Author Topic: Vector Launch (formerly Vector Space Systems) (Read 413087 times)

john smith 19 · « **Reply #80 on:** 02/21/2017 12:55 pm »

Quote from: Ragmar on 02/21/2017 12:32 pm

"Strategic investment with Vector Space Systems"

Does this read as KG is giving Vector money?

Yes that's the implication. When, how much and over what period of time are other questions.

IIRC KG is quite big so provided they don't micro manage the operation this looks like it could get to launch.

ringsider · « **Reply #81 on:** 03/09/2017 04:11 am »

Some new images on the @vectorspacesys Twitter feed:

https://twitter.com/vectorspacesys/status/839298614362955776?s=09

https://twitter.com/vectorspacesys/status/838943456340787200?s=09

It looks more like and extension of existing Garvey work than something new. Not sure I believe they will be orbital by 2018.

Danderman · « **Reply #82 on:** 03/09/2017 04:37 am »

Quote from: savuporo on 12/17/2016 12:40 am

http://www.kgun9.com/news/local-news/vector-space-secures-25-year-lease-in-tucson-hiring-200-employees
Vector Space Systems secures 25-year lease in Tucson, hiring 200 employees

Quote from: ringsider on 03/09/2017 04:11 am

Some new images on the @vectorspacesys Twitter feed:

https://twitter.com/vectorspacesys/status/839298614362955776?s=09

https://twitter.com/vectorspacesys/status/838943456340787200?s=09

It looks more like and extension of existing Garvey work than something new. Not sure I believe they will be orbital by 2018.

Not entirely consistent with the 200 employees news.

Yeah, everyone is a critic these days.

Steven Pietrobon · « **Reply #83 on:** 03/09/2017 05:33 am »

Attaching images.

savuporo · « **Reply #84 on:** 03/09/2017 04:59 pm »

Quote from: Danderman on 03/09/2017 04:37 am

Not entirely consistent with the 200 employees news.

Their LinkedIn is not consistent with the 200 employees aspiration either, quite yet. The team is 50% founders, 50% interns right now and shows about 13 people excluding investors/advisors. If they got the funds, probably need a better recruiter to hit the growth curve target.

Gliderflyer · « **Reply #85 on:** 03/10/2017 12:44 am »

They have some new Twitter updates:

Quote

Vector-R block0 P19h prototype getting ready for launch. Stay tuned for more photos and details about its first launch!

Source: https://twitter.com/vectorspacesys/status/839939371075641344

Quote

Vector-R P19h ready to be skinned and nearly ready for launch, next to her older and wiser sibling the Vector-R MEU.

Source: https://twitter.com/vectorspacesys/status/840013429196840960

Interesting that they are now including "P19h" in the name, similar to the the old Garvey naming scheme. I guess that makes sense, as there are what appear to be two Prospector sized tanks near the nose with about 30 feet of plumbing leading to the fixed engine in the back. It looks like they are putting the same size tanks and engine from their previous vehicles into the OML of their orbital vehicle for the initial test flight.

Katana · « **Reply #86 on:** 03/12/2017 02:19 am »

Quote from: Gliderflyer on 03/10/2017 12:44 am

They have some new Twitter updates:
Quote
Vector-R block0 P19h prototype getting ready for launch. Stay tuned for more photos and details about its first launch!
Source: https://twitter.com/vectorspacesys/status/839939371075641344
Quote
Vector-R P19h ready to be skinned and nearly ready for launch, next to her older and wiser sibling the Vector-R MEU.
Source: https://twitter.com/vectorspacesys/status/840013429196840960

Interesting that they are now including "P19h" in the name, similar to the the old Garvey naming scheme. I guess that makes sense, as there are what appear to be two Prospector sized tanks near the nose with about 30 feet of plumbing leading to the fixed engine in the back. It looks like they are putting the same size tanks and engine from their previous vehicles into the OML of their orbital vehicle for the initial test flight.

So many ribs? Ribs are generally heavy and seldom used on launchers, often used on aircrafts or amateur liquid rockets, Coppenhagen suborbital etc.

No TVC gimbal between engine and structure?

Mardlamock · « **Reply #87 on:** 03/12/2017 10:13 am »

Garvey (and by association Vector) has always seemed extremely unprofessional. Nothing against him honestly, just saying I feel he has been around and doing the same things since forever, barely improving or wanting to do anything other than put a show for the cameras.

Vector also seemed to be more focused on getting 4k helicopter footage of the engine running for 5 seconds than actually improving it over its ancient pressure fed ablative cooled designed. I chuckled when I saw those last pictures come in. Really guys, 2 mini tanks and a huge shell to make it look bigger?

Let's just hope in the future they dont give newspace any more of a bubble rep than it already has.

Space Ghost 1962 · « **Reply #88 on:** 03/12/2017 03:08 pm »

Once I was approached back in the 1980's to negotiate a deal, where the boards/discs/other of a luggable computer were simply put into a file cabinet sized rack, almost all empty.

The rationale for this was that the computer's software/performance/reliability/development was highly valued, but the customer base was used to buying big, clunky things, and they needed to have it big and clunky.

Garvey is simply delivering on what he was asked to do - make a prototype of the envisioned vehicle that will fire rapidly and reliably. Likely for investor confidence, so that then one gets the follow-on tranche of finance, so that you can modernize the tanks, skin, and engine, in that order, to have a useful next step.

