Relativity Space: General Thread

[playadelmars]

Missed this focusing on why Lockheed/NASA decided to launch with Terran. Custom complex payload fairing for fueling.

https://techcrunch.com/2020/10/19/lockheed-picks-relativitys-3d-printed-rocket-for-experimental-nasa-mission/

[john smith 19]

I'd surely grant that staged combustion is harder than an expander cycle, but while on the subject of the SSME...  It took the SSME 35 weeks and 13 turbopump replacements before they managed to hit their minimum power level for an instant.  A bunch of these small, lean companies can't and shouldn't try to afford that type of thing.

Whether it's easier these days- it should be, for sure.  But I don't think Relativity's problem is biting more off, it's chewing.

True. But SSME was built with no CAD. It was entirely blueprints (literally) and microfiche for archival storage.
Where CAD scores is it can serve as the direct input to multiple FAE and CFD systems from day one.

I'm quite sure that Raptor was started up 10s (100s?) of times inside an HPC array before it was ever started IRL.

I would expect any similar development effort to do likewise.

[FutureSpaceTourist]

Relativity Space completes full-duration test fire of its Aeon 1 rocket engine
"Despite coronavirus, we actually hit that target on track."

ERIC BERGER - 11/9/2020, 10:18 PM

Relativity Space said Monday that the company has successfully completed a full-duration test-firing of its Aeon 1 rocket engine, running it at full power for 187 seconds.

The test at NASA's Stennis Space Center in Mississippi took place with all of the engine's key components—including turbopumps, injector, and combustion chamber—operating in a flight-like configuration. Surprisingly, the company met this milestone ahead of schedule—Relativity had been targeting completion of this mission duty cycle test before the end of 2020.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/11/relativity-space-completes-full-duration-test-fire-of-its-aeon-1-rocket-engine/

[FutureSpaceTourist]

Relativity Space raising $500 million at $2 billion valuation from Tiger and others, sources say
PUBLISHED TUE, NOV 17 202011:57 AM EST

Michael Sheetz
@THESHEETZTWEETZ

KEY POINTS

Rocket builder and 3D-printing specialist Relativity Space is raising $500 million of fresh capital in a new round being led by Tiger Global Management, people familiar with the financing told CNBC on Tuesday.

The new fundraise, expected to close in the coming days, would jump Relativity’s valuation to $2.3 billion, those people said.

Existing investors in Relativity are also expected to be contributing to the round -- those include Social Capital, Playground Global, Y Combinator, Bond Capital, Tribe Capital, Jared Leto and Mark Cuban.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/17/relativity-space-raising-500-million-at-2-billion-valuation-from-tiger-and-others-sources-say.html

[Robotbeat]

Doesn't make sense.

[TrevorMonty]

Relativity Space raising $500 million at $2 billion valuation from Tiger and others, sources say
PUBLISHED TUE, NOV 17 202011:57 AM EST

Michael Sheetz
@THESHEETZTWEETZ

KEY POINTS

Rocket builder and 3D-printing specialist Relativity Space is raising $500 million of fresh capital in a new round being led by Tiger Global Management, people familiar with the financing told CNBC on Tuesday.

The new fundraise, expected to close in the coming days, would jump Relativity’s valuation to $2.3 billion, those people said.

Existing investors in Relativity are also expected to be contributing to the round -- those include Social Capital, Playground Global, Y Combinator, Bond Capital, Tribe Capital, Jared Leto and Mark Cuban.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/17/relativity-space-raising-500-million-at-2-billion-valuation-from-tiger-and-others-sources-say.html

"Relativity’s new valuation is expected to make it one of the world’s most valuable private space companies after SpaceX, which commands a valuation above $44 billion after it raised capital in August."

I don't see how company that is 1-2years away from earning revenue is valued so highly. They will be late comers into a very competitive launch market. Both Firefly and ABL their main competitors in 1000-1500kg class are doing stage testing now, while SpaceX and ULA are both targetting rideshare market.

[Davidthefat]

I think it's their investment into the wire deposition process and their 21st century approach to it is really what investors are investing in. $2+ billion valuation though? Not too sure about that one.

[Robotbeat]

I think it's their investment into the wire deposition process and their 21st century approach to it is really what investors are investing in. $2+ billion valuation though? Not too sure about that one.

