Rocket Lab's 'Electron' Marks First Orbital-Class Launch From a Private Pad

[dump...@hotmail.com]

"Rocket Lab, a California-based spaceflight company with its roots in New Zealand,
just launched its two-stage Electron rocket for the first time. The small launch
vehicle successfully lifted off from Rocket Lab's Launch Complex 1 on the Mahia
Peninsula of New Zealand at 12:20 a.m. ET on Thursday May 25—4:20 p.m. New Zealand
time. The successful liftoff marks the first time an orbital-class rocket has been
launched from a private launch facility."

See:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/space/rockets/news/a26638/rocket-lab-launches-electron-rocket-first-flight/

[Fred J. McCall]

It did not, however, reach orbit and it was expected to, so there's a
failure investigation going on.


--
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore,
all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
--George Bernard Shaw

[Greg (Strider) Moore]

"Fred J. McCall" wrote in message
news:r6veictfem49fso9v...@4ax.com...

>
>dump...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>>
>>"Rocket Lab, a California-based spaceflight company with its roots in New
>>Zealand,
>>just launched its two-stage Electron rocket for the first time. The small
>>launch
>>vehicle successfully lifted off from Rocket Lab's Launch Complex 1 on the
>>Mahia
>>Peninsula of New Zealand at 12:20 a.m. ET on Thursday May 25—4:20 p.m. New
>>Zealand
>>time. The successful liftoff marks the first time an orbital-class rocket
>>has been
>>launched from a private launch facility."
>>
>>See:
>>
>>http://www.popularmechanics.com/space/rockets/news/a26638/rocket-lab-launches-electron-rocket-first-flight/
>>
>
>It did not, however, reach orbit and it was expected to, so there's a
>failure investigation going on.
>
>

Huh, thought it had, but not the desired orbit. Either way, someone's got a
lot of 'spaining to do.

--
Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/
CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net
IT Disaster Response -
https://www.amazon.com/Disaster-Response-Lessons-Learned-Field/dp/1484221834/

[Fred J. McCall]

"Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <moo...@deletethisgreenms.com> wrote:

>"Fred J. McCall" wrote in message
>news:r6veictfem49fso9v...@4ax.com...
>>
>>dump...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Rocket Lab, a California-based spaceflight company with its roots in New
>>>Zealand,
>>>just launched its two-stage Electron rocket for the first time. The small
>>>launch
>>>vehicle successfully lifted off from Rocket Lab's Launch Complex 1 on the
>>>Mahia
>>>Peninsula of New Zealand at 12:20 a.m. ET on Thursday May 25—4:20 p.m. New
>>>Zealand
>>>time. The successful liftoff marks the first time an orbital-class rocket
>>>has been
>>>launched from a private launch facility."
>>>
>>>See:
>>>
>>>http://www.popularmechanics.com/space/rockets/news/a26638/rocket-lab-launches-electron-rocket-first-flight/
>>>
>>
>>It did not, however, reach orbit and it was expected to, so there's a
>>failure investigation going on.
>>
>>
>
>Huh, thought it had, but not the desired orbit. Either way, someone's got a
>lot of 'spaining to do.
>

Nope. It got to 'space' (which is an altitude thing), but it didn't
achieve orbit.


--
"I was lucky in the order. But I've always been lucky
when it comes to killin' folks."
-- William Munny, "Unforgiven"

[William Mook]

https://www.nbr.co.nz/article/rocket-lab-hits-us1b-valuation-ck-p-200954

It was a test launch and operated as it was intended.

https://www.rocketlabusa.com/

150 kg into a 500 km sun synchronous orbit - is very interesting! Its ideally suited for a 'dawn-dusk' orbit that stays in sunlight continuously. Orbits +/- 46.3 degrees in longitude from the terminator, never see the sun set. This make very lightweight solar powered satellites possible to build.

These can be above Earth,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun-synchronous_orbit

And above the moon!

https://www.hindawi.com/journals/mpe/2009/740460/

So, launching a solar powered ion engine with the capacity using light weight concentrators, to generate 20 kW per kg, and very high thrust to weight MEMS based ion engines;

http://www.accion-systems.com/

https://info.aiaa.org/Regions/SE/HSV_AIAA/Board%20Meeting%20Agendas%20Minutes%20etc/Course%20Credit%20Hour%20Documentation/20160719%20Electrospray%20Seminar/PDH_Seminar_Miller_NASA_Electrospray_July_19_2016.pdf


Ve=10 km/sec,
P = 0.1 Newton/cm2 = 1020 milligrams(force)/cm2,
W = 46.5 milligrams/cm2
L/W = 21.93:1

500 Watts per cm2 of wafer.
20,000 W/kg satellite weight
40 cm2 --> 40.8 grams (force)per kg.
40.8 milligees! (0.4 m/s/s)

50 kg Stage
1 MW total power. 2,000 Wafers.

