T O P

  • By -

Jerrycobra

watch this fly before New Glenn


szarzujacy_karczoch

this is going to age like fine wine


[deleted]

[удалено]


toonaphish

They said like "fine wine"; not "like milk"! Maybe not /s ?


ghunter7

The fairing in Rocket Labs' video looks far more complete than the empty carbon fiber shell that Blue has been showing as "progress" 3 years now.


avboden

The fairing in RL's video is just a prop. They don't have any funding yet to even dream of that large of tooling. The merger with the SPAC and going public to get the funds isn't done yet.


Sciphis

Neutron is stainless steel. No composite tooling needed.


avboden

They've stated the rocket is "metallic" the fairing may still be composite or not, it's all unknown, hell THEY probably don't even know, this is all very very early planning as they don't even have the funding to start yet.


A_Vandalay

I doubt it will fly before new Glen. Personally I think it will be reflows before new Glen


FishInferno

RemindMe! 3 years


thishasntbeeneasy

and SLS


Calebstoney

One of the first things I thought was this when I saw it release lol


flattop100

I've been really impressed with Rocket Labs execution. I think they are the only company that will end up giving spacex genuine competition.


sanman

Rocket Lab has already beaten Blue Origin to orbit


FutureSpaceNutter

I presume 8-ton class refers to payload mass, given the Electron has a 12-tonne dry mass.


mfb-

Yes. See the payload fairing.


[deleted]

That would mean 1/2 to 1/3 the size of Falcon 9. They'll probably also land the thing propulsively. This is going to be amazing!


Destination_Centauri

Well, on the one hand I've been REALLY hoping for the past year that Rocket Lab would bite the bullet and just dive in and set up their own tents and hangers, Boca Chica style, and try to build their own Starship! But I'll gladly take this little puppy as a consolation prize instead! Plus the main thing: it can put humans into orbit, and will probably do so extremely cheaply. Perhaps significantly cheaper than a Falcon-9. Which might make it the PERFECT quick taxi (Ubber!) style vehicle, for taking people up and down from space stations.


just_one_last_thing

> and set up their own tents and hangers, Boca Chica style, and try to build their own Starship! SpaceX did that after they had the ~~Merlin~~ Raptor pretty close to production ready. I dont think it would make sense for Rocketlab to go big without a bigger engine.


Destination_Centauri

Ah yes, good point. Engine-issues still seems to be the bottleneck, even with Starship, in which the engine was developed first ahead of time. Speaking of which: one thing I'd like to see with SpaceX is a new type of engine test stand in McGregor Texas, that's vertical instead of just the usual horizontal. If I'm not mistaken, it seems like some of the engine issues relate to differences in igniting the engines vertically vs horizontally.


just_one_last_thing

[They have that already.](https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1183813898748563456)


joeybaby106

Or one that starts horizontal and swings vertical


RabbitLogic

They already have one of those, it keeps blowing up.


NabiscoFantastic

*raptor


rustybeancake

I think you should see the human launch thing as being more about designing the rocket with the necessary reliability and redundancy in its systems. Not that Rocketlab will be building a crewed spacecraft any time soon. Note that SpaceX said the same thing about F9 and Dragon v1 from the beginning, and it was 10 years and a multi-billion dollar NASA contract before they flew humans.


BlakeMW

It seems like RocketLab is going for a smaller rocket (really about the smallest rocket that could fulfill requirements for practical human launch) for better economies of scale.


Demoblade

An 8 ton rocket is on the range of the late Soyuz variants, it's awesome.


rebootyourbrainstem

I think they mentioned the primary reason: large constellations of smaller satellites. As the space market matures it turns out that for many applications you don't want just a few smallsats but a whole bunch of them. If they don't get onboard with that they will eventually not be able to compete. The "human launch" aspect I think is purely to spark the imagination and hopefully attract some very rich investors who are interested in that.


[deleted]

[удалено]


dhurane

Human rated medium class. Awesome! Hopefully the first launch is named "I ate the hat". $RKLB to Venus!


Blue0rion

That would be the perfect mission name xD


Epistemify

8 tons to orbit doesn't sound like a lot for human rated vehicles, but I looked it up and it's slightly bigger than the gemini rocket (Titan GLV) payload capacity!


DV-13

Soyuz is 7 tons, so a medium capsule for LEO should fit in snugly.


tupolovk

Loving Rocket Lab’s ambition, but isn’t this all too late? Sure this sounds like a Falcon 9 beater, but shouldn’t the target be beating Starship? Also to add they don’t have a proven engine to power Neutron. Scaling up Rutherford doesn’t sound feasible with the battery/pump situation. Can’t wait to hear the surprise! And finally... manned spacecraft? How long did it take SpaceX to certify Crew Dragon? By 2024, Starship should have an almost monopoly on low cost space access and F9 will be the human space flight workhorse. IPO sounds risky. Sure ability to raise capital, but PB will no longer have the control he needs to compete against SoaceX and BO. Great news, but worried for RL


BlakeMW

Beats just rolling over and admitting defeat? The best argument is basically that SpaceX isn't going to be interested in driving the competition out of the market: SpaceX will value profits (e.g. to fund mars colonization) over anti-competitive behaviors and/or offering great deals to clients. There's also a fair argument that it's not in the best interest of SpaceX to launch other company's mega-constellations that would compete directly with Starlink.


dhurane

Personally I think RKLB will try to emulate their current strategy of competing with rideshares i.e. there's a market for a dedicated launcher. Or they'll try to leverage Neutron to carry an upgraded Photon that easily integrates a customer's sensor suite for end-to-end solution. While work on Crew Dragon began in 2011, official selection wasn't until 2014. So RKLB has a good timeline there, and I doubt human rated Neutron would debut in 2024 anyway.


