Video of Vector test launch
Below is a variety of angles showing the launch today of Vector’s test rocket. The rocket doesn’t fly as straight as one would expect, but then, this is a test flight.
The support of my readers through the years has given me the freedom and ability to analyze objectively the ongoing renaissance in space, as well as the cultural changes -- for good or ill -- that are happening across America. Four years ago, just before the 2020 election I wrote that Joe Biden's mental health was suspect. Only in this year has the propaganda mainstream media decided to recognize that basic fact.
Fourteen years ago I wrote that SLS and Orion were a bad ideas, a waste of money, would be years behind schedule, and better replaced by commercial private enterprise. Even today NASA and Congress refuse to recognize this reality.
In 2020 when the world panicked over COVID I wrote that the panic was unnecessary, that the virus was apparently simply a variation of the flu, that masks were not simply pointless but if worn incorrectly were a health threat, that the lockdowns were a disaster and did nothing to stop the spread of COVID. Only in the past year have some of our so-called experts in the health field have begun to recognize these facts.
Your help allows me to do this kind of intelligent analysis. I take no advertising or sponsors, so my reporting isn't influenced by donations by established space or drug companies. Instead, I rely entirely on donations and subscriptions from my readers, which gives me the freedom to write what I think, unencumbered by outside influences.
Please consider supporting my work here at Behind the Black.
You can support me either by giving a one-time contribution or a regular subscription. There are five ways of doing so:
1. Zelle: This is the only internet method that charges no fees. All you have to do is use the Zelle link at your internet bank and give my name and email address (zimmerman at nasw dot org). What you donate is what I get.
2. Patreon: Go to my website there and pick one of five monthly subscription amounts, or by making a one-time donation.
3. A Paypal Donation:
5. Donate by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman and mailed to
Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652
You can also support me by buying one of my books, as noted in the boxes interspersed throughout the webpage or shown in the menu above. And if you buy the books through the ebookit links, I get a larger cut and I get it sooner.
Below is a variety of angles showing the launch today of Vector’s test rocket. The rocket doesn’t fly as straight as one would expect, but then, this is a test flight.
The support of my readers through the years has given me the freedom and ability to analyze objectively the ongoing renaissance in space, as well as the cultural changes -- for good or ill -- that are happening across America. Four years ago, just before the 2020 election I wrote that Joe Biden's mental health was suspect. Only in this year has the propaganda mainstream media decided to recognize that basic fact.
Fourteen years ago I wrote that SLS and Orion were a bad ideas, a waste of money, would be years behind schedule, and better replaced by commercial private enterprise. Even today NASA and Congress refuse to recognize this reality.
In 2020 when the world panicked over COVID I wrote that the panic was unnecessary, that the virus was apparently simply a variation of the flu, that masks were not simply pointless but if worn incorrectly were a health threat, that the lockdowns were a disaster and did nothing to stop the spread of COVID. Only in the past year have some of our so-called experts in the health field have begun to recognize these facts.
Your help allows me to do this kind of intelligent analysis. I take no advertising or sponsors, so my reporting isn't influenced by donations by established space or drug companies. Instead, I rely entirely on donations and subscriptions from my readers, which gives me the freedom to write what I think, unencumbered by outside influences.
Please consider supporting my work here at Behind the Black.
You can support me either by giving a one-time contribution or a regular subscription. There are five ways of doing so:
1. Zelle: This is the only internet method that charges no fees. All you have to do is use the Zelle link at your internet bank and give my name and email address (zimmerman at nasw dot org). What you donate is what I get.
2. Patreon: Go to my website there and pick one of five monthly subscription amounts, or by making a one-time donation.
3. A Paypal Donation:
5. Donate by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman and mailed to
Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652
You can also support me by buying one of my books, as noted in the boxes interspersed throughout the webpage or shown in the menu above. And if you buy the books through the ebookit links, I get a larger cut and I get it sooner.
See…we DO have paved roads in Georgia!
eddie–
har.
My first introduction to Georgia was very positive, as a kid in the mid 60’s– free Coca Cola at the Welcome Center rest-stop on the Interstate, and then I bought a Confederate flag at the Stuckey’s.
