What is everyone's opinion on their Rutherford engine?

Easy to fine tuning the mixtures.
Minimal coking
Fast start up
Good throttle response

With battery density improving it makes electric pumps a better option. It would be a good option for an Orion type spacecraft as the battery can run internal systems for quite some time.

The Rutherford appears to be a very reliable engine, and in the next few months, they will begin flying recovered engines. Assuming that is successful, they will have a very cost effective and reliable platform for low-lift launch, which addresses the growing smallsat & cubesat markets quite well.

Next step for RocketLab is the Neutron rocket with Archimedes engine, which will address the satellite constellation market.

Why is Rocketlab moving away from electric with Archimedes?

Even 10 years ago the thought of a 40kw motor the size of a coke can was thought to be impossible. We now have 400kw motors and batteries that could easily power a rocket 10 times bigger than electron. Battery density is also improving. Granted Archimedes is 30 times the power

Electric pumps solves all of the development issues of turbopump design. They are fully closed cycle with no turbopump exhaust is wasted. I thought electric pumps would be the future of rockets.

Surely switching from RP1 to Methane doesn't cause that big of an increase in electrical power requirement.

If reusability is a design goal electric pumps will do hundreds of cycles.

Avatar2go wrote:

The TROPICS launch appears to be successful, pending download of the full deployment telemetry package.

Another successful mission (36 launches thus far) for RocketLab. NASA is also breathing a sigh of relief.

Goes to show how amazing RL is. It’s only them and SX that are doing private commercial launches, everything else is government run. Provided Neutron works it’ll be a game changer.

RJMAZ wrote:

Why is Rocketlab moving away from electric with Archimedes?

Even 10 years ago the thought of a 40kw motor the size of a coke can was thought to be impossible. We now have 400kw motors and batteries that could easily power a rocket 10 times bigger than electron. Battery density is also improving. Granted Archimedes is 30 times the power

Electric pumps solves all of the development issues of turbopump design. They are fully closed cycle with no turbopump exhaust is wasted. I thought electric pumps would be the future of rockets.

Surely switching from RP1 to Methane doesn't cause that big of an increase in electrical power requirement.

If reusability is a design goal electric pumps will do hundreds of cycles.

I suspect the reason is the same as for aircraft, the technology doesn't scale to the power density that is needed, when weight is a major consideration. Thus small aircraft can be made fully electric, but not large. Same for rockets, for the same reason.

Avatar2go wrote:

RJMAZ wrote:

Why is Rocketlab moving away from electric with Archimedes?

Even 10 years ago the thought of a 40kw motor the size of a coke can was thought to be impossible. We now have 400kw motors and batteries that could easily power a rocket 10 times bigger than electron. Battery density is also improving. Granted Archimedes is 30 times the power

Electric pumps solves all of the development issues of turbopump design. They are fully closed cycle with no turbopump exhaust is wasted. I thought electric pumps would be the future of rockets.

Surely switching from RP1 to Methane doesn't cause that big of an increase in electrical power requirement.

If reusability is a design goal electric pumps will do hundreds of cycles.

I suspect the reason is the same as for aircraft, the technology doesn't scale to the power density that is needed, when weight is a major consideration. Thus small aircraft can be made fully electric, but not large. Same for rockets, for the same reason.

That's basically exactly it. RocketLab have stated that between the electric motor AND the batteries, Electron is about as big as you can get where the physics still make it feasible. Beyond that size the mass of the batteries mean you massively eat into payload.

The battery hot swap in the second stage should already show how much of an impact the mass has.

RocketLab has the second launch of the TROPICS mission this evening, at midnight EDT. First launch was successful, a few weeks ago. This will make 4 of the 6 planned satellites in orbit. The first 2 were lost in a failed Astra launch.

https://twitter.com/RocketLab/status/16 ... 1HSTg&s=19

The RocketLab TROPICS mission was scrubbed due to weather, and moved to May 27th at 3:30 pm EDT.

The RocketLab TROPICS launch was moved up, due to favorable weather conditions, and went off without a hitch, deploying the last two TROPICS satellites.

RocketLab has revealed they are building the capacity to support an Electron launch cadence of 48 per year. But as of 2024, expect to only reach an annual cadence of 20. Still that is more than enough to drive the economics of reusability.

For Neutron, they are still too early in the development stage to be marketing launches. They don't want the pressure of a backlog until they are within a year or less of launch.

https://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/sta ... 9164684305

Avatar2go wrote:

RocketLab has revealed they are building the capacity to support an Electron launch cadence of 48 per year. But as of 2024, expect to only reach an annual cadence of 20. Still that is more than enough to drive the economics of reusability.

I understand manufacturing facility Rocket Lab bought from Virgin Orbit is across the street from Rocket Labs existing facility in Long Beach.

zanl188 wrote:

I understand manufacturing facility Rocket Lab bought from Virgin Orbit is across the street from Rocket Labs existing facility in Long Beach.

Yes, the Twitter thread mentions that they acquired that property and facilities for $16M, but it's been appraised at $100M. If Virgin Orbit had to go down, I'm glad RocketLab was the beneficiary. They will use it well.

Avatar2go wrote:

zanl188 wrote:

I understand manufacturing facility Rocket Lab bought from Virgin Orbit is across the street from Rocket Labs existing facility in Long Beach.

Yes, the Twitter thread mentions that they acquired that property and facilities for $16M, but it's been appraised at $100M. If Virgin Orbit had to go down, I'm glad RocketLab was the beneficiary. They will use it well.

Yes a great opportunity for Rocketlab. In the startup etc game sometimes it pays to be more established/financially secure so that as competitors fall away you can pick up bargains.

zanl188 wrote:

Avatar2go wrote:

RocketLab has revealed they are building the capacity to support an Electron launch cadence of 48 per year. But as of 2024, expect to only reach an annual cadence of 20. Still that is more than enough to drive the economics of reusability.

I understand manufacturing facility Rocket Lab bought from Virgin Orbit is across the street from Rocket Labs existing facility in Long Beach.

Looking at a map they are about 1.5km away from each other.

Kiwirob wrote:

Looking at a map they are about 1.5km away from each other.

I believe I heard "across the street" in a recent Scott Manley video - so take it for what it's worth.

Across the street by US standards where walking is considered an illness.

RocketLab is preparing to launch the next stage recovery mission. Also the first launch to reuse a previously flown Rutherford engine.

https://twitter.com/RocketLab/status/16 ... 00131?s=20

https://twitter.com/RocketLab/status/16 ... 40176?s=20