Recent Posts
- Movements on ISS: Dragon CRS-19 is unhooked to return to Earth, then astronauts make spacewalk
- Ariane 5 ECA launches comsat pair Eutelsat Konnect and GSAT-30
- China launches Yinhe 1 satellite on a Kuaizhou 1A launch vehicle
- Launch arranger TriSept orders/books Orbex Prime rocket for its client satellites
- China launches four satellites on Long March 2D/2 including a Jilin 1 Earth observation satellite
Cookies & Privacy
Click here to read about use of cookies on the website
Categories
Archives
Tags
nasaecoreviewsspacexesaissvideo25Arianespacevirgin galacticchinaDGAULAaviation weekaresIGTRoscosmosBeidouawardssoyuzspaceSatellite broadcastingresearchfalcon 9Cargo Return VehiclemarsblogmoonInternational Space Stationrussiaimpacthyperboladelaydemocratboeingobamahypertextlunarspacewalkrocketgoogle lunar prizespaceshiptwoorionlaunchevabarack obamatourismnorthISROfiguresconstellationspaceflightmarsnode 2fundedjaxaRaymond LygoVegaromeExpress MD-22009dassault aviationss2Blue OriginAirbus DS2008wk2aviationSESLucyradiomissileEutelsatdocking portexplorationtestinternetsuborbitalukChina Manned Space EngineeringAtlas VElon Musksts-122missile defensespaceportnewspaperProton McotsAriane 5Express AMU 12010flightbuildaltairsstlshuttlespace stationIntelsat 23scaled compositesgalileoCosmosinternational astronautical congressspace tourismEuropean Space Agencyrulesbudgethanleynew yorkthales alenia spaceshenzhouspace shuttleatvVietnamOrbital ATKMojavecongressSLSboldenAriane 5 ECAiacLockheed MartinIntelsatGuiana Space CenterlawsSpace Systems/LoralUK Space AgencykscprotonILSdragonTalulah RileycnesusaSkylonastronautInmarsatApollolanderpicturebaseAstriumeventAriane 6euSSLfiveUS Air ForceAprilinterviewWednesdaySNC50thfalconSea Launchcustomersuccessoratlantislunar landerlink7energiaadministratorrecyclenewshumanRocket LabOneWeb201115orbiternational space symposiumconferenceJFKkoreaUnited Launch AllianceLong Marchcstson its launch padcommercialOctoberpresident
That’s a bit harsh, Armadillo is flying subsystem testing vehicles, Pixel etc, its aiming to build something more substantial soon while an engine its designed has powered a Rocket Racing League prototype, as has Xcor and that company continues developing its Lynx suborbital vehicle’s engine the 5K18 and has private funding in support of that, while Rocketplane has had its ups and downs but it has done wind tunnel testing in the past among other things. So they are not just powerpoint jockeys.
The biggest problem has not been management but Industry and Govt. door slamming. It is a story in COMPLETE contrast to SPACE X which got USAF backing and launch facilities virtually gratis with nothing more than a basic concept, super-hype, but NO hardware which in term enabled them to get orders from commercial customers with NO TRACK RECORD. No financial restrictions were placed on SPACE X COTS contract that have been mentioned – officially of otherwise. Whereas with Kistler…lets hope they can weather the storm and prove THEY have the answer: something I’ve been convinced of since discovering the K-1 on the web over 10 YEARs ago.
I think you’re being a bit harsh on SpaceX. Yes they did a good job of convincing the USAF that they had the operationally responsive space launch answer and yes that did mean they got lots of support – a story that has yet to be written IMHO – but they have had to demonstrate that they can do it. Whether you think four launches to reach orbit is good or bad. Kistler Aerospace is a sadder stopry where they decided to use the space primes as their supply base and that was never going to work out well simply because the primes’ cost base will always ensure that your budget is going to have to be big. SpaceX’s decision to bring virtually everything in-house enabled them to control their costs. Whether COTS-D or even CRS ever happens NASA has got its Delta II replacement with Falcon 9 and my conspiracy theory about all of this is that that was what all of this commercial space guff has been about from the start.
Until Falcon 1/9 are operational with at least 3-consecutive successful launches each, I think the verdict is out on the “Delta II replacement” frankly.
I’m rather curious that there’s no apparent utilisation of SRB’s OR a Falcon 1(Heavy) using the triple stack design we were first to use on our Europa III(cancelled of course!) concept. On the other hand, SPACE-X has listed the NASA standards that their vehicle and Spacecraft are designed to meet. Let’s, for the Astronaut’s sake, hope this is true!
On the other hand, I approve of their keeping it as simple as possible approach, although the use of 27 engines firing simultaneously,for Falcon 9 Heavy lift-off almost approaches the ill-fated N-1 with 30!
Ha,
just discovered that the original ’06 Kistler COTS-D contract was actually with ATK who was the prime Contractor for the K-1 vehicle. RpK was classified as a subcontractor! Strange,because that being so, ATK should have come up with the $500M Kistler was required to obtain, and NOT Kistler. Why didn’t they? Perhaps ARES contracts had something to do with it. SPACE X independence from the Aerospace “Octopus” becomes more and more justified. clearly though that limits their technology base.