Unfortunately, for us, we never had the opportunity to purchase from FMC. We tried to work with XL Systems, but at the time they were unable to provide RGHP to us and asked if we could supply it. So we had no choice but to buy food-grade and concentrate it. Again, once we got the system working smoothly, it was easy for us. Now Frontier Astronautics supplies us and we do have an extremely close relationship with Tim and Frontier. I look forward to sharing more after our test campaign in November up at Chugwater.
We're small but by working so closely with Frontier, we're able to manage the headaches and cost. I definitely do NOT want us to be concentrating it ourselves again. It did turn our focus too much to peroxide production and not the actual engineering.
Strict protocols... definitely!
Best,Matthew
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [AR] Re: Introduction to Aphelion Aerospace and a new RGHP
system
From: Anthony Cesaroni <anthony@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, October 01, 2021 8:40 pm
To: "arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
I could never get my head around trying to make or concentrate HTP if you could simply purchase it from FMC. We went through the “process” years ago and it wasn’t that big of deal. FMC were great to work with although they seemed to be spooked by other types of oxidizers while on site. As I’ve said previously, I guess it’s what you’re used to. That said, it’s not practical or possible to purchase by individuals or small companies due to cost or liability issues. I like HTP and I’m comfortable with it providing the rules are strictly adhered to. It’s also a bit more polite than HNF and ADN. 😊 Anthony J. Cesaroni President/CEO Cesaroni Technology/Cesaroni Aerospace http://www.cesaronitech.com/ (941) 360-3100 x1004 Sarasota (905) 887-2370 x222 Toronto From: arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Matthew Travis
Sent: Friday, October 1, 2021 11:21 PM
To: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [AR] Re: Introduction to Aphelion Aerospace and a new RGHP system Manufacturing in-house is impractical if it's done from scratch. Lower-grade HTP can be processed into RGHP pretty readily. Take a look at our partner Frontier Astronautics. We're working extremely closely with Tim Bendel. In our early days, we purchased rotary evaporators to condense our own peroxide and found it relatively simple, inexpensive and handling/storage was never an issue for us. No negatives except a few bleached pairs of jeans. Best, Matthew-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [AR] Re: Introduction to Aphelion Aerospace and a new RGHP
system
From: roxanna Mason <rocketmaster.ken@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, October 01, 2021 7:49 pm
To: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Yes I do Anthony, it was death by 1000 cuts because they manufactured their own HTP in house which put an unnecessary strain on their resources which otherwise could have been eliminated with an OTS propellant. At least their hydrocarbon fuel was OTS. Ken On Fri, Oct 1, 2021 at 7:34 PM Anthony Cesaroni <anthony@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:Hi Ken, Do you believe the choice of the oxidizer was a contributing factor? If so, how? Thanks. Anthony J. Cesaroni President/CEO Cesaroni Technology/Cesaroni Aerospace http://www.cesaronitech.com/ (941) 360-3100 x1004 Sarasota (905) 887-2370 x222 Toronto From: arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of roxanna Mason
Sent: Friday, October 1, 2021 9:43 PM
To: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [AR] Re: Introduction to Aphelion Aerospace and a new RGHP system For most uses, though, torch
igniters seem quite satisfactory. I second that with >1000 successful torch ignitions under my belt. Years ago I turned down a job with Beal Aerospace because he wouldn't budge from HTP as his main/only oxidizer. When I suggested he think about alternative oxidizers like LOx, he nearly got angry. With such a closed mind attitude I felt the company's days were numbered. The rest is history. Ken On Fri, Oct 1, 2021 at 1:20 PM Norman Yarvin <yarvin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:On Fri, Oct 01, 2021 at 11:58:10AM -0700, Matthew Travis wrote:
>... a new “green” non-toxic and environmentally-friendly hypergolic
>bipropellant in an operational system. This will enable very low
>system cost, minimal infrastructure requirements and low launch
>costs. A lot of our tech is proprietary but I can say that our
>oxidizer uses RGHP and the fuel is NOT petroleum-based (e.g. RP1,
>Kerosene, etc.).
I take it RGHP is "rocket grade hydrogen peroxide"?
To me, the main market for hypergolics seems like it's orbital
maneuvering. Brief pulses of thrust which have to be precise are a
scenario where self-ignition can be a big plus, and since less fuel is
involved, fuel cost is less of an issue. For most uses, though, torch
igniters seem quite satisfactory.