Crispy - 28/3/2007 8:13 AMSounds a bit like OTRAG doesn't it?
Masten is in my thoughts too, but they don't feed me monthly update candy...
publiusr - 30/3/2007 2:16 PMOTRAG would allow for very wide payloads if memory serves, so large aeroshells and maybe even lenticular craft may be possible with the booster big enough.
No doubt. It's interesting to speculate about, and if it works out, it will be proof that the new suborbital vehicles can lead to orbital development.
Mr Carmack closes his most recent update with the following text:
BTW, congrats to the Up Aerospace guys for a successful space shot in New Mexico!
This guy is an all around class act!
Looks like they have an SBIR award, which I must say is richly deserved. There's lots of noise by the new.space crowd, but few actually out there flying (and landing) metal.
I hope to see great things in the future to this little company...
Any of the artsy types care to illustrate a stack of modules making up a BFR, with a picture of widget on the side and black skies above? The only thing I can imagine better than that would be a NASA meatball below widget, or a set of blue USAF wings...
jimvela - 7/5/2007 11:09 PMAny of the artsy types care to illustrate a stack of modules making up a BFR, with a picture of widget on the side and black skies above?
Jason - 29/5/2007 9:49 PMDoes Armadillo do it's test flights in Oklahoma? Because there is a new Temporary flight restriction near Sherman OK. for a Lunar Lander prototype test flight. http://tfr.faa.gov/save_pages/detail_7_2647.html
ericr - 4/6/2007 10:53 AMChris,Isn't this worth writing a story?
Chris Bergin - 4/6/2007 10:18 AMQuoteericr - 4/6/2007 10:53 AMChris,Isn't this worth writing a story?Yep, but we need someone who can write it up (I'm snowed under with STS-117 and I believe Braddock is still a very busy man). We'd also need something fresh for us, as simply repeating what is already out there on the official site is not very newsworthy.Anyone who knows of a solution to the above, mail me.
Chris Bergin - 4/6/2007 12:18 PMQuoteericr - 4/6/2007 10:53 AMIsn't this worth writing a story?Yep, but we need someone who can write it up (I'm snowed under with STS-117 and I believe Braddock is still a very busy man).
ericr - 4/6/2007 10:53 AMIsn't this worth writing a story?
QuoteMKremer - Great demos and videos, but when will there be any kind of test for both flight duration and translation across to a different landing pad and back again? (and will anything like that be tested before the actual competition?)IMO, if they demonstrate *that* beforehand it's not only positive PR, but facts that might help ensure more/additional investments to help future endeavours.Did you read the whole update?What is this, then?:http://media.armadilloaerospace.com/2007_06_03/LLC1demo.mpgQuoting snippets from the update cut/paste (all emphasis and highlighting mine):
MKremer - Great demos and videos, but when will there be any kind of test for both flight duration and translation across to a different landing pad and back again? (and will anything like that be tested before the actual competition?)IMO, if they demonstrate *that* beforehand it's not only positive PR, but facts that might help ensure more/additional investments to help future endeavours.
Quote"One June 2, we conducted a complete LLC 1 operational profile at the Oklahoma Spaceport. Everything went great.""The lovely range with two concrete pads was an overgrown field the week before."
"One June 2, we conducted a complete LLC 1 operational profile at the Oklahoma Spaceport. Everything went great.""The lovely range with two concrete pads was an overgrown field the week before."
Looks to me like they've already demonstrated the capability to win... I'll bet that they do more than just that one test flight between now and then as well...
MKremer - 4/6/2007 10:09 PMSheesh. OK, I agree they accomplished altitude/duration/time winning points... but what about getting from point A to point B, refuelling, then from point B back again to point A?Haven't seen proof of that yet is what I meant.
jimvela - 5/6/2007 12:44 AMQuoteMKremer - 4/6/2007 10:09 PMSheesh. OK, I agree they accomplished altitude/duration/time winning points... but what about getting from point A to point B, refuelling, then from point B back again to point A?Haven't seen proof of that yet is what I meant.Did you actually watch the linked video? In particular, the time-lapse portion in the middle where they re-fuel the vehicle and then proceed to fly the return leg?
MKremer - 5/6/2007 12:32 AMWhat I see, other than that, is a vertical takeoff, hover with small corrections, then a vertical descent.
If they really want to make it obvious they're taking off and landing at different pads, make either pad A or pad B have obviously different markings
What I see, other than that, is a vertical takeoff, hover with small corrections, then a vertical descent.
What I see, other than that, is a vertical takeoff, hover with small corrections, then a vertical descent. Both times.
JesseD - 15/7/2007 9:40 AMThe big thing will be the integration of multiple engines. As Masten is apparently finding out, it's not too trivial.
jimvela - 13/8/2007 3:34 PMThis month's update is up, at the following location:http://armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Home/News?news_id=348
braddock - 13/8/2007 3:38 PMLooks like they may have some serious problems.Armadillo's graphite manufacturer is unable to get them the "good stuff" graphite used in their nozzels for four months, and the second-rate graphite is failing. Also having injector plate issues. They are beefing both up.It will be tragic if they get this close only to be shot down by supply problems.