A repeat from me, but topical & references Vector, Electron, et al, and gives a good context of “small rockets,” which I find useful to get my head around this.
“How Small Can You Make An Orbital Rocket?”
Scott Manley 7-23-17
https://youtu.be/m1bZO16em2c
(9:07)
No billion dollar launch pad needed there. Even the Russians paid $300 million to (sentimentally) repair the launch pad of Sputnik I after an exploding Soyuz destroyed it. How can launch pads be so expensive? It’s just concrete (how does it even break?) And trailer rockets like this can almost launch from the palm of one’s hand. A pocket rocket.
Gotta start somewhere. A little wobble is better than spontaneous disassembly. I wish them success.
The lack of a straight flight path is because the thrust vector control system either wasn’t active or wasn’t installed yet for this particular test flight. The next one (3rd overall flight) will start testing the integrated GN&C system.
“Garvey didn’t give a schedule for the next test flight, which will test a thrust vector control system for the rocket.”
http://spacenews.com/vector-performs-second-test-flight-of-smallsat-launch-vehicle/
At one point in the webcast, a wild pig could be seen crossing the field in front of the launch pad
Welcome to Camden Spaceport/BBQ.
“Our sauce is out of this world”
Eddie-
Good stuff!
-Does wild-ginseng grow in Georgia?
eddie
Since you mention pigs, you maybe mean “sausages out of this world”?
The final count down is lost time anyway, so it would be nice to see one of the staff shoot a boar during it. To make himself productive.
Are they launching from someone’s back yard?
LocalFluff asked: “How can launch pads be so expensive? It’s just concrete (how does it even break?) And trailer rockets like this can almost launch from the palm of one’s hand. A pocket rocket.”
The launch pad depends upon the rocket. Larger rockets need more concrete for their pads, as the exhaust gasses have to be directed away, as they will impinge upon the structure (concrete) for longer time periods than for smaller rockets; there is also more exhaust associated with larger rockets than smaller ones. Larger rockets also need larger facility structures, even at the pad, such as the gantry. There may even be plumbing for water to protect the pad (and the rocket itself) from the exhaust and the effects of the exhaust. The list goes on.
Liquid rockets need plumbing and umbilical lines to fuel them.
Manned rockets need added safety features at the pad.
Frank wrote: “A little wobble is better than spontaneous disassembly.”
I’m not sure that this was a “wobble.” I think that the rocket doesn’t fly as straight as Robert expected because the test only took it to 10,000 feet. It needed to turn downrange fairly early in its flight in order to avoid landing back onto the launch pad or onto the launch support crew.
Blair Ivey asked: “Are they launching from someone’s back yard?”
They are launching from Georgia’s brand-new, 2-year old spaceport. It looks like it has plenty of room left for development, giving it that “backyard” look.
http://spaceportcamden.us/
Edward-
thanks for that link
Pivoting to historic NASA multimedia:
Sounding Rockets: Establishing a Rocket Research Range
1962 NASA
https://youtu.be/XD2o9vv4xtk
(15:32)
Congrats to Vector! I am so excited to see the state of the industry in a decade. Blue Origin is really going to change the dynamics. Also, I don’t think anyone can exclude the possibility that one of these small sat launcher companies will have manned space mission aspirations. I know Jim Cantrell of Vector Space Systems has stated he has no interest in entering that elite club, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see Rocket Lab pursue something like that down the road. Anyone else have thoughts along those lines?
Anthony,
Going from small sat launchers to space stations is a big step. Those are two different industries. Launching a cube sat as secondary payload on one of the large common launchers today cost $100,000 per kilogram (per unit cube). Large payloads pay only $3,000 per kg on the Falcon 9 now. Designing to cut that overhead and launching 100 kg at a time, allows for good business.
Axiom is a space station company with quite some credibility. They are former ISS managers and shuttle astronauts, have real funding instead of some “crowd”, and plan to start out with adding a private segment to the ISS, add to it again and later turn it into a separate space station. Among all the visionaries in the space business, they actually look very sober and realistic. As if they were doing normal business on Earth. Keep an eye on them, they are not as highly visible online like those who have visions or beg crowds for funding.
