Here is Earth to Sky webpage. They are developing 1200kg LV, no info on engines.

https://earthtosky.com/

From their Customer Payload Handbook:

The Sleek Eagle utilizes a pressure fed liquid oxygen/kerosene propulsion that dramatically reduces parts count and simplifies operational procedures. The restartable Ashton 12K engine has a spark torch ignition system that burns gaseous oxygen and gaseous hydrogen. The simplicity of the engine start sequence eliminates most failure modes related to engine starts. The igniter and engine are fabricated out of Inconel 718 using state-of-the-art additive manufacturing. This allows ETS to build the engines with standard production processes.

I don't know enough to know if "Ashton 12K" is their designation for the engine, or represents some property of the engine (like how Inconel 718 is a specific metal alloy).

[FutureSpaceTourist]

https://twitter.com/jamesncantrell/status/1323620795466178561

Many questions on Vector's restart but have waited to comment publicly.  I am not associated in any way with it but wish colleagues @robert_spalding & Chris Barker great success. The small launch market future is bright & has room for lots of competition.

[TrevorMonty]

Here is Earth to Sky webpage. They are developing 1200kg LV, no info on engines.

https://earthtosky.com/

From their Customer Payload Handbook:

The Sleek Eagle utilizes a pressure fed liquid oxygen/kerosene propulsion that dramatically reduces parts count and simplifies operational procedures. The restartable Ashton 12K engine has a spark torch ignition system that burns gaseous oxygen and gaseous hydrogen. The simplicity of the engine start sequence eliminates most failure modes related to engine starts. The igniter and engine are fabricated out of Inconel 718 using state-of-the-art additive manufacturing. This allows ETS to build the engines with standard production processes.

I don't know enough to know if "Ashton 12K" is their designation for the engine, or represents some property of the engine (like how Inconel 718 is a specific metal alloy).

Vector were going to use RP1 engine from Earth & Sky according to couple posts above.