Rocket Lab Successfully Reaches Orbit and Deploys Its First Satellites (geekwire.com)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Rocket Lab Successfully Reaches Orbit and Deploys Its First Satellites (geekwire.com)

Posted by EditorDavid on Saturday January 20, 2018 @04:24PM from the touching-the-sky dept.

Long-time Slashdot reader ClarkMills writes: Rocket Lab has successfully launched its second Electron rocket from New Zealand's Mahia Peninsula, with the rocket reaching orbit for the first time... This follows the company's first launch last May, in which the rocket got to space but did not make it to orbit after range safety officials had to kill the flight.
Just 60 seconds before lift-off yesterday, a "rogue ship" entered their launch-range area, prompting them to postpone the launch until today. GeekWire reports: This mission was nicknamed "Still Testing," but unlike the first mission, the objective was not merely to test Rocket Lab's hardware. The rocket had the additional task of putting three nanosatellites in orbit: an Earth-imaging Dove satellite for Planet, and two Lemur-2 satellites that the Spire space venture would use for tracking ships and monitoring weather... The price tag for a mission is as low as $5 million, thanks to streamlined hardware production techniques. The Electron makes use of carbon composite materials for its rocket core, and 3-D printing techniques for its Rutherford rocket engines.
90 minutes ago Spire tweeted that they'd experienced a "good clean deployment" of their satellites, adding that they were already receiving images and calling it "a huge win" for commercial space, small satellites, the Electron rocket, and New Zealand.

UPDATE: Long-time Slashdot reader Hairy1 shares Rocket Lab's video of their launch.

64 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Space Age by SuperKendall · 2018-01-20 16:39 · Score: 4, Interesting

It seems to me, that we are at long last ACTUALLY entering the Space Age - a label given too prematurely.

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
1. Re:Space Age by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-20 16:47 · Score: 0
  
  You incurable Space Nutter.
2. Re:Space Age by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-20 17:19 · Score: 0
  
  1001010101010 ?
3. Re:Space Age by arth1 · 2018-01-20 18:55 · Score: 2
  
  It seems to me, that we are at long last ACTUALLY entering the Space Age - a label given too prematurely.
  Personally, I don't think polluting Low Earth Orbit qualifies us for the Space Age. It's like saying we entered industrial age when someone first wove reeds or knapped flint.
  Once we have people living on Titan, or have a probe orbiting a different star, I think we're a bit closer. Neither will happen for quite a few generations yet.
4. Re:Space Age by thinkwaitfast · 2018-01-20 19:22 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Getting Low Earth Orbit is the hardest part of getting anywhere in the solar system. Until you can demonstrate you can do this, everything else is a waste.
5. Re:Space Age by arth1 · 2018-01-20 19:51 · Score: 1
  
  Getting Low Earth Orbit is the hardest part of getting anywhere in the solar system. Until you can demonstrate you can do this, everything else is a waste.
  No, it's certainly a hard part for land dwelling animals, but it's immensely easier to toss stuff into LEO than it is to do most stuff in space. Going to Mars is a different ballpark. Not to say anything about leaving the solar system.
  And tossing small objects into low orbits is not very new either, and doesn't require today's technology. Sputnik was 1958.
  Slide rules and telegraph messages.
  It's a step, but a step does not establish the journey. We have a long ways to go before we even can say where we're heading or when we expect to get there. People hopping islands in sail boats several thousand years ago didn't usher in the Age of Sail.
6. Re:Space Age by 50000BTU_barbecue · 2018-01-20 20:11 · Score: 1
  
  "Sputnik was 1958"
  Fuck. What timeline is this?
  
