While it's not evident from these pictures alone, the video makes it clear the painting was done manually, which I'm sure will elicit comments here about "what's the point of 3D printing if you need to take further manual steps to finish the product?"
Quote from: trimeta on 11/04/2021 07:28 pmWhile it's not evident from these pictures alone, the video makes it clear the painting was done manually, which I'm sure will elicit comments here about "what's the point of 3D printing if you need to take further manual steps to finish the product?"Cost/benefit.3D printing the stage has a high initial cost, but has the benefit of demonstrating a brand new stage construction technique - Relativity's raison d'ętre. Robotic painting also has a high initial cost, but has zero benefit (vs. a few person-hours, some vinyl, and some sprayguns). It's a COTS system that has been in use in industry for decades.
Quote from: Navier–Stokes on 12/09/2021 08:56 pmNew test stand and Launch pad videos.Navier its nice to add short comment against links like this.Sent from my SM-G570Y using Tapatalk
(Bloomberg) -- One of the most valuable private space startups after Elon Musk’s SpaceX is the type of company that sponsors of special purpose acquisition companies would love to target for a deal.But Tim Ellis, co-founder and chief executive officer of Relativity Space Inc., just isn’t interested.Ellis, 31, didn’t actively pursue SPACs that approached the company, even during the height of their popularity last year among startups in the fast-growing space economy. Relativity, which makes 3D-printed and reusable rockets, has instead raised $1.3 billion through private rounds and was valued at $4.2 billion in June after backing from investors including Fidelity Management & Research Company LLC, Mark Cuban and Jared Leto.
The company won technical strengths in NASA’s analysis for “proposed iterative prototyping and testing in hardware development” as well as short but frequent missions that could be handled by a “simple” environmental control system. However, NASA said there was no plan for longer missions as well as a lack of details on the design and a lack of technical maturity for key technologies.For Relativity’s business plan, NASA found strong technical management and good in-house resources for development of the station, but a lack of a business strategy and “reliance on cash and revenue that is unsubstantiated.” The company also included launch vehicle development in its proposal which was outside the scope of the program. NASA gave Relativity a technical score of white and business plan score of yellow.Tim Ellis, chief executive of Relativity, told SpaceNews Jan. 31 that the company has a “very early concept” on how the upper stage of its Terran R vehicle could be used as a commercial LEO destination, but declined to go into details. “Just because we did not place in top three selected for this program won’t deter us from continuing conversations with NASA leadership on Relativity’s future vision with a fully reusable Terran R,” he said.
Maiden launch teaser video:
9 engines completed as of 1/27/2022
