Peter Beck just shared an update on the company’s progress with Archimedes. The tweet provides a glimpse into the intricate and methodical process that precedes a full stage hot fire. This milestone underscores Rocket Lab’s commitment to precision engineering and the challenges inherent in developing reliable rocket propulsion systems.

Current Phase: Pre Burner Ignition and Tuning

As Beck’s tweet reveals, Rocket Lab has successfully completed a pre burner ignition and run. This phase involves the initial ignition of the engine’s pre burner, a critical component responsible for driving the turbopumps that feed propellants into the main combustion chamber. The successful ignition indicates that the pre burner is functioning correctly, a foundational step in the overall engine testing sequence.

The next phase focuses on tuning the propellant timings. This process, expected to take a week or more, involves adjusting the precise moments when propellants are introduced and ignited within the engine. These adjustments are crucial for ensuring that the engine operates efficiently and safely. The sensitivity of these timings to start-up transients and other variables necessitates meticulous attention to detail and extensive testing.

Sensitivity to Start-Up Transients

Beck emphasizes the engine’s sensitivity to start-up transients—rapid changes in conditions that occur when the engine starts. These transients can significantly impact the performance and stability of the engine. Understanding and mitigating their effects is essential for achieving a smooth and reliable engine start-up.

Characterizing these transients involves detailed measurements and analysis of various parameters, including pressure, temperature, and flow rates. Engineers use this data to refine the engine’s design and control systems, ensuring that it can handle the dynamic conditions of start-up and operation.

The Path to a Full Stage Run

The ultimate goal of this testing phase is to conduct a full stage run, where the main valves are opened, and the engine operates at its full capacity. This stage is critical for verifying the engine’s performance under real-world conditions and ensuring that it meets all design specifications.

Achieving this milestone requires a comprehensive understanding of the engine’s behavior across a range of operating points. This includes not only start-up transients but also steady-state operation and response to various control inputs. The characterization process, therefore, involves extensive data collection and iterative testing to fine-tune the engine’s performance.

The Complexity of Rocket Engine Development

Rocket engine development is a complex and iterative process that requires a deep understanding of fluid dynamics, thermodynamics, and materials science. Each component of the engine must be carefully designed and tested to ensure that it can withstand the extreme conditions of rocket propulsion.

Rocket Lab’s approach, as evidenced by Beck’s update, highlights the importance of systematic testing and refinement. By focusing on detailed characterization and tuning, the team ensures that each phase of development builds on a solid foundation of validated performance.

Rocket Lab’s recent progress in pre burner ignition and tuning marks a significant step towards achieving a full stage run. The detailed and methodical approach to engine development underscores the complexities involved and the importance of precision in rocket propulsion systems. As the team continues to refine their engine, they move closer to realizing their goal of reliable and efficient Neutron launch capabilities.

This tweet from Peter Beck indicates that Rocket Lab has successfully completed ignition system tests as they close in on a full hot fire of Archimedes. This is an important step in Archimedes' development process, as the ignition system is a critical component that must function reliably to ensure a successful engine test.

Based on the information provided, it seems the team is making steady progress towards their goal of a hot fire test. A recent tweet by Jeff Foust suggests that it could occur in the next ten days or so. The successful ignition system tests are a positive sign, as they demonstrate the team’s ability to integrate and validate key subsystems of the rocket engine.

The fact that the last two testing images shared by the team were taken at night suggests the team has been working around the clock to advance their progress. This level of dedication and commitment is crucial in the fast-paced world of rocket development, where every minute counts towards achieving key milestones.

I asked both Claude 3.5 and ChatGPT to weigh in on this and this is what they had to say:

Claude 3.5

The “spin primes” phase is an important step in rocket engine testing, occurring before full hot fire tests. It’s part of the preparatory stages leading up to a complete engine firing. Here’s a brief overview:

1. Purpose: Spin primes test the turbopumps that deliver propellants to the combustion chamber. The pumps are spun up without igniting the engine.

2. Process: Propellants flow through the system, but at lower pressures and temperatures than a full hot fire. This checks for proper operation of valves, seals, and pumps.

