Connect with us

News

DeepSpace: Rocket Lab bucks the saying that ‘space is hard’ with 4th Electron success

Published

on

Rocket Lab's Electron rocket lifts off for the fifth time, March 29th. (Rocket Lab)

This is a free preview of DeepSpace, Teslarati’s new member-only weekly newsletter. Each week, I’ll be taking a deep-dive into the most exciting developments in commercial space, from satellites and rockets to everything in between. Sign up for Teslarati’s newsletters here to receive a preview of our membership program.

Rocket Lab continues to buck the adage that “space is hard” with its small but increasingly reliable Electron rocket. After a slight range hardware malfunction caused a launch abort just shy of orbit during Electron’s inaugural May 2017 launch attempt, Rocket Lab fixed the issue and returned to flight, successfully completing Electron’s first orbital launch in January 2018. On November 11th, 2018, the rocket completed its first truly commercial launch, placing seven various satellite into Low Earth Orbit (LEO), rapidly followed by Electron’s fourth successful launch on December 16th, barely one month later.

On March 29th, Rocket Lab completed yet another milestone launch for Electron, successfully placing its heaviest payload – an experimental ~150 kg DARPA spacecraft known as R3D2 – into an accurate orbit. Even relative to SpaceX’s barebones Falcon 1 launch campaign, which attempted five launches – two successfully – over a three year career, Rocket Lab’s Electron has progressed at an extraordinary pace, taking less than two years to complete its fifth launch and achieving its first launch success after just one attempt and eight months of flight operations.

Relentless progress

  • To find a rocket with a comparable record of success less than two years after its first launch attempt, one must jump back more than half a century to the late 1950s and early 1960s, when Russia and the US were putting their industrial mights to the challenge of achieving spacefaring ‘firsts’. Almost all of those original vehicles – including Redstone, Atlas, Delta, Thor, Titan, and even Saturn V – were able to weather early failures and achieve extraordinary launch cadences just 12-24 months after their debuts.
    • None, however, were developed as an entirely commercial rocket with almost exclusively private funds, although ESA’s Ariane 3 and 4 vehicles nearly fit the bill, with exemplary commercial track records and impressive acceleration from debut to high launch cadences.
  • Incredibly, Rocket Lab has brought Electron from paper to its fourth successful launch in ~16 months on what can only be described as a shoestring budget relative to all past efforts, perhaps even Elon Musk and SpaceX.
    • According to public investment records, the small US-based, New Zealand-operated company may have reached orbit for the first time with less than $100M, including ~$70M in equity investment and unspecified development funding from DARPA in the early 2010s.
  • Rocket Lab’s Electron rocket is quite small, measuring 1.2 m (~4 ft) wide, 17 m (56 ft) tall, and 12,500 kg (27,600 lb) at liftoff, anywhere from a quarter to half the size of SpaceX’s Falcon 1, by most measures.
    • Electron is capable of placing 150–225 kg (330–495 lb) into either a 550 km (340 mi) sun synchronous orbit (SSO) or a lower low Earth orbit (LEO).
    • Electron is advertised with a commercial list price of around $6M.
  • Aside from Electron’s industry-defying record of achievement, its R3D2 launch is impressive for another reason: the cost of the payload relative to the cost of launch. For a rocket on its fifth-ever launch, DARPA reportedly spent no less than $25M to fund the development of the experimental R3D2 smallsat, while – as mentioned above – the cost of Electron’s launch could have been as low as ~$6M from ink to orbit.
    • In slightly different terms, Electron has now launched a payload that could be 4-5X more valuable than itself after just three prior launch successes and less than two years after beginning operations.
    • While ~$30M would not be a huge loss for a military agency like DARPA (FY19 budget: $3.4B), DARPA’s trust in Electron demonstrates impressive confidence in not just Electron, but also Rocket Lab’s standards of manufacturing, operations, and mission assurance.
  • Relative to a vehicle like Falcon 9 or Atlas V, Electron’s R3D2 mission would be comparable to launching spacecraft worth ~$250M to $500M after just five launches. Both larger rockets accomplished similar feats, but small launch vehicles are historically known for less than stellar reliability.
Rocket Lab’s New Zealand-based Electron factory, 2018. (Rocket Lab)

