Very business-like, countdown proceeds to 0, and it rises like a scorched cat - a very rapid rise.
I'm sure Blaster Bates would have approved.
Europe's first Vega launcher blasted off in South America today in a successful qualification flight that signals the rocket is ready for use. Vega lifted off at 10am from a new launch pad at the European Space Agency's site in Kourou, French Guiana. The "flawless" flight means the Vega will join ESA's Ariane 5 and Soyuz …
...is an old NASA joke from the days when they did manned spaceflight and dumping your pee overboard would result in being surrounded by a cloud of twinkly frozen piddle crystals.
On a related theme, NASA received complaints from a group of Native Americans after it became clear that they were leaving behind bags of astronaut doings on the moon. The tribe in question attached mythological significance to the moon and really didn't want it cluttered up with moon-poo. I can't recall the outcome, but I also can't recall NASA sending up a crew with a couple of carrier bags and a pooper-scooper to tidy up, and I think I'd remember that.
Vega's final stage can stop/start multiple times to deliver different payloads to different orbits from same launch. Also, another player in the field means that there will be more opportunity for cube-sat launches i.e. cheap launches that can do good science for smaller outlay.
The price difference (compared to Soyuz) delivers more flexibility...
Also, the money spent on launches remains in European economies (admittedly, a political advantage).
Historically solid rides are dog rough. They are the reason the first vibration control systems were developed by the USAF to allow re-purposed *solid* ICBM stages to act as launch vehicles.
The fairing jettison was also quite high. IIRC the Shuttle SRB's separated at about the the top of the sensible atmosphere at around 70Km. Trying to keep the acceleration levels down perhaps?
As for fast takeoffs that *was* fast compared to normal *initial* acceleration off a launch pad (unless you've seen a Sprint ABM takeoff.
It's curious the commentator did not mention 2 things.
1) Not only is the first stage the first *ever* to use electromechanical actuators of this size it's also the first to be powered by *batteries* (although they are pretty hefty).
2)Despite the emphasis on the the "all solid" launcher the 4th stage is actually a storable liquid design, much like that on the OSC Pegasus when they are launching multiple payloads or need precision orbital injection.
It's still a pretty astonishing achievement, and mostly made by a subsidiary of Fiat.
"I'm old enough to remember Britian putting up a satellite with Black Arrow. I wonder how this compares?"
Well Vega 3 solids +liquid upper stage
Black Arrow 2 liquid + 1 solid upper stage. Note the solid stage was *critical to getting to orbit. The first more or less got the vehicle across Australia and over the ocean. 1st stage delta v < 2000ms^-1.
Black arrow physically *much* smaller (Could fit into a 60' ISO container)
Quite true. The UK is the *only* state to develop independent launch capability and *abandon* it*
This was partly as a result of a committee of the "Great & the Good" deciding there was no future in this rocket lark and those nice Americans could handle any launches HMG was going to need.
The committee's composition was 1 anatomist, 1 aeronautical engineer, 1 classicist, 1 nuclear physicist, 1 Industrial chemist, 1 ornithologist, 1 botanist, 1 medical researcher, 1 agronomist,1 electrical engineer, 1 physical chemist and 2 mathematicians.
So probably pretty good for getting to the bottom of the truth about AGW but a bit s**t for developing future UK space policy.
Someone's having a full blown queen out.
As it happens looking over the list of specialties today it did occur to me that this would be quite a good review group to look at the evidence on AGW. Chemistry, physics, maths,botany, birds and agriculture would seem to be a good mix of skills to access the validity of both the data and the models it's being fed into.
Which has *not* been subject to detailed scientific analysis in the UK, *despite* claims of the 3 investigations into the behavior of the CRU.
However I don't think I could have picked a *worse* panel to decide the fate of the UK independent space launch capability.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019