3. Position in testing sequence:

   • After component and subsystem tests
   • After cold flow tests (which use inert fluids)
   • Before ignition tests or short-duration firings
   • Well before full-duration hot fire tests

4. Proximity to hot fire: Spin primes are typically conducted days or weeks before the first hot fire test, depending on the testing schedule and results.

Spin primes are crucial for verifying system readiness and identifying potential issues before progressing to more demanding and risky hot fire tests. They help ensure the propellant delivery system functions correctly under more realistic conditions.

ChatGPT 4.o

The “spin primes” phase is a critical step in the testing process of rocket engines. This phase involves spinning the engine’s turbo pumps to ensure they are functioning correctly and can achieve the necessary speed and pressure to deliver fuel and oxidizer to the combustion chamber. Here’s a breakdown of its place in the overall testing process and its proximity to the hot fire test:

1. Component Testing: Individual components of the engine, such as the turbo pumps, injectors, and combustion chambers, are tested to ensure they work correctly on their own.

2. Assembly and Integration: The tested components are assembled into a complete engine. Integration checks are conducted to ensure everything fits and works together as expected.

3. Cryogenic Testing: The engine is tested with cryogenic fluids to check for leaks, proper flow rates, and the correct operation of components at extremely low temperatures.

4. Spin Primes: The turbo pumps are spun up to operational speeds without igniting the engine. This test ensures that the pumps can reach the required speed, generate the necessary pressure, and operate smoothly. It also checks for any anomalies that might occur during pump operation.

5. Wet Dress Rehearsal: The engine is loaded with fuel and oxidizer, and the systems are put through a full operational cycle without actually igniting the engine. This step ensures that all systems are ready for a hot fire test.

6. Hot Fire Test: The engine is ignited and run at full operational conditions. This is the critical test that demonstrates the engine’s performance and reliability under actual operating conditions.

Proximity to Hot Fire

The spin primes phase is one of the final steps before the hot fire test. It is usually conducted shortly before the wet dress rehearsal and the hot fire test. The successful completion of spin primes indicates that the engine’s turbo pumps are functioning correctly and the system is close to being ready for a hot fire test. Typically, only a few tests remain after spin primes, making it a significant milestone in the overall testing process.

In summary, spin primes are crucial for validating the turbo pumps' functionality and are one of the last steps before the hot fire test, indicating that the engine is nearly ready for a full operational test.

Developing a rocket engine that’s ready for large-scale production is significantly more demanding than creating and firing a test article. While both processes are crucial in rocket development, the leap from prototype to production introduces a host of new challenges. Let’s explore why:

Manufacturability and Scalability

Test articles are often built using specialized, sometimes even:

• Hand-crafted components: These prototypes may utilize exotic materials, custom-machined parts, or even 3D-printed elements to rapidly iterate on designs.
• Focus on functionality: The focus is on functionality and proof of concept, rather than repeatability or cost-effectiveness.

In contrast, production engines must be designed with mass manufacturing in mind. This fundamental shift introduces several complex challenges:

Optimizing Designs for Automated Production

• Redesigning components to be compatible with advanced manufacturing processes like additive manufacturing (metal 3D printing), electron beam welding, or precision CNC machining.
• Implementing Design for Additive Manufacturing (DfAM) principles to leverage the capabilities of 3D printing for complex geometries.
• Developing standardized interfaces and self-aligning features to facilitate automated assembly.
• Utilizing topology optimization and generative design to create lighter, more efficient components suitable for mass production.

Ensuring Consistency Across Large Numbers of Parts

• Implementing strict tolerance controls and advanced metrology techniques, including in-situ monitoring during additive manufacturing processes.
• Developing comprehensive quality control processes, including non-destructive testing methods like CT scanning and ultrasonic inspection.
• Creating detailed manufacturing specifications and procedures for each component, accounting for the nuances of advanced manufacturing techniques.
• Investing in precision post-processing equipment for additively manufactured parts to achieve required surface finishes and tolerances.

