[AR] Re: relativity abandons small launch vehicle
- From: Henry Spencer <hspencer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: Arocket List <arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2023 14:28:59 -0400 (EDT)
On Mon, 17 Apr 2023, Uwe Klein wrote:
A corollary: if you think of the first vehicle as a pathfinder rather
than as the main operational moneymaker, it should be sized for easy
manufacturing and operation,
You learn about the target environment.
But scaling effects may turn design decisions upside down.
Yes, you don't necessarily get the main operational moneymaker by just
running the pathfinder's plans through the Enlarge setting on the
photocopier. However, the real plans will also differ significantly from
what you'd have drawn before building and operating the pathfinder. The
purpose of the pathfinder is not to flight-test the technical design of
the operational vehicle, in miniature; it's to give you a better idea of
what that design should look like.
And the technical design of the vehicle is not the only issue. Building a
team that can do a good job on the operational vehicle is part of it too.
So is acquiring credibility as a launch supplier, and figuring out how to
navigate the regulatory process. (Falcon 1 was financially a complete
flop for SpaceX, but it opened doors that were crucial to Falcon 9's
success.) Thinking of success in the launch business as purely a
technical problem is a dangerous delusion.
Henry
Other related posts:
