Yes, that rocket engine would be Estes 1/4A3-3T :-)
On the serious note:
Rocketry and aerospace in general involves indeed a great amount of risk.
On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 4:56 AM, Anthony Cesaroni <acesaroni@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Can anyone on the list cite one rocket engine, including all the ones
considered "proven and successful" that don't have any inherent,
"technological' risks?
None come to mind. :-)
Best.
Anthony J. Cesaroni
President/CEO
Cesaroni Technology/Cesaroni Aerospace
http://www.cesaronitech.com/
(941) 360-3100 x101 Sarasota
(905) 887-2370 x222 Toronto
-----Original Message-----
From: arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On
Behalf Of KEN BIBA
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2015 9:31 PM
To: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [AR] Re: Rocket Labs
Thanks folks. Anyone have opinions about the technology risks of their
motor? Seems to me to be the big issue.
K
On Sep 15, 2015, at 5:46 PM, Ed LeBouthillier <codemonky@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:
launch system?
Anyone here have opinions or information about Rocket Labs and their LEO
investors are quality Silicon Valley VCs - Bessemer and Khosla Ventures.
What I find particularly intriguing is that their two major venture
pretty.
I don't have anything profound to add, but I agree that their hardware is
possible multiple failures early in their launch program. Obviously,
One thing that will be interesting is how they're set up to deal with
Musk/SpaceX had 3 failures in a row with their Falcon 1.
already getting late in the year. They have a flight plan which includes
Their website says a first launch "...planned for 2015..." and it's
preliminary launches in Q3 and Q4 of 2016.
have deep pockets. I wish them the best. None of this is easy.
I certainly like their "spunk." This is a tough business when you don't