Developing Robust Supply Chains for Materials and Components

• Identifying and qualifying suppliers capable of providing aerospace-grade materials for advanced manufacturing processes.
• Negotiating long-term contracts to ensure stable pricing and availability of specialized powders for metal 3D printing.
• Implementing digital inventory systems to manage both physical and digital assets (3D models for on-demand printing).
• Establishing rigorous supplier quality assurance programs, including certification for additive manufacturing processes.
• Developing contingency plans for supply chain disruptions, potentially including in-house manufacturing capabilities for critical components.

This transition from specialized, low-volume production to mass manufacturing represents a significant engineering and logistical challenge. It requires not only a redesign of the engine itself but also the development of an entire ecosystem of cutting-edge processes, advanced tools, and specialized partnerships to support large-scale production while maintaining the high standards of quality and reliability demanded by the aerospace industry.

Reliability and Repeatability

A test firing can be considered successful even with minor issues. Production engines, however, must perform consistently over multiple flights. This demands:

• Extensive testing to identify and eliminate failure modes
• Development of quality control processes
• Rigorous documentation and traceability

Cost Considerations

While cost is less of a concern for prototypes, production engines must be economically viable. This involves:

• Balancing performance with manufacturing costs
• Optimizing designs for ease of assembly and maintenance
• Considering the entire lifecycle cost, including operations and potential reuse

Regulatory Compliance

Test articles may operate under special exemptions, but production engines must meet stringent safety and environmental regulations. This requires:

• Extensive documentation and certification processes
• Compliance with industry standards and government regulations
• Development of safety protocols for manufacturing, transport, and operation

Long-Term Performance and Maintenance

Unlike test articles, production engines must be designed for longevity and ease of maintenance. This includes:

• Developing comprehensive maintenance schedules
• Ensuring accessibility of components for inspection and replacement
• Creating detailed technical documentation for operators and maintenance crews

Integration Challenges

Production engines must seamlessly integrate with other rocket systems and ground support equipment. This necessitates:

• Extensive interface testing and verification
• Collaboration with other subsystem teams
• Development of standardized procedures for integration and launch operations

Environmental Tolerance

While test articles may operate under controlled conditions, production engines must function reliably in a variety of environments. This requires:

• Extensive environmental testing (temperature, vibration, etc.)
• Development of robust thermal management systems
• Ensuring compatibility with various propellants and operating conditions

Continuous Improvement

Unlike a test article, which may be a one-off design, production engines are expected to evolve and improve over time. This involves:

• Establishing feedback loops from manufacturing and operations
• Implementing design changes without compromising reliability
• Managing version control and upgrade paths

In conclusion, while building and firing a test article is an impressive feat in itself, transitioning to a production-ready rocket engine introduces a new level of complexity. It requires not just engineering expertise, but also a deep understanding of manufacturing processes, regulatory environments, and long-term operational considerations. This challenging process is what separates experimental rockets from those capable of reliable, repeated launches – a crucial step in advancing space exploration and commercialization.

In the dynamic world of aerospace, strategic pivots are often necessary to align with market demands and technological advancements. Rocket Lab’s recent decision to deprioritize the reusability of its Electron rockets in favor of accelerating the development of the Neutron medium rocket is a prime example of such a strategic shift. As Rocket Lab CEO Peter Beck candidly noted in a recent interview with Payload, “The most important thing is to not interrupt the production team with new things and just keep the production rate of Electron where it needs to be to support the manifest best this year. Electron reuse is not that important to the business on a margin standpoint, or at this point, even from a technology standpoint. The reusability team and the recovery team are 100% directed and focused on other things, mainly Neutron, of course”.

Focusing on Neutron: The Rationale

Market Demand and Profit Margins: Electron rockets, while successful, primarily serve the small satellite launch market. This market, though vital, offers limited profit margins compared to the burgeoning demand for medium-lift capabilities. Neutron, designed to cater to the medium-lift market, is set to unlock significant revenue streams. By accelerating Neutron’s development, Rocket Lab is positioning itself to capture a more substantial share of this lucrative market, which is essential for long-term growth and sustainability.

Technological Advancements: The focus on Electron reusability, though innovative, does not present immediate technological or financial advantages. As stated, reusability in the Electron program is not critical from a margin or technology standpoint. Instead, resources and efforts are better invested in perfecting the Neutron rocket, which promises more considerable advancements and benefits for the company’s portfolio.