100 kg payload & propellant.

Accelerating from 7.62 km/sec to 10.85 km/sec is a boost of 3.23 km/sec. Entering low lunar orbit takes another 0.67 km/sec. To return another 0.67 km/sec. A total of 4.57 km/sec deep space maneuver. This requires 55.02 kg of propellant. This leaves 44.98 kg of useful payload (with 50 kg dedicated to the solar ion system). This powers a 50 cm x 40 cm array of electrospray rockets.



Two 30.5 m diameter inflatable concentrators, massing 17 kg each, illuminating a 300 mm diameter multi-spectral photovoltaic massing 133 grams, produces 500 kW of power when pointed at the sun. x2 equals 1,000 kW total. Additional 8 kg of propellant for attitude control and orbital changes. 7 kg of inert structure including communications and control.

A lunar lander and return vehicle consisting of

23.56 kg - LOX/LH propellant
5.38 kg - structure
16.04 kg - landed payload on moon (and return)

We can also launch satellites that are in the dark half the time, but receive power (as well as broadband through Li-Fi)

http://purelifi.com/

from those satellites in constant sunlight.

The lander consists of two nested spheres, one containing LOX and the other containing LH2, in a zero boil off cryogenic containment, 52 cm in diameter. This is surrounded by a 4 cm thick propulsive and sensory skin made of arrays of chemical thrusters, and arrays of light sensors and light sources as well as numerous 2 cm x 2 cm x 2 cm cavities. The system settles down on the lunar surface, is capable of flying over the lunar surface, and of rolling along it, and returning.

Micro-robotic systems arrayed throughout the surface have the ability to leave their surface and operate cooperatively to move things into the satellite and of organising patterns in the lunar dust and photographing them. A panoramic 360 degree view of the scene is created and stored on board. The stars and horizon are recognised as well as lunar surface features and Earth surface features, to aid in celestial navigation.

Services offered are;

(1) Photgrammetry of the lunar surface, its features, and objects
(2) Retrieval of small objects from the lunar surface,
(3) Deposition of small objects to the lunar surface,
(4) Writing and drawing patterns in the lunar dust (that will last millions of years)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_artificial_objects_on_the_Moon#/media/File:Moon_map_grid_showing_artificial_objects_on_moon.PNG

Retrieval of pieces of Luna 2 and moon rocks, from which jewelry is made, is quite valuable. Writing your name, and the name of a loved one, on the lunar surface, is likewise quite valued. Depositing keepsakes on the moon also is quite valued. Documenting prior lunar landings and operations, surveying for water resources, orbital surveys, etc., is also of tremendous value.

Well worth the $12 million spent on the programme.

[Fred J. McCall]

William Mook <mokme...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Friday, May 26, 2017 at 12:55:36 PM UTC+12, Fred J. McCall wrote:
>> dump...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"Rocket Lab, a California-based spaceflight company with its roots in New Zealand,
>> >just launched its two-stage Electron rocket for the first time. The small launch
>> >vehicle successfully lifted off from Rocket Lab's Launch Complex 1 on the Mahia
>> >Peninsula of New Zealand at 12:20 a.m. ET on Thursday May 25—4:20 p.m. New Zealand
>> >time. The successful liftoff marks the first time an orbital-class rocket has been
>> >launched from a private launch facility."
>> >
>> >See:
>> >
>> >http://www.popularmechanics.com/space/rockets/news/a26638/rocket-lab-launches-electron-rocket-first-flight/
>> >
>>
>> It did not, however, reach orbit and it was expected to, so there's a
>> failure investigation going on.
>>
>

>https://www.nbr.co.nz/article/rocket-lab-hits-us1b-valuation-ck-p-200954
>
>It was a test launch and operated as it was intended.
>

Not according to the head of the company, it didn't.

http://spacenews.com/rocket-lab-reaches-space-but-not-orbit-on-first-electron-launch/

<snip Imaginary MookSpew>


--
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the
truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."
-- Thomas Jefferson

[Jeff Findley]

In article <r6veictfem49fso9v...@4ax.com>,
fjmc...@gmail.com says...

