Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Thursday January 26 2023, @10:14AM   Printer-friendly

Rocket Lab has aces its first launch from U.S. soil:

Rocket Lab has completed its maiden mission from its new launch site in the U.S., marking a big step forward for the company as it seeks to better compete with the likes of SpaceX.

[...] The spaceflight company used its trusty Electron rocket to deploy three satellites for Hawkeye 360, a radio frequency geospatial analytics company, to an orbit of 342 miles (550 kilometers) above Earth.

It means Rocket Lab has now launched 33 Electron missions from three different pads in two countries — the U.S. and New Zealand — deploying a total of 155 satellites to orbit.

Rocket Lab livestreamed the mission, which showed the early stages of the Electron's flight. You can watch the launch below. There was, however, a longer than usual — and rather tense — wait for confirmation of the mission's success. The delay was put down to a ground station malfunction that temporarily prevented communications between the satellite and the team on the ground. Thankfully, around 90 minutes after launch, a relieved team was able to confirm that everything had gone to plan.

Now with two launch complexes in two countries, the SpaceX rival says it will be able to support more than 130 launches annually for government and commercial satellite operators.

Besides expanding its satellite-launch service using the Electron, Rocket Lab is also building its next-generation rocket, the Neutron, which will also launch from the Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport, with its first test launch targeted for 2024.


Original Submission

This discussion was created by janrinok (52) for logged-in users only, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Thursday January 26 2023, @02:54PM (5 children)

    by JoeMerchant (3937) on Thursday January 26 2023, @02:54PM (#1288702)

    If we're going to have a commercial spaceflight sector, it needs competition, I really hope RocketLab continues to succeed.

    Also:

    TFS: Rocket Lab has now launched 33 Electron missions from three different pads in two countries

    Scotty : I've never beamed three people from two targets onto one pad before!

    --
    🌻🌻 [google.com]
    • (Score: 2) by Immerman on Thursday January 26 2023, @03:37PM (4 children)

      by Immerman (3985) on Thursday January 26 2023, @03:37PM (#1288708)

      Me too. The Neutron especially seems like a really promising design that could give SpaceX a run for their money - why waste mass on unnecessary aerodynamic surfaces and compressive supports in the second stage? At least until they're ready to attempt to attempt recovery... but reentry is a very different brand of aerodynamics.

      I'm really hopeful for Relativity Space and their 3D printed rockets as well - as much for the high-strength 3D printing technology as anything (can you say printing habitat modules in space?), but for all their marketing success (they've pre-sold more launches than anyone since early SpaceX) they seem to be having some trouble getting off the ground, and since their next-gen reusable Terran R rocket uses much larger engines I suspect they'll have a rough path to reusability.

      • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Thursday January 26 2023, @09:12PM (3 children)

        by JoeMerchant (3937) on Thursday January 26 2023, @09:12PM (#1288797)

        I don't know who all the players are (one I see on the highway is "Made In Space") but Jacksonville Florida is tinkering with a horizontal launch to orbit facility on an old disused Navy air field here... wouldn't hurt for them to get in the game too.

        --
        🌻🌻 [google.com]
        • (Score: 2) by Immerman on Friday January 27 2023, @04:26PM (2 children)

          by Immerman (3985) on Friday January 27 2023, @04:26PM (#1288941)

          Yeah, horizontal launch is interesting - There's Virgin Orbit in Europe currently doing that, and I think someone else somewhere - maybe I'm thinking of your guys? But I thought they had reached orbit already too...

          Sort of like a "stage 0.6" launcher - doesn't give nearly the speed boost towards orbit as a typical first-stage rocket, but does handle getting out of most of the atmosphere far more efficiently. I suspect it will never scale to large payloads, but great for putting small satellites into orbits they cant get a cheaper ride-share to. Though I suspect once one of the companies working on "orbital tugboat" platforms enters the market that will make starting from a rideshare to a remote orbit a lot more attractive. Though being able to launch from a local airfield rather than shipping your expensive satellite halfway around the world will still be a big advantage. I've heard that the Earthside transportation can actually rival the rideshare price into orbit.