Team Focus and Efficiency: Rocket Lab’s reusability and recovery teams are now dedicated entirely to the Neutron project. This focused approach ensures that the company’s top talent and resources are utilized efficiently, driving faster and more effective development cycles. The shift in focus means less interruption to the Electron production team, allowing them to maintain optimal production rates and support existing launch manifests without additional strain.

The Bigger Picture

Rocket Lab’s strategy underscores the importance of adaptability in the aerospace sector. By prioritizing the Neutron rocket, Rocket Lab is not only responding to market needs but also paving the way for future technological advancements and business growth. This decision is a testament to Rocket Lab’s forward-thinking approach and its commitment to staying ahead in a competitive industry.

Despite this shift in focus, it’s important to acknowledge the significant progress Rocket Lab has already made toward Electron reusability. The strides they have taken in this area ensure that when the time comes to revisit Electron reusability post-Neutron, it should be a relatively straightforward process. The foundation laid so far will allow Rocket Lab to efficiently integrate reusability features into the Electron program without substantial delays or resource reallocation.

In conclusion, Rocket Lab’s move to prioritize Neutron over Electron reusability makes perfect sense. It aligns with market opportunities, leverages technological advancements, and ensures efficient use of resources. As the space industry continues to evolve, Rocket Lab’s strategic pivot positions it well for continued success and innovation, with the flexibility to return to and capitalize on Electron reusability in the future.

I asked Claude Opus to explain why Rocket Lab’s choice of carbon composite construction for their Neutron rocket makes sense for their specific application. SpaceX has famously chosen stainless steel for their Starship rocket, and many people assume that the use cases for the material and vehicles are the same. However, the vehicles and their flight profiles are very different. The links were added by me.

Rocket Lab’s decision to use carbon composites for their Neutron rocket is a testament to their deep expertise in this cutting-edge material and their understanding of its unique advantages for their specific design and mission requirements.

One of the key reasons Rocket Lab can leverage carbon composites for the Neutron rocket is the fact that its first stage is not subjected to the same extreme heating and forces as SpaceX’s Starship. The Starship is designed for deep space missions and must withstand the intense heat and pressures of atmospheric re-entry from orbital velocities. In contrast, the Neutron rocket’s first stage is designed for a more conventional launch and recovery profile, similar to SpaceX’s Falcon 9.

This means that the Neutron’s first stage will not experience the same level of thermal stress during its descent and landing. As a result, carbon composites, which offer exceptional strength-to-weight ratio and durability, are more than capable of handling the forces and temperatures the Neutron will encounter.

Moreover, Rocket Lab brings a wealth of experience and expertise in carbon composite manufacturing to the table. The company has been using carbon composites in their Electron rocket since its inception, and they have developed proprietary techniques for producing lightweight and robust components.

Rocket Lab’s proficiency in carbon composites extends beyond just the manufacturing process. They have also invested heavily in research and development to optimize the design and performance of their composite structures. This includes advanced simulation and testing to ensure that the Neutron’s components can withstand the rigors of launch and recovery.

By leveraging their unique expertise in carbon composites, Rocket Lab can create a highly optimized and efficient first stage for the Neutron rocket. The lightweight nature of carbon composites allows for significant weight savings compared to traditional materials, which translates to increased payload capacity and improved launch economics.

Furthermore, Rocket Lab’s experience with carbon composites enables them to design and manufacture the Neutron’s first stage with reusability in mind. The company has already demonstrated their ability to recover and refurbish the Electron rocket’s composite components, and they plan to apply this knowledge to the Neutron. The inherent durability and resistance to fatigue of carbon composites make them ideal for reusable rocket parts, as they can maintain their structural integrity over multiple launches.

In summary, Rocket Lab’s choice of carbon composites for the Neutron rocket is a strategic decision based on their deep expertise in this material and the specific design and mission requirements of the Neutron. By leveraging the unique properties of carbon composites and their proven track record in manufacturing and reusability, Rocket Lab is well-positioned to create a highly capable and efficient launch vehicle that will drive innovation in the commercial space industry.

