After taking the McGregor facility out of mothballs from the Army, I did
have fun doing design work on Beal's 30K vertical test stand.
Ken.
On Fri, Oct 1, 2021 at 8:23 PM Matthew Travis <matt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Hi,
True there was politics and Beal claiming NASA was preventing private
companies from entering the industry by doing things like developing SLI or
whatever failed program at the time. Interestingly, 2 years later, Elon
Musk founded SpaceX. Beal just didn't have what it takes.
And SpaceX got Beal's milkstand in McGregor. Our CEO used to work out
there on the stand.
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 7:53 pm
To: "arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
I didn’t know that. I was under the impression that FMC was the supplier
and there were a lot of politics involved.
What happened to all the hardware that was built?
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 10:50 PM
*To:* arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
*Subject:* [AR] Re: Introduction to Aphelion Aerospace and a new RGHP
system
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.