  --
  Mostly random stuff.
7. Re:Space Age by Kjella · 2018-01-21 00:45 · Score: 2
  
  It seems to me, that we are at long last ACTUALLY entering the Space Age - a label given too prematurely.
  Reaching orbit was - unlike many other arbitrary lines in the sand - a real breakthrough compared to crashing back to earth. And we went from that to landing on the Moon and sending the first probe to leave the solar system in 20 years (1957-1977), that's an amazing development over a short time that deserves its own "age". If you look at all the communication satellites, broadcast satellites, observation satellites, GPS system, ISS, deep space probes etc. we have in space I think it would be complete lunacy to claim that the "Space Age" starts now.
  Maybe this will be like a new age but then it should pick a new name, though honestly I'm not sure what's revolutionary so far. There's a new generation of rockets sure, but so far they're doing things we've already done like launch satellites into space or resupply the ISS. All the plans for the Moon, Mars etc. are still on the drawing board. And the Falcon 9s are technically not the first thing we've sent into space, landed and sent again - that honor belongs to the Space Shuttle despite its exorbitant refurbishment costs. There's a lot more promised for the future than what's reality today. When does the Space Colonization Age start?
  
  --
  Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
8. Re:Space Age by drinkypoo · 2018-01-21 01:09 · Score: 1
  
  Until you can demonstrate you can do this, everything else is a waste.
  We demonstrated that we could do that [as a species] decades ago. And yet, all we've done with it is communications and spy satellites, and some small science projects. If that's the hard part, why haven't we done the other things?
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
9. Re:Space Age by CrimsonAvenger · 2018-01-21 02:34 · Score: 2
  
  but it's immensely easier to toss stuff into LEO than it is to do most stuff in space.
  Well, no. In terms of deltaV, LEO is more than halfway to anywhere. LEO+40% is Terra Escape Speed. LEO doubled is pretty much Solar Escape Speed....
  
  --
  
  "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
10. Re:Space Age by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-21 03:03 · Score: 0
  
  Not enough motivation; you've seen one dead rock, you've seen them all. More interesting live rocks in the movies. And despite the oft repeated platitude,most people are not explorers
11. Re:Space Age by Immerman · 2018-01-21 03:53 · Score: 1
  
  Sure, it's not that much harder to *get* to anywhere, assuming you're willing to wait years or decades to arrive. Actually *doing* anything there - mining, refining, manufacturing, colonizing etc... We currently don't have a lot of technology oriented towards those ends. And if we try to do it with accepted American/European levels of safety and refinement, it's liable to be a long, slow, expensive project.
  On the other hand, while getting into orbit requires a lot of precision as every gram matters, actually *doing* things in space has a lot more room for "sloppiness", and may lend itself to a far more "rough and ready" approach, for those willing to simply spend as many lives as it takes. Granted air seals and other aspects of atmosphere management need a certain level of consideration - but while many are complex, they're not necessarily especially difficult or failure prone - we've been making viable long-term sealed terrariums for decades.
  Meanwhile rockets, factories, etc. can be *sloppy* - early industrial age quality and precision would be far more than needed for such things. At least, if we assume that initially only bulk manufacturing is being done, with more "high tech" components being imported from Earth. Presumably paid for by the export of relatively useless rare metals found alongside the more immediately useful iron and water.
  And of course if you *are* investing in advanced technology, all sorts of "experimental" technologies like 3D printing, humanoid robotics, and VR telepresence suddenly become far more immediately useful in space. I'd bet that quite often a VR controlled strong and nimble humanoid robot would be "hands on" enough to get most the benefit of direct human involvement. Not to mention making bathroom breaks far more convenient than a space suit.
  
  --
  --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
12. Re:Space Age by Immerman · 2018-01-21 04:01 · Score: 1
  
  I've got to agree - access to space it the natural point to mark the beginning of the Space Age. Historically, I think that will be seen as the beginning of our expansion, even if it started a little slowly. Whats a few decades to start in the face of history?
  "Space Colonization Age" is just too wordy - and I doubt the distinction will really matter after the first generation of colonists have passed.
  