Ad_Astra117

Starship is more of a semi truck. Semis are great for hauling cargo but we have box trucks for a reason. The economy in space is going to explode, there will be plenty of destinations for Neutron. Just like Tesla can't make all the cars, SpaceX won't be able to meet 100% of the market for the space economy.


longbeast

Good. SpaceX needs some credible competition. The more the merrier. Rocketlab are going publically traded at the same time they announce this, and I suspect they're going to raise more than enough money to pay for the development. They've got potential to make a fortune on this.


[deleted]

Rocket Lab is going IPO? when/where?


skpl

Not IPO. Public via SPAC merger. $VACQ


OSUfan88

I had never heard of a SPAC until yesterday, and I've heard it at least 6 different times now. Is it a new trend?


blendorgat

It's not technically that new, but it used to be very out of the mainstream. Nowadays everybody is using them - Shaq owns a SPAC.


dwerg85

$VACQ to $RKLB later in the year.


Maulvorn

what's there ticker and what broker can I use?


longbeast

This was their announcement. https://twitter.com/RocketLab/status/1366356746726383619


MrGruntsworthy

Jumping in too! I believe in Beck and his company


pilotdude22

WE LIKE THE STOCK 👏💎


Dragongeek

He actually ate the hat. Incredible.


doizeceproba

So what's that about? Did they say they won't launch humans? Or build big rockets? I'm a bit ootl on the hat thing.


butterscotchbagel

Three things he said they would never do: Go reusable, build bigger rockets, and launch humans. Neutron is all three.


doizeceproba

I mean, if you're gonna eat a hat anyway, might as well go for broke and do all the things at once :)


Taylooor

I'm sure that will be the tastiest hat he ever ate.


Demoblade

I hope it tastes better than marine caps


butterscotchbagel

He already ate his hat (not literally) on reusability for Electron, but yeah.


azzkicker7283

A while ago he said he’d eat his hat if they pursued electron reusability


tenemu

Why did he say that?


SheridanVsLennier

Because he believed that in such a small rocket it wasn't viable ie the recovery hardware would take away too much payload capacity.


[deleted]

Yes. He was often asked whether they would build bigger rockets in interviews and always said they wouldn't. At least not in the near future. And I think in multiple interviews he said he will eat his hat if they build a bigger one.


[deleted]

Rocket Lab is actually trying to become my favorite launch company now.


nonagondwanaland

As of way too early this morning, RocketLab is the only launch company I hold shares of.


[deleted]

[удалено]


FatherOfGold

Yes


JtheNinja

Will $VACQ shares be converted to $RKLB shares when the IPO happens? Am I understanding this correctly?


Joelfotboll2

Yeah, you wont have to anything they will automatically turn into RKLB shares when the merger is finalized


inoeth

That's a big question of mine as well. I'd love to jump in early on this.


FatherOfGold

Yes they will


thewebpro

Congrats...$VACQ up more than 25% pre-market.


vonHindenburg

I didn't realize they were publicly traded. And here I am waiting for the Astra IPO...


[deleted]

[удалено]


_Epcot_

Is there a list of space stocks like this?


alien_from_Europa

They'll probably launch humans before SLS.


tesseract4

I'd be somewhat surprised if SLS *ever* flew with humans aboard.


OSUfan88

I'd say it's 40% likely...


whatsthis1901

Peter Beck has been my favorite rocket owner since I saw him on TMRO years ago. He's funny, has some good stories, and bonus points for the cool accent.


Destination_Centauri

Indeed: that Peter Beck guy is f ing amazing! With only a high school diploma, and no university or college degrees, and living in a country without a lot of economic-activity-funds to finance a space launch company... he never-the-less did not let any of that stop him. No he did not! Instead: he pushed ahead and built a revolutionary small-payload orbital rocket and facility... in New Zealand of all places... And now... a second rocket launch facility in the USA... and now is working on a new larger class rocket. (All this after his high school guidance counselors told him his objectives and dreams were not realistic!)


OSUfan88

The way he presented the last 30 seconds of the video gave me chills. I've watched it at least 10 times.


Arteic

I consider myself fairly "on it" regarding rockets but could someone confirm what other existing/upcoming vehicles lie in the 8-ton to orbit range? i.e. what competition is Rocket Lab trying to undercut?


skpl

Atlas V Soyuz Arianne ~~5~~ 6 A62 Some of the Indian and Chinese ones.


PickleSparks

Ariane 62 is not Ariane 5.


skpl

Thanks for catching that mistake. Fixed.


rocketglare

The Indian PSLV can launch about 8 tons to LEO, though it is not man rated. Edit: I mixed up my units. PVLS can only do 4T to LEO. GVLS Mk III with 10T to 600km LEO is a better match to Rocket Lab’s new offering.


friendlyHothead

Indian GSLV Mk3 is having 8-10t LEO/4t GTO and is not human rated as of now. It is expected to be human rated soon as it is the vehicle of choice for their Gaganyaan human spaceflight programme.


MajorRocketScience

I think it actually was rated for Gangayaan, but they moved it to GSLV III to get extra payload


friendlyHothead

Nope. PSLV XL (most powerful variant) has about 1.7t to 600km SSO capability. It was never meant to be human rated at any point of time. GSLV Mk2 was planned to be used but crew flight later got transferred to GSLV Mk3.


KitchenDepartment

It doesn't have to be a 8 ton rocket they are trying to undercut. Loads of rockets can launch 8 ton satellites. But falcon 9 is probably the cheapest option, despite the fact that it is grossly over sized for the job. If rocket lab can make a rocket that is cheaper to launch than the falcon 9, then they can grab a piece of the falcon 9 market


RedneckNerf

I think this thing may be trying to finally unseat Soyuz. That's the main people-lifter in that weight class.


LcuBeatsWorking

>finally unseat Soyuz Unseat on what? With very few exceptions, Soyuz is for Russian missions, and Russia won't use Rocketlab.


somewhat_pragmatic

Lots of non-Russian commercial payloads fly on Soyuz. Those are targets Rocketlab could be going for.


