Tag: commercial

Rocket Lab launches satellites for Japan’s space agency JAXA

9:56 pm

Rocket Lab today successfully placed eight smallsats for Japan’s space agency JAXA, its Electron rocket lifting off from one of its two launchpads in New Zealand.

Because all of JAXA’s rockets are presently grounded due to technical failures, Japan’s space agency has had to turn to Rocket Lab. In fact, these eight satellites were originally supposed to launch on JAXA’s Epsilon-S rocket, which remains grounded after an explosion during a static fire test. There have been no updates on the status of Epsilon-S since December 2024.

Rocket Lab was also supposed to do a suborbital hypersonic test flight yesterday out of Wallops Island in Virginia, using the first stage of Election in its HASTE suborbital configuration. As this is a test for the War Department, little information is generally released. This video from a distance confirms the launch apparently took place, but whether it was a success or not remains unknown. That Rocket Lab’s announcers did not tout its success either before or after today’s JAXA launch — as they have routinely done in the past — suggests something might have gone wrong, though this too is pure speculation.

The leaders in the 2026 launch race:

48 SpaceX
21 China
6 Russia
6 Rocket Lab

For the third straight year SpaceX continues to lead the entire world combined in total launches, 48 to 38.

10 comments

European startup Atmos raises €25.7 million to develop its orbital research capsules

9:18 am

Atmos' Phoenix-2 during re-entry
A graphic showing Atmos’ Phoenix-2 capsule during re-entry,
protected by an inflatable shield. Click for more information.

The European startup Atmos announced today that it has raised an additional €25.7 million [$30 million] as part of its ongoing commercial program to develop its Phoenix orbital research capsules that will fly in space for several months — where products can be produced in weightlessness — and then return those products safely to Earth.

The funding will support an initial three-vehicle PHOENIX 2 fleet, the launch of ATMOS WORKS for governmental and defence customers, and development of PHOENIX 3, the company’s next-generation orbital return vehicle.

The round is co-led by Balnord and Expansion, and joined by Keen Defence and Security. The European Innovation Council (EIC) participates through its Accelerator programme via blended financing, combining grant and equity components. Additional investors include OTB Ventures, High-Tech Gründerfonds (HTGF), APEX Ventures, Seraphim, Faber, E2MC, Kirch Ventures, Lennertz & Co., Mätch VC, MBG Baden-Württemberg, and Tech Horizons.

Since the American company Varda successfully demonstrated there was money to be made flying these small recoverable capsules, investment capital has poured into this industry. In the U.S. Varda, Inversion Space, and Sierra Space, have raised money for doing such orbital work. In Europe, The Exploration Company in France, Atmos in Germany, PLD in Spain, Genesis in Croatia, and Space Cargo in Luxembourg have also raised capital.

At this moment, however, only Varda has successfully launched and recovered a capsule.

0 comments

Northrop Grumman lost $71 million from its bottom line because of its solid-fueled booster failures

9:00 am

In its most recent financial statement, Northrop Grumman admitted it took a $71 million charge due to nozzle failures on two of its solid-fueled boosters, dubbed GEM 63XL, during two different launches of ULA’s Vulcan rocket.

In a statement about its first-quarter financial results, the company said its Space Systems division recorded a $71 million “unfavorable adjustment” to earnings at completion on its GEM 63XL booster “associated with a launch anomaly that occurred during the first quarter.”

The GEM 63XL solid-fuel booster is used on United Launch Alliance’s Vulcan Centaur rocket. On a Feb. 12 launch, one of four boosters shed debris about 65 seconds after liftoff. The “observation,” as ULA termed it initially, did not affect the success of the USSF-87 mission, placing its payload into its planned geosynchronous orbit.

ULA later called the incident a “significant performance anomaly” with the booster that it would investigate before returning Vulcan to flight. The vehicle has not launched since then.

A similar incidence took place during an earlier Vulcan launch, with the rocket’s core stage and the remaining undamaged boosters getting the payload into the proper orbit. The continuing problem however has now grounded Vulcan, though the military is considering using it for some small payload launches, without the GEM strap-on boosters.

As a result, the Pentagon has already shifted several launches from ULA to SpaceX, costing ULA a significant amount of revenue. In addition, Vulcan’s grounding will impact the launch of Amazon’s Leo internet constellation, which had a major contract with ULA to get its Leo satellites into orbit.