  --
  --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
13. Re:Space Age by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-21 05:46 · Score: 1
  
  It's the timeline where Biff Tannen is in the White House. Sorry.
14. Re:Space Age by 110010001000 · 2018-01-21 05:59 · Score: 0
  
  Yes we are. We can now launch satellites into LEO. Truly the dawn of a new age.
15. Re:Space Age by arth1 · 2018-01-21 08:21 · Score: 1
  
  Well, no. In terms of deltaV, LEO is more than halfway to anywhere. LEO+40% is Terra Escape Speed. LEO doubled is pretty much Solar Escape Speed....
  Brute speed isn't the overriding achievement. Achieving the speed needed to go to the moon was the least of the problems fifty years ago.
  We're nowhere near conquering space, but paddle around in the surf, thinking we've conquered the ocean.
Cubesat by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-20 16:41 · Score: 0

Whats their cost per pound to LEO?
1. Re:Cubesat by PopeRatzo · 2018-01-20 19:05 · Score: 1
  
  Whats their cost per pound to LEO?
  Why, what did LEO do to you?
  
  --
  You are welcome on my lawn.
2. Re:Cubesat by willy_me · 2018-01-20 19:18 · Score: 1
  
  From the link: Payload of 225 kg at a cost of 7.16 mil.
3. Re:Cubesat by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-20 21:37 · Score: 0
  
  Falcon 9 seems to lift 5,500 kg with $62 milj
  $/kg
  >>> (7.16*10**6)/225
  31822.222222222223
  >>> (62*10**6)/5500.
  11272.727272727272
4. Re:Cubesat by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-21 05:27 · Score: 0
  
  Apples and oranges, where do you find 5 tons of cubesats that all want to get to the same orbit? Nowhere that's where, unless you are Indian maybe. These two rockets are at totally different ends of the launch market, if Falcon 1 was still alive we could talk comparison. Electron is more of a competitor to systems like Epsilon, Pegasus, Minotaur, Long March 11 and other smallsat launchers. If possible then smallsats and cubesats obviously rideshare, but what if you want to go to an orbit where no rideshare options are heading? Then you pay for a smallsat launcher.
Congratulations to every one involved by banjonz · 2018-01-20 16:45 · Score: 4

This makes me proud to be a kiwi.
1. Re:Congratulations to every one involved by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-20 17:59 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  As an Aussie it pains me greatly to say it but bloody good job and congratulations you kiwi bastards!! ;)
2. Re:Congratulations to every one involved by PopeRatzo · 2018-01-20 19:07 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  This makes me proud to be a kiwi.
  You should be proud. NZ looks like an awesome place. I saw a documentary that you guys have hobbits and elves and shit, and at least two wizards. That is so cool. You live anywhere near that big tower with the eyeball on it?
  
  --
  You are welcome on my lawn.
3. Re: Congratulations to every one involved by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-20 19:38 · Score: 0
  
  Kiwis never kiss and tell, asshole.
4. Re:Congratulations to every one involved by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-20 20:36 · Score: 0
  
  Unfortunately, our towers with eyeballs aren't even built to our notoriously shoddy building code, so after each eathquake we have to knock them down and rebuild them, also failing to meet the slightly improved but still notoriously shoddy code.
5. Re: Congratulations to every one involved by Hairy1 · 2018-01-20 20:52 · Score: 2
  
  Must be an Australian. They are not in the space club yet, and are probably jealous that we beat them. Again. This limp dick insult is the usual response by insecure betas to having their ass kicked by the Kiwis alphas.
6. Re: Congratulations to every one involved by baker_tony · 2018-01-20 22:10 · Score: 1
  
  Haha, amen to that!
7. Re:Congratulations to every one involved by Pikoro · 2018-01-20 22:55 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Oh don't give them too much credit. All they had to do was cut it loose from the ground and it fell into space.
  
