DailyDirt: Cheaper Rockets Taking Off

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

Thu, Mar 31st 2016 5:00pm — Michael Ho

Rocket science is difficult, but as technology gets better, it looks like more and more people are capable of launching pretty powerful rockets. Private companies are semi-routinely shooting satellites into space, and that capability could be useful for all kinds of applications ranging from scientific exploration... to intercontinental missiles. If hobbyist drones seem like a problem now, wait until more hobbyist rockets are launching into space.

New Zealand-based Rocket Lab has a partially 3D-printed rocket engine scheduled to launch later this year. Its Electron rocket powered by 9 Rutherford rocket engines can get small satellites into orbit -- for just $5 million (versus a $60 million SpaceX rocket or even more expensive competitors). [url]
NASA has successfully tested several components of a 3D-printed rocket engine, and it's well on the way to making an entire rocket engine from 3D printed parts. Nearly every rocket maker is using 3D printed parts -- SpaceX uses additive manufacturing for its Merlin rocket engines, and more traditional aerospace giants are no strangers to 3D printing. [url]
The Portland State Aerospace Society (PSAS) is a student organization that has already launched an amateur rocket 3 miles high. We've mentioned other student rocket projects before (USC reached an altitude of 4 miles a while ago), and the Civilian Space eXploration Team (CSXT) made it to 72 miles up in 2004. [url]

After you've finished checking out those links, take a look at our Daily Deals for cool gadgets and other awesome stuff.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: 3d printing, civilian space exploration team, csxt, portland state aerospace society, rockets, space, space exploration, usc
Companies: nasa, rocket lab, spacex, ula

7 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 31 Mar 2016 @ 5:34pm

Who will be the first to sell a cheap rocket to North Korea?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 31 Mar 2016 @ 5:59pm

Also, SpaceX's SuperDraco engine is completely 3D printed.

Just sayin'.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 31 Mar 2016 @ 7:35pm

Rocket science is hard?
Horse puckey. Rocket science is trivial. Here: F = d(mv)/dt
That's it.

Rocket engineering is pretty damned hard, not the science.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 1 Apr 2016 @ 7:20am

And NASA is now saying that it will cost billions to develop a domestic rocket engine to replace the Russian-built RD-180, which somehow became a critical mainstay of the US military and space program.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 1 Apr 2016 @ 9:41am

Re: Rocket science is hard?
Try adding the change in vehicle thrust and weight components to your calculations. Agreed, it is more math then science but your simple equation hardly addresses the real world parameters that need to be accounted for.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 1 Apr 2016 @ 10:16am

Re: Re: Rocket science is hard?
I think that's his point: there's a difference between science and engineering, and "rocket science" as commonly used is incorrect.

I love a good bit of pedantry. :)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 1 Apr 2016 @ 6:01pm

Re: Re: Re: Rocket science is hard?
Agreed.

Also, there is a bit of science required in order to predict the change in air density with altitude and its impact upon friction. Also required is an understanding of the corrosive affects of atomic oxygen and how to mitigate it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]