Generation Orbit SLVs

[blackshire]

Hello All,

A new company called Generation Orbit (see: www.generationorbit.com ) has been formed to serve the nanosatellite and microsatellite markets. Their satellite launch vehicles will be air-launched from retired military aircraft (F-4, F-15, and Su-27) and executive aircraft (Gulfstream II and III). Their GO1 SLV will have a payload capability of 1 kg - 10 kg, while their larger GO2 will be able to orbit a minimum of 20 kg - 30 kg. They do have "purty pictures" of the vehicles on their web site, and I am delighted at the bold, garish 1950s-style paint schemes on the launch aircraft and the SLVs. Also:

With the new EDF (Electric Ducted Fan) R/C model jets (including scale ones) that are now available, these Generation Orbit vehicles would make for interesting "cross-over" R/C *and* model rocket flying scale models. As long as the rockets were launched from the model airplanes within 30 degrees of vertical, they should comply with the NAR Safety Code.

[MarkB.]

True,

But it would NOT comply with the AMA code for projectiles from model aircraft.

Dropping a rocket-powered R/C X-1 from an R/C B-29: OK

Launching rockets from a P-38: NOT OK

It would be cool though. . . .

[tbzep]

(F-4, F-15, and Su-27)(Gulfstream II and III)
That's an eclectic collection! I wish those were real photos instead of computer graphics. I wonder if (and hope) the company will ever get off the ground.

Not only do I not understand why they'd need five different launch platforms, I can't see them doing so many launches that they'd need more than one plane. Maybe a second for backup, but that's it.

As it stands, they will need parts and maintenance upkeep for five different planes. You'd think they would have gone after several of the same make in order to keep maintenance costs down.

[foamy]

That's an eclectic collection! I wish those were real photos instead of computer graphics. I wonder if (and hope) the company will ever get off the ground.

Not only do I not understand why they'd need five different launch platforms, I can't see them doing so many launches that they'd need more than one plane. Maybe a second for backup, but that's it.

As it stands, they will need parts and maintenance upkeep for five different planes. You'd think they would have gone after several of the same make in order to keep maintenance costs down.
I agree. If I was being asked to be an investor in that company, why, I'd be skeptical at the very least. It doesn't seem logical or rational.

[blackshire]

True,

But it would NOT comply with the AMA code for projectiles from model aircraft.

Dropping a rocket-powered R/C X-1 from an R/C B-29: OK

Launching rockets from a P-38: NOT OK

It would be cool though. . . .No problem! I'm a NAR member, but not an AMA member...

[blackshire]

I agree. If I was being asked to be an investor in that company, why, I'd be skeptical at the very least. It doesn't seem logical or rational.There is a method to their madness: the smaller GO1 vehicle is sized to be launched from fighter aircraft, while the larger GO2 is to be launched from Gulfstream II and III executive jets. The illustrations just show the various aircraft that -can- be used to launch the rockets, and I'm sure they'll buy or lease one fighter and (later) one business jet to launch satellites. In the meantime, they could practice and make money by air-launching surplus military 2.75" (70 mm) Hydra 70 and 5" (127 mm) Zuni rockets (both Folding-Fin Aircraft Rockets [FFARs]) as suborbital sounding rockets carrying commercial and student payloads. (In the 1950s, a subsonic jet fighter fired one or two instrumented 2.75" Mk 4 "Mighty Mouse" FFARs to altitudes of 54 km, if memory serves.)

[Gus]

I'm having great difficulty imagining the dinky solid fuel rocket shown in the pictures accelerating to 17,500 mph, even with a mach 2 or 3 launch speed. The website is remarkably short on specifics, or animations.

I'm also having difficulty with the concept financially. Cost-to-orbit drops dramatically with increased payload size. I can't imagine a 1 to 10 kg payload ever being worth launching by itself. Current costs to orbit run anywhere from $4000 to $10000 per pound. Even with a best case scenario I can't imagine one of these launches costing less than $200,000.

