ARCA Plans 2018 Launch For Revolutionary Single-Stage Rocket (newatlas.com)

An aerospace company is building a cheap, simple, lightweight rocket that they hope will redefine the microsatellite industry. Eloking quotes New Atlas: New Mexico-based ARCA Space Corporation has announced that it is developing the world's first Single Stage to Orbit (SSTO) launch vehicle that can deliver both a small payload and itself into low Earth orbit, at a cost of about US$1 million per launch. Dubbed the Haas 2CA after the 16th century rocket pioneer Conrad Haas, the new booster uses a linear aerospike engine instead of conventional bell-shaped rocket engines to do away with multiple stages. [YouTube video]
They're working with six different NASA centers and have scheduled their first launch for 2018. The rocket will be 53 feet tall (16 meters) with a diameter of just 4.95 feet (1.5 meters), and will weigh 1,210 pounds when empty, but 35,887 pounds when fueled, "thanks to ACRA's proprietary composite materials for the propellant tanks and other components."

Comments

Revolutionary Rocket aka aerospike engine

[Eloking]

I remember back in the early 2000 when I first read about the aerospike engine and saw that stunning picture : https://upload.wikimedia.org/w...

Quite an impressing concept, the nozzle compensate depending on the altitude to kept it's efficiency on a wide range of altitude. One of the reason of multistage rocket is, of course, to lower the weight to raise efficiency as you climb, but another more subtle reason is also that conventional bell-shaped rocket are only efficient at a narrow range of altitude.

Aerospike engine doesn't have this problem, it stay efficient at all time. And on the plus side, as you can see in the picture above, they look freaking cool.

Re:Revolutionary Rocket aka aerospike engine

[AJWM]

You're confusing aero spike engines with simpler (but heavier) spike engines.

In an aerospike, aerodynamic forces (often with the assist of gasses injected at the base of the engine) form the "pointy" part of the spike, so there's both the lighter and easier to cool aspect. Also known as a plug-nozzle, but the latter are usually (a) circular and (b) even shallower than this linear aerospike.

Spike nozzles (circular ones) have also been flight tested, but yeah, the tail of that spike is heavy -- and also not what you want if you're planning to reuse the vehicle, because it aggravates reentry heating. (Doesn't look like this is what ARCA is planning though, I guess they're just going for cheap and disposable. Maybe reusable will follow.)

NASA never had any problems with their X-33 aerospike, it was all down to the weird-ass V-shape fuel tank configuration.

Well...

[Rei]

The rocket equation works out for those figures. But those figures are insanely optimistic. A nearly 30:1 mass ratio? That's nuts. I mean, if they really can do it, go them! But let's just say I'm not holding my breath.

Also: why oh why does every last rocket startup and their cousin start off with HTP as their oxidizer? It never works out well. Performance is bad, and density is no better than a number of other alternatives, and the latter are less likely to kill you if you look at them funny.

Re:Well...

[Rei]

- Net propellant densities are very similar to many others, such as MON, IRFNA, etc.
- The others are non-cryogenic as well.
- No difference on staged combustion for the others

Versus:
  - Not self-pressurizing
  - Detonates if it gets too hot
  - Detonates if there's any contamination in the tank, the plumbing, fittings, anything. The cleanliness requirements can be extreme.
  - You can load it up with stabilizers to prevent explosion, but then they hinder combustion as well, as well as lowering performance.

It doesn't even win on a "health hazard" perspective, as one may think when they think of alternatives. HTP isn't like household peroxide - it burns your skin, your lungs, causes blindness if it gets in your eyes in tiny quantities, etc. You not only have to wear protective suits, but you have to make sure that they're made of a material that it won't explode on contact with. It's easier to clean up than some of its competitors, but that's about it.

Everyone tries it. Then subsequently gives up on it.

Re:Microsatellites

[NEDHead]

Approximately 8" x 8" x 8'

X-33 was going to use an Aerospike engine

[jmichaelg]

The Lockheed X-33 Single Stage to Orbit Vehicle Skunk Works team was making identical claims back in the mid 90's.

They blew through $1 Billion before grinding to a halt when their carbon fiber oxygen tank delaminated during testing. Their budget was so tight, that a single setback like that one killed the project. They considered ditching CF in favor of an aluminum oxygen tank but the added weight didn't leave enough for any significant payload.

Perhaps this group has better carbon fiber manufacturing skills than Lockheed's Skunk works did back then and they'l be able to make good or perhaps it's just a "let's find some rubes and fleece them" scheme.

Time will tell.

Side story. I took a group of middle school students to Palmdale to see the X-33 chassis that was then under construction. It was the first time any of us had seen anything made with Carbon Fiber. The engineer giving us the tour handed us a CF strut to pass around and said "Carbon fiber is very light and much stronger than steel. It'll take a lot of abuse." When the strut was handed to this one particular kid, he started banging on it to see how much abuse it would take. The kid's mother freaked out while the engineer laughed it off and said "send him to work for us when he graduates. We need his kind of thinking."

  The strut survived the kid's abuse.