          SpinLaunch is probably the one I'm most interested in though. Only works for seriously durable payloads, but if they can scale it up as intended it should rival the contribution of traditional first stages. Though where I'm really interested to see them is on the moon, where their "first stage" launch speed is enough to throw payloads completely free of the Moon and into Earth orbit, e.g. to the L4/L5 points, for less than 1kWh/kg (before inefficiencies). And it doesn't actually take much more than that to reach Mars or Venus, which could be immensely helpful for projects there.

          • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Friday January 27 2023, @07:51PM (1 child)

            by JoeMerchant (3937) on Friday January 27 2023, @07:51PM (#1288971)

            >Earthside transportation can actually rival the rideshare price into orbit

            I can definitely see this for ESA in French Guiana, particularly for big sensitive payloads.

            >SpinLaunch

            In my mind, SpinLaunch has some rather frightening military potential: just spin-shoot 50 payloads a day up there for a few years and now you have thousands of potential javelins from orbit that can be targeted just about anywhere.

            >the Moon

            I'd really like to see operations up there in earnest, dealing with stuff like highly abrasive electrostatically deposited dust coatings... it's going to take some development work to make things operate long term in that environment. Kind of like undersea and sea surface operations are actually a lot more demanding than orbital...

            --
            🌻🌻 [google.com]
            • (Score: 2) by Immerman on Saturday January 28 2023, @12:10AM

              by Immerman (3985) on Saturday January 28 2023, @12:10AM (#1289011)

              I don't see that Spinlaunch is any worse in that respect than any other launch system at a comparable price point. And we really need to hit that price point if we're ever going to actually colonize space.

              It is a little scarier as a direct-fire canon, especially on the moon. No need for expensive rocket engines and guidance systems on every javelin like you would if they were in orbit - you can just throw completely inert, dirt-cheap mining slag at a target for as long as you want. Of course it takes a few days for them to reach Earth, so anything mobile can get out of the way, but cities and other infrastructure would be SOL. Probably not really any scarier per impact than conventional heavy artillery, except that you can keep it up for months for pocket change (by military budget standards anyway).

              Which is why I really don't want either China *or* the US to be the only superpower industrializing the moon. One part MAD, one part "we can sneak over and blow your launch system into scrap if we have to" should help keep both sides from being too tempted to abuse the advantage they would otherwise have.

              And yeah, I really want to see us getting established there too. There's some size large challenges to actually making it work, but we've reached the point where we have the technology to make it possible, and even potentially profitable. In theory - it's the practice we need, and I think we're ready to hit the ground running. I just hope we have the commitment to take a few black eyes along the way. There's far more to realistically win than in any war, and the price in lives will be far lower. But it won't be zero. Heck, if you count the lives lost in engine testing I think it's already in the hundreds, but losing someone in the media spotlight tends to bring things to a grinding stop. At least in the US - China might be different. And the US might have to put on our hero pants if we don't want to get left behind.

  • (Score: 2) by Frosty Piss on Thursday January 26 2023, @04:51PM (2 children)

    by Frosty Piss (4971) on Thursday January 26 2023, @04:51PM (#1288721)

    I'd be interested in the cost analysis over time with a reusable platform such as SpaceX Falcons.

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Thursday January 26 2023, @09:44PM (1 child)

      by JoeMerchant (3937) on Thursday January 26 2023, @09:44PM (#1288807)

      I'd be interested in the real numbers, the chances of honesty in that department seem slim at best.

      --
      🌻🌻 [google.com]
      • (Score: 2) by Immerman on Friday January 27 2023, @04:33PM

        by Immerman (3985) on Friday January 27 2023, @04:33PM (#1288943)

        Well, few companies are forthcoming about their cost for the products and services they sell... but as more competition enters the market to drive down costs we should get a better idea what at least the most expensive of them actually costs. Assuming they don't collude too badly of course...

(1)