11 comments

Two launches by SpaceX

12:02 am

In the past two days SpaceX completed two more launches. The first, yesterday morning, placed 25 more Starlink satellites into orbit, its Falcon 9 rocket lifting off from Vandenberg Space Force Base in California. The first stage completed its 8th flight, landing on a drone ship in the Pacific.

Then tonight SpaceX launched a GPS satellite for the Space Force, its Falcon 9 rocket lifting off from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station in Florida. The first stage completed its 7th flight, landing on a drone ship in the Atlantic. That drone ship, “Just read the instructions,” is now being shifted to support Starship operations, and will no longer be used for Falcon 9, after supporting 155 first stage landings. What it will do in connection with Starship has not been made clear. The two fairing halves completed their 2nd and 3rd flights respectively.

The Space Force had originally intended to launch this satellite on a ULA Vulcan rocket, but a month ago it shifted the contract to SpaceX because of the nozzle problem that has plagued two different ULA Vulcan launches. Because of this shift, the time from contract award to launch was the quickest by SpaceX for the Space Force.

The leaders in the 2026 launch race:

48 SpaceX
21 China
6 Russia
5 Rocket Lab

For the third straight year SpaceX continues to lead the entire world combined in total launches, 48 to 37.

15 comments

NASA’s IG: With only Axiom building NASA’s future spacesuits, the agency’s lunar program faces great scheduling risk

12:23 pm

Axiom's two spacesuits being tested underwater
Axiom’s two spacesuits being tested underwater in October 2025.
Click for original.

According to NASA’s inspector general’s report today [pdf] on the state of NASA’s effort to create new spacesuits for use by its astronauts on future space stations as well as in its Artemis lunar program, the planned schedules for the lunar landing and those stations are threatened because the agency presently has only one contractor, Axiom, building new suits, and has not established any spacesuit standardization rules should it want to issue contracts to others. From the report’s conclusion:

While NASA is taking steps to mitigate schedule risk, it must also contend with the unique risks inherent to a single-provider environment until future competition is introduced. … If Axiom cannot satisfy its contractual requirements in a timely or cost-effective manner, then NASA could be forced to continue using the problematic EMUs throughout the life of the ISS and significantly adjust its lunar plans. [EMUs are the complex suits presently used on ISS, and would not work well for any lunar landing mission.]

While xEVAS [the new suit concept] is flexible enough to allow for additional providers, doing so may not help the Agency meet its more immediate Artemis goals. Critically, NASA must address existing design and safety risks resulting from the lack of standard requirements for spacesuits to be compatible with various lunar spacecraft and assets.

As shown by the photo above, the development of Axiom’s spacesuit has been proceeding, and seems likely to be available for next year’s Artemis-3 Earth orbit test mission. At the same time, it is still behind schedule, a fact that has been mitigated because NASA’s entire Artemis program is equally behind schedule.

The report lists three commercial companies that might be able to provide alternative suits, and thus some redundancy, as shown by the image below.
» Read more

9 comments

New Glenn launches for 3rd time, reuses first stage and lands it, but fails to put satellite in correct orbit

11:54 am

New Glenn's first stage, just prior to landing
New Glenn’s first stage, just prior to landing

Blue Origin in the early morning hours today successfully completed the third launch of its New Glenn rocket, lifting off from Cape Canaveral Space Force station in Florida and placing in orbit AST SpaceMobile’s Bluebird-7 cellphone satellite. For Blue Origin, this launch was the first for a commercial outside customer, a significant step forward for the company, which has sadly earned a reputation for operating too slowly.

Unfortunately, according to an update from Blue Origin the satellite was deployed but in an “off nominal orbit.” An update just posted by AST states the satellite is a loss and is being de-orbited. This satellite would have been the seventh in AST SpaceMobile’s 45-60 satellite constellation designed to act as cell towers in space. AST hopes to have at least half the constellation in orbit by the end of ’26. Several major phone companies, such as AT&T, Verizon, and Vodaphone in Europe, have already signed on.

