Interesting newcomers

[FrankTB 14]

If you folks haven't already seen this you might find it pretty 

 

Kiwi space rocket!

 

http://rocketlabusa.com/index.html

[Do335 382]

hmm space commerce. catching up the sci-fi stories here.

[FastCargo 412]

I'll believe it when I see it.

 

FC

[+Typhoid 231]

I didn't watch the whole thing, long on marketing but short on some important details.  Like payload...

 

I am reading into this but I think the "launch breakthrough" is more a payload breakthrough on miniaturization.  Micro satellites can do the job now that it took very large satellites before and THAT is why a launch company can advertise such reduced launch costs. 

 

basic physics are still in play here - it takes so much energy to put a payload into orbit. 

[TeargasHorse 287]

The advert showed a

100kg Nominal payload

500km Nominal Sun-Sync. Orbit

2 Stages

1m Diameter

20m Height

US$4.9m Price

 

For a 100kg, >1 meter diameter satellite.

Need something a bit larger for the Bigelow expanding pods built here in Vegas... http://bigelowaerospace.com/  

[FrankTB 14]

To sum it up you have a young fella that looks like he is just out of school telling you that he is got a rocket that he's knocked up with some carbon fiber to launch a 100kg payload into orbit powered by a battery powered rocket motor that he made with a 3d printer, "what,s not to believe"

[FastCargo 412]

basic physics are still in play here - it takes so much energy to put a payload into orbit.

Bingo. Read these:

 

www.spacedaily.com/news/oped-05zy.html

 

www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/expeditions/expedition30/tryanny.html

 

In the latter article, it's shown that a Space Shuttle external tank has more fuel mass fraction than a soda can. In other words, a ET has to be more efficient and effective at carrying fuel than a soda can. If that doesn't tell just how much engineering goes into an orbital rocket...

 

FC