Author Topic: Gilmour Space Technologies  (Read 139416 times)

Offline Int.RocketLaunches

  • Member
  • Posts: 20
  • Australia
  • Liked: 26
  • Likes Given: 4

Offline Int.RocketLaunches

  • Member
  • Posts: 20
  • Australia
  • Liked: 26
  • Likes Given: 4

Offline Metalskin

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 168
  • Brisbane, Australia
  • Liked: 127
  • Likes Given: 1857
Re: Gilmour Space Technologies
« Reply #322 on: 02/19/2024 02:37 am »
(Moderator Note: Merged into existing thread)

Please let me know if there is an existing thread on Gilmour. I tried searching but the only post was over 300 days old.

So... News article in the ABC (Australian Broadcasting Company) about Gilmour Space Technologies preparing for a launch in Bowen, Queensland.

The ABC state that
Quote
Adam Gilmour says Eris is the first locally made rocket to be launched into space from Australian soil. (Supplied: Gilmour Space)

This is the first image of the Australian-built rocket, released ahead of it's "...maiden orbital launch this year".

Quote
"The only thing we're waiting on is approvals from the Australian Space Agency which we think are coming soon."

Quote
It has been in production since Gilmour's rocket program began in 2015.

Quote
Weighing more than 30 tonnes and measuring 25 metres

Quote
...working towards an official launch in April.

Quote
Mr Gilmour said the investment would allow his team to make at least four launch attempts, but he expected the first trials might not reach orbit.

The first third pic is the rocket Eris. The first official picture (apparently).

The second first pic is Adam and James Gilmour.

The third second pic is the Eris project crew members.

The original article: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-02-19/gilmour-space-technologies-prepares-launch-rocket-bowen/103483078

--- edit --- fixed first pic, didn't upload for some weird recon.
--- 3rd edit --- added link to original article.
« Last Edit: 02/19/2024 03:06 am by Metalskin »
How inappropriate to call this planet Earth when it is quite clearly Ocean. - Arthur C. Clarke

Offline plugger.lockett

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 139
  • Perth, WA
  • Liked: 51
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: Gilmour Space Technologies
« Reply #323 on: 02/19/2024 06:03 am »
Quote
Gold Coast-based company Gilmour Space said it was a month away from the first rehearsal launch in the north Queensland town of Bowen.

Sounds like they're actually going to do a wet dress this time!

Quote
The project has been delivered a major boost after raising $55 million from investors including Queensland Investment Corporation and superannuation firms Hostplus and HESTA.

Glad my super isn't with those funds.

Quote
Mr Gilmour said the investment would allow his team to make at least four launch attempts, but he expected the first trials might not reach orbit.

Interesting. So they've basically set themselves the Falcon 1 bar, we'll see if they're able to meet that objective.

Offline TrevorMonty

Re: Gilmour Space Technologies
« Reply #324 on: 02/19/2024 09:28 am »




Quote
Mr Gilmour said the investment would allow his team to make at least four launch attempts, but he expected the first trials might not reach orbit.

Interesting. So they've basically set themselves the Falcon 1 bar, we'll see if they're able to meet that objective.

At least Gilmour is realistic, history isn't on side of successful maiden launch.


Offline ringsider

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 714
  • Liked: 508
  • Likes Given: 98
Re: Gilmour Space Technologies
« Reply #325 on: 02/19/2024 02:27 pm »
Their website now says

"Gilmour Space's innovative Eris orbital launch vehicles will deliver up to 305 kg to LEO with a first commercial launch expected in 2023/2024."

The only surprise is that anyone is surprised.

Gilmour's June 2022 accounts show they burned half their mid-2021 AU$61m / US$46m raise* by mid-2022, so they had burned around AU$30m that year, with approx. AU$30m of the investment income left at that point.



Today it's one year later, and they have probably burned at least that much again, if not more, so how much money does the company have in the bank in mid-2023? The capital they raised in mid-2021 will be gone if the spending was at that same rate, and the same document states they had 165 employees in June 2021, so that gives some idea of the burn rate - about AU$17m annually on salaries alone.

They do get Australian R&D tax credits at a rate of about 40% of expenses, and possibly some grants, so maybe they have about $25m-$30m left in the tank, mostly refunds from those tax credits and whatever grants are left.

