To Open The Sky
THE UPSTART STARTUPS
Flash Gordon's spaceship speeding through the void
Copyright © ???? Edward Rowles
http://www.starships.com/
Analogies are risky; but the situation is somewhat analogous to the computer industry in 1975. You remember; at that time there were a few big companies that made mainframes (the so-called "big iron") and a handful of medium-sized companies producing minicomputers. Handheld calculators had appeared, at very high prices. That was the year Popular Electronics broke a cover story about the first personal computer. It was huge and heavy and costly and complicated and finicky — but it did the job. And it was, of course, merely the earliest trickle through the floodgates. They soon opened wide as a host of computer startups introduced new designs, and storefront outlets like the Digital Deli1 sprang up to introduce the public to them.
Those were brave days. A bunch of scruffy, jeans-clad idealists, with their visions of "a computer in every home" and "information wants to be free" went up against an establishment protecting its turf by claiming that microcomputers would never work (or if they would, they still made no business sense) — and the idealists won. Nothing less than a true revolution in the means of computation was under way. The advent of this disruptive technology gave us many benefits. One, tangential to the computer revolution but relevant to my topic, is Rick Cook's Hackers, a fictional evocation of a similar revolution in space transportation.
Today, a series of startup companies have been trying to bring us a real-life version of Hackers. Note that I said "series". The reason is that, technically, it's roughly ten times harder to build a reusable SSTO vehicle than to build a personal computer — in the sense that roughly ten times as many technical specialties are involved — and also because the SSTO's unit costs are orders of magnitude greater. There will be, therefore, no host of garage startups making personal rockets. But there may be a succession of larger companies that, over time, get closer and closer to success, and finally achieve it.
That is in fact what we have been seeing. The names of some of those companies are Pacific American Launch Systems, and Rotary Rocket, and Beal Aerospace, and McDonnell-Douglas (because they built the Delta Clipper). Those particular companies are gone, now; but others remain and still others are yet to arise. It won't be as easy as Rick Cook's story made it seem; the technical problems, and the difficulty of raising capital, will see to that. Yet I maintain that I will see this dream realized in my lifetime. When I do, I'll raise a toast to another victory by the upstarts.
Most folks probably won't see that victory coming. Very little coverage of space activities is provided today by the major media, and space entrepreneurs get even less from them. But most companies have their own Web pages, and a number of independent Web pages provide background information. (A few are linked at the end of this page.) Arguably the most complete source of information on such path-breaking activity is Space Future's Vehicle Designs Page. From data found there and elsewhere, I've compiled tables that summarize the current contenders and some noteworthy former entries.
My goal for the "Current Contenders" table is to provide funding data for every vehicle. However, this is not always easy to find, and if found it may not be accurate. There's also the "constant dollar"problem of adjusting the amounts for programs from different years so that valid comparisons can be made. Please bear with me, and consider these tables a work in progress.
Current Contenders
| NATION | GROUP | VEHICLE | DESCRIPTION | PAYLOAD | ESTIMATED COST | FUNDING SHORTFALL | STATUS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Information based on Space Future and Hobbyspace descriptions. | |||||||
| Australia | Kistler Aerospace, Inc. | Kistler K-series | Series of reusable VTOL rockets | Increasing size and value payloads | $500M? | $400M? | Active |
| Canada | Canadian Arrow (?), Ltd. | Canadian Arrow | Two-stage reusable suborbital rocket | Three people to 70 miles | $unknown | $unknown | Active |
| England | Bristol Spaceplanes, Ltd. | Ascender | Suborbital spaceplane | 2 crew, 2 passengers | $unknown | $unknown | Active |
| Spacebus | Two-stage HTOL | More than 6 passengers | $unknown | $unknown | Active | ||
| Spacecab | Two-stage HTOL | 6 passengers | $unknown | $unknown | Active | ||
| England | British Aerospace (Alan Bond?) |
