A disjointed couple of stories: they don't really go together, but who says they have to?
The Highly Improbable Approach to launching satellites is gone
Remember the SpinLaunch, the company that planned on spinning satellites in a ground-based centrifuge on the order of 330 feet in diameter until they reached a velocity that could fling them into orbit? The last post I have about them is from October of 2022. As we talked about a few times back then, their big and fundamental problem was their flings are harder on the payloads than a typical rocket launch. The quote I can't forget is the one that went, “It’s a very gentle 10,000 g.” That's an oxymoron!
It turns out that SpinLaunch sorta went quiet not long after that test. You could say they disappeared, for all I heard. This week they've announced a rather complete change in direction. They're going to go back to regular rockets.
"The launch market is relatively small compared to the economic potential of satellite communication," [CEO David] Wrenn said. "Launch has generally been more of a cost center than a profit center. Satcom will be a much larger piece of the overall industry."
The source article at Ars Technica goes into a bit of the details. I have to say I'm not particularly convinced they've set up a good business plan and have a good chance of success. I didn't think they had much of a chance with their centrifuge-as-launch-vehicle approach, either.
The SpinLaunch test vehicle at the end of what appears to have been their last
flight test. It's hard to get a good scale from this video, but it
appears to be on the order of 6' long - about the height of the men digging it
out of the ground. Screen capture from their video (obviously).
A mission to retrieve Vanguard 1 from the orbit it has been in since 1958
That's 67 years ago. America had just been shocked by the Soviet Union launching Sputnik 1 in October of 1957. The newborn American space program had been hard at work trying to get to orbit and the frustration from being beaten to orbit by them was palpable. It hurt more later in the year when the U.S. Navy's Vanguard rocket failed as the booster toppled over and exploded on its first attempt to put a US satellite into orbit.
Lately,
there has been an effort going to design a mission to retrieve the old
satellite and bring it back down; there will be examinations of it for various reasons and then it will
probably go into a museum.
The space race was just getting started, and the US Army was the first organization
to reach orbit with Explorer 1 on January 31, 1958. Vanguard 1
reached orbit on March 17, 1958 as the second U.S. satellite.
The US Naval Research Lab is still the owner of the miniature metal ball of Vanguard 1, and while Explorer 1 reentered in 1970, Vanguard 1 is still in orbit.
Today, the satellite is in an elliptical orbit with its perigee roughly at 410 miles (660 kilometers), swinging out to an apogee of approximately 2,375 miles (3,822 kilometers) from Earth, with a 34.25 degree inclination.
A team that includes aerospace engineers, historians and writers recently proposed "how-to" options for an up-close look and possible retrieval of Vanguard 1.
A mission like this is probably more complicated than it sounds, due to the satellite not having been designed with any thought given to capturing it a later date. You can be sure there are no features on the little satellite to grab. Add to that the fact the it's a small satellite at 3 pounds that's a 5.9 inch diameter aluminum sphere with a 36 inch antenna span. It would be a delicate, 'handle with care' mission.
Vanguard I satellite, a component of the Vanguard Project, is a small aluminum
sphere designed to take part in the International Geophysical Year (IGY) — a
series of coordinated observations of various geophysical phenomena during
solar maximum, spanning July 1957 through December 1958. (Image credit: NASA)
I think recovering old satellites is a good idea. Just for historical reasons. Then there's the material science portion, how does 60-70-80 years in space affect everything.
ReplyDeleteAnd, coolness factor!
That last one, about how 60 years or more in space with micrometeors, high radiation levels and the other hazards affects the satellites is the big one.
Delete
ReplyDeleteAs to SpinLaunch, gee, why not just shoot satellites into orbit using a cannon?
That's Bull.
DeleteGerald Bull, that is.
(And seriously, there are lots of problems, starting with having your satellite survive the acceleration.)
Like the "very gentle 10,000 G" acceleration of spin launch? Or worse?