Rocket Lab CEO Peter Beck and CFO Adam Spice continue the post-earnings release podcast rounds with an appearance on Dave G Investing. Some key takeaways from both:

Peter Beck

• Building a rocket is a challenging process, with much of the work going into infrastructure, factories, and test facilities, not just the rocket itself.
• Design for Neutron prioritizes affordability and reusability, with tradeoffs made to optimize performance and cost.
• Block upgrades for Neutron will likely follow a similar path to Electron, focusing on incremental improvements rather than major redesigns.
• Rocket Lab’s composite structures are a core strength, and the company has organized a new business unit to leverage this capability.
• The space industry is at an inflection point, with vertically integrated companies like SpaceX and Rocket Lab positioned to become the dominant players in the future while existing primes are stepping back.
• Rocket Lab is producing more than 2,000 reaction wheels this year.
• Beck on the minimal impact that an Electron customer delay has on revenue: “Just so people understand that from a financial standpoint we collect 90% of all of the the launch contract prior to ignition so there’s generally only 10% of the contract left when we ignite the rocket and as the rocket is being built you know we’re collecting against milestones along the way so there’s never any like rocket sitting there that that owes us a heap of money.”

Adam Spice

• Neutron’s margin profile is expected to improve more quickly than Electron’s due to its reusability being designed from the start.
• The investment in Neutron’s manufacturing facilities, such as the composite facility in Maryland, can benefit other parts of the business.
• The Space Systems side of the business is less capital-intensive than the rocket side, and Rocket Lab has invested in its manufacturing footprint and systems to enable scalability.
• Government business, particularly opportunities like the Space Development Agency (SDA) platform, represents a significant growth opportunity for the company.
• Sinclair’s reaction wheel production has scaled from 150 a year to thousands since being acquired by Rocket Lab, creating significant opportunities for increased margin.

Both Beck and Spice emphasized Rocket Lab’s long-term vision of becoming an end-to-end space company, with vertical integration and the ability to provide complete space-based solutions to customers. They additionally highlighted the company’s focus on execution, delivery, and transparency as key differentiators in the evolving space industry.

In a recent appearance on the Vince is Bullish podcast, Rocket Lab CEO Peter Beck discussed the company’s Q1 earnings and provided insights into its future plans and the space industry as a whole. Here are the key takeaways from the interview:

• Launch manifest flexibility: Beck emphasized that launch delays and rescheduling are common in the industry and that Rocket Lab’s diversified business helps mitigate the financial impact of such changes.
• Neutron rocket contracts: Rocket Lab plans to sign Neutron launch contracts once the rocket is close to its first flight, ensuring they can meet customer demands and secure the best pricing.
• Neutron’s target customers: The rocket is designed to serve a wide range of customers, including mega-constellation operators, government agencies, and other commercial entities.
• “I fully predict that 50% of Neutron launches will be other people’s and 50% of Neutron launches will be ourselves.”
• Vertical integration and acquisitions: Rocket Lab pursues vertical integration when the supply chain is too slow or expensive. Acquisitions are made to secure strategically important capabilities or to create synergies with existing business lines.
• Competing with SpaceX: Beck believes that the space industry will be dominated by companies with their own launch capabilities, like SpaceX and Rocket Lab. He sees Neutron as a medium-class launcher complementing Electron, serving different market segments than Starship.
• Future vision: Rocket Lab aims to become an end-to-end space company, providing not just launch services and satellite manufacturing but also complete space-based solutions and services to customers.

Beck’s podcast appearance highlights Rocket Lab’s ambitious long-term vision and strategic positioning within the rapidly evolving space industry. Through vertical integration, strategic acquisitions, and the development of the Neutron rocket, the company is actively working towards becoming an end-to-end space solutions provider. Beck’s insights reveal his unwavering commitment to playing a pivotal role in shaping the future of spaceflight, as he lays the groundwork to capitalize on the limitless opportunities that lie ahead in the space sector and positions Rocket Lab to be a multi-generational space company.