Yeah. People think this is some new, crazy, hyper-modern 21st century development, but it definitely isn't. The wire deposition process (on a gantry or a robot arm) is approximately half a century old. I'm sure they've probably improved quality a bit ("AI-driven quality-optimization feedback loop" or some such Silicon Valley buzzword), but a $2 billion evaluation without having a real product deployed, even a minimally viable one, is pretty nuts.

Not as nuts as Virgin Galactic, tho.

[Davidthefat]

I think it's their investment into the wire deposition process and their 21st century approach to it is really what investors are investing in. $2+ billion valuation though? Not too sure about that one.

Yeah. People think this is some new, crazy, hyper-modern 21st century development, but it definitely isn't. The wire deposition process (on a gantry or a robot arm) is approximately half a century old. I'm sure they've probably improved quality a bit ("AI-driven quality-optimization feedback loop" or some such Silicon Valley buzzword), but a $2 billion evaluation without having a real product deployed, even a minimally viable one, is pretty nuts.

Not as nuts as Virgin Galactic, tho.

As a comparison, Velo3D is a firm that incorporate simulations, in situ inspections, and other software driven processes to the powder bed SLM process only raised $128 million total by round D. Again SLM has been around for decades, but with the Silicon Valley tech mentality, it brought it to the 21st century. They have actual paying customers using their products and services too. It's not a fallible process, but still has advantages that companies are using.

May be an enclosed box with lasers is less cool that a giant robot arm that makes rocket tanks? Velo3D just needs to merge with one of the many rocket start ups and raise 5 times they've raise so far.

[Robotbeat]

SLM is a newer process, too.

[john smith 19]

Doesn't make sense.

I think I'm getting the hang of this game....

It's not about how much you ask for as such, it's how how much you give in return

Without the shares being traded on a stock market "valuing" a company is very much a matter of opinion.  There are some numbers. Above (IIRC) 25% you're a substantial share holder. At 51% you can over ride any other share holders vote (if there is a vote on an issue to begin with).  Beyond that....

If I raise $100m and sell you 40% of the company to do so I'm now a $250m company. By extension that's what the rest of the business is worth.

If I raise $100m and sell you 10% (because it's such an amazing outfit and I'm a genius CEO  We are now a $Bn corporation.

The actual practical difference is likely minimal, until the profits start coming in or the shares are offered to the general public on a stock exchange.

The final arbiter is the market when the shares are actually offered for sale.   If people really believe it's worth that then the price will hold up. If not then it will crash. 

[bodhiandphysics]

The actual practical difference is likely minimal, until the profits start coming in or the shares are offered to the general public on a stock exchange.
.

The difference is less than you think since in most of thee deals, if the company has to raise more capital at a lower valuation, or if it IPOs or sells at a lower valuation, the losses come out first of the founder's equity.  So in this series investors are buying %25 for 500 mil, but if in the next round the company is valued at only 1 billion, that %25 becomes closer to %50.  The risk for the investors is smaller than it appears.

One thing to note on these deals is that I don't think they're actually buying the rocket.  They're buying a company that can make a rocket.  Spacex lost every penny invested into falcon 1, but they also proved that they could actually build hardware, which is where everything started.  if you think space is going to be a big industry, than you want to find companies that can build hardware, and building a small launcher is a good way to separate the wheat from the chaff (i.e. Relativity from Virgin Orbit).  The idea might be that if you an build a rocket, you can build anything else.  Worked out pretty well in the case of Spacex! 

[ringsider]

I think it's their investment into the wire deposition process and their 21st century approach to it is really what investors are investing in. $2+ billion valuation though? Not too sure about that one.

Yeah. People think this is some new, crazy, hyper-modern 21st century development, but it definitely isn't. The wire deposition process (on a gantry or a robot arm) is approximately half a century old. I'm sure they've probably improved quality a bit ("AI-driven quality-optimization feedback loop" or some such Silicon Valley buzzword), but a $2 billion evaluation without having a real product deployed, even a minimally viable one, is pretty nuts.

Not as nuts as Virgin Galactic, tho.

The Emperor's new clothes... Sooner or later someone in the crowd will say "but can't you just, uh, make a tube in a few hours by bending or extruding metal?"

