Vector Space Systems Micro Satelite Lauches

[tater]

 

[tater]

 

[Cheif Operations Director]

Thanks @tater for the update

[tater]

Sounds pretty bad.

[Ultimate Steve]

Aww man. I was really looking forward to these guys getting to orbit, but I wouldn't put my bets on it now.

RIP Vector.

 

[ThatGuyWithALongUsername]

45 minutes ago, Ultimate Steve said:

Aww man. I was really looking forward to these guys getting to orbit, but I wouldn't put my bets on it now.

RIP Vector.

 

What the? They just won an air force contract like a week ago. Wow.

 

I kinda heard that Cantrell never really got along with... well, anyone... and I guess that may have something to do with it. But I don't know the details.

 

And they always did act like they were farther ahead then they actually were. Remember when they said they were 100% confident that they would launch to orbit in Summer of 2018, specifically mentioning that they were sure there wouldn't be delays like other launch companies? (EDIT: That's in the article:

Quote

Originally, the company planned to begin orbital flights in 2018. As late as March of that year, Cantrell was still brimming with confidence. "My confidence level is 100 percent," Cantrell said at the time. "Not to pick on them, but we don't work on SpaceX schedules. We can't afford to run a business like that. We're not giving you schedules that we know we can't live with." (Cantrell has often played upon his SpaceX experience in media interviews, but sources at the company say he only worked there as a consultant to founder Elon Musk for a couple of months.)

)

Edited August 9, 2019 by ThatGuyWithALongUsername

[tater]

 

Quote

In response to a significant change in financing, VectorLaunch Inc (Vector) announced today that it is undertaking a pause of operations. A core team is evaluating options on completing the development of the company’s Vector-R small launch vehicle, while also supporting the Air Force and other government agencies on programs such as the recent ASLON-45 award.The company plans to make more information available next week.

 

[sh1pman]

 

[tater]

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=40158.msg2095321#msg2095321

Post to NSF by a former Vector person. Ouch.

 

[Nightside]

1 hour ago, tater said:

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=40158.msg2095321#msg2095321

Post to NSF by a former Vector person. Ouch.

 

Quote

From the post:

"Oh and for this flight we used propane on accident - the company delivering the propylene mixed it up and we didn't think to check. Safe to say we were VERY rigorous on checking our fuel deliveries from then on."

Wait, what even is propylene? - I've been thinking it was a solid... Probably just thinking of all the polypropylene long underwear I've had over the years. 

 

It sure sounds like a bit of a cluster*, but that is cast in the light of their ultimate failure. 

If SpaceX every goes belly up, I'm sure there will be endless stories of failures, bad ideas and dumb mistakes that never saw the light of day.

[MinimumSky5]

Sadly, this doesn't surprise me. The only smallsat companies that I expect to survive are Rocket Labs (obviously), Relativity Space, and maybe Astra. There just isn't enough demand for many rockets. 

[tater]

I think any past RocketLab are in for some substantial difficulty, unless they are able to do it even cheaper.

[Ultimate Steve]

On 6/12/2020 at 12:49 PM, Nightside said:

Wait, what even is propylene? - I've been thinking it was a solid... Probably just thinking of all the polypropylene long underwear I've had over the years. 

Propane and Propylene appear to be fairly similar, both fuel gases. From what I can tell, Propane is C3H8 and Propylene is C3H6.

A few other takeaways from the posts in the NSF thread: After they laid off pretty much everyone, they did a full duration fire of an engine in a last ditch attempt to get more investor funding. As for their most recent plan for their path to orbit, B0.101 was switched back and forth between many roles, including suborbital demonstrator. This particular booster had a lot of issues with it. Eventually they decided to focus on getting to orbit, and B0.101 was supposed to be for ground tests. B1.002 would have used the information from the ground tests, and it would have stretched tanks. This would be the first orbital launch attempt, although it would have been incapable of carrying any payload because of the extremely slim margins. From there they were planning on B1.003, which would have been even more stretched with larger engines to reach the originally planned performance. Due to the fact that they were making Vector-R bigger and bigger, they considered scrapping it and going straight to Vector-H.

Also:

Quote

The company ended up closing its doors so suddenly because, in the process of changing CEOs, we realized that the money we thought we had to cover us for a few weeks/months until we closed the series C round we did not actually have. Due to the WARN act, we did not have enough money to keep everyone employed for 60 days and therefore all of us got let go without ANY warning at all. A bit of irony there, that the law ended up directly causing the very situation it is supposed to prevent.
 

 

On 6/12/2020 at 12:49 PM, Nightside said:

It sure sounds like a bit of a cluster*, but that is cast in the light of their ultimate failure. 

If SpaceX every goes belly up, I'm sure there will be endless stories of failures, bad ideas and dumb mistakes that never saw the light of day.

These failure stories would be interesting to read, no matter which organization they are from. Does anyone have any sources for more stories like this one? I don't think we have many other actual failed space organizations, but plenty of space organizations have had non fatal failures.

 

 

[insert_name]

Vector under new ownership, will be switching fuels to kerolox, and aiming to start with a suborbital vehicle

https://spacenews.com/vector-restarting-operations-under-new-ownership/

[Scotius]

Well. It worked for SpaceX, so... More power to them?

[tater]