Rocket Lab has completed the first full assembly of its Archimedes engine, a 3D printed, reusable rocket engine designed for the company’s Neutron medium lift launch vehicle. Here are some key facts about the Archimedes engine:

• Powered by liquid oxygen and methane, using an oxidizer rich staged combustion cycle
• Capable of producing 165,000 lbf (733 kilonewtons) per engine, with a combined total of 1,450,000 lbf on Neutron’s first stage (nine engines)
• Designed for maximum reusability, with a minimum target of up to 20 launches per engine
• 3D printed critical parts include turbo pump housings, pre-burner and main chamber components, valve housings, and engine structural components
• Intensive test campaign has begun at NASA’s Stennis Space Center in Mississippi
• Production of subsequent engines is ongoing in parallel with the test campaign
• Full-rate production will take place at Rocket Lab’s Engine Development Complex in Long Beach, California

The Archimedes engine test and development campaign is a key driver for Neutron’s first launch, which is now expected to occur no earlier than mid-2025. Rocket Lab has also completed carbon composite flight structures for Neutron’s fairing panels, Stage 1 and Stage 2 tanks, and the reusable Stage 1 structure. Infrastructure development also continues at Neutron’s dedicated launch site at Wallops Island, Virginia.

One of the reasons I aggregate the Neutron slides in posts like this one is that it helps quickly assess the scale and pace of development. Here’s a great example showing the state of the Archimedes engine in the late February investor update and then again today. That is a massive difference in just over two months.

February 27, 2024

And May 6, 2024

Rocket Lab has posted photos of Archimedes on the test stand at Stennis. I’ve highlighted the location (in green) on this Google earth view.

2024 is going to be an extremely busy year as Rocket Lab pushes to get Neutron on the pad by December. I may not be able to capture every update, but I will at least pull all the official slides and key tweets together in one place. You can also track other Neutron updates on the blog here. For the updates from 2021 through 2023 see this post.

July 25, 2024 | Tweet by Rocket Lab

July 13, 2024 | Tweet by Peter Beck

July 3, 2024 | Tweet by Peter Beck

July 3, 2024 | Tweet by Peter Beck

June 11, 2024 | Tweet by Rocket Lab

May 17, 2024 | Tweet by Rocket Lab

May 7, 2024 | Tweets by Rocket Lab

May 6, 2024 | Q1 2024 Investor Update

May 6, 2024 | Tweet by Rocket Lab

April 22, 2024 | Tweets by Rocket Lab

March 18, 2024 | Tweets by Rocket Lab

February 27, 2024 | Q4 & Full Year 2023 Investor Update

Rocket Lab updated the project milestones on their Neutron page to move the first Archimedes engine hot fire from the last milestone of 2023 to the first slot in 2024. While this is a bit of a slip it seems to be a minor one and not real cause for concern at the moment. Rocket development projects without timeline adjustments just aren’t a thing so adjustments should be expected along the way. Rocket Lab is still very well positioned to make the required progress in the year ahead as you can see from my roundup of 2023 development updates. Notably, they did not push launch into 2025 while making their edits. Do I think the first Neutron launch is likely to slip to 2025? Yes, but I think most analysts assumed that would be the case when Rocket Lab committed to their admittedly aggressive timeline. One milestone slip does not necessarily doom a timeline, however, and Rocket Lab might still pull it off. I expect clear guidance from them on that in the new year.

I’ve updated my earlier post on the milestones to reflect this update.

Rocket Lab has a very cool slider on their Neutron site that illustrates the key milestones in Neutron’s development. I’ve extracted the text from it for easier reading but do check it out.

2023

Stage 2 Build COMPLETE: First full-scale carbon composite tank built using advanced manufacturing methods

Structural and Cryogenic Testing Neutron’s carbon composite second stage to complete a barrage of structural tests in preparation for flight.

Flight Mechanisms Test Program Testing of critical flight mechanisms including separation systems, fairing actuation, control surfaces and actuators.

Archimedes Engine Build First Archimedes development engine completed.

Hardware-in-the-Loop Flight to Orbit Testing of all avionics and communications devices with critical onboard software and GNC algorithms.

2024

First Archimedes Engine Hot Fire Archimedes to breathe fire at Rocket Lab’s Propulsion Test Complex within NASA Stennis Space Center.

Stage 1 Build Full-scale carbon composite stage 1 tank built using advanced manufacturing methods.