GF3 - 23/8/2007 2:00 PMIt sucks to hear about their crash... I was really hoping to see them perform well at the Xprize. Hopefully they can pull something together in time.
meiza - 23/8/2007 7:46 PMPeople have blown this particular crash far out of proportion, comments from people who know nothing fly around the internet, of course, mostly on other sites than this...
halkey - 24/8/2007 2:37 PMI never know whether to laugh or cry. I just always fear that these types of people with grossly misinformed opinions will be listened to somewhere up on the food chain and that their ignorance will kill future advancement. Yes, I'm paranoid.
If anything, John's joke that perhaps Masten would "see the error of their ways" with respect to multiple vectored engines vs single gimbaled sounded just a shade below the the belt, but I know he wasn't meaning it that way.
savuporo - 29/8/2007 3:02 PMLLC is now down to 7 competitors, as MicroSpace didnt show up (whodathunk!?) and "mystery team" pulled out.Anyone wanna bet that actually there will be just one team flying this year, again ?
hop - 29/8/2007 9:05 PMOne rumor was that the mystery team is Blue Origin. If that was true, they actually have flown an impressive vehicle and so could have offered serious competition. Moot point now, since whoever it was is out.
Masten has a good chance of flying IMO. From a quick google, it seems to me none of the others have actually come anywhere close to flying a controlled VVTL rocket. Perhaps they are just playing their cards closer to their chests than Armadillo and Masten, but I have my doubts.
One rumor was that the mystery team is Blue Origin. If that was true, they actually have flown an impressive vehicle and so could have offered serious competition. Moot point now, since whoever it was is out.
gladiator1332 - 29/8/2007 10:33 PMOne question, regarding the modular concept:http://www.hobbyspace.com/AAdmin/Images/RLV/Armadillo/orbitalConfig.jpgWill this structure eventually be covered by some sort of shroud? Where will the payload sit? And will there be a payload fairing?
The nosecone is just for single module high speed flights. We aren't sure yet if we will put a fairing on the multi-module systems, it will depend on the total drag and mass tradeoff.
Surprisingly, the flight computer was continuing to operate and transmit through all of this, but the sensor and wiring harnesses were shorted out in the fire, so we didn't have any sense of the state of the tanks. With trepidation, someone approached the vehicle and found that the lox tanks were still full and pressurized at the same pressure as when the vehicle was shut down.
meiza - 7/9/2007 6:54 AMHmm, I wondered that myself too. But what can you do in such a situation? Maybe you could let it sit for a day and have most of the lox boil and exit through relief valves.
The MOD just flew a qualification flight for AST into the teeth of a windthat was pushing our flight safety limit of 25 mph. Had to fight it all theway across the 100-m pads, but we stuck a precision landing with propellantto spare. Looks like we will have both the MOD and the QUAD (Pixel ... hersister died in a tragic accident) flying next weekend at XPC2007. Stillwaiting on FAA AST official notification of the acceptance of the flightdata.
Acuity:Very Secret I know almost nothign about their progress. They had an unflown vehicle at the 2006 XPC, they could be the dark horse. They have an interesting control scheme that always made me wonder.Armadillo: As ready as anyone could be, the "Gold Standard"Bon Nova: They have posted a couple of very quick Rocket Motor videos, the longest being several seconds. We posted our 106 Second firing in April and we did not make it. They have posted no vehicle hardware pictures.Masten: They just announced on their blog they are out for 2007.Micro space: Failed to attend the required team meeting in Aug.Paragon Labs: They have a very credible vehicle, well constructed and professional Another team that is somewhat secretive and an unknown. They posted finished airframe and rocket firing pictures in Aug. They were planning to have throttling via movable pintile in the all aluminum motor, while technically very cool, not easy to do and Armadillo was never able to make an all aluminum motor last without melting.Speed Up:Announced that they will not make 2007.Unreasonable Rocket:Announced we will not make it in 2007.Team X :Pulled out before the Last team summit.
