First Flight of Isar Aerospace's Spectrum Rocket Lasted Just 40 Seconds (arstechnica.com) 24
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: The first flight of Isar Aerospace's Spectrum rocket didn't last long on Sunday. The booster's nine engines switched off as the rocket cartwheeled upside-down and fell a short distance from its Arctic launch pad in Norway, punctuating the abbreviated test flight with a spectacular fiery crash into the sea. If officials at Isar Aerospace were able to pick the outcome of their first test flight, it wouldn't be this. However, the result has precedent. The first launch of SpaceX's Falcon 1 rocket in 2006 ended in similar fashion. "Today, we know twice as much about our launch system as yesterday before launch," Daniel Metzler, Isar's co-founder and CEO, wrote on X early Monday. "Can't beat flight testing. Ploughing through lots of data now."
Isar Aerospace, based in Germany, is the first in a crop of new European rocket companies to attempt an orbital launch. If all went according to plan, Isar's Spectrum rocket would have arced to the north from Andoya Spaceport in Norway and reached a polar orbit. But officials knew there was only a low chance of reaching orbit on the first flight. For this reason, Isar did not fly any customer payloads on the Spectrum rocket, designed to deliver up to 2,200 pounds (1,000 kilograms) of payload mass to low-Earth orbit. [...] Isar declared the launch a success in its public statements, but was it? [...] Metzler, Isar's chief executive, was asked last year what he would consider a successful inaugural flight of Spectrum. "For me, the first flight will be a success if we don't blow up the launch site," he said at the Handelsblatt innovation conference. "That would probably be the thing that would set us back the most in terms of technology and time."
This tempering of expectations sounds remarkably similar to statements made by Elon Musk about SpaceX's first flight of the Starship rocket in 2023. By this measure, Isar officials can be content with Sunday's result. The company is modeling its test strategy on SpaceX's iterative development cycle, where engineers test early, make fixes, and fly again. This is in stark contrast to the way Europe has traditionally developed rockets. The alternative to Isar's approach could be to "spend 15 years researching, doing simulations, and then getting it right the first time," Metzler said. With the first launch of Spectrum, Isar has tested the rocket. Now, it's time to make fixes and fly again. That, Isar's leaders argue, will be the real measure of success. "We're super happy," Metzler said in a press call after Sunday's flight. "It's a time for people to be proud of, and for Europe, frankly, also to be proud of." You can watch a replay of the live launch webcast on YouTube.
Isar Aerospace, based in Germany, is the first in a crop of new European rocket companies to attempt an orbital launch. If all went according to plan, Isar's Spectrum rocket would have arced to the north from Andoya Spaceport in Norway and reached a polar orbit. But officials knew there was only a low chance of reaching orbit on the first flight. For this reason, Isar did not fly any customer payloads on the Spectrum rocket, designed to deliver up to 2,200 pounds (1,000 kilograms) of payload mass to low-Earth orbit. [...] Isar declared the launch a success in its public statements, but was it? [...] Metzler, Isar's chief executive, was asked last year what he would consider a successful inaugural flight of Spectrum. "For me, the first flight will be a success if we don't blow up the launch site," he said at the Handelsblatt innovation conference. "That would probably be the thing that would set us back the most in terms of technology and time."
This tempering of expectations sounds remarkably similar to statements made by Elon Musk about SpaceX's first flight of the Starship rocket in 2023. By this measure, Isar officials can be content with Sunday's result. The company is modeling its test strategy on SpaceX's iterative development cycle, where engineers test early, make fixes, and fly again. This is in stark contrast to the way Europe has traditionally developed rockets. The alternative to Isar's approach could be to "spend 15 years researching, doing simulations, and then getting it right the first time," Metzler said. With the first launch of Spectrum, Isar has tested the rocket. Now, it's time to make fixes and fly again. That, Isar's leaders argue, will be the real measure of success. "We're super happy," Metzler said in a press call after Sunday's flight. "It's a time for people to be proud of, and for Europe, frankly, also to be proud of." You can watch a replay of the live launch webcast on YouTube.
Try and try again. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's hard to predict. I'd say they're in good shape as long as the launches show steady improvement. There are lots of ways to blow up a rocket, and lots of them can only be found the hard way.
Re: (Score:2)
For example?
Re: (Score:3)
The classic example is pogo.
Pogo isn't a problem any more, because we know about it and know how to deal with it during the design phase so that it doesn't become a problem during the flight phase.
But when you design something new, you always run the risk of discovering some new failure mode that no one has ever found before. In addition to all of the other failure modes that are known, but not conclusively defeated yet. And all of the failure modes that have been defeated, but by humans who aren't perfec
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Space is hard, and wants to kill you.
Still a throwaway booster in 2025 (Score:3)
China, India, Japan and a dozen other countries have been launching these kinds of rockets for decades now.
Re: (Score:2)
A dozen other countries? For decades? Really? Care to name 'em?
Re:Still a throwaway booster in 2025 (Score:4, Informative)
According to Wikipedia [wikipedia.org], twelve countries had "operated" satellites in orbit by November, 1974, although as of 2022, only eleven countries [wikipedia.org] have had the capability to send objects into orbit with their own launch vehicles.
Re: (Score:2)
You could have gone with the short answer: "no".
While it is true that there seem to be 11 launch capable countries, now, that has not been the case for decades. And certainly not the "China, India, Japan and a dozen other..." that you claimed.
Rocket science continues to be as hard as rocket science.
AI: "how many rocket launch failures have there been in the past year"
In 2024, there were 8 orbital launch failures out of 259 attempts. This resulted in a failure rate of 3%, which is lower than the previous ye
Re: (Score:3)
Everyone has to start somewhere. The flight failed because the guidance system was wonky, so spending time and money developing a landing system at this stage would be completely pointless.
Roll maneuver (Score:2)
It looked to me like as soon as the rocket initiated it's roll maneuver things went sideways, so to speak. Probably a software bug to work out.
Re: (Score:3)
The first nation to reach space (Score:5, Funny)
As the first nation to build a rocket that passed the Karman line, we welcome the Germans back to space. Just keep the flight path well clear of London please.
This was anticipated (Score:3)
Here's what an Isar Aerospace spokesperson said way before launch (auto-translated)
According to Isar Aerospace, the goal of the test flight is to gather as much data and experience as possible. "The rocket is allowed to explode; that's even likely during the test flight," a spokeswoman said in advance. "Even 30 seconds would be a major success." It would be the first flight for the start-up company.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. No idea why this launch gets reported as a failure. It is not.
meh no big deal (Score:2)
(shrug) rockets blow up. They learn something, try again. Glad to hear that there's another dynamic entity in the launch field. The marketplace will only be better for it.
Good luck on the next launch guys!
Commentary and Armchair Sleuthing (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
That was a great analysis, very informative. The steering system seemed to over-correct as the rocket was rising, maybe it eventually hit a failsafe that shut it down. Or perhaps the launch crew realized what was going on and terminated it from the ground. Also I thought I saw some asymmetry in the exhaust plume at the end, maybe an engine malfunctioned.
This was expected (Score:2)
No idea why so many reports on this try to paint it as a failure...
cold? (Score:2)
Maybe it was too cold for the seals?
Sigh... (Score:2)
No, you chuckleheads, it was exactly what they expected. It was never going to work first go, that's why they don't set them off in downtown Trondheim.
And then they go and contradict themselves not two paragraphs later
> But officials knew there was only a low chance of reaching orbit on the first flight.
> "Can't beat flight testing"
>"Our first test flight met all our expecta