Astra Space Inc. (formerly Ventions) Launch

[sevenperforce]

3 hours ago, AckSed said:

Huh. Given the dire warnings of cooling phenomena I've heard floating about - polymerisation, coking and sulphur - how common is using kerosene to cool?

I wonder if they have to be careful about where they source their RP-1?

Kerosene polymerization/coking temperature (at least for reasonably pure kerosene) is actually comparable to the coking temperature for propane. As long as you have enough of the stuff flowing through the cooling manifold that you aren't completely cooking it, it'll be fine. Here, however, the problem was that its tank temperature was too high to begin with, leading to it boiling (and possibly coking) due to changes in flow speed which lowered its boiling point thanks to Bernoulli, which meant a vapor gap, which meant not enough kerosene in the cooling manifold, which meant cooling manifold burn-through.

You can't use kerosene for an expander-cycle engine, though, because its boiling point is too high to have a significant pressure change without a phase change. Methane and hydrogen (and to a lesser extent, propane) have a much wider temperature and pressure range in which they stay supercritical and thus avoid the dreaded phase change.

You can also do things like the RD-180, where you use helium as coolant with a secondary heat exchanger to transfer that heat to another propellant.

[tater]

 

 

[tater]

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/07/10/astra-plans-reverse-stock-split-seeks-to-raise-up-to-65-million.html

Quote

Astra plans a reverse stock split, seeks to raise up to $65 million in offering

Spacecraft engine manufacturer and small rocket builder Astra plans to conduct a reverse stock split at a 1 to 15 ratio, the company disclosed in a securities filing Monday. Astra also seeks to raise up to $65 million through an “at the market” offering of common stock, the filing said.

They apparently have very little cash on hand, and they're like a year from flying again... looks like another company heading to the dustbin.

[Exoscientist]

 I hope they are able to make it to orbit with the larger rocket. Skipping to the larger rocket without first successfully flying the smaller one is also the route chosen by Relativity Space. Like Astra, they were able to get the first stage to successfully fire all the way to stage separation. It was the second stage that failed. My understanding though is Relativity is awash in cash, while Astra is struggling. It maybe for Astra the repeated failures led to loss of confidence in the company by the investors.

 The story of Astra and other recent space start-ups is told in the book:

When the Heavens Went on Sale: The Misfits and Geniuses Racing to Put Space Within Reach. https://www.amazon.com/When-Heavens-Went-Sale-Geniuses/dp/B0BCD4D4DK/

  Bob Clark

Edited July 11, 2023 by Exoscientist
Added book link.

[tater]

The problem of course is that even if successful in terms of delivering payloads to orbit, small launch is a dead end. Maybe 1-2 providers can service this market—and one already exists and is reliable, Rocket Lab.

Astra's target of 600kg is higher than the 200kg Electron offers, but larger sats cost more, and will result in customers wanting reliability, something Astra entirely lacks. They need cadence to establish reliability, it's a vicious cycle.

 

[tater]

 

[Scotius]

"Optimizes workforce." Yeah, right.

Less people now has to do more for the same pay.

Quality of work will not suffer at all...

[darthgently]

2 minutes ago, Scotius said:

"Optimizes workforce." Yeah, right.

Less people now has to do more for the same pay.

Quality of work will not suffer at all...

You understand that they in a relatively shoestring budget and aren't making any money yet, right?  They need to lean out to survive.  And no smart investors are going to want to rescue a company in distress that is doing nothing to save itself

[Scotius]

I just take issue with firing people, and dressing it up as "Optimization of workforce".

Soulless af.

[darthgently]

2 hours ago, Scotius said:

I just take issue with firing people, and dressing it up as "Optimization of workforce".

Soulless af.

Getting laid off is not getting fired.  If the company does better they will likely be the first ones sought after for rehire at Astra for their prior experience.  Until then, they collect unemployment or similar which Astra has almost certainly been required to pay into.  Or they find an even better job.  I wonder if the employees are as concerned as you are honestly.  They probably weren't surprised and were probably kept up to date on the possibility of layoffs  for a few months, or at least weeks, if like most work places

Personally, I'd only want employees who understood that optimization of the service or production of the company is job number one.  Sometimes that means fewer people collecting checks

[tater]

ASTR is on nasdaq. As a public company, they have to present information in a certain public-facing way as well. "Optimizing" paints the best picture for current and future investors.

[tater]

 

[darthgently]

1 hour ago, tater said:

 

Well, that sucks.  I hadn't realized that they are publicly traded until now.  That can throw a lot of unknowns and strange pressure into the budgeting and planning process.  I wonder why the IPO'd at such an early stage prior to bigger achievements?  Must have made sense at the time

[tater]

Small sat launch was always a dead end, IMHO.

As has been said in a few different threads, the global, commercial launch market is some small number of billions. For a number of reasons, no provider will capture 100% of that market—but even if they did, it's just not that much money. I mean a small company like Astra might be happy with some 10s of millions in revenue per year, but that's only a thing until one of the 900 lb gorillas nearby show up... Starship and New Glenn. Both are large vehicles, and even at "just" 45t to LEO, NG's payload volume is huge, and if competitive with F9 makes "small sat" sort of pointless.

[darthgently]

44 minutes ago, tater said:

Small sat launch was always a dead end, IMHO.

As has been said in a few different threads, the global, commercial launch market is some small number of billions. For a number of reasons, no provider will capture 100% of that market—but even if they did, it's just not that much money. I mean a small company like Astra might be happy with some 10s of millions in revenue per year, but that's only a thing until one of the 900 lb gorillas nearby show up... Starship and New Glenn. Both are large vehicles, and even at "just" 45t to LEO, NG's payload volume is huge, and if competitive with F9 makes "small sat" sort of pointless.

I think many of these small startups at some point just hope to develop IP that entices a bigger competitor to buy them.  Not a bad strategy if you have the IP to back it up I suppose

Stoke comes to mind.  Even if they can't get market share, they have some interesting IP

Edited November 4, 2023 by darthgently

[tater]

 

 

[satnet]

I found an article covering their merger with a SPAC (Holicity): https://www.space.com/astra-launch-company-public-nasdaq

From the article: "The merger with Holicity values the company at $2.1 billion and is expected to provide Astra with about $500 million in cash proceeds."

$30 million is a pretty steep discount from what they were valued at a couple years ago. Of course SPAC mergers have quickly developed a reputation for terrible performance and losing over 90% of their value is not that unusual.

[RCgothic]

Astra warn of imminent bankruptcy if reduced offer to take company private isn't accepted:

https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/03/rocket-report-astra-warns-of-imminent-bankruptcy-falcon-heavy-launch-delay/

 

[RCgothic]

And Astra goes private after losing 99% of its value: https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/03/after-astra-loses-99-percent-of-its-value-founders-take-rocket-firm-private/

 

[Spaceception]

If they manage a comeback after all of this, I'd be a little impressed. The only thing keeping me from being really impressed is how much of this is not having enough investors, and how much is their fault? My impression from loosely following the news is that taking Astra public in the first place was a bad idea, at least when it's such a young company (since Rocket Lab seems to be making it work - or isn't suffering at least).

[RCgothic]

I'm not sure what they could have done to do better, but ultimately 5/7 of their Rocket 3 launches was pretty bad. Sounds trite, but if they'd been successful they'd have been successful.