Go[ing] forth and conquer[ing]

  • Put simply, Rocket Lab has managed to build what appears to be a shockingly reliable small launch vehicle with a budget that would make Old Space companies whimper, all while offering a potential cadence of dozens of annual launches at per-launch costs as low as $6M.
    • While the cost-per-kg of a $6M Electron launch is still extremely high relative to larger rockets and rideshare opportunities, what Rocket Lab has achieved is nothing short of spectacular in the commercial spaceflight industry.
    • If there ever was an actual ‘space race’ to fill the small launch vehicle void created by the growth of small satellite launch demand, Rocket Lab has won that race beyond the shadow of a doubt. There is still plenty of room for competition and additional cost savings from a customer perspective, but Electron is so early to the party that future competition will remain almost entirely irrelevant for the better part of 2-3 more years.
  • According to CEO Peter Beck, the company’s ambition is to sustain monthly Electron launches in the nine remaining months of 2019. Flight 6 hardware is likely already on its way to Rocket Lab’s Mahia, New Zealand Launch Complex 1 (LC-1).

Mission Updates

  • The second launch of Falcon Heavy – the rocket’s commercial debut – is still scheduled to occur as early as April 7th, but a slip to April 9-10 is now expected. The massive rocket’s static fire – the first for a Block 5 Falcon Heavy – is set to occur as early as Wednesday, April 3rd.
  • After Falcon Heavy, Cargo Dragon’s CRS-17 resupply mission is firmly scheduled for April (April 25th), while the first dedicated Starlink launch is now NET May 2019.
  • In late May, SpaceX could launch Spacecom’s Amos-17 spacecraft, effectively free to the customer as part of a settlement following the tragic Amos-6 Falcon 9 anomaly that destroy the rocket, satellite, and large swaths of the LC-40 pad in September 2016.

Photo of the Week

NASASpaceflight forum contributor BocaChicaGal provided one of the best glimpses yet of SpaceX’s ongoing Starship prototype test campaign, thus far involving 5+ wet dress rehearsals (WDRs) and one or two Raptor preburner ignitions. The first integrated Raptor static fire (and potential hop test) could occur later this week.
(NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

Eric Ralph is Teslarati's senior spaceflight reporter and has been covering the industry in some capacity for almost half a decade, largely spurred in 2016 by a trip to Mexico to watch Elon Musk reveal SpaceX's plans for Mars in person. Aside from spreading interest and excitement about spaceflight far and wide, his primary goal is to cover humanity's ongoing efforts to expand beyond Earth to the Moon, Mars, and elsewhere.

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

Elon Musk updates the SpaceX timeline for Mars

Published

on

Rendering of a colonized Mars by way of SpaceX
Rendering of a colonized Mars by way of SpaceX

Elon Musk has updated his timeline for when humans will walk on Mars and for when ships will simply get there.

The objective of getting to Mars has been one of Musk’s biggest goals since becoming a serial entrepreneur and realizing that time on Earth is limited. Musk has said several times he hopes to die on Mars, and not by impact.

Musk now believes that people will be on Mars in “roughly 5 to 7 years.” He said that a Mars lander will get there “a few years sooner.”

The response from Musk comes after NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman said that SpaceX’s biggest priority is the Moon and not Mars. Because of this, Isaacman conceded that he believes nuclear power and propulsion investments will provide “potentially the pathway with the fewest miracles required to put four people on Mars in the next 10 to 15 years.”

Advertisement
-
-

Of course, this is what NASA can do through taxpayer funding and nuclear investments, he added.

Musk’s grand ambitions are much more optimistic than most, and it is certainly a double-edged sword. This is not the first time timelines for Mars have been somewhat lofty, especially to those normal thinkers like you and me, not super geniuses like Musk.

SpaceX Board has set a Mars bonus for Elon Musk

In fact, the SpaceX and Tesla frontman has said on at least a dozen occasions that we could be on Mars in the coming years. Musk said 2020 would be the big year as early as 2009. In 2020, he was “highly confident” of a landing in 2026, and had even said 2024 in a best-case scenario.