  --
  "Freedom in the USA is not the ability to do what you want. It is the ability to stop others from doing what THEY want"
8. Re: Congratulations to every one involved by oob · 2018-01-20 23:50 · Score: 1
  
  having their ass kicked
  The word is arse. In New Zealand we speak proper English, no true Kiwi uses zionAmerican pidgin.
  Fuck off, fraud.
9. Re: Congratulations to every one involved by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-21 00:52 · Score: 0
  
  A true (warm) alpha doesn't respond to name-calling, and uses violence only as a last resort. Caring and protecting is the dtrongest alpha trait, not fighting and dominance.
10. Re: Congratulations to every one involved by MerlTurkin · 2018-01-21 01:44 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah but they the hottest women on Earth. Seriously.
11. Re:Congratulations to every one involved by DNS-and-BIND · 2018-01-21 15:04 · Score: 1
  
  National pride is toxic. Making people feel proud of their country is racist. New Zealand is a nation of murderous white settlers.
  
  --
  Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
12. Re:Congratulations to every one involved by PopeRatzo · 2018-01-21 16:08 · Score: 1
  
  New Zealand is a nation of murderous white settlers.
  And orcs. Don't forget the orcs.
  
  National pride is toxic
  All pride is toxic. It goeth before the fall.
  
  --
  You are welcome on my lawn.
13. Re: Congratulations to every one involved by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-22 17:31 · Score: 0
  
  WRESAT launched from Woomera in 1967 and Australia became the third country to launch their own satellite.
  WRESAT — Weapons Research Establishment Satellite
  Yes, they had a little help but it still counts. PS. Enough of the cheap Aussie-bashing insults - just be happy that the launch was a success and stop embarrassing yourself.
14. Re:Congratulations to every one involved by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-23 09:06 · Score: 0
  
  "National pride is toxic. Making people feel proud of their country is racist. New Zealand is a nation of murderous white settlers."
  You're racist against your stereotype of New Zealanders, and use that as an arguments against national pride? Piperatzo got the orcs but forgot to mention the trolls in middle earth, that turn to stone in the sunlight...
Second stage by Sooner+Boomer · 2018-01-20 18:17 · Score: 1

I've tried to catch every launch of SpaceX (and NASA). One thing I noticed in the video - when the second stage lights off, it really scoots away from the first stage! A LOT more than with Falcon launches.

--
Chaos maximizes locally around me.
1. Re:Second stage by thinkwaitfast · 2018-01-20 19:41 · Score: 1
  
  Another thing is this went straight up for the whole first stage without adding much tangential velocity. Probable a much higher power to mass ratio.
  Calculus of variations.
  How does it work?
2. Re:Second stage by Immerman · 2018-01-21 04:24 · Score: 1
  
  Hmm, you're right - though it did seem to start leaning over around the time it his max dynamic pressure.
  I wonder... if their vacuum engine is notably more efficient than their atmospheric one, then it might make sense to just get out of the atmosphere as quickly/cheaply as possible, and then let a larger second stage worry about the acceleration. Especially if they're going with composite materials for the tanks so that the mass penalty of continuing to accelerate a larger, but mostly empty, tank is not so great. The square-cube law does favor larger tanks, and carbon-composite materials would move that "sweet spot" considerably.
  
  --
  --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
3. Re:Second stage by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-21 05:38 · Score: 1
  
  Atmosphere is much more of an impediment for smaller rockets and results in a very significant dV penalty, that's why its important to get out asap, for systems like Pegasus and some anti satellite missiles it even makes sense to do an air launch. Whereas for a large rocket like Saturn V atmosphere is almost negligible. Size disadvantage becomes worse and worse smaller you get, tabletop orbital launcher is pretty much impossible, dV requirement would become ridiculous due to atmospheric losses.
4. Re:Second stage by Michael+Woodhams · 2018-01-21 09:55 · Score: 2
  
  This is 100% speculation:
  Their payload was much lighter than maximum capacity. Therefore they could afford a less than optimal ascent profile. Because this was primarily a test, they were keen on getting complete uninterrupted telemetry. Therefore they used an ascent profile which would keep the rocket in line of sight of the receiving dishes at launch site, from launch to at least stage 2 shutdown.
  