>
> dump...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> >
> >"Rocket Lab, a California-based spaceflight company with its roots in New Zealand,
> >just launched its two-stage Electron rocket for the first time. The small launch
> >vehicle successfully lifted off from Rocket Lab's Launch Complex 1 on the Mahia

> >Peninsula of New Zealand at 12:20 a.m. ET on Thursday May 25?4:20 p.m. New Zealand

> >time. The successful liftoff marks the first time an orbital-class rocket has been
> >launched from a private launch facility."
> >
> >See:
> >
> >http://www.popularmechanics.com/space/rockets/news/a26638/rocket-lab-launches-electron-rocket-first-flight/
> >
>
> It did not, however, reach orbit and it was expected to, so there's a
> failure investigation going on.

I'm surprised they got as far as they did.

But yes, there is a bit of a PR spin going on in the news articles.
This was a test flight and it was mostly successful... mostly. But it
did not go into orbit, so it's not quite ready for paying customers who
expect their satellite to be placed into earth orbit.

Still, SpaceX had several Falcon 1 failures before they finally "got it
right". This stuff isn't easy.

Jeff
--
All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone.
These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends,
employer, or any organization that I am a member of.

[William Mook]

McCall takes everything out of context, which is usual for him.

https://www.rocketlabusa.com/latest/

https://www.rocketlabusa.com/latest/rocket-lab-successfully-makes-it-to-space-2/

This FIRST LAUNCH of the Electron was a TEST LAUNCH. Orbit would have been nice to achieve and was a goal, but wasn't achieved in this case. Had it been achieved, without major mishap, dropping one test launch, would have been nice for the budget. However, a lot of BS is spun out as fact around sci.space - largely due to people like McCall taking things out of context.

Fact: RocketLab already has commercial clients.

Fact: RocketLab is planning two more TEST launches in the THREE LAUNCH TEST SEQUENCE prior to committing to its FIRST COMMERCIAL LAUNCH, WHICH IS ALREADY BOOKED.

Fact: RocketLab is committed to a programme of continuous improvement that allows it to adjust its digital tooling and rapid production chain to take advantage of lessons learned.

lol.

As the man once said, You ain't seen nothin' yet!

* * *

Mini-satellites of immense capacity!

* * *

Some very exciting commercial payloads are forthcoming putting New Zealand in a very strong position to participate in the small satellite marketplace and delivering very interesting capabilities.

One is a lunar landing and return robot previously described, that provides;

(1) lunar video
(2) lunar photogrammetry
(3) lunar payload delivery (and return)
(4) lunar sample return (jewelry)

* * *

Another is a deep space Li-Fi network

* * *

https://energy.gov/eere/solar/downloads/low-cost-light-weigh-thin-film-solar-concentrators

https://www.nature.com/articles/srep14758

Another is a 3 MW laser based solar power satellite

* * *

Another is a 1.25 MW laser based solar power satellite - AT MARS

Giving routine delivery and return of 150 kg payloads to and from Mars orbit and Deimos and Phobos - and providing communications and live access to users anywhere.

* * *

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/2040-8978/18/6/063002

http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/1251612/

A Li-Fi based telecommunications system, that provides broadband from deep space, in GEO, Earth Moon Lagrange Points, and Sol Earth Lagrange Points - Sol Mars Lagrange Points - Deimos and Phobos - combined with advanced AI for mission planning and control - provide a sound basis for deep space missions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_communication_in_space

Li-Fi routers on orbit that provide uplink downlink using 802.11a virtual cells doppler corrected and stationary relative to the Earth's surface, despite being 'painted' by moving satellites, provide free global mesh net discoverable by any device with wi-fi or bluetooth capability.

* * *

MEMS Based Ion Engine

http://www.accion-systems.com/accion-tech/

For high efficiency, deep space booster, using a solar pumped electro-spray ion engine, and a laser pumped electro-spray ion engine that's powered from a solar pumped laser satellite re, form the basis of a deep space stage of immense capacity.

* * *

http://lasermotive.com/

A solar pumped laser power satellite that beams energy to receivers on Earth using a conjugate optics to maintain safe reliable precise tracking.

[William Mook]

Jeff,

RocketLab received $75 million a few months ago, and announced three TEST FLIGHT prior to committing to their first COMMERCIAL LAUNCH. Had everything gone perfectly, the company may have dropped one test launch. As it stands, they will review 25,000 channels of data collected, and run it through their automated design and production process. Their tooling is largely digitally defined, and they have an awesome system of continuous improvement building their hardware with equipment that others might have called in an earlier day rapid prototyping. Their next rocket will have some awesome improvements, and their next one after that. As they strive and achieve perfection.

[Jeff Findley]

In article <939fb6e3-b1fa-4bf7...@googlegroups.com>,
mokme...@gmail.com says...

