U.S. Air Force working on rocket-powered cargo delivery
Jun. 07, 2021 1:53 PM ETVirgin Galactic Holdings, Inc. (SPCE), LMT, BORGN, SPACEBy: Yoel Minkoff, SA News Editor36 Comments
- What if the military could deliver supplies and equipment across the world in under one hour via quick trips through space? What if that technology could eventually be leveraged to enable point-to-point commercial space travel anywhere on the globe? Those realities may be possible in the future, with the U.S. expanding a small development program that wants to use reusable rockets for a program called Rocket Cargo.
- "The Department of the Air Force seeks to leverage the current multi-billion dollar commercial investment to develop the largest rockets ever, and with full reusability to develop and test the capability to leverage a commercial rocket to deliver AF cargo anywhere on the Earth in less than one hour, with a 100-ton capacity," according to the latest budget proposal from the Pentagon. "The Air Force is not investing in the commercial rocket development, but rather investing in the Science & Technology needed to interface the capability with DoD logistics needs, and extend the commercial capability to DoD-unique missions."
- Who would vie for the contract? SpaceX (SPACE) would be the likeliest candidate, but others that competed under NASA's Commercial Lunar Payload Services program may also be looking for some business. Those include Blue Origin (BORGN), Firefly Aerospace, Lockheed Martin (NYSE:LMT), Masten Space Systems and Sierra Nevada Corporation. Nearly $50M was allocated to the Rocket Cargo concept, but it could be years and billions of more dollars until things finally take off. Example: The Commercial Crew program for NASA took almost a decade to come to fruition, and it's currently only launching a handful of astronauts to the International Space Station.
- Go deeper: Point-to-point space travel is something out of the science fiction theater, though it's increasingly being looked upon as an emerging industry. The space tourism market, like the one being pursued by Virgin Galactic (NYSE:SPCE), could be a precursor that could bring costs down, though other challenges would need to be overcome. Flying over land masses presents problems, as well as the logistics, infrastructure and last-mile travel to proposed spaceports. Safety concerns would additionally need to be addressed and customers would need to feel that trips through space are routine as aviation transportation.
- Need for speed? United Airlines is looking to get in on the supersonic travel revival, ordering 15 jets from Denver-based startup Boom.
Recommended For You
Comments (36)
Have a tip? Submit confidentially to our News team. Found a factual error? Report here.
R
Richard Carleton
16 Jun. 2023
If cost makes little difference, then forcing those so inclined to travel and transport in this fashion to use liquid hydrogen and oxygen, would eliminate the carbon problem. But, this does seem an exaggerated solution to a seemingly trivial problem. After all, we have gotten over the absence of supersonic Concorde flights and we have yet to build a cross country supersonic vacuum tunnel. That it can be done doesn't mean that it should be done.
C
Calibama
16 Jun. 2023
With all the hysterics about air pollution and penalizing the peons - what is all this rocket fuel doing and why is no one talking about it? question from a person questioning the logic of where all the focus on green energy is coming from, AKA rotting wind turbines, dead birds, backup for our "green energy grid" etc.
