"Electron" Rocket makes New Zealand the 11th country to join the space club

[smartcooky]

Only those that go into orbit, or will remain in orbit for some period of time. De-orbited stages are not registered. SpaceX  de-orbits second stages (once the payload is deployed) so as not to add to the problem of space junk. Rocket Lab also did this in "Still Testing", and they destroyed the whole rocket on "Its a Test" so as not to have it go into orbit.

Both the second and third stages from "Still Testing" are still in orbit.  They destroyed "It's a Test" because they lost telemetry and couldn't confirm it was still on track, it was planned to go into orbit with a Humanity Star satellite.

I don't know where you get your information from, but Electron is only a two-stage rocket.

[gwiz]

I don't know where you get your information from, but Electron is only a two-stage rocket.

Rocket Lab didn't announce it until a few days after the launch, but "Still Testing" carried a third stage (called "kick stage" in the link) which was used to raise the orbit of two of the three Cubesat payloads.
https://www.rocketlabusa.com/news/updates/rocket-lab-successfully-circularizes-orbit-with-new-electron-kick-stage/

[smartcooky]

I don't know where you get your information from, but Electron is only a two-stage rocket.

Rocket Lab didn't announce it until a few days after the launch, but "Still Testing" carried a third stage (called "kick stage" in the link) which was used to raise the orbit of two of the three Cubesat payloads.
https://www.rocketlabusa.com/news/updates/rocket-lab-successfully-circularizes-orbit-with-new-electron-kick-stage/

The "kick stage" is not a stage at all. i.e. its not required to get into earth orbit, its part of the payload adaptor . Calling it a "stage" is like calling an apogee kick motor a stage, or calling the  SM the 4th stage of a Saturn V

However, I'm glad brought it up, it because its another piece of Kiwi ingenuity (Peter Beck's idea actually)  that allows each satellite on a launch to be inserted exactly into its own orbit, something that cannot be usually done with a small satellites that hitch a ride on a launch with a large primary satellite.

Anyway, I've had enough of this "you say, I say" crap, so I decided to end this by getting the information from the horse's mouth, i.e. going directly to the source. On the weekend, I wrote to Rocket Lab's communications manager, Morgan Bailey. This is what I wrote;

Hello
I see that the "Still Testing" launch is being claimed as making New Zealand the 11th country to launch rocket into space and deliver a satellite/payload into orbit. However, I am also hearing claims that this is not a NZ rocket at all, but an American rocket.

Can you confirm whether or not Peter Beck and/or Rocket Lab considers this a New Zealand launch?

And this was his reply...

Hi Ian,

Rocket Lab is a US company with a New Zealand subsidiary. The Electron launch vehicle is launched from New Zealand, making New Zealand the 11th country to reach orbit.

Thanks

Morgan Bailey
Communications Manager
ROCKET LAB

I am prepared to forward the email to you so that you can see this is not BS and this I what I actually received from the Rocket Lab.

AFAIC that is the end of the matter. This was a New Zealand launch from a New Zealand launch site by a New Zealand subsidiary company that originated in New Zealand, and therefore, by all the measures that matter, makes this country the eleventh country in the world launch a satellite into orbit.

End of story

[gwiz]

The "kick stage" is not a stage at all. i.e. its not required to get into earth orbit, its part of the payload adaptor .

Precisely like the HAPS stage on a Pegasus.  Plenty of other stages take their payload on from an initial Earth orbit.  If it's not a stage it seems strange that they should call it one.  Both stages have the same description "Electron r/b" in the Satellite Situation Report.

I applaud your efforts to get a straight answer out of Rocket Lab, but "launched from New Zealand, making New Zealand the 11th country to reach orbit" just takes us back to my first post in this thread: "If what counts is the country of launch rather than who manufactured the vehicle..."

[gwiz]

Just googled up this document, the agreement between the NZ Government and Rocket Lab.  Note the references to "U.S. Launch Vehicles" throughout:
http://www.mbie.govt.nz/info-services/sectors-industries/space/new-zealand-space-agency/document-image-library/folder-pdf-library/agreement-nz-government-rocket-lab-nz-usa.pdf

[smartcooky]

Precisely like the HAPS stage on a Pegasus.  Plenty of other stages take their payload on from an initial Earth orbit.

