credit: Starchaser Industries / caption: this graphic shows the rocket's capsule and LES
credit: Starchaser Industries / caption: the rocket's one-man capsule
Below are Starchaser Industries' founder Steve Bennett's answers to my questions
I will post the pictures of the actual rocket on 1 July
What propulsion system will it use?
This first launch will be an unmanned "little Joe" type test to validate our capsule Launch Escape System (LES) in flight. The altitude will therefore be fairly low - circa 13,000ft (3,900m) - depending on what the [UK Civil Aaviation Authority] will allow. Nominally then, we'll launch the booster on solid motors (which will produce an average thrust equivalent to about 5,000kg) before pulling the capsule clear using the capsule mounted LES, which will be powered by a 1,000kg thrust High Test Peroxide / HTPB hybrid rocket motor. The final altitude of the capsule will be about 18,000ft
The project also has an educational component in that it will visit 100 UK schools prior to launch as part of our "Starchaser Rocket Schools Fellowship" outreach programme to promote science and engineering in the classroom. Fellowship School parties will also be invited to view the launch and we will run a competition in order to choose one pupil to "press the red button" to launch the rocket.
Where do you intend to launch it from?
We have several launch sites under consideration.
How do you expect get through all the regulatory hurdles, all within 15 months?
We don't see this as a problem since we won't be going that high. Subsequent, higher altitude flights of course may present more of an issue but we are working on that!
And what happened to Rocketcity in New Mexico
On hold, though we still have the land and buildings out there.
And the solid rocket propulsion you embarked on?
We have been developing liquid and hybrid systems (making good progress with both) but we have not been working on solid motors
Great to see Star Chaser getting ready to take off! I have followed them with interest for years.
One minor quibble though. Mr Bennett gives thrust values in kg. Thrust (and any other kind of force) in the metric system is typically measured in Newtons. Kilograms are technically a measure of mass and only relate proportiately to force because of F=ma. Besides, I would think British rocketeers would want to use a unit named after Sir Isaac!
The conversion of kilograms to Kilo-Newtons for thrust is to mutiply the kilogram figure by 0.00445 so 1,000kg equals 4.45kN.
Yes, on Earth at sea level where the gravitational acceleration is 9.80 meters per second (remember F=ma) something massing 1000kg would indeed weigh (that is be pulled by the force of gravity) 0.00445 times 1000 equals 4.45 kilo-newtons. On the moon where the acceleration due to gravity is approximately one sixth that of Earth, the object would still mass 1000 kg but would weigh about one sixth of the above stated kilo-newtons due to the lesser acceleration.
Sorry, I meant to say "meters per second squared" in the previous post rather than just "meters per second"
Again my apologies. In my haste I did not notice that the conversion factor that Mr. Coppinger cited was incorrect. He gave the conversion factor of pounds to kilo-newtons instead of kg to kilonewtons. 1000 pounds equate to 1000 times 0.00445 = 4.45 kilo-newtons. The correct number of kilo-newtons at sea level for a mass of 1000 kg using the F=ma formula is 9.8 kilo-newtons. Again the weight on the moon would be one sixth of the kilo-newtons measured on the Earth’s surface.
Well spotted Rick!
Of course I was just testing you all...