Acuity:Acuity was almost ready for last years XPC. They had their regulatory afairs in order and were building real hardware at least 18 months ago. Acuity has a control scheme that looks a little bit too cute for my taste. They are using short aquat tanks that will slosh on a vehicle with VERY limited control authority. There control experience is in winged UAV's where you can usea self righting gyro bias just like you do on an aircraft while flying on instruments. If you use the rate of turn and compass to fly straight then you can use the vertical earth gravity vector to zero out your bank gyro drift. If you hold a constant altitude then you can use the gravity vector to zero out your pitch gyro. This is done automagically by the low to medium cost gyro systems for UAV's, and by all aircraft horizon gyros. This does not work on a free flying hovering rocket. I believe that these two issues will conspire to cause them problems in their free flights.I would be absolutely stunned if they made it to the XPC.Paragon Labs:Paragon Labs built a Pixel/Texel clone. The finish quality of what they fabricated was on par or better than what AA has done. They have done significant quality work in the electronics and control space. I believe that there two primary issues will be the motor and insurance/regulatory compliance. The motor is an all aluminum Regen, it uses a mechanical pintile for throttling. They have issues a single photo of the motor running, but no video. I think they will have problems cooling the all aluminum motor and the moveable pintle is technically cool, but practically hard to make work. One of my biggest issues has been holding the tolerance of the pintiles in my motors after accounting for heating stress hardening and hydraulic stretch. They need to keep these tolerances on moving sealed parts. I would say they are probably the best machinists of all the LLC groups, but its still hard.Flying at Holloman means a really high maximum probable Loss as there are nearby expensivestructures and getting insurance for a vehicle that has not had much flight time on it will be expensive. Given the lack of public flight test for the Paragon vehicle, I would not be surprised if the Insurance quote for team Paragon exceeded the amount of their entire stated development budget.Paragon labs only has one vehicle, so even if they make it to the 2007 show there will still be some prize money for 2008.
After landing at the end of the first half of its trip, an igniter problem caused the team to alter the fuel flow rate. The 50-meter (165-foot) ascent of Module 1 (MOD) for its return journey back to its origin was faster than expected, which caused concern to John Carmack, the founder of Armadillo Aerospace. The engine was running rough, but the craft managed to remain aloft for most of the required 90 seconds—moving 50 meters (165 feet) across the desert back to the original launch site.However, it was having trouble landing, swinging back and forth in its unstable descent back to the ground. It then tipped over then it did reach the concrete pad.Team members of Armadillo Aerospace have further tries to win the prize. They are expecting to use a backup MOD for one of these tries at Level 1 (the $350,000 prize). They are also expecting to fly Pixel for the more dangerous attempt at landing on a rough landing site (Level 2), rather than on a concrete pad. The prize for successful completion of Level 2 is one million dollars. Level 1 and Level 2 prizes are provided by NASA.Additional information on the Wirefly X PRIZE Cup is found at “2007 Wirefly X PRIZE Cup: ‘Earth's Great Space Exposition’”: http://www.itwire.com/content/view/15058/1066/
When the launch countdown ended at 1334 US Mountain Standard Time (1934 GMT), Armadillo's Module 1 vehicle exploded in a fireball with a bang that was audible from more than 1 kilometre away....Following the failure, Armadillo Aerospace chief John Carmack said his team would not attempt the more demanding Level 2 challenge.
Tergenev - 31/10/2007 9:49 AMI'm very sad to see this. I suspect, with the failure of Kistler to get private funding and their subsequent loss of the COTS contract, the 'failure' of the second SpaceX test flight, and the subsequent continuous delays to SpaceX's launch schedule, the Scaled Composites explosion, the dramatic fall of the US Dollar and it's international purchasing power (and Bigelow's ability to buy launches for a reasonable price, and now this second near miss by Armadillo . . . . that we may be seeing the fizzle of the New Space initiative. Yeah, there's still some momentum on some projects, but much of the energy is gone.Jim and the other NASA and EELV people around here must be very pleased.
Tergenev - 31/10/2007 9:49 AMJim and the other NASA and EELV people around here must be very pleased.
Tergenev - 25/2/2008 3:05 PMThat, and the fact that once again timid neighbors have squelched much of what made 'New Space' possible, low overhead and quick turnaround. I'm sure that we'll see the next shoe drop soon. No more public reports because somebody will complain to some authority somewhere who will go yell at them. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that someone who reads this board has already done just that.
josh_simonson - 25/2/2008 2:51 PMThat six pack vehicle looks scary. I guess that would be more for thrill seekers than 'tourists'.
hyper_snyper - 25/2/2008 3:25 PMQuotejosh_simonson - 25/2/2008 2:51 PMThat six pack vehicle looks scary. I guess that would be more for thrill seekers than 'tourists'.Yeah, I hope there is more than those tethers holding that fish bowl secure to the vehicle.On the other hand, that rocket truck is awesome. Also, I think it's good they're starting from nearly scratch on their engines. Better to get the problems that prevented them from winning the LLCs out of the way.
Tergenev - 25/2/2008 3:05 PMWhat I find more depressing about this report is the fact that Armadillo seems to be going back to nearly scratch when it comes to their engine designs. That, and the fact that once again timid neighbors have squelched much of what made 'New Space' possible, low overhead and quick turnaround. I'm sure that we'll see the next shoe drop soon. No more public reports because somebody will complain to some authority somewhere who will go yell at them. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that someone who reads this board has already done just that.
Jim - 26/2/2008 2:32 AMRocket science is not meant to be done in areas designated "light industrial"