Stage 2 Static Fire Hot fire exercising the Archimedes engine and all second stage systems. Testing like we would fly.

Stage 1 Static Fire Hot fire exercising the cluster of 9 x Archimedes engine and all first stage systems. Testing like we would fly.

Launch Complex 3 Complete Neutron’s launch site at the Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport within NASA’s Wallops Flight Facility in Virginia complete.

Final Integration Full flight vehicle complete and ready for flight.

Wet Dress Rehearsal Final systems checks before first launch.

LAUNCH! Neutron will take to the skies, ushering in a new era of U.S. space access.

Neutron stage 2 tank testing is underway. We should see a frosty tank soon!

Rocket Lab presented at the Bank of America Virtual SMID Conference yesterday. You can watch the recording here. Some quick notes:

• Rocket Lab is, and can continue to be, selective in their customer choice - choosing to work very strategically to choose high margin work that benefits all parties.
• Defense/Government segment of the business helps insulate the company in more constrained environments.
• They continue to make progress on the margin front for both launch and space systems. They are ahead of expected progress on the space systems side of the business.
• Pent up commercial demand and increasing government budgets are driving significant opportunity on the space systems front.
• Highlights strategic importance of relationships with Varda, Earth Intelligence, and direct to mobile customers in driving the scale of Rocket Lab’s business and shareholder value.
• Importance of vertical integration: Can deliver value to the customer across space systems and launch fronts. Minimizes risk, complexity, and cost for the customer.
• Neutron development costs will ramp (as expected) through 2024 with an expected first launch still planned for Q4.
• No planned short term M&A. Company has significant assets with current portfolio.
• Virgin Orbit acquisition gives the company the extra footprint it needed to enable the kinds of scale they want to achieve. Company can evolve into a “serialized producer” of components or spacecraft.
• On target for 15 Electron launches in 2023 and 20 in 2024 with average sale price hitting the $7.5M target average.
• HASTE demand is expected to scale on both the civil and defense front. Low single digit HASTE launches are planned for 2023 and 2024 but after that customers might need on the order of “tens of launches” to operationalize a product.
• Counter-hypersonic system development is expected to become a significant market, possible the largest market, in the next couple of years.
• Recovery programs are on track and expected to provide significant margin support in the future.
• Initial development of spacecraft for customers like Varda and MDA could be leveraged to develop platforms that could be serialized for mass production later.
• Key milestones for Neutron in 2023 continue to be “frosty tanks” and “hot fire” as stage 2 cryogenic starts and Archimedes testing ramps up.
• Current small launch competition is limited. The only real operational competition is Northrop Grumman’s Minotaur which is significantly more expensive at ~$30-40M per launch compared to Electron’s $7.5M.
• The most significant medium launch competitor is the SpaceX Falcon 9.
• Target 20x reuse for Neutron (vs ~10 for Falcon 9). This is primarily achieved by running Archimedes significantly under its full potential.
• Key space systems competition is on the solar front in Boeing’s Spectrolab and Germany’s Azur Space. “We have been happy to let those competitors fill up their fabs with lower margin work.”
• Space grade solar is incredibly constrained which allows Rocket Lab to continue to be very strategic in customer selection or prioritize product for in-house use while competitors struggle with supply chain constraints.

Between SmallSat 2023 and Q2 earnings there’s so much going on. Here’s a quick roundup of some of the stuff I’m tracking:

• Rocket Lab results match Wall Street estimates, company adds contracts for 10 launches - View the deck here.
• Rocket Lab announced additional progress on Neutron. I’ve updated my Neutron development page with the updates.
• 5 of the ten new launches that Rocket Lab booked this quarter are for BlackSky’s next-generation Gen-3 satellites.
• BlackSky reports Q2 2023 earnings before the open tomorrow.
• Spire Global Awarded Space Services Contract by GHGSat to Expand Satellite Constellation for Emissions Monitoring
• Spire also reports Q2 2023 earnings tomorrow.
• Rocket Lab has booked another HASTE hypersonic launch out of Wallops for a “confidential customer.”
• Space company Redwire trims quarterly losses, builds order backlog past $270 million

We have new Neutron renders. Check out my massive roundup of Neutron updates for more.