So I would not run him down for what you see. Makes sense to me. But then, I deal with finance guys, big and small. And there are worse to deal with - policy makers.

It is those financing Vector who likely are the "unprofessional rocket scientists". Quite common.

If Vector gets the follow-on and doesn't execute as above, he won't get a second chance. And its substantial funds to get all that's needed to bring off those development/test/certify miracles.

So - why with Prospector didn't all these things get done? Perhaps because there was no budget for them? Duh.

Good luck to Garvey and Vector, hope they pull it off.

savuporo · « **Reply #89 on:** 03/12/2017 04:03 pm »

Quote from: Mardlamock on 03/12/2017 10:13 am

Vector also seemed to be more focused on getting 4k helicopter footage of the engine running for 5 seconds ..

Drones are a thing now. The drone that took this video didn't cost substantially more than a decent enthusiast-level DSLR camera.

Lars-J · « **Reply #90 on:** 03/14/2017 04:40 pm »

The pictures seem to indicate to me that they are building a mockup, not a real rocket. But I could certainly be mistaken, but it seems like a strange way to assemble a tank.

Kryten · « **Reply #91 on:** 03/14/2017 07:27 pm »

You can see the tanks in the pictures above; they're the small objects near the front of the rocket. It's essentially a mockup that flies.

Lars-J · « **Reply #92 on:** 03/14/2017 07:30 pm »

Quote from: Kryten on 03/14/2017 07:27 pm

You can see the tanks in the pictures above; they're the small objects near the front of the rocket. It's essentially a mockup that flies.

Thanks, that makes more sense!

savuporo · « **Reply #93 on:** 03/14/2017 07:32 pm »

A mock-up that flies is a pretty good thing to have for many reasons, no? Before committing to huge tooling expenses, getting data on how the aero shape performs through initial stages of flight sounds like not a bad plan. In addition putting engine, GSE, and electronics through it's paces, too.

ringsider · « **Reply #94 on:** 03/14/2017 09:17 pm »

Quote from: Mardlamock on 03/12/2017 10:13 am

Vector also seemed to be more focused on getting 4k helicopter footage of the engine running for 5 seconds than actually improving it over its ancient pressure fed ablative cooled designed. I chuckled when I saw those last pictures come in. Really guys, 2 mini tanks and a huge shell to make it look bigger?

Let's just hope in the future they dont give newspace any more of a bubble rep than it already has.

PR has it's place, but Vector has taken it to another level. Once you look behind the PR to the companies and circumstances of those companies - take a look at the size / finances of York and Iceye and tell me how they write contracts totalling tens of millions - it becomes really damaging to the industry.

All this hype makes it more diffcult for companies with more conservative plans to raise money, and eventually creates a really negative backlash from investors who get oversold on wild promises. You can already read those stories in various parts of the press. Vector may be creating a situation that bites their own behind just when they need another large funding round. Just think ahead a year or two, when the stock market crashes and people get fired because the sector got over-hyped...

3-4 companies are / were really making lots of noise from very little - Vector, the Bloostar rockoon guys, Orbital Access (spaceplane in Scotland), and maybe also I would add Firefly (RIP), although that last one is probably slightly unfiair. Rocket Lab and Virgin are paragons of modesty in comparison. I am actually starting to respect Virgin a little more than I did to be honest, they are making good progress.

FutureSpaceTourist · « **Reply #95 on:** 03/15/2017 09:03 pm »

Quote

Vector-R p19h and Vector-H prototypes nearing completion and getting ready for launch very soon... stay tuned for more news!

https://twitter.com/vectorspacesys/status/842125392257277952

savuporo · « **Reply #96 on:** 03/16/2017 12:07 am »

Quote from: Space Ghost 1962 on 03/15/2017 09:08 pm

It is too easy to get "stupid money". It is much harder to get "smart money". Hunch here is that "smart money" would like to see a nano launcher without all the baggage (pad, GSE, facilities)...

Not that i disagree with any of that, but i think the bar is actually a tad lower: a nanosat launcher that actually flies. Just getting to space, nevermind to orbit, would be enough of a milestone to secure reasonable funding, that would carry you from development to operations phase.
Actually flying also tightens the uncertainties around eventual operational costs way more than any financial modeling genius can.

FutureSpaceTourist · « **Reply #97 on:** 03/21/2017 06:55 pm »

Quote

Vector Space Systems on Saturday to erect Vector-R at Space Florida's LC46, announce "intention to use the launch facilities in the future."

https://twitter.com/flatoday_jdean/status/844274247811940352

TrevorMonty · « **Reply #98 on:** 03/21/2017 10:31 pm »

Some titbits from Space show interview 19Mar.
Fuel LOX/ Propylene. ISP high 200s. Autogenous pressurized, no He or exploding He tanks to worry about. Simple low cost pressure fed engine.

FutureSpaceTourist · « **Reply #99 on:** 03/23/2017 08:53 am »

Quote from: TrevorMonty on 03/21/2017 10:31 pm

Some titbits from Space show interview 19Mar.
Fuel LOX/ Propylene. ISP high 200s. Autogenous pressurized, no He or exploding He tanks to worry about. Simple low cost pressure fed engine.

Here's the link http://www.thespaceshow.com/show/19-mar-2017/broadcast-2885-jim-cantrell-vector-space-systems

First test flight planned for first week of April!

Edit: focus for 2017 is suborbital flights; orbital 2018