But without fresh capital to spend on R&D those R&D tax credits will dry up, leaving them with no money once that remaining cash has gone. Plus, building these things always takes longer than startups think, and as they step into the final stages the need for more money, more people etc climbs dramatically.

So two conclusions:

1) that they will be raising AU$50m-100m around now, which is a tough sell when even your home space agency has pulled out of supporting the sector, and doing so in a tricky/sceptical funding environment.

2) they are probably conserving / stretching the remaining cash they have, and thus delaying anything expensive until they can afford to do it, hence new dates - which will probably be unrealistic until they have more fresh capital to deploy reliably.

*https://spacenews.com/gilmour-space-raises-46-million-for-small-launch-vehicle/

^^^ Looks up ^^^

Pretty accurate.

They did a good job to find a local lead investor.
« Last Edit: 02/19/2024 02:28 pm by ringsider »

Offline Steven Pietrobon

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39463
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 33124
  • Likes Given: 8901
Re: Gilmour Space Technologies
« Reply #326 on: 02/20/2024 06:24 am »
They've raised another $55M.

https://www.gspace.com/post/fresh-capital-fuels-queensland-s-space-race-as-gilmour-eyes-launch

"QUEENSLAND, Australia – February 19, 2024 – Queensland's space race is gathering pace with Gold Coast-based Gilmour Space Technologies raising a $55 million Series D round ahead of a maiden orbital launch later this year."

Quote
Adam Gilmour says Eris is the first locally made rocket to be launched into space from Australian soil. (Supplied: Gilmour Space)

Note that this isn't the first Australian made rocket to reach space (defined as going above 100 km). That honour goes to Long Tom, first launched in October 1957. Long Tom could reach 120 km, but was built using British surplus Mayfly motors (three motors in the first stage and one motor in the second stage). The all-Australian two stage Kookaburra 2 sounding rocket reached 121 km in 1973, if you want to exclude foreign motors from the criteria.

http://www.astronautix.com/k/kookaburra2.html
Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #1:  Engineering is done with numbers.  Analysis without numbers is only an opinion.

Offline Metalskin

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 168
  • Brisbane, Australia
  • Liked: 127
  • Likes Given: 1857
Re: Gilmour Space Technologies
« Reply #327 on: 02/20/2024 06:30 am »
Note that this isn't the first Australian made rocket to reach space (defined as going above 100 km). That honour goes to Long Tom, first launched in October 1957. Long Tom could reach 120 km, but was built using British surplus Mayfly motors (three motors in the first stage and one motor in the second stage). The all-Australian two stage Kookaburra 2 sounding rocket reached 121 km in 1973, if you want to exclude foreign motors from the criteria.

http://www.astronautix.com/k/kookaburra2.html

Strange choice of names. If I was to build a rocket, I'd call it YBR-1, for you bloody ripper 1. Hmm or maybe ARRS-1 for A real rip snorter 1.

That aside, thanks for the info, I was aware of Long Tom, but wasn't aware of Kookaburra 2 (though it does sound familiar, not the name, the fact that it's a sounding rocket).
How inappropriate to call this planet Earth when it is quite clearly Ocean. - Arthur C. Clarke

Offline Steven Pietrobon

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39463
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 33124
  • Likes Given: 8901
Re: Gilmour Space Technologies
« Reply #328 on: 02/20/2024 07:04 am »
Strange choice of names. If I was to build a rocket, I'd call it YBR-1, for you bloody ripper 1. Hmm or maybe ARRS-1 for A real rip snorter 1.

Other Australian sounding rockets were HAT (High Altitude Temperature), HAD (High Altitude Density), Cockatoo and Aero High. The Jabiru rocket (Mk. 1, 2 and 3) was also developed for hypersonics research.
Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #1:  Engineering is done with numbers.  Analysis without numbers is only an opinion.

Offline PM3

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1527
  • Germany
  • Liked: 1892
  • Likes Given: 1354
Re: Gilmour Space Technologies
« Reply #329 on: 02/20/2024 12:11 pm »
Gilmour so far has only published hilarious nonsense launch dates. Now that they say April 2024, I can hardly believe that this is a true schedule (though this date may have helped raising funds).