  --
  Quattuor res in hoc mundo sanctae sunt: libri, liberi, libertas et liberalitas.
youtube video of launch by Sooner+Boomer · 2018-01-20 18:21 · Score: 2

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

--
Chaos maximizes locally around me.
1. Re:youtube video of launch by PopeRatzo · 2018-01-20 19:10 · Score: 1
  
  Nah, that's not a rocket. Now THIS is a rocket:
  https://youtu.be/UExTN3_UOIY
  
  --
  You are welcome on my lawn.
2. Re:youtube video of launch by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-20 19:21 · Score: 0
  
  It's amazing to think that each one of the computers in the kiwi control center has more computing power than the combined computing power of the entire Earth back when Apollo 11 launched.
3. Re: youtube video of launch by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-21 06:02 · Score: 1
  
  Well, that's JavaScript for you.
Interesting fuel cycle by duinsel · 2018-01-20 22:33 · Score: 3, Interesting

It is notable that their engine uses electrically powered pumps for fuel and oxidizer. Most rocket engines use turbo pumps that burn fuel to spin a turbine that is connected to these pumps, which require a respectable amount of power. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... Here, they use LiPo batteries to power DC electric pumps (2x 50hp), which reduced complexity and cost. I was quite surprised that this is a feasible approach.
1. Re:Interesting fuel cycle by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-20 23:16 · Score: 0
  
  spinning is spinning. motors, turbopumps, it matters not.
2. Re:Interesting fuel cycle by duinsel · 2018-01-21 01:16 · Score: 2
  
  Surprising in terms of power requirement.Numbers I read for turbopumps in rockets are 10's or 100's of MW. 50hp=0.04MW. The (admittedly larger) Saturn V F1 engine had 55.000 hp turbopumps (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocketdyne_F-1)
3. Re:Interesting fuel cycle by thinkwaitfast · 2018-01-21 03:10 · Score: 2
  
  Power density is close, but H2O2 powered pumps still had them beat last time I calculated, but there's always more than one criteria (safety, complexity, cost, certification for example).
4. Re:Interesting fuel cycle by chispito · 2018-01-21 04:18 · Score: 2
  
  It is notable that their engine uses electrically powered pumps for fuel and oxidizer. Most rocket engines use turbo pumps that burn fuel to spin a turbine that is connected to these pumps, which require a respectable amount of power. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... Here, they use LiPo batteries to power DC electric pumps (2x 50hp), which reduced complexity and cost. I was quite surprised that this is a feasible approach.
  I have a feeling it's only feasible at such a relatively small scale, compared to other orbital rocket engines. It probably saves a lot on cost and complexity.
  
  --
  The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
5. Re:Interesting fuel cycle by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-21 05:53 · Score: 0
  
  Yeah the electric approach doesn't scale to larger engines. It does have it's advantages on small motors though, I could see it becoming a thing for on orbit maneuvering engines and such.
Awesome! by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-20 23:39 · Score: 0

Go Kiwis, GO!
Next video game craze: The Kiwi Space Program, staring Sam Neill and the creatures from Weta Workshop.
1. Re:Awesome! by MoaDweeb · 2018-01-21 09:46 · Score: 1
  
  Directed by Taika Waititi and produced by Jermaine Clement.
  
  --
  New Zealanders are well balanced with a chip on each shoulder. One represents Australia, the other the rest of the world
"Sputnik was 1958" by rossdee · 2018-01-21 02:34 · Score: 1

. Fuck. What timeline is this?
Dunno, bit in the timeline I was born in, Sputnik 1 was 1957
Not sure how many other Russian craft were called Sputnik
Sputnik 2 was dogged (or should that be bitched)
Re: Lunar Eclipse in 9 days on flat Earth by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-21 05:40 · Score: 0

Whatever you forgot to swallow this morning, now would be a good time, mate.
First from a non-nuclear power? by ukoda · 2018-01-21 16:20 · Score: 1

Great work guys!

When I think of other counties that have reached space I can't think of any who didn't need the technology for their nuclear weapons. Is there any other countries with a successful space program that didn't need it for their military?