HOTOL | Design for air-breathing reusable SSTO spaceplane | $? | 1984 | n/a | Unknown |
| England | Reaction Engines, Ltd. | Skylon | Unpiloted reusable HTOL SSTO | Twelve tonnes of cargo | $unknown | $unknown | Active |
| England | Starchaser Industries, Ltd. | Thunderbird | Suborbital reusable VTOL rocket | Three people to 100km | $unknown | $unknown | Active |
| Nova | Suborbital reusable VTOL rocket | One crew to 100km subscale prototype of Thunderbird |
$unknown | $unknown | Active | ||
| Japan | Japanese Rocket Society | Kankoh-maru | Reusable SSTO | 50 passengers to 200km orbit | $10,000 per passenger | $unknown | Active |
| USA | TGV Rockets, Inc. | MICHELLE-B | Suborbital sounding rocket | Scientific instruments | $50M | $unknown | Active |
| USA | Kelly Space & Technology, Inc. | Eclipse | Tow-launched HTOL | Passengers | $400M | $unknown | Active |
| USA | SpaceClipper International, Inc. | Space Clipper SC-1 | Suborbital reusable VTOL spaceplane | Two crew, up to 10 passengers to 140km | $unknown | $unknown | Active |
| Space Clipper SC-2 | Orbital reusable VTOL spaceplane | Two crew, up to 10 passengers (?) | $unknown | $unknown | Active | ||
| USA | XCOR Aerospace, Inc. | Xerus | Suborbital reusable HTOL spaceplane | Two persons to 100km microsats & science payloads |
$unknown | $unknown | Active |
| USA | Microcosm | Scorpius® SR-S | Suborbital rocket testbed | Up to 100 lbs. Payload to 130 N. mi. altitude | $unknown | $unknown | Active |
| USA | Microcosm | Scorpius® SR-XM-1 | Suborbital rocket testbed | Up to TBD lbs payload to TBD N. mi. altitude | $unknown | $unknown | Active |
| USA | Microcosm | Scorpius® SR-XM-2 | Suborbital rocket testbed | Up to TBD lbs payload to TBD N. mi. altitude | $unknown | $unknown | Active |
| USA | Microcosm | Sprite® | Orbital rocket testbed | 700 lbs. to 100 NMi Low Earth Orbit | $1.8 million by tenth production flight | $unknown | Planned |
| USA | Pioneer Rocketplane, Inc. | Black Horse Pathfinder | Orbital reusable HTOL spaceplane Uses in-flight refueling |
Two crew, satellite payloads | $300M | $unknown | Active |
| USA | Scaled Composites, Inc. | Proteus | First stage for reusable HTOL spaceplane | Up to three passengers (2000lb) to 60,000ft. | $unknown | $unknown | Active |
| SpaceShip1 | Suborbital spaceplane (X-Prize contender) | Pilot & 2 passengers to 100km | $unknown | $unknown | Active | ||
| USA? | Starcraft Boosters, Inc. | Star Booster | Reusable first stage VTOHL vehicle | ? | $unknown | $unknown | Active |
| USA | Space Access LLC | Spaceplane | TSTO spaceplane | ? | $5B | $unknown | Active |
| USA | The da Vinci Project Group | da Vinci | Suborbital reusable balloon-launched VTOL vehicle | Three people to 120km | $unknown | $unknown | Active |
| USA | Cosmopolis XXI Suborbital Corporation | Cosmopolis XXI | Suborbital RLV lifting body | Pilot & 2 passengers to 100km | $unknown | $unknown | Active |
| USA? | Star-Raker Associates | Star-Raker | SSTO HTOL vehicle | Up to 200,000lb | $100/lb | $unknown | Active |
| USA? | Cerulean Freight Forwarding Company | Kitten | Suborbital reusable vehicle | Pilot & 2 passengers to 235km | $500k | $unknown | Active |
| Calico | Short-stay orbital reusable vehicle | Pilot & 8 passengers (4,000lb) | $unknown | $unknown | Active | ||
| Angora | Orbital reusable vehicle | Pilot & 40 passengers (2-week orbit) | $unknown | $unknown | Active | ||
| USA | Vela Technology Development | Space Cruiser System | Suborbital reusable two-stage spaceplane | Passengers to ?km | $unknown | $unknown | Inactive |
| USA? | Lonestar Space Access (formerly Dynamica Research) |
Cosmos Mariner | SSTO spaceplane | Pilot & 4 passengers | $100M | $unknown | Active |
| USA? | ? | Pogo | Air-breathing first stage of TSTO or MSTO | Pegasus-size vehicle to 80,000 ft. | $unknown | $unknown | Active |
| USA? | ? | Spacecub | Suborbital rocket vehicle kit | Four-seater | $250k to $500k (less fuel) | $unknown | Active |
| USA? | Space Tour, Inc. | Space Van | Reusable TSTO vehicle | Three crew & 16 passengers | $unknown | $unknown | Active |
Take a minute and compare the costs in the above table (where development costs are given) with the budgets for the past projects listed below. Do you see a difference? There should be a markedly lower cost for the current crop. This difference shows up most clearly in the X-33 and X-15. Both were "X vehicles", remember. Yet comparing the budgets, we find that development plus 199 flights of the X-15 was $1.6 billion (in 2004 dollars) while the $1.3B X-33 never flew, was never even completed.