Really? I wasn't aware that HAPS could change the orbit and inclination of multiple satellites on one payload adaptor, or that it has its own precision gas thruster control system, avionics systems, power source, and communications equipment. Nothing I have read about HAPS makes me believe it is "precisely like" the Electron kick stage.

If it's not a stage it seems strange that they should call it one.  Both stages have the same description "Electron r/b" in the Satellite Situation Report.

Meaningless. Lots of things that are different have the same name or are called the same thing. wheels, gears, motors etc.

I applaud your efforts to get a straight answer out of Rocket Lab, but "launched from New Zealand, making New Zealand the 11th country to reach orbit" just takes us back to my first post in this thread: "If what counts is the country of launch rather than who manufactured the vehicle..."

As I considered your opinion from your first post in the thread to be entirely without merit, it makes no difference to my position. Try as I might, I cannot find a single website saying what you are saying. I can find plenty that are calling this a New Zealand launch (every one I go to except this thread in this forum). I keep searching for websites saying its not a New Zealand launch, and I keep getting results that say it is.

Incidentally, try not to  be patronising... its rude.

Just googled up this document, the agreement between the NZ Government and Rocket Lab.  Note the references to "U.S. Launch Vehicles" throughout:
http://www.mbie.govt.nz/info-services/sectors-industries/space/new-zealand-space-agency/document-image-library/folder-pdf-library/agreement-nz-government-rocket-lab-nz-usa.pdf

And... ?

[gwiz]

Really?

Yes, it exactly matches your description that I quoted: "its not required to get into earth orbit, its part of the payload adaptor."  The remaining differences between the HAPS and the Electron kick stage don't make the latter any less a stage, rather the reverse.

Meaningless.

The Satellite Situation Report tries to get its object identification and nationality information from the owners of the objects, so it's likely the identification of both objects as stages (r/b in SSR terms) comes from Rocket Lab.

And... ?

And the document adds the NZ Government to the organisations that identify it as a US launch vehicle.

[smartcooky]

Yes, it exactly matches your description that I quoted: "its not required to get into earth orbit, its part of the payload adaptor."  The remaining differences between the HAPS and the Electron kick stage don't make the latter any less a stage, rather the reverse.

This does not meet your claim of "precisely like"

"precisely like" means exactly the same in every respect

The Satellite Situation Report tries to get its object identification and nationality information from the owners of the objects, so it's likely the identification of both objects as stages (r/b in SSR terms) comes from Rocket Lab.

All very interesting and all highly illuminating, but ultimately irrelevant because none of this overturns the internationally accepted fact that this was a NZ launch, making this country the 11th country to put a satellite into orbit. This is the hurdle you have to get over. I have the established and accepted facts in my corner; you own the burden of proof to prove your claim.

And the document adds the NZ Government to the organisations that identify it as a US launch vehicle.

Yes, a US owned launch vehicle...

Conceived in New Zealand by the New Zealander who started Rocket Lab in New Zealand
Designed in New Zealand by New Zealand aerospace engineers
Built in New Zealand by New Zealand engineers
Supported by the New Zealand government
Launched from New Zealand at a site owned by a New Zealand/American Aerospace company.
Claimed by Rocket Lab (you know, the actual company that launched it) to be a New Zealand launch.

Until you come up with some verifiable statements, attributable to official aerospace organisations, that New Zealand is NOT the 11th country in the world to launch a satellite into orbit, your claims will not stand up, and I will not be convinced.

NOTE: No registry entries or inferred claims. Only an actual challenge to Rocket Lab's claim are acceptable.  Currently, you are the only person on the planet actively challenging this claim.

ETA:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-lockheed-rocketlab/lockheed-invests-in-rocket-labs-u-s-unit-to-keep-pace-with-innovation-idUSKBN0LY21Y20150302

"Lockheed invests in Rocket Lab's U.S. unit to keep pace with innovation"
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Lockheed Martin Corp said on Monday it had made a strategic investment in the U.S. unit of New Zealand’s Rocket Lab, which is building a carbon-composite rocket, the Electron, to launch small satellites into orbit for less than $5 million.

Ned Allen, Lockheed’s chief scientist, said Lockheed’s investment in the New Zealand startup was aimed at helping Lockheed keep pace with innovation across the industry.

I have quite  a number of similar pages. Would you like me to link them?

[gwiz]

Yes, a US owned launch vehicle...