LocalFluff wrote: “Axiom is a space station company with quite some credibility. … Keep an eye on them,
Bigelow, Axiom, and the Ixion Initiative Team (NanoRacks, Space Systems/Loral, and ULA) are the three space station companies/groups that I am keeping an eye on. Bigelow may be in the lead, right now, but the other two seem to be serious about space habitats/space stations.
LocalFluff,
I agree, going from small satellite launchers to crewed space stations is indeed a huge step. I think you may have misunderstood me when I said “manned space mission.” To better explain my original point, consider where SpaceX started. The Falcon 1 was a foot in the door, but from the beginning Elon had aspirations of doing manned space missions. Likewise, even Jeff Bezos started with small unmanned vehicles. So just because Rocket Lab’s and others’ initial vehicles are small and unmanned doesn’t mean they will stay small and unmanned.
Edward,
I’m with you on your assessment of the US space station industry. I really hope Bigelow gets the first private space station in LEO because he used a huge amount of his own money and I really like the pragmatic philosophy behind expandables. Nothing against Dr. Baine or Mr. Suffredini, I hope Axiom is successful too. There’s plenty of room up there and I think eventually, a lot of money to be made out of thin space.
Plenty of room and with some commonality in terms of mating, plenty of room to specialize in different capabilities. In the hopefully not too distant future, we probably wont see stations or ships built entirely by one manufacturer but several, although there might be a prime contractor.
Wodun,
“. . . and with some commonality in terms of mating, plenty of room to specialize in . . .”
I assume you mean the ability to connect various modules together, even if they’re from different vendors; and also docking hatches which allow spacecraft from different vendors to visit.
OK, so how does one go about establishing standards for this interconnection? I’m asking the question seriously. Do we go with the docking system NASA set up for Cygnus and Dragon? Does NASA issue an RFI, then an RFP for a contract to develop a standard? Or do we just let the vendors innovate for a while and see what happens?
Although it has taken years and years, the development of competitive standards like USB -1 -2 -3 -C for various levels of data throughput (and against versions of SCSI, e-SATA, etc.) has been quite interesting. You could say the same about the rise of various flavors of WiFi vs. Bluetooth. There’s one real difference between this mass produced hardware and interconnections of space hardware, made on a more individual, custom basis.
So, for space modules, how are the standards developed?
OK, so how does one go about establishing standards for this interconnection?
In some ways this already exists on the ISS.
But to answer your question, I don’t know. NASA could help but it would be better if industry figured it out. Other than the industry not really existing right now, the problem could be that some would choose to be the Apple of space and create a walled garden.
Taking your USB example further, there are any number of USB to X adapters. For example, a female USB to male micro USB adapter. You can even take an old IDE hard drive and turn it into an external USB portable hard drive. Some companies may choose to play nice and other companies might create nodes between nodes to make everything work across manufacturer and model.
John E. Bowen,
I thought the IDA (International Docking Adapter) was an attempt at answering this question. It converts the ISS docking system to the International Docking System Standard. I think the industry should be allowed to figure out how the modules will stick together and let the docking hatches be an internationally agreed upon standard. I think it’s important to have a common docking system so that a spacecraft from one station can perform an emergency rescue at another station. Either way it’s an interesting question John.
Perhaps when the time has come for a Space Corps one of its jobs will be to set safety and engineering standards like the US Coast Guard does for water based vehicles. I know, it sounds silly talking about a Space Corps, but… it’s still cool to me.
Anthony Domanico wrote: “There’s plenty of room up there and I think eventually, a lot of money to be made out of thin space.”
What a nice twist on the phrase. Making money out of thin air:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkXI-MNSb8Q (10 minutes, “What We Believe: Wealth Creation” by Bill Whittle)
In the same way, money can be made out of thin space.
John E Bowen,
You asked: “So, for space modules, how are the standards developed?”
Historically, they have been developed by governments. If wodun’s answer, “In some ways this already exists on the ISS” is not good enough for you, then there is always the usual way that standards are determined in any industry, such as your USB example: a convention of companies. I expect that many future standards will be developed in this way, rather than being imposed by governments.
Edward,
I’m glad you caught that! I’m a huge fan of Bill Whittle ever since you shared a link to one of his videos.