Peter Beck, CEO of Rocket Lab, joined The Business of Tech podcast to discuss Electron resuability.

Notable discussion points:

• Latest Electron recovery represents successful operationalization of recovery process.
• Hardware is surprisingly minimally impacted by marine recovery.
• Up to 50% of future Electron mission may eventually be reusable.
• Electron recovery program has substantially informed Neutron development process.
• Peter Beck’s current primary focus is Neutron.
• Recovered Rutherford engine will be flown soon.
• Physical Neutron program hardware is proliferating as development progresses.
• Peter Beck does not want to go to Mars. “Have you seen that place? It’s a fixer-upper!”

This animation is about a year old but but it’s so good that I had to make sure that it was captured here on the blog.

I’ve read through all of the presentations on Rocket Lab’s investor relations site and pulled the substantial Neutron development slides from each. There were more than I thought so this post is quite long but it’s very useful to see them in all one place and in chronological order.

Note: 2024 is going to be an extremely busy year for Neutron development so I have created a dedicated post for 2024. You can also monitor Neutron Rocket tagged posts.

Nov 8, 2023 | Third Quarter 2023 Financial Results Presentation

Sep 13, 2023 | Tweet

Sep 13, 2023 | Tweet

Aug 08, 2023 | Second Quarter 2023 Financial Results Presentation

July 27, 2023 | Neutron Web Page Renders Updated

May 9, 2023 | First Quarter 2023 Financial Results Presentation

February 28, 2023 | Fourth Quarter 2022 Financial Results Presentation

November 9, 2022 | Third Quarter 2022 Financial Results Presentation

September 21, 2022 | 2022 Investor Day and Neutron Update

August 11, 2022 | Second Quarter 2022 Financial Results Presentation

June 9, 2022 | Stifel 2022 Cross Sector Insight Conference

May 16, 2022 | First Quarter 2022 Financial Results Presentation.

February 28, 2022 | Fourth Quarter 2021 Financial Results Presentation

November 15, 2021 | Third Quarter 2021 Financial Results Presentation

July 27, 2021 | Investor Presentation . . .

The recent acquisition of Virgin Orbit’s manufacturing capability at auction has drawn a lot of attention (appropriately so for such a massive win) but Rocket Lab has been consistently negotiating deals to drive down the cost of Neutron development. Space is a notoriously capital intensive business and Rocket Lab has distanced itself from many of its competitors by aggressively managing that risk:

• The selection of Wallops for North American launch came with significant commitments from the state of Virginia and the Virginia Commercial Space Flight Authority: “$30 million has been set aside for infrastructure and operational systems improvements to the Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport, along with $15 million from the MEI Project Approval Commission in site improvements and building construction in support of Neutron.” ($15 million will go into construction for the facility, and the 30 million will be geared toward the construction of the new launch pad - TechCrunch)
• The company secured an undisclosed capital investment incentive from the Mississippi Development Authority to build out infrastructure for Neutron’s reusable engines. According to MDA they are “providing assistance for site development and equipment relocation and installation. Hancock County and Stennis Space Center also are assisting with the project.”
• Rocket Lab was “awarded a $24.35 million contract with the U.S. Space Force’s Space Systems Command (SSC) for development of the Neutron launch vehicle’s upper stage.”
• “Rocket Lab has been awarded Virgin’s 144,000-square-foot Long Beach, California–based manufacturing facility for $16.1 million…Analysts from investment bank Jefferies says that the Virgin Orbit assets have helped propel Rocket Lab’s value by around $100 million, made up of $80 million in Virgin equipment and $20 million in value from the Long Beach factory.”

These four deals alone represent more than $150 million dollars in concessions, assistance, and savings - a massive impact on the bottom line. In the second half of this year we should start seeing updates on progress increase in both frequency and importance with 2024 being particularly active. It should be fun to watch.

Shaun D’Mello, VP of Launch with [Rocket Lab] discusses Neutron development with the folks at NSTXL (National Security Technology Accelerator).

Rocket Lab reports that this Neutron test stand is “ready to receive a full-scale second stage tank for structural & cryogenic testing in the coming weeks.”