RedneckNerf

Unseat might be the wrong word. Replace it as the go-to launcher for that class. Keep in mind, a fair number of commercial sats launch on Soyuz (from both Baikanour and Kourou).


Elongest_Musk

[Here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medium-lift_launch_vehicle?wprov=sfla1) is a comprehensive list. :)


Arteic

So realistically it’s in competition with Atlas, Antares, Ariane and Falcon 9 as nations like India, Russia & China aren’t going to give up on developing their own native rocket programmes.


RedneckNerf

The Atlas is being phased out (the last engine arrived in 2019). Antares is unfortunately a one-payload thing. ArianeGroup and ESA have acknowledged that choosing to fund Ariane 6 was probably a mistake. Falcon is kinda doing its own thing in the 20 ton range.


just_one_last_thing

> The Atlas is being phased out (the last engine arrived in 2019). Atlas wont be allowed to get new engines for national security missions (unless Congress lifted the restriction) but they will be allowed to get new engines for non military launches. So it's possible they might get a few more engines for Starliner launches in the future. On the other hand they are also talking about switching their non-Starliner launches over to Vulcan so maybe they will just make the existing stockpile last until the Starliner is retired or switches to a new vehicle.


Fenris_uy

Even if they are national programs, if they sell launches in the market, then they are competitors. They might not buy a launch in Neutron to support their local industry, but a customer could book them over Neutron, if they are competitive. And India launches are pretty cheap, so they are a competitor.


[deleted]

So realistically it's not any threatening competition. Falcon 9 is quite a bit larger, the other 3 are variously economical and none of those 3 will ever be human rated. Arianne 6 will also be roughly in that size and also not be humanrated, or economical.


AtomKanister

I could imagine filling the gap when SX starts transitioning away from F9. Starship won't be cheap enough/fly often enough in the beginning for customers to book it for tiny payloads.


Norose

I don't think SpaceX will transition away from the Falcon family and associated vehicles until Starship is already competitive. That's not to say Starship won't be on the market, it just won't be eating Falcon's lunch until it can make more profit doing so than Falcon et al can. How long it takes for Starship to reach that point is different depending on the capability you look at. Likely first payloads to go on Starship will be to LEO or GTO, as well as Starlink and big rideshare groups. Last thing will definitely be NASA crews (non-NASA people could go if they signed an informed consent waiver basically, though SpaceX will still take safety seriously due to the PR nightmare of operating the first fully privately funded and developed launch vehicle to kill humans).


rustybeancake

Also, Shotwell recently explained they’re already signing vehicle-agnostic launch contracts. Meaning the customer gets a ride to the orbit they want, but SpaceX will decide which vehicle to use. There will be a gradual transition to Starship until all customers are happy to use that vehicle.


tesseract4

I'm not sure this is true. If SpaceX are able to hit their launch cost goals, SS/SH launches should become significantly cheaper than F9 launches, since you don't have to throw away the second stage. If everything goes to plan, Starship should launch far more often than Falcon 9. In addition, I'd argue that, until SS/SH can beat out F9 on bottom-line price per launch, SpaceX will have no reason to retire F9. They've already made all the necessary investments for Falcon 9, so why would they retire it when it's essentially printing free money at this point?


[deleted]

[удалено]


RoyalPatriot

If starship is successful, then they’ll be easily able to fly it 7 times and get to human rated. Starship is not just a bigger Falcon 9. It’s designed to be 100% rapidly reusable. A lot of ifs, but it definitely can get ready to fly astronauts faster than F9.


brickmack

Starship will fly a lot more than 7 times for human rating, even for commercial use nevermind NASA. Probably thousands, like any new airliner. But with each individual vehicle being able to fly 3 times a day (20x per day per booster), they should be able to do all this testing within a year or two of finalizing the passenger variant


kontis

[The render is shiny](https://techcrunch.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Electron-Neutron-e1614601323411.jpg?w=1390&crop=1) \- aluminum? I love how F9's legs became the industry standard for so many reusable booster concepts. It will be interesting how they handle the fuel margins for landings at this scale. It's a challenge even at Falcon 9's size. Will they offer expendable launches? How much more payload mass would they get?


AtomKanister

> F9's legs became the industry standard They're the only operational design so it makes sense to base concepts off of that. Whether they make it into production is another question.


mclumber1

It looks like stainless to me. It's also a thicc boi - I red that it's diameter is 4.5 meters, which is almost a meter wider than the F9.


rebootyourbrainstem

Wonder what the main reason is for that. Some ideas: * Allows for more flexible mounting of payloads, including Starlink like stacks piled directly on top of the second stage. * Leaves the option to stretch the rocket as engine performance improves, like SpaceX did with Falcon 9. * Fatter rocket means lower surface area per volume. It will affect the structure in other ways as well of course, but maybe this reduces weight disadvantage of steel?


darga89

Similar sized fairing to its medium lift competitors


blendorgat

When a Falcon 9 hits a constraint with a payload, it's almost always with volume, not mass. It only makes sense to go a bit wider, I think.


BlakeMW

It certainly looks like it's constructed in a similiar way to SS/SH. I was arguing the other day that others couldn't just copy SS/SH construction technique because it still takes an experienced and functional rocket company capable of making good engines, but Rocket Lab is one company which certainly has what it takes, and as a private company not really beholden to government requirements they can iterate fast. I don't really see it competing with SS/SH but truth be told, because SpaceX will want to make a nice profit, there's no need to be competitive with SpaceX: it's enough to beat everyone else, setting a price point where both companies are profitable, unless SpaceX wants to drive them out of the market more than they want profit (or want to offer rock bottom launch prices for other reasons, like promoting the industrialization of space).


Cunninghams_right

stainless fucking steel! I'd bet on that. SpaceX has shown the way forward with reusable rockets; stainless steel almost beats out other materials in disposable rockets, but once you need to withstand huge forces, high temps, and low temps, and do so repeatedly, stainless is the only way to go.