Projects of the Past
| NATION | GROUP | VEHICLE | DESCRIPTION | TOTAL BUDGET | PROJECT START | FIRST FLIGHT | OUTCOME |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Above information based on Space Future and Andrews Space and Technology vehicle descriptions. | |||||||
| 1 Budget quoted is for test article; full vehicle estimated to need $150 million. | |||||||
| 2 The test article rolled out in March 1999 and flew 3 times that year. | |||||||
| 3 This is the amount actually spent through cancellation. Total budget was about $5B. | |||||||
| 4 This original budget was overrun by 30%. NASA's request for $200M more was not funded, and the project was cancelled in 2001. | |||||||
| 5 Intended as alternative to Russian Soyuz for returning ISS crew. Cancelled 2001. | |||||||
| 6 The X-15 flew 199 times during the 1960s, reaching Mach 6.6 and over 100k feet. | |||||||
| USA | McDonnell-Douglas / DARPA | Delta Clipper | Prototype of reusable VTOL SSTO vehicle | $100 Million | 1985? | 1993 | Cancelled |
| USA | Advent Launch Services | CAC-1 | Sea-launched suborbital VTOHL rocket | $? | 19?? | n/a | Unknown |
| USA | Douglas Aircraft Company (Philip Bono) |
SASSTO | Piloted, reusable SSTO VTOL rocket | $? | 1960s | n/a | Unknown |
| Germany | Messerschmitt Boelko Blom (Dietrich Koelle) |
Beta | Design for a reusable SSTO VTOL rocket | $? | 1970s | n/a | Unknown |
| USA | Pacific American Launch Systems (Gary Hudson) |
Phoenix | Sea-launched suborbital VTOHL rocket | $? | 1980s | n/a | Unknown |
| USA | Rotary Rocket, Inc. (Gary Hudson) |
Roton | Fully reusable SSTO rocket | $30 Million 1 | 1980s | 1999 2 | Cancelled |
| USA | ? (Max Hunter) | SSX | Modified version of Phoenix | $? | 1980s | n/a | Unknown |
| Germany | MBB | Saenger | Design for 2-stage HTOL launch vehicle | $? | ? | n/a | Unknown |
| USA | NASA / Lockheed-Martin | X-33 | Unpiloted, reusable VTOHL rocket test vehicle | $1.3 Billion 3 | 1995 | n/a | Cancelled after tank failure |
| USA | Lockheed-Martin | Venture Star | Planned commercial SSTO follow-on to X-33 | $? | 1995 | n/a | Not funded |
| USA | NASA / Orbital Sciences | X-34 | Unpiloted, reusable HTOL rocket test vehicle | $100 million 4 | 1996? | n/a | Cancelled |
| USA | NASA / Boeing | X-37 | Unpiloted, reusable reentry & landing test vehicle | $? | 1996? | n/a | Unknown |
| USA | NASA | X-38 | Crew Return Vehicle (CRV) design 5 | $500 million | 1995 | n/a | Unknown |
| USA | USAF / Rockwell International | X-15 | Piloted, reusable suborbital rocket plane | $300M (1968?) | 1955 | 1960? 6 | Goals met |
- Mark Wade's Encyclopedia Astronautica
- Marcus Lindroos on space vehicles
- Space Future Database of Vehicles
- Clark S. Lindsey's Hobbyspace page
- General Astronautics Reference Section (captures on the Wayback Machine 2001-2003. This link is the latest of them.)
- Jim Kingdon's Space Markets Page
Quote without comment
"The breakthrough technology and expert management of Rotary Rocket Company are an exceptional combination," said Afsaneh Naimollah, managing director and global head of the technologies group of Barclays Capital. "It will quickly become the world leader in cost-effective space transportation."
