Frist test flight, which is expected to explode anyways.

But let’s hope, that we are heading towards a good European satellite delivery method.

Also, there are several other European companies building rockets. Might want to take a look at them, too.

Edit

The countdown has begun for the test flight of the Spectrum rocket from Bavarian start-up Isar Aerospace. If nothing else intervenes, it should take off within a time window of 12.30 to 15.30, according to the company. However, this is not yet certain, as the countdown before a rocket launch is often stopped or even aborted - possible reasons include safety concerns or the weather.

According to Isar Aerospace, the aim of the test flight is to gather as much data and as much experience as possible. The possibility of the rocket reaching orbit is largely ruled out. In the past, no company has ever managed to get its first rocket into orbit, a spokeswoman emphasized in advance. “The rocket may explode, that is even likely during the test flight,” she said. ”30 seconds would already be a great success.”

The next rockets are already in production

If the test flight goes well, things could continue relatively quickly. Rockets two and three are already in production, according to the spokeswoman. “How quickly they will be on the launchpad also depends on the results of the first test flight - and whether only software or hardware adjustments need to be made. In any case, our goal is to be back on the launch pad as quickly as possible.”

The Spectrum rocket is 28 meters long and has a diameter of 2 meters; depending on which orbit it is aiming for, the commercial load it can carry - known as payload in space jargon - is 700 to 1000 kilos. According to current plans, it will already be used by satellites on the second flight.

The launch of the test rocket from Norway will be a double premiere: not only the first flight for Isar Aerospace, but also the first launch of an orbital launch vehicle in continental Europe.

Up to 40 rockets per year

Isar Aerospace develops launchers for the transportation of satellites into orbit. Last year, even India launched more rockets than Europe. One reason for this is the many years of delays in the development of the Ariane 6 launcher.

Isar Aerospace’s vision for the future is to build up to 40 launch vehicles per year. The start-up has raised more than 400 million euros in capital to date. The Nato Innovation Fund, a venture capital fund supported by 24 Nato states, also participated in the latest financing round.

Translated with DeepL.com (free version)

    • Señor Mono@feddit.orgOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      Changed it as requested, but with translations being available in modern browsers this seems just to be a tedious chore with almost no use. Will keep me from posting articles in future.

      • federal reverse@feddit.orgM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        Thank you!

        As to your criticism: Not everyone uses a browser with translations, especially on mobile where you often can’t install add-ons either. And not everything survives machine translation. We recently had a Polish post with the term “anti-Musk alliance” in it. DeepL translated that into English as “anti-Muslim alliance”, while Firefox came up with “anti-muscle alliance”. Kind of a big difference, hence I think the rule still makes sense.

  • MaggiWuerze@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    Why not make it reusable though? If you go and design a rocket from scratch today, that seems a must to me. It doesn’t need to be a star ship competitor, but at least try to be on par with Falcons, New Shepherds etc…

    • llothar@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      5 days ago

      It will be first ever orbital launch from European soil, and first ever orbital launch for the company. I think non reusable is good enough for now.

      • MaggiWuerze@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 days ago

        Hm, so Ariane is actually hoping to tests their first reusable prototype this year, but given it’s Ariane, I’ll hold my expectations for now. Isars second rocket is supposed to be bigger, but not clearly stated as being reusable at this point… Guess we’ll see

    • anton@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 days ago

      Because the rocket equation is brutal.
      A rocket is almost entirely fuel some structure and a minuscule amount of payload. If you want to save fuel for for relanding you need to take less payload or accept a lower orbit.

      If we look at Falcon 9, the payload to geostationary transfer orbit^* goes from 8,300 kg when expended, to 5,500 kg when landing on a barge or 3,500 kg when landing on the launch site.

      * meaning the payload needs an additional stage to enter geostationary orbit

      • MaggiWuerze@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        I’m aware, still throwing away you rocket every time is neither financially nor ecologically sustainable. The fact that SpaceX has managed to lower the cost per kilo to orbit that much proves it

    • Señor Mono@feddit.orgOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      I guess there are advantages and disadvantages of re-usable rockets. This one might be easier and can be fast tracked to have solution after all. I stumbled over an article talking about SpaceX re-usability is a reason for economic problems - cannot remember where though.