From greenly resources greenly.earth/... :
"In fact, research has shown that the more rocket launches that are to occur – the more that the Earth’s atmosphere and ozone layer will be warmed and depleted. This is due to the fact that rocket launches contribute to black carbon, which is more commonly recognized as the dark, soot-like substance that vehicles with gas engines, such as cars, leave behind. Anything that uses fossil fuels might create black carbon. Scientifically, black carbon is composed of several different forms of pure carbon, and heavily contributes to air pollution. This remains one of the largest environmental concerns with rocket launches, as rocket launches are subject to creating extensive amounts of black carbon which pollute the Earth. When rocket launches occur, they emit black carbon into the stratosphere – and given rocket launches occur well above ground, these toxic particles have a better chance at harming the stratosphere than the black carbon produced from a car still on the ground. Even worse, rocket launches may emit black carbon even higher than the aircraft may go – meaning, even if the rocket launch is ultimately a failure, these polluting substances will still be released into the air. In addition to this already catastrophic environmental effect of rocket launches, black carbon doesn’t dissipate with ease – as the residue and toxic particles from black carbon can remain present in the stratosphere for up to four years. This is bad for both the planet and space exploration, given it contributes to pollution and can prevent successful space exploration due to lack of visibility. The environmental impact of black carbon in conjunction with consistent rocket launches isn’t positive news for those enduring the fight against climate change. In fact, if rocket launches continue to occur at the current rate that they are – it could provoke the temperature of the stratosphere to rise almost three degrees Fahrenheit while still thinning the ozone layer."Thank you for letting me vent
From greenly resources greenly.earth/... :
"In fact, research has shown that the more rocket launches that are to occur – the more that the Earth’s atmosphere and ozone layer will be warmed and depleted. This is due to the fact that rocket launches contribute to black carbon, which is more commonly recognized as the dark, soot-like substance that vehicles with gas engines, such as cars, leave behind. Anything that uses fossil fuels might create black carbon. Scientifically, black carbon is composed of several different forms of pure carbon, and heavily contributes to air pollution. This remains one of the largest environmental concerns with rocket launches, as rocket launches are subject to creating extensive amounts of black carbon which pollute the Earth. When rocket launches occur, they emit black carbon into the stratosphere – and given rocket launches occur well above ground, these toxic particles have a better chance at harming the stratosphere than the black carbon produced from a car still on the ground. Even worse, rocket launches may emit black carbon even higher than the aircraft may go – meaning, even if the rocket launch is ultimately a failure, these polluting substances will still be released into the air. In addition to this already catastrophic environmental effect of rocket launches, black carbon doesn’t dissipate with ease – as the residue and toxic particles from black carbon can remain present in the stratosphere for up to four years. This is bad for both the planet and space exploration, given it contributes to pollution and can prevent successful space exploration due to lack of visibility. The environmental impact of black carbon in conjunction with consistent rocket launches isn’t positive news for those enduring the fight against climate change. In fact, if rocket launches continue to occur at the current rate that they are – it could provoke the temperature of the stratosphere to rise almost three degrees Fahrenheit while still thinning the ozone layer."Thank you for letting me vent
R
Russell Ollie
17 Jun. 2021
Don't know...I think the research here is something else than what's published. Think about the ability to loft 100 tons of made in China (substitute Vietnam, Taiwan, Singapore if you like) crap for Amazon, use global jet streams, and get things to US or EU in 2-3 days. A great foil to China's global Belt and Road initiative. China has been buying influence in Africa, Middle East, and Carribean for years to pull this off and I've been thinking about a concept like this to obsolesce their plans.
K
Kyle54
08 Jun. 2021
I wonder how damaging to our climate (carbon footprint, other fuels that are damaging) are all these rocket tests and actual use. No climate radicals seem to worry about that, and it is rare to hear complaints about air traffic.
HLB1
08 Jun. 2021
@Kyle54 There are many damaging things that humankind is doing every day, many of them to suppress the last damaging thing they did, all in order to find a new and non-existing magic level of existence. Watch out for people spending other people's money to ship un-needed products across the globe in an instant for mere trillions of dollars.HLB
m
mexec1
08 Jun. 2021
Seems like a perfect fit for Astra I.e. via HOL. They can launch with 6 people from anywhere in the world in short notice. ASTRA goes public this month and it’s pps won’t stay at $10 like it sits today.
rurichyet?
08 Jun. 2021
How about a missile cargo delivered half an hour anywhere around the world.
Watch out!
Watch out!
J
Jon Brien
07 Jun. 2021
If you're on the receiving end out of food, water, ammunition and hope a100 ton care package from home, in an hour, would be just the ticket.
w
C
C
v
pat45
07 Jun. 2021
got to see if any way to make money, only so many billionairs who will pay for a quick space trip
d
doctahJonez
07 Jun. 2021
(its spaceX)
Downeast
07 Jun. 2021
What is the timing or latest on the Aerojet Rocketdyne acquisition ?
rookster
07 Jun. 2021
Other than it launched above ground, how does a country tell if incoming rocket is nuke or not? Bad idea…
d
Booban
07 Jun. 2021
@doctahJonez whats that supposed to mean? Different from what? If they want to Nuke that spot, an ICBM would follow that trajectory too.
d
doctahJonez
07 Jun. 2021
@Booban google the flight profile of an ICBM, tell me if it looks anything like a suborbital P2P flight profile ; )
a
L
Logan3355
07 Jun. 2021
@Joe Springer ICBM POG