For Blue Origin, the launch wasn’t a total failure. The rocket’s first stage had flown in November 2025 on the second New Glenn flight, and was refitted (with a new set of engines) to fly again on this flight, the rocket’s third. It not only did its job, getting the upper stage into space, it successfully landed for the second time on New Glenn’s barge in the Atlantic. This fast reuse and successful landing should do a great deal to improve the company’s slow reputation. Unfortunately, the failure to deliver the customer’s satellite will counter that most significantly.

As for Blue Origin, this was its first launch in 2026, and it was also unsuccessful. The leader board for the 2026 launch race remains unchanged:

The leaders in the 2026 launch race:

46 SpaceX
21 China
6 Russia
5 Rocket Lab

For the third straight year SpaceX continues to lead the entire world combined in total launches, 46 to 37.

45 comments

Final ground testing begins of Katalyst’s Swift rescue spacecraft

5:46 am

Katalyst's proposed Swift rescue mission
Katalyst’s proposed Swift rescue mission.
Click for original image.

Only seven months after NASA awarded the satellite repair startup Katalyst the contract to save the Gehrels-Swift space telescope, the company has delivered the completed LINK spacecraft to the Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland for final ground testing.

Katalyst will move forward with LINK’s vibration and thermal tests using NASA Goddard’s in-house facilities in the coming weeks before installation into Northrop Grumman’s Pegasus rocket at the agency’s Wallops Flight Facility in Virginia.

Gehrels-Swift has been one of NASA’s most productive space telescopes. Unfortunately its orbit is decaying and if nothing is done to raise that orbit it will burn up in the atmosphere in 2029 or so. To extend this timeline engineers have stopped almost all science work in February.

Katalyst hopes to launch LINK as soon as later this year. It was able to get it built so quickly because it was already under construction as the company’s first demo of its repair technology. When NASA put out a bid for boosting Swift, the company shifted gears and reconfigured LINK for this mission.

If successfully, the achievement will be a major coup for this startup.

1 comment

The space station startups: NASA’s new space station plan is mistaken

9:01 am

The American space stations under development

At a conference event this week officials from three of the five American space station startups expressed strong disagreement with NASA’s new space station plan.

The new plan would have NASA build and launch its own new core module, dock it with ISS, and have the new stations attach their first modules to it prior to flying freely. NASA proposed this plan because it does not believe there is enough market to sustain the stations independently and NASA doesn’t have the budget to fully fund them.

The officials repeatedly disagreed about the market issue.

“We believe not only we can be ready by 2030” when the International Space Station is slated to be retired, “but we also believe that we can be profitable on the current market, not waiting for the future market we all will develop and will be successful at,” said Max Haot, CEO of Vast [building the Haven-1 and Haven-2 stations].

…Haot and executives from Axiom Space and Starlab Space said their responses to NASA’s request for information — which were due April 8 — show otherwise. “We put in 390 pages of independent analysis, research studies, datas, contracts, those types of things,” said Marshall Smith, CEO of Starlab Space, which is targeting 2029 for its station to be on orbit. “We’re being very clear and what we can do and how that works.”

One prominent revenue stream the panelists pointed to is other space agencies and nations eager to send their astronauts and payloads to space. “We’ve flown 12 people to space that paid us money to do that,” said Jonathan Cirtain, CEO of Axiom Space, referring to the four private astronaut missions it’s conducted to ISS. “We’ve flown 166 payloads today. All of those are paying payloads that generate revenue for the company.” The Texas company plans to begin operating in 2028 when its first two station modules are slated to be in orbit, then gradually grow the station to five modules.

The officials also said the core module idea would actually slow things down. NASA would have to first build and launch it, and would be starting from scratch to do so. It takes years to build such a thing, and it will certainly not be ready by 2030, when ISS is presently supposed to be retired. Moreover, forcing them to dock to this module would force them all to completely change their own plans, something they all find counter-productive.

In announcing NASA’s core module plan, NASA administrator Jared Isaacman also stated that he was open to industry feedback. I suspect that his core module proposal is going to die, and be replaced with the more direct transition from ISS to these private stations, the approach these companies favor.

I should add that the three startups that spoke up at this conference are also the three that are in the lead to build their stations, according to my rankings below. As far as I can tell, they are all tied for first place, with their station development very robust and well financed.
» Read more

26 comments
1 … 9 10 11 12 13 … 896