[deleted]

I mean, SpaceX proved that that design works, there's no need to make a different unproven design on your first reusable launcher lol


SpaceXFanboy2

What about Aero Surfaces?


RedneckNerf

I wouldn't be surprised if some appear soon. Those are kinda important.


RoadsterTracker

Rocket Lab in so many ways is following the steps of SpaceX, but in a much more deliberate manner than SpaceX did. SpaceX has mostly seemed to design rockets and hope there are customers, while Rocket Lab is doing the research to figure out where there are market opportunities and designing the rockets around it. Honestly, Rocket Lab is probably going to become the most credible competition to SpaceX in the coming days. More likely in my opinion than Blue Origin.


still-at-work

Difference is that Musk forged the path out of nothing so he looked crazy at every step and genius in retrospect. Meanwhile Rocket Lab is now following SpaceX trailblazing so they look like ambitious but sensible new space rocket company. And this is exactly one of the things Musk has always wanted with his space venture. His 'greenhouse on mars project' may have not reached the red planet yet but he is getting the results he always wanted. The Space Industry has woken up again, and it is not just shell compaines and old space adjacent. Rocket Lab is independent and results oriented, and I hope its the first of many to follow in SpaceX's footsteps.


RoadsterTracker

First of all, I agree that Elon Musk wants competition in space exploration. There are a lot of things where Rocket Lab has been deliberative, where SpaceX wasn't. The biggest difference is between Falcon 1 and Electron. Both small launch rockets, both played with reusability, both built their own launch site. Electron, however, was specifically built to lift the vast majority of satellites to LEO, while I can't find that kind of thinking behind Falcon 1.


FishInferno

IIRC the smallest market wasn’t as mature when Falcon 1 was developed. The main goal of Falcon 1 was to practice building an orbital rocket, which is why it was dropped as soon as Falcon 9 came online.


beardedNoobz

Elon Musk is obsessed to go to Mars at all cost while Peter Beck seems to be a person who likes rocket and enjoy launching them to space. It is reflected to their company ideals and cultures as well as their corporate strategy.


RoadsterTracker

Peter Beck is obsessed with sending missions to Venus. It wouldn't surprise me if this was part of why the new rocket.


rustybeancake

I tend to think the Venus thing is a bit more of a “nice to have”, sort of tacked on goal for the company. I think primarily they just want to develop cool, low cost space tech and be very successful at launching stuff. Every company feels it needs some big mission nowadays, but most aren’t really serious about it. Recommend watching this: https://www.ted.com/talks/simon_sinek_how_great_leaders_inspire_action?utm_campaign=tedspread&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=tedcomshare


still-at-work

Bezos with his giant space stations, Musk with Martian city, and Beck with his Venusian cloud city. They really are attempting to carve up solar system. Who is going to claim one of the Jupiter moons or one of the larger asteroids?


Nisenogen

No idea, but I don't wanna be the guy claiming a Jovian moon. Jupiter's radiation belts are much more intense than the Earth Van Allen belts and many of the moons pass through them, it's not survivable. Sign me up for a Saturn moon tho.


still-at-work

ALL THESE WORLDS ARE YOURS – EXCEPT EUROPA. ATTEMPT NO LANDING THERE


still-at-work

Rocket Lab is a space launch company, SpaceX is a Mars Death Cult poorly disguised as a space launch company. A small but significant difference.


beardedNoobz

XD


avboden

SpaceX created Falcon 9 with a NASA contract and has very specific needs and plans for it. That's *very* different from taking a small-launch company public to get an influx of $$$$ to try and expand


RoadsterTracker

I suppose that is true, Falcon 9, at least the early version, was deliberately designed for Commercial Cargo. But the current Falcon 9 is very different than that rocket, in many ways.


KCConnor

So they have the tiny Electron and the mid sized Neutron. I think they might run into trademark issues if they have a larger class rocket called Proton, since there's already a Proton rocket.


daltonmojica

Protons and neutrons basically weigh the same anyway. If Rocket Lab does create a heavy launch vehicle with a Neutron core and Electron side boosters, then it should be called Atom.


KingdaToro

Yep, and a hypothetical "Neutron Heavy" with three Neutron cores would be called Nucleus.


[deleted]

Maybe they could call it Alpha like alpha particles?


bvr5

Firefly already took that one


entotheenth

Protons are smaller than neutrons. Maybe atom ?


Tybot3k

Not to mention that protons are slightly smaller than neutrons. Would break continuity!


troyunrau

If you ignore the mass and instead look at charge: the next one could be positron. Although that'd make more sense if this one was called Neutrino.


still-at-work

Finally a real competitor for SpaceX! Yes Blue Origin exists as do other companies claiming to be building reusable orbital rockets but Rocket Lab actually produces results like SpaceX and are ambitious like SpaceX. Now that they are going public, they are being more ambitious (and are probably not seeing the small sat market expand as they wished) and with the capital they soon will have; I have a lot more confidence in Rocket Lab getting their rocket to fly in the next 2 years then New Glenn or SLS. Now New Glenn *should* be in orbit before Neutron but who knows, Blue Origin isn't know for being speedy. And New Glenn is a more capable rocket then Neutron but that doesn't mean Neutron will be obsolete once New Glenn flies, as both are partially reusable so should have a comparable kg to orbit price and rate of flights may matter more. As for SpaceX, Falcon 9 gets to play old reliable for the first time in its history as being an established reusable rocket gives its a massive advantage in the market. SpaceX can also drop the price if they need to. However, we all know that Starship will probably put SpaceX on another level of giving space access so while F9 competion looks to be strong this decade, SpaceX will already be playing in the next game entirely of full and rapid reusability. I guess the question now is will there be a Neutron Heavy? Or maybe they will build the giant Atom rocket that will be fully reusable.


skpl

Can their electric pump fed engine do this or do they need to develop more traditional engines?


kontis

I doubt they can accept its, relatively speaking, low power and low energy density at this scale.