And this is the weakness in the entire thing. This process, while admittedly good for press photos, is just too clunky and slow for the application. Rocket Lab showed video of them making the main tanks in a couple of days. Relativity famously had that video showing them making a small one in about a month. And the GIF of the tank burst looks like something ARCA might have done.

For all the PR they are years away from launching, and if this raise is anything to go by, burning cash faster than Virgin Orbit or Vector, which is some kind of record.

That said, $500m, if the investors don't wake up from their bewitched slumber, will probably see them through to launch.

At least now we know why the CTO left a few weeks ago; obviously a condition of them raising this round. Bad news also for Astra and Virgin Orbit you would think.

[john smith 19]

The Emperor's new clothes... Sooner or later someone in the crowd will say "but can't you just, uh, make a tube in a few hours by bending or extruding metal?"

And this is the weakness in the entire thing. This process, while admittedly good for press photos, is just too clunky and slow for the application. Rocket Lab showed video of them making the main tanks in a couple of days. Relativity famously had that video showing them making a small one in about a month. And the GIF of the tank burst looks like something ARCA might have done.

As a "Thing making factory" they might have something but building the bulk of a rocket IE the tanks does not play to the strengths of the technology.

Any new mfg concept in making rockets has to make it a)Better b)Faster c)Cheaper. It doesn't do b). It might do a) and c) is possible, but not a given. 

Relatively attacks the "Standing arm" of rocket mfg. But the other money sink to rocket development are Non Recurring Engineering costs. Which for this technology are huge

AM scores when you look at the more complex areas like tank ends. The shape, but especially incorporating fittings without welding. Inspection hatches, sensor pockets, fluid flanges etc.

I can think of a number of unconventional ways to mfg tanks (including integral stiffeners). Likewise tank ends and engines. When you factor in all the development costs there would be no guarantee any of them would work out cheaper either.    Although I do think a slinky spring combustion chamber would be pretty cool. 

[john smith 19]

One thing to note on these deals is that I don't think they're actually buying the rocket. 

They are not.

They are buying a portion of the company that makes rockets, in the expectation they will get profits afterward  and that most of the costs have already been spent to do this, so each rocket will have a profit margin, some of which they can have.

[edzieba]

Valuations of non-public companies are not a measure of how much an investor thinks the company is worth.

At best, it's the minimum an investor is willing to bet that it will be worth at some point in the future (which could well be over a decade) when it eventually becomes a publicly traded company or is acquired. Any investor is hoping that it will be worth (a lot!) more than that, but the valuation is basically "we're confident enough to risk an investment of $x that the company will not sell/float for less than this". Complicating this is that acquisitions of private firms are also based on future valuations: when a company acquires a private firm, they do not buy it at the 'price it is worth' they do so at some proportion of the value they expect it to deliver over its lifetime.

[FutureSpaceTourist]

https://twitter.com/relativityspace/status/1329486092714663937

We’re kicking our engine testing at our @NASAStennis  facility into high gear as we march towards launching the world’s first entirely 3D printed rocket in 2021! Stay tuned for more updates. 🔥 #RelativitySpace #HotfireTest #EngineTestStand

[edzieba]

Don't think I've seen that small diameter shock cone behaviour on an engine starting up before.

[Craftyatom]

Don't think I've seen that small diameter shock cone behaviour on an engine starting up before.

It is interesting - I assume that's their igniter.  Relativity lists the Aeon's igniter as a "Gas-Gas Torch", but I've never seen one so strong and prominent.

[FutureSpaceTourist]

Relativity Space adds $500 million to ‘war chest’ for scaling production of 3D-printed rockets
PUBLISHED MON, NOV 23 202011:00 AM EST

Michael Sheetz
@THESHEETZTWEETZ

KEY POINTS

3D-printing rocket builder Relativity Space closed a $500 million round of new capital which CEO Tim Ellis said now gives the company a “war chest” to further advance its technology.

“This really accelerates Relativity’s momentum and scaling as we focus beyond first launch on production and various infrastructure expansion projects,” Ellis said.

Relativity’s valuation climbed to $2.3 billion after this round, CNBC reported last week, making it the second most valuable private space company in the world backed by venture capital after SpaceX, according to Pitchbook.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/23/relativity-space-builds-war-chest-for-building-.html