>
> On Monday, May 29, 2017 at 2:05:18 AM UTC+12, Jeff Findley wrote:
> >
> > I'm surprised they got as far as they did.
> >
> > But yes, there is a bit of a PR spin going on in the news articles.
> > This was a test flight and it was mostly successful... mostly. But it
> > did not go into orbit, so it's not quite ready for paying customers who
> > expect their satellite to be placed into earth orbit.
> >
> > Still, SpaceX had several Falcon 1 failures before they finally "got it
> > right". This stuff isn't easy.
>

> Jeff,
>
> RocketLab received $75 million a few months ago, and announced
> three TEST FLIGHT prior to committing to their first COMMERCIAL
> LAUNCH.

Yes, this has been reported.

> Had everything gone perfectly, the company may have dropped one
> test launch. As it stands, they will review 25,000 channels of
> data collected,

Yes that 25,000 channels of data collected has been reported too.

> and run it through their automated design and production process.

You make it sound like Rocket Lab has some sort of artificial
intelligence that can take 25,000 channels of data from a test launch
and tweak the production process without human intervention. That
simply isn't true though. That data will be interpreted by engineers,
not by some "automated design and production process".

> Their tooling is largely digitally defined, and they have an
> awesome system of continuous improvement building their hardware
> with equipment that others might have called in an earlier day
> rapid prototyping. Their next rocket will have some awesome
> improvements, and their next one after that. As they strive
> and achieve perfection.

I'll wait to see how the next couple of launches go. Like I said, this
stuff isn't easy. Running out of money before successfully making orbit
has happened to other start-ups in the past. It could happen again,
even though I hope it doesn't.

[Fred J. McCall]

Poor Mookie. The CEO of the company doesn't know what he's talking
about and Mookie knows better.

Phew, what a loony.

William Mook <mokme...@gmail.com> wrote:

>McCall takes everything out of context, which is usual for him.
>
>https://www.rocketlabusa.com/latest/
>

>https://www.rocketlabusa.com/latest/rocket-lab-successfully-Pmakes-it-to-space-2/

[William Mook]

On Monday, May 29, 2017 at 2:13:48 PM UTC+12, Jeff Findley wrote:
> In article <939fb6e3-b1fa-4bf7...@googlegroups.com>,
> mokme...@gmail.com says...
> >
> > On Monday, May 29, 2017 at 2:05:18 AM UTC+12, Jeff Findley wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm surprised they got as far as they did.
> > >
> > > But yes, there is a bit of a PR spin going on in the news articles.
> > > This was a test flight and it was mostly successful... mostly. But it
> > > did not go into orbit, so it's not quite ready for paying customers who
> > > expect their satellite to be placed into earth orbit.
> > >
> > > Still, SpaceX had several Falcon 1 failures before they finally "got it
> > > right". This stuff isn't easy.
> >
> > Jeff,
> >
> > RocketLab received $75 million a few months ago, and announced
> > three TEST FLIGHT prior to committing to their first COMMERCIAL
> > LAUNCH.
>
> Yes, this has been reported.
>
> > Had everything gone perfectly, the company may have dropped one
> > test launch. As it stands, they will review 25,000 channels of
> > data collected,
>
> Yes that 25,000 channels of data collected has been reported too.
>
> > and run it through their automated design and production process.
>
> You make it sound like Rocket Lab has some sort of artificial
> intelligence that can take 25,000 channels of data from a test launch
> and tweak the production process without human intervention.

You make shit up and then gripe about what you make up. lol. What I said is true. What you said. Not so much.

>That
> simply isn't true though.

The part you made up isn't true. I agree.

> That data will be interpreted by engineers,

Of course, with assistance from computers. You're the one who made up shit about no human intervention. OF COURSE their engineers will review everything.

> not by some "automated design and production process".

You haven't done much engineering for production recently have you? lol. Production tools have become highly automated over the past few years.

> > Their tooling is largely digitally defined, and they have an
> > awesome system of continuous improvement building their hardware
> > with equipment that others might have called in an earlier day
> > rapid prototyping. Their next rocket will have some awesome
> > improvements, and their next one after that. As they strive
> > and achieve perfection.
>
> I'll wait to see how the next couple of launches go.

Quite right! They planned three test launches, and intend to take advantage of all three to exercise their system before going to their commercial campaigns. Observers will be surprised by the rapidity of the process. A Delta campaign takes years. A RocketLab campaign will take weeks.

> Like I said, this
> stuff isn't easy.