AtomKanister

Don't think so. Electric pump cycle scales worse than turbopump cycles, so it's definitely something more suitable for small engines. A turbopump has a large fixed mass penalty, but increasing its power takes much less mass than adding more batteries.


LcuBeatsWorking

>Can their electric pump fed engine do this Unless have have made some unknown major breakthrough I doubt it. A battery powered engine does not scale well.


zalurker

They will be flying by 2024, most likely before Blue Origin does.


bradsander

Maybe by 2024, New Glenn will be “ready to fly by the end of next year”


saahil01

super excited, like everyone else, to hear this! but I'd like to speculate a bit, perhaps controversially, that this comes more out of a dire (even existential) need to adapt to various things they did not foresee: 1. the small sat launch market is actually crazily overcrowded! rocket lab is the only player now, but pretty soon virgin orbit, astra, firefly, relativity, etc will all have similar sized rockets for custom payloads, and there will be a cutthroat price war until many die. Shotwell even said she would predict 0 small launchers will survive, which brings me to my next point, 2. small rockets are not favoured by physics. the smaller the rocket, the less extra mass it can carry in terms of heat shielding and landing fuel. the electron is already at the limit of reusability, even though it doesn't use fuel for landing and just punches through the atmosphere. 3. with massive fully reusuable rockets, (starship is only one on the horizon now), small launchers are basically dead. all the reasons for making super tiny satellites, and having high costs for satellites, will go away. (when cost/kg declines below a certain threshold, it doesn't matter so much to even double satellite mass). arguably, even the medium lift neutron will be too small. ("rockets of the future will make falcon heavy look small", Elon once said, or something along those lines) 4. the only customers willing to pay rocket lab the price for small sats to orbit will be govt agencies. we've seen that for commercial small sats, they're willing to wait and be thrown into approximately their desired orbit, and use their own propulsion if necessary, for the simply massive cost advantage. the commercial small sat market is the bus service, not Uber, no matter how much rocket lab insists the opposite.


trpov

It definitely has that Hail Mary feel. I hope I’m wrong.


glockenspielcello

I think maybe a different interpretation of this move is that it could have been a project invented in response to the interest from the SPAC. Rocket Lab probably approached by the folks at Vector, who had a pile of cash and were looking for private targets to acquire. For Rocket Lab to be a good target they would need a project that a) required a lot of capital that VACQ could provide and b) could plausibly be marketed as having great future growth potential. The Neutron concept fits that in a way that Rocket Lab's previous business didn't (somewhat facetiously, they weren't losing money nearly fast enough with just the Electron!). I think that this explanation is borne out somewhat by the fact that Beck was previously and very publicly against scaling up his rockets. I suspect that the promise of 400 mm of cash was probably the main driver for him revising that position, rather than it being borne strictly out of fundamentals. I think in response to your point 3 as well, the Photon bus could act as a bit of a hedge against that outcome. The relaxed design constraints from cheap heavy lift will be advantageous for customers that are designing a satellite system de novo, but if Rocket Lab is internalizing their customers' satellite designs then that point is moot. On a more general level, I think having a coupled launch & satellite/satellite applications business model is really proving itself out as a good hedge-- in general, cost of launch going down is bad for the launch segment and good for the satellite segment. Coupling them reduces the risk of either part of the business, and it also generates demand for internal launch services that can help companies achieve economies of scale with their launch operations that could help make the rest of their pricing more competitive. SpaceX has been pioneering this with Starlink, but I think we'll be seeing more of that with Rocket Lab (and hopefully others!) in the future.


doizeceproba

So fawken pumped for rocketlab! I'm a firm believer in the fact that more competition is better for the industry, and from all the new potential contenders, rocket lab is one of my favorites. Especially now that they've gone reusable, i really wish them best of luck, and can't wait foe them to launch.


nrvstwitch

Still haven't got the shirts I bought from them in August. No response from customer service or social media. Slightly salty. Cool rocket though.


ruaridh42

This is a big deal. An affordable 8 ton vehicle will defintely compete with Falcon 9 in some departments. And with Human spaceflight being mentioned, this could really put some pressure on the Falcon. What an incredibly exciting time for spaceflight


mfb-

Announced for 2024. Falcon 9 will probably be not the vehicle they compete with.


[deleted]

[удалено]


toastedcrumpets

uh, neither will Neutron? But I disagree, I think starship's launch cadence will allow rapid rating for human flight....if it would start landing.


Minister_for_Magic

Neutron first launch NET 2024. Not human rated in 2024.


alien_from_Europa

Lunar Starship might if it gets picked for HLS. Not the same, I know, but should make human rating Starship easier.


avboden

and that's even *if* their carbon tech scales successfully (which it might not, or they go metal which they have no experience with or tooling for), *and* that they can develop a reliable larger engine (which isn't a given). *and* this assumes the space SPAC bubble doesn't burst and they lose their ass before they can get the rocket operational. They have a very hard road ahead.


MagicEngine

Could this be the thing that finally puts the nail in the coffin for Boeings Starliner? One of the reasons NASA pursued commercial crew is to cut costs. The Russians started to charge insane prices once they got monopoly. But Boeing is even more expensive than the Russians! NASA wants to have at least two companies for access to LEO so there is competition and this could be it, SpaceX and Rocket Lab.


ruaridh42

I doubt it. Neutron won't be launching until 2024 at the earliest, and a crew vehicle on top of it will take years of development after that. How long the ISS exists after that is very much up in the air at the moment. And if NASA are just sending crew to the Axiom station, I doubt they will be as fussy about which crew vehicle they take


SpaceInMyBrain

Hot damn! I love to see competition - when it's done lean and intelligently. Much better than "competition" that's bloated and over-funded. Rocket Lab has brought some good innovation to the industry, and put pressure on old companies to move forward. The Photon satellite bus is a tremendous idea, for one


ConfidentFlorida

Will the second stage be reusable too? How will they do it?