Is there any indication that they have tested and qualified rocket stages? This is a process which usually takes > 1 year, starting with first hot-fire of the upper stage.
« Last Edit: 02/20/2024 12:12 pm by PM3 »
"Never, never be afraid of the truth." -- Jim Bridenstine

Online Tywin

Re: Gilmour Space Technologies
« Reply #330 on: 02/21/2024 12:18 am »
Gilmour so far has only published hilarious nonsense launch dates. Now that they say April 2024, I can hardly believe that this is a true schedule (though this date may have helped raising funds).

Is there any indication that they have tested and qualified rocket stages? This is a process which usually takes > 1 year, starting with first hot-fire of the upper stage.

Do you think this rocket in the picture is not flight hardware?
The knowledge is power...Everything is connected...
The Turtle continues at a steady pace ...

Offline PM3

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1527
  • Germany
  • Liked: 1892
  • Likes Given: 1354
Re: Gilmour Space Technologies
« Reply #331 on: 02/21/2024 04:41 pm »
Do you think this rocket in the picture is not flight hardware?

I suspect that it is as flightworthy as an Aventura I. And that there will be lots of reasons (preferably external reasons, like a missing license, or launch pad not completed by some contractor, or rocket damaged by transport company, or an epic streak of bad weather) to let the launch attempt slip to later 2024 or to another year.

I have no hard evidence for believing this, but there are indicators - like these notorious BS launch dates, overall unprofessional appearence, and where are the stage tests? With best wishes to all Aussie space enthusiasts that I am sensing wrong here.
"Never, never be afraid of the truth." -- Jim Bridenstine

Offline plugger.lockett

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 139
  • Perth, WA
  • Liked: 51
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: Gilmour Space Technologies
« Reply #332 on: 02/23/2024 04:29 am »
Gilmour so far has only published hilarious nonsense launch dates. Now that they say April 2024, I can hardly believe that this is a true schedule (though this date may have helped raising funds).

Is there any indication that they have tested and qualified rocket stages? This is a process which usually takes > 1 year, starting with first hot-fire of the upper stage.

Nope, not cold flow or static fire tests have occurred with fight hardware that have been publicly disclosed. Last static motor fire was far from optimal and didn't reach end of burn.



They've "flown" two rockets now (I'm being generous here). First flight was a commercial hobby hybrid rocket that they didn't recover successfully. Last attempt was their "One Vision Launch Attempt" on 29 July 2019, where the rocket experienced a RUD before ignition. Video attached.

Offline Int.RocketLaunches

  • Member
  • Posts: 20
  • Australia
  • Liked: 26
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: Gilmour Space Technologies
« Reply #333 on: 03/06/2024 01:52 am »
https://twitter.com/AusSpaceAgency/status/1765172182022578459


Still waiting on a launch permit for their first test flight.

Offline mikelepage

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1260
  • ExodusSpaceSystems.com
  • Perth, Australia
  • Liked: 886
  • Likes Given: 1404
Re: Gilmour Space Technologies
« Reply #334 on: 03/07/2024 04:58 am »
Gilmour so far has only published hilarious nonsense launch dates. Now that they say April 2024, I can hardly believe that this is a true schedule (though this date may have helped raising funds).

Is there any indication that they have tested and qualified rocket stages? This is a process which usually takes > 1 year, starting with first hot-fire of the upper stage.

I don’t know enough about historical rocketry to be able to understand the full implications of the hybrid rocket motor as it relates to engine testing and stage qualification. Hybrid meaning LOX plus a “proprietary 3D printed solid rocket fuel”. My understanding is that the point is to have the isp of solid rockets but the throttleability of liquid rockets. But maybe it comes with some of the downsides of solids too.

I am also curious if hybrid thruster designs present different options for in space propulsion. Would be cool if solid cartridges of fuel could be shipped as payloads in missions where isru is planned. Then you only have to worry about making the LOX.

In any case, word on the grapevine is that these more recent NETs are much more plausible.

I have no hard evidence for believing this, but there are indicators - like these notorious BS launch dates, overall unprofessional appearence, and where are the stage tests? With best wishes to all Aussie space enthusiasts that I am sensing wrong here.

I wouldn’t read too much into the “unprofessional appearance”. We Aussies do love keeping it casual.
« Last Edit: 03/07/2024 05:01 am by mikelepage »

Offline TrevorMonty

Re: Gilmour Space Technologies
« Reply #335 on: 03/07/2024 05:01 pm »
https://twitter.com/AusSpaceAgency/status/1765172182022578459


Still waiting on a launch permit for their first test flight.
The paperwork quite often is long pole in space programs. Government departments need to make it look complicated to justify their large headcounts and budgets.