That is the point I've been making all along.  I'm not disputing the New Zealand input, just arguing who owns it and gets to put their flag on it.

[smartcooky]

Yes, a US owned launch vehicle...

That is the point I've been making all along.  I'm not disputing the New Zealand input, just arguing who owns it and gets to put their flag on it.

Well guess what... both flags are on the rocket, so by your criteria, that counts as a launch by both countries.. and that still makes NZ the 11th country to launch a rocket with a payload to orbit.

The established and accepted facts are still in my corner... the burden of proof is yours.

[gwiz]

Well guess what... both flags are on the rocket...

Interesting, where's the NZ one?

[smartcooky]

Well guess what... both flags are on the rocket...

Interesting, where's the NZ one?

Note: this one also has Rocket Lab's website www.rocketlab.co.nz  (.co.nz is a NZ domain). Try going to www.rocketlab.com and see where you end up (yes, the USA partner is at rocketlabusa.com)

Now here is an interesting one


These are early testing rockets, and, oh no, they have New Zealand National Flags on them... oops. I asked them why they don't use the New Zealand National Flag, and the answer was that could if they wanted to, but they consider the Silver Fern Emblem to be a better recognised symbol of New Zealand globally.

Now this pretty much cuts the legs out from under your argument, because they could use the New Zealand flag if they wanted to, but they choose not to.

As a Kiwi, I find it very easy to both understand and agree with that decision. You show that Silver Fern Flag anywhere in the world and most people will associate it with New Zealand. Show them a New Zealand Flag, and they think its Australian.


We've even had Kiwis win medals at international sports events where the organisers hoisted the Aussie flag instead. Not hard to see why kiwis prefer the Silver Fern. In any case, I'm happy to see any flag representing this country that doesn't have that effing Union Jack in the corner.

[smartcooky]

Now here is an interesting aside. Technically, they should not be putting the US flag on Electron (or any other rocket for that matter) because it violates the USC (The Code of Laws of the United States of America). Why?  Well, I'll let the USC speak for itself.

USC176 (i)  The flag should never be used for advertising purposes in any manner whatsoever. It should not be embroidered on such articles as cushions or handkerchiefs and the like, printed or otherwise impressed on paper napkins or boxes or anything that is designed for temporary use and discard. Advertising signs should not be fastened to a staff or halyard from which the flag is flown.

Aren't rocket stages "designed for temporary use and discard"?

[gwiz]

Aren't rocket stages "designed for temporary use and discard"?

Not SpaceX's.

NASA have been putting the US national flag on launch vehicles since the 1960s, so I guess the government doesn't have any problems with it.

I see the NZ flag on the early test rockets, but not on the Electron.  I take that as an indication of when the company became a US one.  I appreciate that your national flag isn't instantly recognizable and you'd like to change it to the silver fern, but as far as I can see, this has yet to happen.

[smartcooky]

I see the NZ flag on the early test rockets, but not on the Electron.  I take that as an indication of when the company became a US one.

Then you take it wrong. I'll quote the bit you intentionally ignored form my previous post

"I asked them why they don't use the New Zealand National Flag, and the answer was that could if they wanted to, but they consider the Silver Fern Emblem to be a better recognised symbol of New Zealand globally."

I appreciate that your national flag isn't instantly recognizable and you'd like to change it to the silver fern, but as far as I can see, this has yet to happen.

Again, you have completely ignored the facts I have posted earlier in this thread. If you knew anything at all about New Zealand you would know that the Silver Fern IS the symbol of New Zealand, internationally recognised in all affairs except those of government. Trade, sport, retail and manufacturing all use the Silver Fern and only the Silver Fern. It is the officially registered trademark of NZ

http://www.fernmark.nzstory.govt.nz/silver-fern
(NOTE: this is a NZ government website)

New Zealand Companies use the Silver Fern in exactly the same way that American companies use the Stars & Stripes. While private companies can use the NZ flag, most choose to use the fern instead.  What you are arguing is that if they were to choose to use the NZ Flag, you would be happy to acknowledge that you are wrong, but because they choose to use the internationally recognised Silver Fern instead, you won't. This sounds awfully like Conspiracy Theory 101 to me... if something does fit your personal criteria, you hand-wave it away.

Once again, the established and accepted facts are still in my corner... the burden of proof is still  yours.