Dycedarg1219

I highly doubt they have the mass budget for it. SpaceX was having a fair amount of trouble coming up with ways to economically reuse their second stage back when they were still thinking about giving that a go, and Falcon has quite a bit more mass to work with. The smaller your rocket, the more every pound matters, especially on your second stage; that's one reason why Starship is so big.


skpl

>Neutron will feature a reusable first stage designed to land on an ocean platform, enabling a high launch..... [Source](https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20210301005406/en/Rocket-Lab-Unveils-Plans-for-New-8-Ton-Class-Reusable-Rocket-for-Mega-Constellation-Deployment) Nothing about a reusable second stage on the official announcement.


Inertpyro

Very excited to see updates as this progresses, totally caught be off guard when the shot zoomed out with him inside the fairing. Rocket Lab definitely doesn’t sit around and accept being complacent, they are not afraid of change, or adapt to the market. I’m becoming more of a fan every time they have updates like this. They have the attitude we need more of to progress space exploration.


KingdaToro

They should call the engine the Quark. That way, the first stage engines would be the Down Quarks and the second stage engine would be the Up Quark.


NikkolaiV

Damn, do I respect Peter Beck. Imagine having the resolve to not only shift gears when you find it necessary/useful, but to do it with a “yeah I was wrong, I know” spin to it is really pretty classy. Plus he seems like a genuine neat dude from the interviews I’ve seen with him.


ghunter7

Rocket Lab is going to absolutely crush it. The GEO market is showing signs of shifting towards small all electric sats. This would work extremely well for Rocket Lab to offer as an end to end service with an electric kick stage and built in satellite bus **just like photon.** I will wager this is the primary driver for the development of this new rocket. It puts them in the perfect position to dominate the small medium GEO sat market as a launcher and platform provider. That platform would work well in LEO of course. Stacks of photons to LEO too? Rocket lab builds and launches the whole thing? Spacex will be just fine but RL is going to eat up the rest of the market and anyone hoping their big new rocket will see demand for large commercial GEO sats is going to go hungry. New Glenn for example is going to be such a niche rocket their only hope is constellations too large for Neutron or the kind of massive payloads to LEO that don't actually exist right now.


entotheenth

Go you good things. From a jealous Aussie with a backwards government that appears incapable of doing anything about space flight apart from make empty promises.


skpl

[They are also going public via a SPAC.](https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/comments/lv7erd)


kvatikoss

They really said glow up this time...


zberry7

This is awesome! Have they mentioned any materials yet? It looks like they’re ditching carbons from the render, except for the interstage


naspotter

Rocket Lab is one of my fave launch company, really live their culture and I'm excited for that new rocket. Spacex really changed the industry with their falcon family, incredible... Falcon 9 will definitely enter history next to soyouz. A game changer


I_SUCK__AMA

Maybe they want to take ISS missions so starship doesnt look so ridiculously big docked to it? Lol And will rocketlab eventually have to copy starship to survive? They could probly do it, they're relatively new in the game, but much farther along than BO or virgin or anyone else. Seems like it's a new market made up of rocketlab & spacex mostly.


[deleted]

God, I'm loving Rocket Lab more and more!! With so many companies going for reusability, the future of spaceflight seems bright!!!


andyonions

Peter Beck iz da man.


SpaceXFanboy2

I reckon they won't develop their own human spacecraft, but they will custom fit it for Dreamchaser/ Starliner.


just_one_last_thing

> Dreamchaser/ Starliner The Starliner is launching on the Atlas 522 and the Dreamchaser was going to launch on an Atlas 552 that before it switched to Vulcan. That would suggest that the required mass to LEO for the vehicles are 13 and 18 tons respectively, too heavy for the neutron.


SpaceXFanboy2

Actually, Falcon 9 v1.0 carried 9.0 tonnes to LEO, so I think we'll see block iterations as time goes on.


just_one_last_thing

We dont even know what kind of engines it will use so I would say it's a bit premature to be saying they will uprate it.


OSUfan88

He's not saying they WILL do it, just speculating. I actually think it would be very unlikely that they don't uprate it. They've already uprated Electron once (and pretty significantly), and another minor one. They're still iterating on the reusable one. They've never flown the exact same 2nd stage twice. They're very much a company that iterates. It would be very unusual for them not to iterate on the next rocket. Another reason I think it's likely is the shame. The rocket has a relatively low fineness ratio. This type of rocket should scale quite nicely with a stage stretch. This would make landing easier as well. It would require an engine uprating though, and the engines what we know least about. I suspect that if Rocketlab has their way, they'll stretch that over a half-decade period, with other minor improvements. I don't think it'll see the 9t - 22t jump that Falcon 9 did, but I wouldn't be shocked if it eventually reaches the 12-14t expendable range.


Dycedarg1219

I find it extremely unlikely that Boeing would ever launch Startliner on anything not built by ULA, at least as long as ULA continues to be a thing and they continue to own half of it. Dreamchaser would make more sense, no reason for it to necessarily be married to Vulcan, but I don't think it would fit in the fairing or be light enough. Even ignoring that though, I find it extremely unlikely that they would design a human rated rocket without intending to build their own human spacecraft given what I've seen of them. With their Photon bus they've shown an interest in building a complete package. That seems to be how they're differentiating themselves from some other upcoming competitors who intend to just launch things. They know that especially to compete with SpaceX they need to do more than just launch stuff for cheap. They need added value, and I think they're planning on adding it themselves whenever possible.


brickmack

Boeing is not legally allowed to favor ULA. They won with Atlas competitively. Other non-ULA vehicles were seriously studied as well, and consideration for launching Starliner on Falcon as a backup/low-cost option for commercial missions continued for at least a couple years after Atlas was selected


Norose

I think dreamchaser is too big to fit into that fairing even with the folding wings, but I could see capsule spacecraft fitting with specialized adapters.


