Congratulations on a successful test fight in Mojave today. That’s pretty good progress for a year-old company. There’s going to be a shakeout in this market, but they seem to be real.
[Mid-afternoon update]
If this isn't the coolest damned angle for a rocket shot then I don't know what is. @vectorspacesys Vector-R B0.1 first launch today #space pic.twitter.com/rd3Tt33JH4
— Jim Cantrell (@jamesncantrell) May 3, 2017
I like how the shadow stays in the frame as the rocket disappears from it.
[Thursday-morning update]
Eric Berger has the story.
Nice. I presume that was recorded from a copter drone?
Apparently. A second drone is visible nearer ground level, it is stationary at the beginning of the video then moves from left to right toward the pad.
I’m left with a lot of questions after reading that article, and the Vector website didn’t really answer them.
What was the test flight apogee? How was this rocket different than the Vector-R that they claim will enter service next year? (for starters, it looks like this flew with one engine vs. the advertised three). Was the booster recovered? And in what condition? How is it recovered? I want to say parachutes like the other Garvey rockets, but their website mentions “UAV recovery”?
From the article it seems as if they’ve identified a good niche market.
Jeff Foust has more details here: http://spacenews.com/vector-tests-prototype-small-launch-vehicle/
Designed apogee was 1,370 m (4494 feet).
Kinda seems like this was just a Garvey rocket with a Vector paint job.
Yeah the Forbes article is rather thin on technical details. Then again we shouldn’t expect much of that in a business magazine.
Vector-R seems to be a two stage rocket with 3x 5,000 lb first stage engines on LOX/Propylene and 1x 800 lb second stage engine. Pressure fed engines with carbon fiber construction. With an optional electric propulsion third stage.
Between these guys and Rocket Lab it seems the small launcher market will be well served. I don’t know if these payloads are good enough though. It’s probably going to be real hard to find clients. I think something in the Falcon 1/1e class would be better. Otherwise they’re gonna be launching CubeSats. IMHO these small launcher guys need to develop a common satellite bus that’s larger than a regular CubeSat if they want to be in the market.
The Forbes article is evidence that their PR is developing nicely. It remains to be seen if their rocket will develop as well. This launch was very much like the ones Garvey has been doing for the past fifteen years or so. It’s just a little bigger. But the technology is the same: an unguided, low altitude, single stage rocket launch with a pressure fed, ablatively cooled engine.
GSC News 2003 – 2006
Well Garvey *is* the CTO of Vector Space. I agree with the guidance issues but the fact that it is pressure fed isn’t necessarily an obstacle. Although I would personally prefer a pump-fed first stage as well.
The format could be based around one of the computer rackmount formats for example:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rack_unit
Need three things to get to orbit….
MassFraction
Guidance
Propulsion.
Its possible that this test demonstrated the propulsion part, but shows little evidence of the other two.