True, but its getting easier.

http://www.ulalaunch.com/uploads/docs/Published_Papers/Evolution/AIAA11731CriticalEventsDIV.pdf

United Launch Alliance points out that the Delta IV has a 40 year history, and to create the EELV and Delta Heavy it took $60 billion and 30 years leading up to that point.

SpaceX took 15 years and $10 billion to achieve what they have.

RocketLab took 4 years and $100 million.

True, 150 kg to SSO is not 53,000 kg - but Electron places 250 kg into Low inclination orbits from their Kennedy Space Center launch site, and its good to remember that the original Thor Delta put up only 226 kg back in the day.

configured as a common core booster, with two liquid fuelled strap-ons, operating as an additional stage, payload of 625 kg is achieved. Adding four liquid fuelled strap-ons as another added stage, increases payload capacity to 1,625 kg!

Without major tooling changes AT ALL.

> Running out of money before successfully making orbit
> has happened to other start-ups in the past.

True of any business.

> It could happen again,

With RocketLab's launch book and capabilities, it is unlikely to happen to them.

> even though I hope it doesn't.

Yeah, I can feel the love! lol.

>
> Jeff
> --
> All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone.
> These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends,
> employer, or any organization that I am a member of.

PILOTED ELECTRON

A biosuit with built in thermal protection allows the two stage Electron to send an astronaut on the flying suit ride of their life!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7f-K-XnHi9I

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qnv664BmdPU

Sky dive from space!

The 1 meter diameter main body of the Electron is large enough to support a BD-5 cockpit - and aircraft.

https://www.the-blueprints.com/blueprints-depot-restricted/modernplanes/modern-ba-bn/bd_5b-32725.jpg

A BD-5J masses 161 kg and is 4 meters long and has a 0.61 meter wide cabin.

Lightweight structural aerogels are available.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8OhJKR3AA4

From which to make DynaSoar X-20 subscale lightweight version

http://www.astronautix.com/graphics/x/x20titn1.jpg

http://www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Martin-3-view1.gif

A 40% scale model of the DynaSoar X-20 would have the same cabin volume as the BD-5J.
The mass of the sub-scale version 262 kg when made of the same materials as the original X-20, which weighs 4,091 kg when full size.

When constructed of advanced materials, weights are cut to 125 kg, without pilot and consumables. The smaller version has a 2.4 meter wingspan.

An 'Electron-Heavy' - can't be called Proton that name is already taken! - lol places this lightweight sub scale X-20 derivative carrying one pilot, into orbit.

Another 625 kg stage, launched previously, is equipped with a solar ion booster rocket, and a rocket belt. The DynaSoar docks with the booster stage and both vehicles are accelerated to lunar insertion trajectory. The booster brings the vehicle to a low lunar orbit four days later. The astronaut, moves from the DynaSoar to the rocket belt, and lands on the moon, leaving the equipment on orbit. The astronaut then returns stowing all away, and boosting back to Earth. The booster and spacecraft separate, and re-enter landing back at the launch center to be refurbished and reused.

[William Mook]

On Monday, May 29, 2017 at 4:06:32 PM UTC+12, Fred J. McCall wrote:
> Poor Mookie. The CEO of the company doesn't know what he's talking
> about and Mookie knows better.

You are making shit up and falsely attributing it to me.

>
> Phew, what a loony.

Yes you are. Definitely.

How is a ONE TEST FLIGHT OF A PLANNED SERIES OF THREE TEST FLIGHTS THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED that tried to make it to orbit, but didn't make it to orbit, translate in your demented mind that somehow I'm disagreeing with the CEO of the company? lol.

ITS NOT you freaking lunatic! lol.

Look, its obviously you're a predatory bastard who has no regard at all for reality.

Get a freaking life! lol.

[Fred J. McCall]

William Mook <mokme...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Monday, May 29, 2017 at 4:06:32 PM UTC+12, Fred J. McCall wrote:
>> Poor Mookie. The CEO of the company doesn't know what he's talking
>> about and Mookie knows better.
>
>You are making shit up and falsely attributing it to me.
>

You're a liar and lost in your own spew, which is why I generally
ignore you.

<snip MookSpew>


--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
only stupid."
-- Heinrich Heine

[William Mook]

HAHAHAHA - A perfect description of your modus operandi! lol.

[Fred J. McCall]

William Mook <mokme...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>HAHAHAHA - A perfect description of your modus operandi! lol.
>

Time for you to check back in for treatment, Mookie.

Bottom line, *YOU* claimed the rocket worked just like it was supposed
to. The CEO of the company that launched the rocket disagrees with
your assessment and said they were doing a failure analysis to
determine why it did not reach orbit.

Now here you are wanking about how you've been unfairly treated. Seek
help.