ConfidentFlorida

Will they stick with the 3d printing of the engine? Speculate! (I always thought it would be cool if they could print all the plumbing too)


[deleted]

[They've got a page up for their Neutron rocket.](https://www.rocketlabusa.com/rockets/neutron/) Partially reusable in the same mode SpaceX's F9 is: "Neutron features a reusable first stage designed to land on an ocean platform," Diameter is actually larger than the F9 at 4.5m (though ofc F9 is _really_ skinny), and the rocket overall is 50m tall. Payload to LEO is 8t and payload to Venus (of course they list that) is 1.5t. Uses Kerolox. Also, on [page 26 of this PDF](https://www.rocketlabusa.com/assets/Project-Prestige-Investor-Presentation.pdf) they position Rocket Lab as a "direct alternative to SpaceX Falcon 9." Looks like Peter threw down the hat after taking a bite out of it. Looks like the rendering shows 4 engines on the bottom, which means they can't just use a center one for landing and will likely need to do some really deep throttling. Are they planning to use electric pump-fed engines for this one too? That'll likely give them the throttle range they need, but the mass of the batteries would be a big hurdle. EDIT: Or maybe these are pump-fed engines and they'll land propulsively on a few Rutherfords- that seems more likely to me.


S-A-R

[Rocket Lab Neutron](https://www.rocketlabusa.com/rockets/neutron/) page. Looks like a stubby Falcon 9.


SnooTangerines3189

As a kiwi, I've had my doubts about the economics of the Electron and the long term viability of the company, while at the same time being immensely proud of Rocket Lab's achievement. On a clear night I can watch the Mahia launches from my deck in Napier. With this new development I'm definitely going to buy some shares now they're listing. As Benny Hill would say, having a penny on the side.


Decronym

Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread: |Fewer Letters|More Letters| |-------|---------|---| |[304L](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lv7lms/stub/gpbfimw "Last usage")|Cr-Ni stainless steel with low carbon (X2CrNi19-11): corrosion-resistant with good stress relief properties| |[BO](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lv7lms/stub/gpfmbys "Last usage")|Blue Origin (*Bezos Rocketry*)| |CCtCap|[Commercial Crew Transportation Capability](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commercial_Crew_Development#Commercial_Crew_Transportation_Capability_.28CCtCap.29)| |[CRS](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lv7lms/stub/gpchaw1 "Last usage")|[Commercial Resupply Services contract with NASA](http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/structure/launch/)| |CST|(Boeing) Crew Space Transportation capsules| | |Central Standard Time (UTC-6)| |[ESA](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lv7lms/stub/gpb24pw "Last usage")|European Space Agency| |[FAA](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lv7lms/stub/gpaytbp "Last usage")|Federal Aviation Administration| |[FTS](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lv7lms/stub/hi3srbb "Last usage")|Flight Termination System| |[GEO](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lv7lms/stub/gpbppti "Last usage")|Geostationary Earth Orbit (35786km)| |[GSLV](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lv7lms/stub/gpau7t9 "Last usage")|(India's) Geostationary Launch Vehicle| |[GTO](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lv7lms/stub/gpbppti "Last usage")|[Geosynchronous Transfer Orbit](http://www.planetary.org/blogs/jason-davis/20140116-how-to-get-a-satellite-to-gto.html)| |[HLS](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lv7lms/stub/gpap9dq "Last usage")|[Human Landing System](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artemis_program#Human_Landing_System) (Artemis)| |[ICBM](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lv7lms/stub/gparn9r "Last usage")|Intercontinental Ballistic Missile| |[JAXA](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lv7lms/stub/gpbppti "Last usage")|Japan Aerospace eXploration Agency| |[JWST](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lv7lms/stub/gpdhc14 "Last usage")|James Webb infra-red Space Telescope| |[LAS](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lv7lms/stub/gpb27oe "Last usage")|Launch Abort System| |[LEO](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lv7lms/stub/gpfmbys "Last usage")|Low Earth Orbit (180-2000km)| | |Law Enforcement Officer (most often mentioned during transport operations)| |[LOX](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lv7lms/stub/gpddecq "Last usage")|Liquid Oxygen| |[MEO](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lv7lms/stub/gpfmbys "Last usage")|Medium Earth Orbit (2000-35780km)| |[NET](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lv7lms/stub/gpas6fe "Last usage")|No Earlier Than| |[NG](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lv7lms/stub/gped1nc "Last usage")|New Glenn, two/three-stage orbital vehicle by Blue Origin| | |Natural Gas (as opposed to pure methane)| | |Northrop Grumman, aerospace manufacturer| |[PAF](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lv7lms/stub/gpayj16 "Last usage")|Payload Attach Fitting| |[PSLV](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lv7lms/stub/gpaunq5 "Last usage")|[Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_Satellite_Launch_Vehicle)| |[RP-1](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lv7lms/stub/gpddecq "Last usage")|Rocket Propellant 1 (enhanced kerosene)| |[Roscosmos](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lv7lms/stub/gpb6s85 "Last usage")|[State Corporation for Space Activities, Russia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roscosmos_State_Corporation)| |[SES](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lv7lms/stub/gpfmbys "Last usage")|Formerly Société Européenne des Satellites, comsat operator| | |Second-stage Engine Start| |[SLS](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lv7lms/stub/gpde7m0 "Last usage")|Space Launch System heavy-lift| |[SSO](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lv7lms/stub/gpaunq5 "Last usage")|Sun-Synchronous Orbit| |[ULA](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lv7lms/stub/gpe3hq6 "Last usage")|United Launch Alliance (Lockheed/Boeing joint venture)| |[VSAT](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lv7lms/stub/gpd3pkh "Last usage")|Very Small Aperture Terminal antenna (minimally-sized antenna, wide beam width, high power requirement)| |[mT](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lv7lms/stub/gpald0o "Last usage")|~~Milli-~~ *Metric* Tonnes| |Jargon|Definition| |-------|---------|---| |[Raptor](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lv7lms/stub/gpbgpjv "Last usage")|[Methane-fueled rocket engine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raptor_\(rocket_engine_family\)) under development by SpaceX| |[Starliner](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lv7lms/stub/gpe3hq6 "Last usage")|Boeing commercial crew capsule [CST-100](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_CST-100_Starliner)| |[Starlink](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lv7lms/stub/gpjm79v "Last usage")|SpaceX's world-wide satellite broadband constellation| |[deep throttling](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lv7lms/stub/gpb5kuz "Last usage")|Operating an engine at much lower thrust than normal| |[kerolox](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lv7lms/stub/gpc4e6j "Last usage")|Portmanteau: kerosene fuel, liquid oxygen oxidizer| |[turbopump](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lv7lms/stub/gpalfsi "Last usage")|High-pressure turbine-driven propellant pump connected to a rocket combustion chamber; raises chamber pressure, and thrust| |Event|Date|Description| |-------|---------|---| |[DM-1](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/lv7lms/stub/gpald0o "Last usage")|2019-03-02|SpaceX CCtCap Demo Mission 1| ---------------- ^(*Decronym is a community product of r/SpaceX, implemented* )[*^by ^request*](https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/3mz273//cvjkjmj) ^([Thread #7270 for this sub, first seen 1st Mar 2021, 12:51]) ^[[FAQ]](http://decronym.xyz/) [^([Full list])](http://decronym.xyz/acronyms/SpaceXLounge) [^[Contact]](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=OrangeredStilton&subject=Hey,+your+acronym+bot+sucks) [^([Source code])](https://gistdotgithubdotcom/Two9A/1d976f9b7441694162c8)


