NASA and the Private Sector - Page 207
Forum Index > General Forum |
Keep debates civil. | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
![]() | ||
ZerOCoolSC2
8960 Posts
On December 01 2021 03:22 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: ![]() https://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1465726291567693826 That's...dire. I don't know if he's doing his usual hyperbole or not, but if this is true, then I don't see how the people wouldn't rally to get the engines needed made. If they can get at least 2-3 flights done, outside investment should take care of itself. I'm also assuming that the sooner they go public, the better it would be for their bottom line. But then you have shareholders and other stupid shit, so I can see him wanting to keep it private for the time being. He may have to liquidate some more stocks to keep things afloat though. Going to be very interesting to follow this through next year. | ||
Cyro
United Kingdom20282 Posts
| ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhJRzQsLZGg | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
Cyro
United Kingdom20282 Posts
On December 02 2021 11:07 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: https://twitter.com/RocketLab/status/1466214486717521924 Thx, should be fun | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
Will be made of Carbon Composite, which will be mass 3D Printed. The rocket will land back at the launch site. Now the question is how are they going to build up the AI/Machine Learning to land said rockets. Doubt New Zealand will allow that, the US certainly won't. Archimedes engine to test fire next year. Replay: | ||
Cyro
United Kingdom20282 Posts
Much of the challenge comes not from the math for how to land, but in making sure that hardware is actually working and responding well - for example SpaceX had numerous failures and problems due to engines not firing when they were supposed to, getting the wrong fuel/oxidizer ratios, getting stuck on the wrong throttle setting and all that sort of thing. They also had issues with the approach to landing because they were using grid fins and the control authority would change in strange ways at the transonic regime - even reversing for a time, and so algos had to be iterated on and the EDL had to be changed to account for the windows of poor control. The aerodynamic controls ran out of hydraulic fluid several times; when they turned it into a closed system it broke once before it was made redundant. Making the hardware work predictably and reliably (something that SpaceX ended up devoting way more mass to than they originally hoped for) and mapping out the control authority and lags in different regimes is really important. Neutron is using more classic control surfaces that shouldn't be as derpy at transonic speeds (although they're less mass-efficient, especially since the vehicle shape provides worse leverage than a pencil-shaped design with control surfaces at the end). It looks like it will have a substantially better ballistic coefficient so it probably won't be transonic at 3km. Heat shielding is also really important and something that F9 had to iterate on many times, even after block 5. If it's not done right, cheap and rapid re-use won't be possible. A large re-entry burn (afforded by a good mass ratio on the stage) and a good ballistic coefficient (same) goes a long way towards making that easier. Having the payload bay be on the first stage and house the entire upper stage + payload is a new and very interesting idea. I hadn't considered that before. | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
In another major reversal from March, downrange landings in the ocean are now no longer planned for the rocket, and missions that cannot return to the launch site would be expended —which would increase the total payload capacity of the rocket from 8,000 kg, with stage one return, to 15,000 kg with an expended first stage and fairings. For the upper stage, Beck noted that it has competing design requirements. “It has to be the lightest and the most high-performing structure as part of the launch vehicle, but it also has to be the lowest cost because for Neutron, at least at this point in time, it’s a disposable stage.” To this, and based on the clamshell design of the opening firings, the second stage is hung from the payload separation plane. According to Beck, Neutron’s second stage is “incredibly strong and the lightest upper stage ever in history.” Overall, Neutron is now 7 m in diameter at its base with an increased payload fairing diameter of 5 m. The overall height of the rocket has not changed and remains 40 m. The rocket will be made of Rocket Lab’s own carbon composite material. Peter Beck had previously noted that this material was not under consideration for reusable rockets, but in today’s update, he said, “Sometimes carbon composites get a tough rap because they’re expensive to manufacture and slow to produce. Not the case. We’re gonna do this fast.” Beck went on to say that the plan is to use automated fiber placement. “3-D printing really changed the game when it came to rapid manufacture. With metallic 3-D printing, we measure the speed in millimeters per minute. With automated fiber placement, you measure the speed in meters per minute.” “We have already shown with Electron that carbon composites are an ideal material for an orbital rocket,” said Beck. “Now, thanks to Neutron, it’s gonna really come into its own as a rocket material of the future.” Back further noted that prototype tanks for Neutron’s two stages are already being built and that the first hot-fire test of the new Archimedes engine is planned for 2022. Notably absent from the presentation was an estimate on the first launch date, which had previously been 2024. Also absent was mention of the Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport in Virginia which had been planned as the initial launch site for the vehicle. Instead, Beck mentioned a launch facility devoid of most equipment – as simple as possible. A switch away from Pad 0A at the Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport would make sense given Neutron’s desire to use a very simple launch pad and its switch of propellants from RP-1 kerosene and liquid oxygen (the ground support equipment for which is already present at Pad 0A) to liquid methane and liquid oxygen. Source | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
Cyro
United Kingdom20282 Posts
On December 03 2021 01:19 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: So only a couple of the Neutron's will be reused... what? Source https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/1466440518271832064 Why do you think "only a couple" of neutrons will be launching payloads <=8t LEO equivelant? They didn't even list >8t on the original specification as an option at all. | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
Test Tank is going through more tests. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhJRzQsLZGg | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
This basically means SpaceX will have fulfilled their entire contract before Boeing even does a flight. | ||
| ||