Author Topic: Firefly Space : Company and Development General Thread (Read 485002 times)

Robotbeat · « **Reply #800 on:** 01/14/2022 04:10 pm »

But the longer they wait, also the greater the probability it’ll be worth effectively nothing as key people leave & stuff is liquidated.

Someone else could also snatch them up.

JEF_300 · « **Reply #801 on:** 01/14/2022 08:00 pm »

Firefly headquarters is just a town over, and that fact strokes my hometown nostalgia, and my Texan... I was gonna say patriotism, but, er... maybe residual-nationalism is the term? Anyway, I'd like to see an oil baron or something buy it so that it is once again totally a Texas company. I don't suppose there is any chance we could convince Beal to jump back into the market.

I wonder if a change in ownership will result in another change in direction. I've been quite unimpressed with the Firefly Beta designs we've seen thus far. Honestly at this point, it mostly just looks like Neutron, but worse in every way (except physical size I guess).

jdon759 · « **Reply #802 on:** 01/15/2022 06:46 am »

Whoever does buy it should rename them "Phoenix Aerospace." It would certainly be fitting.

TrevorMonty · « **Reply #803 on:** 01/15/2022 05:03 pm »

NGIS could be possibility. Alpha would give them replacement for Pegasus and Beta a replacement for Antares.

There is still issue of Urkraine connection with engine development. I assume the US side of Firefly can build and support existing Reaver 1 engines. Can they complete design of larger engines on Beta.

NGIS has lot expertise with composites from ATK part of they business. There is also option to add SRBs to Beta for high performance expendable missions.

Sent from my SM-G570Y using Tapatalk

JEF_300 · « **Reply #804 on:** 01/15/2022 05:54 pm »

Quote from: TrevorMonty on 01/15/2022 05:03 pm

NGIS could be possibility. Alpha would give them replacement for Pegasus and Beta a replacement for Antares.

There is still issue of Urkraine connection with engine development. I assume the US side of Firefly can build and support existing Reaver 1 engines. Can they complete design of larger engines on Beta.

NGIS has lot expertise with composites from ATK part of they business. There is also option to add SRBs to Beta for high performance expendable missions.

Sent from my SM-G570Y using Tapatalk

Beta is planned to have an expendable upper stage anyway, so maybe they would use the Castor-30XL if NGSS bought them. It makes more sense then most possible buyers.

While I seriously doubt they could build the staged-combustion Reaver-2 without Ukrainian aide, they probably wouldn't have any trouble building a tap-off engine of that size. They'd lose some isp, But it would be simpler, cheaper, faster to develop, and they wouldn't need outside help. And if they thought that lost isp was critical, they could gain it all back by switching to methalox.

russianhalo117 · « **Reply #805 on:** 01/15/2022 06:22 pm »

Quote from: TrevorMonty on 01/15/2022 05:03 pm

NGIS could be possibility. Alpha would give them replacement for Pegasus and Beta a replacement for Antares.

There is still issue of Urkraine connection with engine development. I assume the US side of Firefly can build and support existing Reaver 1 engines. Can they complete design of larger engines on Beta.

NGIS has lot expertise with composites from ATK part of they business. There is also option to add SRBs to Beta for high performance expendable missions.

Sent from my SM-G570Y using Tapatalk

To correct you since NGIS no longer exists. NGIS was dissolved into the rest of the company and its assets were redistributed thoughout the companies other business sectors. The TRW space assets were removed from NGAS and merged with OATK's pure space assets from the temporary NGIS entity to create the new permanent Northrop Grumman Space Systems business sector now also called NG Space for short as of January 2022. NGSS came into existence during January 2020.

Websites:
https://www.northropgrumman.com/what-we-do/
https://www.northropgrumman.com/space/
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_Grumman#Business_sectors

trimeta · « **Reply #806 on:** 01/27/2022 02:24 am »

As mentioned over in this thread, NASA has created a new launch services program, Venture-Class Acquisition of Dedicated and Rideshare (VADR) missions, and awarded 12 companies the right to bid for future contracts that fall under this program. Notably, Firefly Aerospace was not included in that list, despite having actually attempted a launch, something 1/3 of the companies on that list can't claim. What does that tell us about the US government's current opinions on Firefly and Max Polyakov, and their expectation that things might improve in the future (although VADR does have an on-ramp provision)?

whitelancer64 · « **Reply #807 on:** 01/27/2022 03:51 pm »

NASA already has a contract with them for a CLPS lunar landing, so there is that.

edzieba · « **Reply #808 on:** 01/28/2022 12:19 pm »

Quote from: trimeta on 01/27/2022 02:24 am

As mentioned over in this thread, NASA has created a new launch services program, Venture-Class Acquisition of Dedicated and Rideshare (VADR) missions, and awarded 12 companies the right to bid for future contracts that fall under this program. Notably, Firefly Aerospace was not included in that list, despite having actually attempted a launch, something 1/3 of the companies on that list can't claim. What does that tell us about the US government's current opinions on Firefly and Max Polyakov, and their expectation that things might improve in the future (although VADR does have an on-ramp provision)?