[blackshire]

I'm having great difficulty imagining the dinky solid fuel rocket shown in the pictures accelerating to 17,500 mph, even with a mach 2 or 3 launch speed. The website is remarkably short on specifics, or animations.Air-launched SLVs can be surprisingly small (the U.S. Navy's "NOTSNIK" [see: http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/app4/notsnik.html ] was only 14 feet, 4.5 inches long!). This SPG (Space Propulsion Group, Inc.) proposed two-stage, F-15 launched LOX/paraffin hybrid propellant SLV (see: http://www.spg-corp.com/nanolaunch-project.html ) has a 22" diameter first stage and a 10" diameter second stage, a gross mass of 3,008 kg, and a payload of 30 kg to a 400 km orbit. SPG prepared this design for NanoLaunch, which is now known as Generation Orbit. The SPG design is their larger GO2 vehicle. Also:

A full-size mockup of the GO1 air-launched SLV was displayed (mounted under a MiG-21) at the Oregon International Airshow in August (see: http://www.premierspacesystems.com/Events.html and http://www.premierspacesystems.com/Nanolaunch.html ). Here (see: http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3A27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3A0427b302-0de4-49b6-988d-1dc834390f7e ) are more views of the Generation Orbit vehicles, as well as other firms' proposed air-launched SLVs. One of them is designed to be launched off the *back* of an F-15! Also:I'm also having difficulty with the concept financially. Cost-to-orbit drops dramatically with increased payload size. I can't imagine a 1 to 10 kg payload ever being worth launching by itself. Current costs to orbit run anywhere from $4000 to $10000 per pound. Even with a best case scenario I can't imagine one of these launches costing less than $200,000.These air-launched SLVs are intended to solve two problems that face nanosatellite and microsatellite operators--launch scheduling and choice of orbit parameters. To date, these tiny spacecraft have had to ride as "hitch-hiker" payloads along with larger satellites, on a space-available standby basis. Also, the nanosatellite and microsatellite owners have had to settle for whatever orbit altitudes, periods, and inclinations that they could get, and these "grab-bag" orbits are often not optimal for their satellites' purposes. These satellite operators would prefer to have their spacecraft injected into *their* desired orbits *when* they want--that is why Generation Orbit's motto is "Your orbit on time." As in most businesses, many if not most of these nanosatellite and microsatellite operators would be willing to pay more--within reason--for such a launch service that would bend to fit *their* satellites' needs instead of their having to settle for whatever launch dates and orbits they could "scrounge up" as secondary payload "hitch-hikers."

[Gus]

Thanks for the info. I understand the issue of wanting to go to any orbit, any time, but I'm still having a hard time understanding the finances of this. Any idea what the proposed cost of putting a 10 kg satellite in LEO will be?

[blackshire]

Thanks for the info. I understand the issue of wanting to go to any orbit, any time, but I'm still having a hard time understanding the finances of this. Any idea what the proposed cost of putting a 10 kg satellite in LEO will be?I haven't read through their entire web site yet, so I don't know if they have a price or a price estimate. I think they are also interested in providing this launch-on-demand service to the military, in which case the cost would (within reason) be less important. Their GO2 vehicle will use SPG's very simple (and cheap to manufacture) LOX/paraffin hybrid motors for both stages, so they are working hard to push down the costs since their main market is commercial satellite operators.

[blackshire]

-SNIP-
Not only do I not understand why they'd need five different launch platforms, I can't see them doing so many launches that they'd need more than one plane. Maybe a second for backup, but that's it.

As it stands, they will need parts and maintenance upkeep for five different planes. You'd think they would have gone after several of the same make in order to keep maintenance costs down.Generation Orbit is a partnership between several companies. Premier Space Systems is handling the launch airplane part of the operation, and they already own three MiG-21 fighters (see: http://www.premierspacesystems.com/Aircraft.html ). They are also interested in possibly acquiring one or more F-15A or F-15B fighters. Also:

Space Propulsion Group (SPG) has developed very simple and cheap-to-manufacture LOX/paraffin hybrid rocket motors for the larger GO2 air-launched satellite launch vehicle. The other partners (links to all of them are here: http://www.premierspacesystems.com/Affiliates.html ) include PSAS (Portland State Aerospace Society, who are developing the GO1 and GO2 SLVs' electronic and telemetry systems), Spath Engineering (they operate the rocket motor test stands and collect static test data), Premier Jets (they have executive jets that will be used to air-launch the larger GO2 SLV), and Classic Aircraft Aviation Museum (which provides storage space for Premier Space Systems' MiG-21 aircraft and will also house other launch aircraft that Premier Space Systems may acquire).