The point is, the range has varied, and it’s anyone’s guess when we’ll get there. This latest adjustment to the timeline is typical of Musk, and while the Moon has seemingly taken priority over Mars, it is still worth mentioning that the ultimate goal is to make life multiplanetary, and it starts potentially with the Red Planet.

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

SpaceX gets an absolutely crazy price target after rough IPO

Published

on

Credit: SpaceX

SpaceX (NASDAQ: SPCX) got an absolutely crazy price target rating from Raymond James after the company experienced a tough first few weeks following its Initial Public Offering (IPO).

Despite the tumultuous start, SpaceX has plenty of believers, and the company’s massively successful Starship launch last Friday, its 13th test flight of the massive rocket, went so smoothly that Raymond James analysts pushed its price target on the company to roughly 7 times its current trading level.

SpaceX Starship just nailed something it’s never done before

The firm officially put a “Strong Buy” rating and an $800 price target on the stock. It currently trades at around $113. Its all-time high is $225.64, reaching this trading level shortly after shares first went public.

Raymond James’ price target is tied to the firm’s confidence after Starship’s 13th test flight. Analysts at the firm said it was an incremental step that reduces engineering risks, citing the widely successful heat shield test that CEO Elon Musk recently detailed, the smooth deployment of Starlink V3 satellites, and a successful in-space engine relight.

SpaceX also managed to see Starship splash down safely in the Indian Ocean, while the Super Heavy Booster fell down to the Gulf of America with no incidents.

It is interesting to see these launches have such a tremendous impact on the stock and what investors think of it. After SpaceX initially delayed the Starship launch last week, shares fell tremendously. Most probably did not realize that the stand-down is a standard practice, especially if everything is not perfect.

Advertisement
-
-

The mission was initially aborted due to an issue with Raptor engines. This was resolved, and Starship launched last Friday after another delay on Thursday, which was caused by weather.

Now that analysts have seen what SpaceX launches are capable of and how impressive the feat is, firms are adjusting their price targets accordingly, making it known that they have high expectations for the space exploration company.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Elon Musk responds to Volvo’s latest LiDAR decision

Published

on

(Credit: Tesla)

Tesla CEO Elon Musk has responded to reports that Volvo is officially discontinuing the LiDAR sensor on two of its cars.

Volvo announced that it would officially scrap LiDAR systems on its EX90 and ES90 vehicles in various markets. In Norway, owners will get a €1,800 compensation for features that will never arrive due to this decision. There will be no option to remove the unit from vehicles, either.

The issue stems from Volvo’s supplier, Luminar, and its bankruptcy filing. Luminar will no longer be able to supply LiDAR units to Volvo for the EX90 and ES90, effectively axing any use the unit has on vehicles. Volvo will phase out the data collection processes via the LiDAR system, and it will not be utilized whatsoever.

Musk saw the story on X and responded, stating:

“I did try to warn them. Humans drive using neural nets and optical sensors. Same is true for robot cars.”

Musk has been publicly vocal about his disdain for LiDAR systems, once calling them “a fool’s errand,” as he has consistently kept the outlook that they are not needed for effective self-driving.

The typical example used as evidence for this by Musk is humans themselves: made with only eyes and memories, humans are capable of navigating a car by using what they can see and what they’ve personally experienced on the road.

Elon Musk argues lidar and radar make self driving cars more dangerous

“Same is true for robot cars,” Musk says, as Teslas have eight exterior cameras that help see everything surrounding the vehicle, and a neural network that analyzes behavior and tendencies with every mile driven.

Tesla is a vision-only self-driving company that ditched sensors and radar several years ago in favor of cameras. Behind this effort, the company has established a reputation for having one of the most robust self-driving platforms in the world.

Musk’s big bet with Tesla on its self-driving program’s strategy has widely paid off. Other companies continue to utilize things like LiDAR, radar, and sensors for effective self-driving, but Tesla has shown that there is more than one way to give consumers a strong and accurate driver assistance suite.

Advertisement
-
-

The real question is: who will be the first company to take Musk’s advice and attempt a self-driving platform based on cameras only, or even license FSD for themselves?

Continue Reading