Jump to content

RocketLab Discussion Thread


Kryten

Recommended Posts

Crew-rated as well. I'm really looking forward to seeing Neutron fly!

That looks like 7 engines in the first stage, so they're going to need a bigger first stage engines than Rutherford. Well it also be electric cycle, or a more traditional kerolox gas generator?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, sh1pman said:

Why? Soyuz spacecraft weighs 7.2 tons, and I’ve never heard anyone calling it lightweight.

I do call it lightweight.

Spoiler

Endeavour_docked_to_ISS.jpg

You can catch two Soyuz and stack them one-on-another inside the Space Shuttle bay. Just based on that alone, it's very small.

What I'm saying is that there's no reason to think that what manned spacecraft ends up on Neutron would end up being sent to BLEO missions. Problem is that everyone is now setting sights on BLEO missions, and other next-gen LEO spacecrafts promises mass launch of people... I have a feeling that Rocket Lab is almost like chasing a vanishing gap here.

Edited by YNM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, YNM said:

next-gen LEO spacecrafts promises mass launch of people...

Only one of them does, and it's unclear if it is able to keep the promise. Things may not work out, and businesses investing too much in ambitious next-gen projects can go bankrupt.

7 minutes ago, YNM said:

What I'm saying is that there's no reason to think that what ends up on Neutron would end up being sent to BLEO missions.

You mean human BLEO missions? There's no market for BLEO human spaceflight yet. Will it be a big market if/when it appears? Probably not. But even then, distributed launch and on-orbit assembly of BLEO stacks is an option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, tater said:

Kinda shiny for carbon fiber... Steel?

I guess if BO isn't going to be a "fast follower," someone should.

Steel or aluminium. Legs but no grid fins, suggesting that attitude control during landing will be done by RCS and engine gimbal. 

Seems to be a close competitor to Amur.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, sh1pman said:

Steel or aluminium. Legs but no grid fins, suggesting that attitude control during landing will be done by RCS and engine gimbal. 

Either that or this is just a really early render and they haven't figured out how the aerosurfaces will look yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, sh1pman said:

You mean human BLEO missions? There's no market for BLEO human spaceflight yet.

And there's no Neutron rocket yet either, at least until 2024. We also haven't seen any progress on the capsule in public, so by the time they get to fly a human their competition would at least be about reaching that point as well.

This is why I said "almost". It's not necessarily that their effort is a complete waste yet. And they need every effort possible to make sure they came first.

Edited by YNM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Crew Dragon is ~12t.

CST-100 is ~13t.

The focus on giant, expendable launch vehicles for human BLEO (<cough>SLS</cough>) is dumb. The hardest part of crew is the first and last 100km of the trip. Send people up safely to LEO, then use big rockets to assemble a vehicle to go where you need to go.

 

Edited by tater
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really like Rocket Lab. I hope they know what they're doing here. It would seem dangerous to throw down their hat (after taking a bite from it) and challenge SpaceX, but I guess they had to after SpaceX was gobbling up their lunch with the rideshares. It'll be really sad if it doesn't pay off, and really wonderful if it does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, RyanRising said:

I really like Rocket Lab. I hope they know what they're doing here. It would seem dangerous to throw down their hat (after taking a bite from it) and challenge SpaceX, but I guess they had to after SpaceX was gobbling up their lunch with the rideshares. It'll be really sad if it doesn't pay off, and really wonderful if it does.

They sort of have to. Just as SpaceX needs SS. Rocket dev, even at SpaceX speed is not fast. ITS talk was late 2016. If they manage orbit this year, it will have taken 5 years from starting to "bend metal" (or wrap fiber ;) ). Not counting Raptor dev time.

BO has been working towards NG for, well, forever.

That said, to the extent launch revenue matters (or did X years ago when SpaceX started working on BFR), the possible entry of BO in the indeterminate future matters to them. NG is more capable than F9, so any planning ahead needs to start early.

RL is in the same boat. Electron works well enough, but existing SpaceX rideshare seriously impacts their business model. A single Neutron launch will generate more revenue than possibly a year of Electron launches.

Edited by tater
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, tater said:

Crew Dragon is ~12t.

CST-100 is ~13t.

This is why I said 8 tonnes seems to be on the small limit. Not saying it's impossible or anything, Gemini was only 7 tonnes, and Soyuz with the extra-cramped 3-seats (it does have an orbital section which isn't found on any other design) is indeed only 7 tonnes as well. If they only carry enough to supply the astronauts inside for a few hours up to half a day, and you don't go too high, maybe you can have an 8-tonne capsule + SM (retrorockets really) for maybe 4 people.

It'd be interesting if we ever end up seeing cursed Neutron with Electrons strapped around it though.

Edited by YNM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly it feels like this will compete with Soyuz-level payloads more than Falcon-level payloads. 

The 8 ton class is pretty much where the Soyuz is.

Now obviously the F9 does have its rideshare capability which definitely stops some of RL's business, so IDK.

I'll be interested to see the GTO capacity. For some reason they only list capacity to Venus and Mars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, Soyuz (spacecraft) is small.

Small for LEO is fine, it's a taxi. Look at the travel times for Soyuz to ISS—if they can launch into a similar rapid rendezvous orbit, what do they really need?  Some seats.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, tater said:

Small for LEO is fine, it's a taxi. Look at the travel times for Soyuz to ISS—if they can launch into a similar rapid rendezvous orbit, what do they really need?  Some seats.

Who's going to pay them to go to the ISS though ? NASA already have two contractors, Roscosmos is having their own, then CSA, ESA and JAXA just fills the slot of NASA astronauts really. Others who have a large enough program is developing their own manned launcher (ISRO and CNSA if they ever get in the treaty). Probably some rich oil country, if they're interested...

Most likely to a private station, maybe that Axiom module thing would heed their own astronauts ?

Edited by YNM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How long is ISS even going to stay in operation? There's talk of shutting it down.

Presumably there would be some kind of replacement, but maybe the question that needs to be addressed is "why?" -- why a space station?

We now have a fair amount of data and experience with living in microgravity. Do we need more? What else does the ISS really do? It's never been clear to me what people up there do other than "live in space".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, mikegarrison said:

We now have a fair amount of data and experience with living in microgravity. Do we need more?

They were putting a furnace on zero-G flights. We also haven't seen much for like plant and animal growth + breeding. Plus other 'mundane' things, usually to do with crystals or with thermodynamics.

ISS, the modules that are built in the start of the millenium, will have to retire though. That's the part I was wondering.

Edited by YNM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, mikegarrison said:

How long is ISS even going to stay in operation? There's talk of shutting it down.

Presumably there would be some kind of replacement, but maybe the question that needs to be addressed is "why?" -- why a space station?

We now have a fair amount of data and experience with living in microgravity. Do we need more? What else does the ISS really do? It's never been clear to me what people up there do other than "live in space".

ISS doesn't really do any useful science other than the science of humans in microgravity.

Regardless, as @YNM says, Axiom is attaching commercial modules, and their plan is for self-sufficient modules that will eventually be detached to form their own station (integral life support, RCS, power, etc, is what I mean by self-sufficient).

Why? Because, lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...