Register here

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Space Projects / Re: Another Rocket Startup
« Last post by TomcatViP on Today at 11:02:05 am »
Ahhh Startup and marketing... :D

Let's dig in the numbers .., 5% of maximum cost offset lead to 1/6th the final launch price of their competitors? Those guys should ran for a local election, they have talents.

So, if I am 5% stronger that my neighbor I can cut more wood with an axe that my skinny friend using a chainsaw?   :o

2
Missile Projects / Re: GQM-163A Coyote Target Missile
« Last post by marauder2048 on Today at 10:47:22 am »
from fbo:


The Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR), Patuxent River, MD intends to
award a sole source, Delivery Order under Basic Ordering Agreement
(BOA) N00019-16-G-0015 with Orbital Sciences Corporation, 3380 Price
Road, Chandler AZ, for the integration of a Deployable Chaff System to the
GQM-163A target.  This system will be used to simulate the radar signature
of a Multi-Stage Supersonic Target (MSST) separation event through the
use of Deployable Chaff and the Orbital-ATK GQM-163A target vehicle
.

my emphasis
3
Space Projects / Another Rocket Startup
« Last post by fredymac on Today at 09:59:39 am »
Relativity Space
https://www.relativityspace.com

Their approach is to 3D print the whole thing (really big printing machines).  Their rocket uses a 15,500lb thrust engine with 9 in the first stage and 1 on the upper.  Cost would be $10M/launch.  Interesting statistic they mention is that raw materials (to make the rockets) and the propellant are 5% of total launch costs.  No matter what, it will be interesting to watch their first launch if they make it that far.

4
Aerospace / Re: Just what is the mystery sensor on Progress MS-07?
« Last post by TomS on Today at 09:35:45 am »
All of these theories keep having to find very convoluted reasons why it doesn't matter that NROL-76 was supposed to launch days earlier into an orbit that would have been nowhere near ISS.  This article mentions that objection but discounts it without any real explanation.
5
Indeed ! I think, it's more a kind of quite hastily sketched idea, not really a technical drawing.
6
Military / Re: AMDR ships
« Last post by TomS on Today at 09:06:03 am »
No worries.  Lots of moving parts to keep track of on these programs.
7
I did notice one minor glitch: Tex Johnston's name is missing from the index! :(
8
What are the estimates for the feasible production rate of ICBMs and warheads in North Korea?

As I have been saying, the DPRK's missiles are unreliable and lack range to hit most of Australia or the US, if at all...  Their problem is getting a missile that can reliably be fired and can reliably expect to hit what it is aimed at.  That is still IMHO about five years off.

Youtube is full of early Atlas and Thor failures.  Minuteman...not so much.  Even if five years off, that just means we've got five years to do something definitive about the problem, not that we can sit on our hands for five more years.  Personally, I'll bet we see a successful ICBM-range test within the year.

Policy responses are a different topic than estimating capability.
10
Designation Systems / Re: Lockheed L-/CL- project numbers
« Last post by hesham on Today at 08:43:15 am »

L-402         LASA-60 small civil STOL transport (2 ex.,1959); license-built by Lockheed-Azcarate SA in Mexico

It was called CL-402,and not only L-402.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10