Offline plugger.lockett

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 139
  • Perth, WA
  • Liked: 51
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: Gilmour Space Technologies
« Reply #336 on: 03/08/2024 12:54 am »
I don’t know enough about historical rocketry to be able to understand the full implications of the hybrid rocket motor as it relates to engine testing and stage qualification. Hybrid meaning LOX plus a “proprietary 3D printed solid rocket fuel”. My understanding is that the point is to have the isp of solid rockets but the throttleability of liquid rockets. But maybe it comes with some of the downsides of solids too.
I'm pretty sure the "3D printed grain" was nothing more than a differentiator for marketing purposes. And I'm not sure if they're still doing that? Also, liquids have a higher ISP, on average, when compared to solids. Hybrids are considered simpler than liquids and have the stop start capability that liquids do.

Regardless, liquid engines, solid motors, and stages are normally qualified on the ground before being flown. There's no reason for cold flow, wet dress, and static fire tests to not occur, especially given the fact it's a completely new and untested stack.

I am also curious if hybrid thruster designs present different options for in space propulsion. Would be cool if solid cartridges of fuel could be shipped as payloads in missions where isru is planned. Then you only have to worry about making the LOX.
Maybe, but the fuel grain is also consumable and not easily replaced once exhausted. And I'm not sure how making LOX in space really makes sense, but I'm far from across these things.

I wouldn’t read too much into the “unprofessional appearance”. We Aussies do love keeping it casual.
Being honest here, the "she'll be right mate" mentality and rocketry do not go well together. We'll see how it shakes out in reality but I'm firmly with PM3 here that anecdotally everything here looks REAL BAD from a successful launch perspective. And that's assuming they even get all the permits required to press the button, which is a big if at this point.

Online CameronD

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2428
  • Melbourne, Australia
    • Norton Consultants
  • Liked: 901
  • Likes Given: 564
Re: Gilmour Space Technologies
« Reply #337 on: 03/08/2024 01:28 am »
Still waiting on a launch permit for their first test flight.
The paperwork quite often is long pole in space programs. Government departments need to make it look complicated to justify their large headcounts and budgets.

Nah.. over here it's mainly a dose of ignorance coupled with fear of the unknown: ..rockets always blow up! ::)

As demonstrated by that Twitter/X post: Either Mr Husic MP (or someone in his department) has a really short memory or they've decided to split hairs (or perhaps everything is a "first" for them), because this would be the fourth launch facility license grated by that erstwhile organisation, with the first two going to Southern Launch and the third to ELA.
« Last Edit: 03/08/2024 01:33 am by CameronD »
With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine - however, this is not necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are
going to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly overhead.

Offline plugger.lockett

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 139
  • Perth, WA
  • Liked: 51
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: Gilmour Space Technologies
« Reply #338 on: 03/08/2024 05:17 am »
The paperwork quite often is long pole in space programs. Government departments need to make it look complicated to justify their large headcounts and budgets.
I'm nothing but a rank hobbyist and yet even I know the adage that building a new space launch vehicle results in three big problems of largely equal measure.

1. Build/test the launch vehicle
2. Build the launch pad/ground infra to support launching your new vehicle
3. Gaining all the necessary paperwork and approvals to legally press the button

I don't know it for a fact, but I've been told that breaking the Karman line in Australia without prior governmental approval is a criminal offense with jail time expected. Regardless, approvals are well known for being a significant blocker, especially for a new stack. If I was going to go about something like this, I would have started working that part of the equation on day 1.

Offline Steven Pietrobon

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39463
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 33124
  • Likes Given: 8901
Re: Gilmour Space Technologies
« Reply #339 on: 03/08/2024 05:55 am »
I'm pretty sure the "3D printed grain" was nothing more than a differentiator for marketing purposes. And I'm not sure if they're still doing that?

The Eris launch vehicle has hybrid first and second stages and a kerolox thirds stage. If it reaches orbit, I believe it will be the first hybrid rocket to do so.

I don't know it for a fact, but I've been told that breaking the Karman line in Australia without prior governmental approval is a criminal offence with jail time expected.

Unless you're pointing the rocket at New Zealand, I think the worst that would happen is that you get a big fine.
Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #1:  Engineering is done with numbers.  Analysis without numbers is only an opinion.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0