DeleteWell, with a multi-chambered breach, the acceleration could be increased incrementally by firing off each charge individually, so kind of like a 'Project Orion' push system, except in a gun barrel.
DeleteCould be done.
Rockets made by SpaceX are cheaper and less destructive.
I am seeking investors for my GCSS Launch System. That's Grand Canyon Slingshot. We have the technology to do this. I have an army of skilled bungie jumpers standing by to make the slingshot.
ReplyDeleteEither that, or a giant water rocket. Pressurize the tank, and voila, space.
Have you considered a joint venture with the ACME company, project leadership by their Chief Product Tester, a hirsute and tough fellow called Wile. E C***** (name redacted for security purposes)?
DeleteSad to hear about Spinlaunch. As with all space projects, wanted them to be successful.
ReplyDeleteThe article about Vanguard recovery seemed almost like an April Fools joke. There was no substance to it. Summary is "History is historical and maybe some billionaire will pay for it." If anyone really wanted it done, we could send one of the x37b's and bring it back next month. Not too different from Shuttle Hubble repair 30 years ago. Can Rocket Lab or anyone else launch an x37b? If not, why not?
And the last item, I have entirely too much hope pinned on Isaacman.
What company is talking about a compressed air cannon to launch their satellites? Is that Spin launch or someone else?
ReplyDeleteI know they are still going, though I don't know how fast.
Jonathan
Lineal Accelerators! Build them along the Himalayan Mountains, pointed into earth's rotation, gets you added delta v. Cheap cargo system, use steel cargo cans, on minimum energy Hohmon Orbits to the moon, an LN on the moon, they can re-use the cans for return cargo, and its down hill into earths gravity well, land them the ocean.
ReplyDeleteJust like Heinlein wanted. But, of course, that would be dealing with either Pakistan, India or Red China, none of them exactly truly friends of the world.
DeleteWith the focus on launch vehicles and launch companies, it was interesting to me to learn that the X in SpaceX is for Exploration, part of the company's full name. Space Exploration Technologies Corp. Not Space Satellite Launch corp, or Universal Launch Group... I think (and hope and pray) that the Exploration focus will continue to build with the launch business paying for it.
ReplyDeleteIt's a subtle difference but one I hope becomes much more profound with Elon's company as time goes by.
n
It's something that I know I've seen around but doesn't get mentioned much anywhere online. Everywhere we read about them, they just go by the shortened name.
DeleteIt's hard to summarize just how much they've revolutionized Space Exploration. The FRAM2 mission that just ended was nothing but pure exploration, just Earth and not another planet. Same for Polaris Dawn. Fly a booster and if landing it isn't wild enough for you, they'll grab it out of midair. Not to mention their pace of basically launching every other day between the three main launch sites (two on the cape and the one in Cali).
Oft has been said that we know more about outer space than our ocean deeps. In many ways this remains true.
DeleteTurning the focus inward reveals great discovery. That these can say that they are the first humans to see the poles from such vantage, after these many decades, speaks loudly.
SpaceX has done lots in the 'space exploration' portion. It's all just being beta tested on their Starlink satellites. Things like laser communications between satellites. Direct communication links with spaceships and orbital satellites and ground stations so there's no loss of signal at all. Cheap (in comparison, $200k isn't 'cheap') but extremely reliable pressure suits that are being reworked to space EVA suits and most likely surface EVA work.
DeleteAll of what SpaceX is doing in LEO is infinitely scalable to the Earth-Moon system, to the Earth-Mars transit orbits, to eventually the whole solar system.
The brains at SpaceX (not just Musk but..) aren't telling us about what they're planning in the future. But if you just think past the 'right in front of our noses' information, it's all there. Or could be.
Send up a Starship with a clamshell nose... or, maybe a Neutron when it gets spaceworthy...
ReplyDeleteHow about a Dragon capsule to come alongside, twist off those long antenna elements (if necessary) and bring it down?
Lots of possibilities.