Scroll down to read this post.

 

Please consider supporting my work here at Behind The Black by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, in any one of the following ways:

 

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:

4. A Paypal subscription:


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


Vector files for bankruptcy

Capitalism in space: On December 13 the smallsat rocket company Vector officially filed for bankruptcy, a precursor to having its assets sold off.

The company filed a voluntary petition for bankruptcy with the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware, the state where the company was incorporated.

…Vector had been one of the leading companies in the small launch vehicle market until August, when the company said that a “significant change in financing” led it to pause operations and lay off nearly all of its more than 150 employees. Jim Cantrell, Vector’s chief executive, also left the company at the time. That announcement came just two days after the company won an Air Force launch contract.

According to industry sources familiar with the company, the August layoffs were triggered when one of the company’s major investors, venture fund Sequoia, withdrew its support for the company because of concerns about how the company was managed. That came as Vector was working on a new funding round, and Sequoia’s decision had a domino effect, causing other investors to back out. Sequoia didn’t respond to a request for comment in August about any role it played in Vector’s problems.

The company is currently being funded through “debtor in possession” financing from Lockheed Martin, according to a resolution by Vector’s board of directors included in the filing. Under a Nov. 20 agreement, Lockheed provided Vector with a $500,000 secured loan and proposed purchasing Vector’s assets associated with a satellite program called GalacticSky for no more than $2.5 million.

While companies sometimes recover from this situation, in this case Vector looks quite dead, for good. A real tragedy, but part of the reality of capitalism. The competition fuels innovation and success, but carries great risk and the real possibility of failure.

Share

Conscious Choice cover

Now available in hardback and paperback as well as ebook!

 

From the press release: In this ground-breaking new history of early America, historian Robert Zimmerman not only exposes the lie behind The New York Times 1619 Project that falsely claims slavery is central to the history of the United States, he also provides profound lessons about the nature of human societies, lessons important for Americans today as well as for all future settlers on Mars and elsewhere in space.

 
Conscious Choice: The origins of slavery in America and why it matters today and for our future in outer space, is a riveting page-turning story that documents how slavery slowly became pervasive in the southern British colonies of North America, colonies founded by a people and culture that not only did not allow slavery but in every way were hostile to the practice.  
Conscious Choice does more however. In telling the tragic history of the Virginia colony and the rise of slavery there, Zimmerman lays out the proper path for creating healthy societies in places like the Moon and Mars.

 

“Zimmerman’s ground-breaking history provides every future generation the basic framework for establishing new societies on other worlds. We would be wise to heed what he says.” —Robert Zubrin, founder of founder of the Mars Society.

 

All editions available at Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and all book vendors. The ebook can be purchased direct from my ebook publisher, ebookit, in which case you don't support the big tech companies and I get a bigger cut much sooner. Note that the price for the ebook, $3.99, goes up to $5.99 on September 1, 2022.

 

Autographed printed copies are also available at discount directly from me (hardback $24.95; paperback $14.95). Just email me at zimmerman @ nasw dot org.

4 comments

  • Questioner

    Mr. Z .: I am sorry for that company. Can’t you try to find out, using your good contacts, what was the exact technical cause (or maybe even a conceptional design failure ) for Vector’s failure as a company?

  • Questioner: Read the link. They state the actual reason, there in plain black and white. It wasn’t technical, a major backer pulled out.

  • Questioner

    Mr. Z .:

    The article does not give a satisfactory answer. According to the article, it is clear that the main sponsor has lost confidence in the performance of the management. This in turn can indicate a deeper reason. I remember reading in an older article that the company had difficulty building the structure of the missile, especially its tanks, so lightly that it was possible to orbit with the intended payload. I think that could be the real cause. Technically, Vector was unable to build a rocket powerful enough to orbit, possibly due to the low specific impulse of its pressure-fed engines (no turbopumps) and the relatively high masses of the propellant tanks.

  • Questioner

    In addition to my last comment to the subject:

    I believe that Vector, like Virgin Galactic, made a serious failure, when choosing the rocket propulsion system’s basic concept. At Vector it was the choice of the 2-stage pressure-fed liquid rocket engine based launcher concept and at VG the choice of the hybrid rocket engine concept. Much has been written about the latter case, but not yet about the problems of Vector’s decision.

    Dispensing with turbopumps to deliver the propellants at Vector’s rocket may lead to a technically simpler propulsion system, but in any case results in massive performance losses, because due to the pressured-fed injection of the propellant into the combustion chamber the combustion pressure must be low (and therefore the specific impulse) and the other because of the high tank pressure required (about an order of magnitude higher than with turbopumps) the tank weight is quite large.

    I believe that Vector’s chief designer has believed to be able to save weight on the tanks’ pressurization systems by means of an “intelligent” design (choice of a self-pressurizing fuel for example, which, however, btw has only a low density). Maybe this calculation didn’t work out and they ended up in a technical dead end. The inherent performance disadvantages of a pressure-fed rocket can be partially compensated for by adding a third rocket stage in order to achieve at the end the orbit. I have always wondered why Vector’s chief designer has been thought that it could manage this task by means of two rocket stages. Microcosm, which also has chosen a pressure-fed design uses three rocket stages instead:

    https://smad.com/launch/

    If you fund such a development project yourself or from ongoing revenue, you may still be able to try to make fundamental design changes in order to rescue the project, but not, if you have this type of financing and main sponsor has lost his trust.

Readers: the rules for commenting!

 

No registration is required. I welcome all opinions, even those that strongly criticize my commentary.

 

However, name-calling and obscenities will not be tolerated. First time offenders who are new to the site will be warned. Second time offenders or first time offenders who have been here awhile will be suspended for a week. After that, I will ban you. Period.

 

Note also that first time commenters as well as any comment with more than one link will be placed in moderation for my approval. Be patient, I will get to it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.