Firefly already received a $9.8m Venture Class demonstration contract a month ago.

trimeta · « **Reply #809 on:** 01/28/2022 09:28 pm »

Quote from: edzieba on 01/28/2022 12:19 pm

Quote from: trimeta on 01/27/2022 02:24 am
As mentioned over in this thread, NASA has created a new launch services program, Venture-Class Acquisition of Dedicated and Rideshare (VADR) missions, and awarded 12 companies the right to bid for future contracts that fall under this program. Notably, Firefly Aerospace was not included in that list, despite having actually attempted a launch, something 1/3 of the companies on that list can't claim. What does that tell us about the US government's current opinions on Firefly and Max Polyakov, and their expectation that things might improve in the future (although VADR does have an on-ramp provision)?
Firefly already received a $9.8m Venture Class demonstration contract a month ago.

Check the date a little more carefully, that was December 11, 2020, over a year ago.

Although we're not even a month into the new year, so forgetting that 2020 was two years ago is pretty common.

jstrotha0975 · « **Reply #810 on:** 02/12/2022 06:22 pm »

What components of the Alpha are made in Ukraine? With a Russian invasion imminent, could we see a Russian clone of alpha in the future?

Redclaws · « **Reply #811 on:** 02/12/2022 06:27 pm »

Quote from: jstrotha0975 on 02/12/2022 06:22 pm

What components of the Alpha are made in Ukraine? With a Russian invasion imminent, could we see a Russian clone of alpha in the future?

That seems *extremely* unlikely. For one thing, no one is suggesting Russia would completely conquer Ukraine. For another, why? And why would the company go along with it? I sincerely doubt it’s valuable enough for Russia to steal and copy (or if it were they could already do so).

butters · « **Reply #812 on:** 02/12/2022 06:50 pm »

Quote from: jstrotha0975 on 02/12/2022 06:22 pm

What components of the Alpha are made in Ukraine? With a Russian invasion imminent, could we see a Russian clone of alpha in the future?

They make a lot of parts in Ukraine, including turbopump components, combustion chambers, valves and valve bodies of various types, they even wind solenoid actuators. It's their high-end machine shop, basically, where they do their 3D printing and advanced milling operations. Here's an article with good photos if not spectacular writing:

https://www.techtimes.com/articles/248153/20200318/how-the-private-space-company-firefly-aerospaces-ukraine-production-facility-is-arranged-photo-story.htm

They don't make enough of the rocket to suggest that a clone would be particularly practical. It's not like Antares, where the first stage is manufactured by Yuzhnoye/Yuzhmash and delivered from Ukraine in a more-or-less fully-assembled state.

russianhalo117 · « **Reply #813 on:** 02/12/2022 10:04 pm »

Quote from: butters on 02/12/2022 06:50 pm

Quote from: jstrotha0975 on 02/12/2022 06:22 pm
What components of the Alpha are made in Ukraine? With a Russian invasion imminent, could we see a Russian clone of alpha in the future?
They make a lot of parts in Ukraine, including turbopump components, combustion chambers, valves and valve bodies of various types, they even wind solenoid actuators. It's their high-end machine shop, basically, where they do their 3D printing and advanced milling operations. Here's an article with good photos if not spectacular writing:

https://www.techtimes.com/articles/248153/20200318/how-the-private-space-company-firefly-aerospaces-ukraine-production-facility-is-arranged-photo-story.htm

They don't make enough of the rocket to suggest that a clone would be particularly practical. It's not like Antares, where the first stage is manufactured by Yuzhnoye/Yuzhmash and delivered from Ukraine in a more-or-less fully-assembled state.

Firefly previously stated under the previous company leadership that they will fully manufacture operational production flight models in the US for the market in the Americas and production flight models in Ukraine for the EU/EUSPA/ESA market. The American market is their initial company target. Alpha, Beta et al will not debut in Europe until first they are fully operational in the states and secondly until Ukraine receives candidate status to join ESA, EUSPA, and the EU et al which the invitation to the application process is targeted for 2025 but with recent geopolitical issues that target is being considered for advancement to send a geopolitical message from the EU.

Robotbeat · « **Reply #814 on:** 02/12/2022 11:22 pm »

You don’t need to be part of the EU to be a member of ESA.

russianhalo117 · « **Reply #815 on:** 02/13/2022 12:17 am »

Quote from: Robotbeat on 02/12/2022 11:22 pm

You don’t need to be part of the EU to be a member of ESA.

You do for EUSPA. At the moment Firefly is ineligible until the the US joins ESA as an observer. Ukraine hasn't been invited yet by ESA. The statement was oversimplified to state their goals.

Phil Stooke · « **Reply #816 on:** 02/13/2022 07:27 pm »

A lot of talk about the launcher, but what about the CLPS lander (derived from Beresheet)? I would be worried about Firefly's ability to continue with that now.

Hug · « **Reply #817 on:** 02/16/2022 09:41 pm »

Quote from: Hug on 01/06/2022 01:51 am

Polyakov has to first sell his ~0.5 bil $ stake so that they can do launches again; so the 300 mil raise actually has to raise 800 mil.

Or it could be sold for 1$. Bit sad for Max though.

https://twitter.com/SciGuySpace/status/1494072439235559426

StormtrooperJoe · « **Reply #818 on:** 02/16/2022 09:48 pm »

Quite unexpected that he gave away his entire stock for free, but given the situation in Ukraine right now I don't know how could have expected to keep his stock. On the otherhand, this is good news for Firefly as a company as it means they should be able to move forward without further delays.

Lars-J · « **Reply #819 on:** 02/16/2022 09:59 pm »

I'm guessing there will be some interesting inside stories about this period in Firefly in a couple of years when people have distance and feel they can spill the beans. Weird happenings for sure. It seems tough on Max but where there is smoke one can only assume there is some fire. Weird.

But I hope Firefly can proceed and start flying again.