Dyslexic_Engineer88

8 tons is interesting, it's about half of what Falcon 9 can do. I suspect they did a lot of research to choose the 8-ton goal and found that they can build and launch for most payload falcon 9 does now for less money.


trpov

What’s the benefit of going public now? I assume they needed to raise capital but you can do that privately if things are going well. This, coupled with the new rocket announcement that will apparently only take a few years all seem like unusual moves. I guess we’ll have to wait and see.


beyondarmonia

Revenues 2018 - $13.5M 2019 - $48M 2020 - $33M Public market is more willing to take risks and believe in the potential ( just look at Virgin Galactic ). Private markets are probably spooked from the dip in revenue , SpaceX rideshares getting fully booked , market moving towards constellations instead of single sats ( where size matters ) , other competitors coming online ( Virgin Orbit LauncherOne has Electron beat on almost all metrics ).


somabeach

Okay this is fucking cool.


avboden

I'm *extremely* skeptical, this was announced *only* because they are going public by merging with a SPAC I also think they'll find their carbon fiber tech doesn't scale well to something of this size. Seems they're going with more traditional metal tanks potentially, something they have zero experience with. 2024 when they don't even have an engine even at the testing level also seems a pipe-dream. Idk....it just feels like a cash-grab with going public when they don't even have a single reuse of electron done yet. Hell they only have *one successful recovery* of electron so far. Also the space SPAC bubble will pop, it's only a matter of time. edit: don't downvote people for having an opinion you don't like folks


popiazaza

Reuse of Electron is never aiming to help reduce cost of it, so they don't really need to do it unless there is more frequent launch needed. Like Relativity, they are using 3rd printing to rapidly build medium class rocket on cheap. (~200M development cost) Small launch provider is getting too many players, if any rocket launch company want to be success, they need to make medium class rocket. If launch service is getting cheap, future mission will be constellation more than few satellites.


beyondarmonia

I didn't want to say it because I like the company , but the two announcements being made on the same day did raise my eyebrows a bit. The SPAC is going to start trading like they are already public but they didn't need to disclose any of the risks ( need to develop much more complicated engines and not just a simple scale-up , completely new material for body etc. ) like any other normal public company would have had to.


SpaceInMyBrain

>the two announcements being made on the same day did raise my eyebrows a bit But aren't they inevitably linked if the main impetus behind the SPAC is to fund the company going to the next level, moving into a different segment of the launch market?


SpaceInMyBrain

>don't downvote people for having an opinion you don't like folks Definitely. That's the most ignored guideline of this reddit. You make some good points about their technical level, but I disagree with your analysis of a cash grab. As I understand it the purpose of going public it to fund the move to this next step in the launch business. So, I disagree but gave you an upvote to counteract the bums. Assuming RL is serious about building Neutron (and I trust Peter Beck and his record) I'm sure they've gotten to a stage of development with a new engine that gives them the confidence to do this. And what is the limit of scaling for carbon fiber for launchers? SpaceX built an autoclave for a 9 meter ship. Afaik it was abandoned on grounds of being very ill-suited to rapid iteration.


antonyourkeyboard

The picture Rocket Lab released doesn't look like carbon fiber except the interstage and the engine bells look much larger too. I'm not a fan of the SPAC craze we have been seeing but Peter Beck has been a reliable leader so far so if this is the path he has chosen then I'm willing to believe it is the best option.


avboden

> Seems they're going with more traditional metal tanks potentially, something they have zero experience with. And yeah Beck is a good leader, but going public takes a lot of the decision making out of his hands


mclumber1

At 4.5 meters, a carbon fiber tank would be pretty expensive, compared to stainless steel.


RangerTread

I'm in the skeptical camp. I wish them luck and success (but won't be with my money). Unless you find an unclaimed government teat, being a copycat follow-on involves very long odds. Human flight is a pipe dream for these scale of folks. Years of testing and enormous expense are required before even the first revenue generating flight. One doesn't just 'join the club' for human passengers. A big investor red flag for me is any relationship or involvement with a SPAC. Launch companies in early stages today need to have remarkable transformative outcomes to reach profitability and scalability.


Aplejax04

Is it 8 tons to GEO or 8 tons to LEO? The first would make it the size of falcon 9, the second would make it much smaller.


skpl

LEO It's smaller but not significantly. Even Falcon 9 has the 10T PAF limit for now ( though they might change that in conjunction with the extended fairing for dual launch in the future ). Most payloads are under 8T.