Relativity and Impulse Space Announce the First Commercial Mission to Mars
Video Caption: Impulse Space, Inc. – leading the development of in-space transportation services for the inner solar system –announced a groundbreaking partnership and launch mission with Relativity Space, Inc., the first company to 3D print entire rockets and build the largest metal 3D printers in the world, to deliver the first commercial payload to Mars. With an anticipated launch window starting in 2024, the historic partnership rapidly advances the companies’ shared goal of a multiplanetary existence for humanity.
Under the exclusive agreement, Relativity is scheduled to launch Impulse’s Mars Cruise Vehicle and Mars Lander in Terran R from Cape Canaveral, FL in an exclusive arrangement until 2029. Terran R will deliver Impulse’s Mars Cruise Vehicle and Mars Lander on a trans-Mars injection (TMI) orbit launched from Earth to Mars. Once in Mars orbit, the aeroshell-equipped Mars Lander will enter the red planet’s atmosphere and propulsively land on Mars’ surface. Impulse’s Mars Lander will have its own payload capacity to the Martian surface, supporting the research and development needed to build toward humanity’s multiplanetary future.
Designed as the world’s first fully reusable, entirely 3D printed rocket, Terran R is pioneering a new class of reusable launch vehicles that will open new opportunities for space exploration and scientific research. Made possible through Relativity’s proprietary 3D printing process and exotic materials, Terran R features unique design geometries that are not possible to achieve in traditional manufacturing, driving exponential innovation and disruption in the industry.
With a five-meter payload fairing and the ability to launch almost 20 times greater payload than Terran 1 –Terran R represents a large leap towards Relativity’s mission to build humanity’s multiplanetary future, by serving as a point-to-point space freighter capable of missions between Earth, the Moon and Mars. To date, Relativity has signed a total of five customers for Terran R totaling more than $1.2B in backlog, including a multi-year, multi-launch Launch Services Agreement (LSA) with OneWeb recently announced in June 2022.
For more on Terran R, visit our website: https://www.relativityspace.com
For more information on Impulse, visit https://www.impulsespace.com
51 responses to “Relativity and Impulse Space Announce the First Commercial Mission to Mars”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
It will be interesting to see this happen.
Yeah. I’m gonna file this away right next to the Griffin/Viper mission.
That might prove to be a bit over-hasty. Impulse’s CEO is Tom Mueller, SpaceX’s original propulsion wizard. On the Relativity side, the guy in charge of this effort is Zach Dunn, who was one of Mueller’s early deputies during the Falcon 1 days. So there’s more than a bit of the flavor of getting a classic rock group back together again going on here. As with SpaceX, this project may not make its initial date, but I’d give it good odds. And I think it will get done even if it slips.
True. And considering that NASA just gave Astrobotic another nice chunk of change for Griffin, and has plenty of skin in the game with Viper, I have high hopes for that mission too. The file I put both programs in is the Slip The Deep Space Trip File. Artemis 2 and Dear Moon are snugged up against them in there.
Given that no one seems to be celebrating the 53rd Anniversary of the Lunar Landing you have to wonder if anyone will care if any of those missions happen.
Right. But the fact that satellites and Mars rovers and deep space probes and exoplanet discoveries have become so commonplace is probably a really good thing. The first Human landings on the Moon this century will be a really big deal. After that it won’t be long before that too is commonplace. That’s something we can celebrate.
Perhaps, but it also an indication of how this generation of Americans are forgetting our history. Especially as this year was the first International Moon Day.
True. But, here in California, European Americans are the minority. So the teaching of European and European American history as we learned is a non-starter. But not to worry. When Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk agree to a Cage Match on the Moon…people will take notice.
thats not true
Neither of them will ever go into “real space” ie orbit
Bezos is likely to be too old by the time any manned launch capability exists for New Glenn. And he certainly wouldn’t go on Starship. Musk might well go at least to orbit in Starship sometime in the next few years. Maybe even to the Moon and back. Mars, he will probably save as a last port of call for his declining years.
Meh. No one is going to want to watch that. Now if you could corral Gina Carano and Ronda Rousey for a 40s-And-Still-Fabulous cage match in 1/6th-G, you might have something that would sell big on pay-per-view.
because really today it is none of our history. the historical time line did not change because of the lunar landings. its the Vikings in the new world.
That very much remains to be seen. The Vikings likely didn’t stay in North America because they never went in strength and because the Native American population was much larger then than it was by the time the Brits came along six centuries or so later. Hostile natives, at least, won’t be a consideration anent the Moon.
International Moon Day strikes me as premature. When the first SpaceX lunar expedition with actual non-American crew aboard goes to the Moon, then a reasonable date will be in-hand for declaration of such a thing.
no one will care. worse even when people go back to the Moon sometime next decade…few will care. particularly when the cost is explained
JWST seems to have polled well in terms of value and cost because the people can relate to pictures
a few folks on the Moon for 2 weeks costing 7 billion a pop after tens of billions of development cost will be seen for what it is, not relevant to our lives today
If that was all that was going to happen on the Moon, I would certainly agree. Fortunately, the mingy Artemis program will quickly constitute a minor sideshow anent the Moon.
The further back in history an event occurred, the more it is inclined to be mentioned only on anniversaries divisible by, first five years, then ten, then 25, then 50, etc. We’re just about to the fives point with 9-11. I don’t expect any great outpouring of remembrance on this year’s 59th anniversary of the JFK assassination either. Even the 80th anniversary of the Battle of Midway, a 10-versary, passed pretty much unremarked. I think Midway has graduated to an every-25-years commemoration as of its 75th anniversary in 2017.
Very cozy.
“Commercial” implies a customer. Who’s the customer ?
The first mission will be a self-funded proof-of-concept demonstration. Customer missions would come after that. It’s going to be a ballsy play as Relativity is planning this mission to be the first ever flown by Terran-R.
Terran-R itself strikes me as a ballsy play, considering that Musk has stated that Starship is as small as he could make it. I might feel better about it if Terran-1 had already happened and was a real thing in the world. As it is, I see leveraged hype. Now, that may be what needs to happen to make it happen, but it still engenders a bit of queasiness.
until one of them actually works, all the “fully reusable” vehicles are mostly leveraged hype. there probably is a “secret sauce” combination of distribution of Delta V and materials that make it work, but I suspect when it does it will be “just barely” with the game then being incremental improvements along the way to try and get to some usable payload
its kind of like the BD5 jet. a friend and his wife (also a friend) worked at Pax for 20 years and 15 of those were spent making the BDJ into a reality they are here on the left coast now…and fly them pretty regularly. but they carry next to nothing other than the person
Yes, cute toys for those with the money to afford them…
the BDJ’s yeah I am sure its a fun thing for them. most of us who love airplanes and flying have not a small amount of joy in our endeavors. they are both test flight engineers who have made a pretty solid career and living out of “small vehicles” aka drones and I think that has been part of it
there is really no market for the BDJ style airplanes. in terms of human flight. drones are quite another.
Especially given that they were not for novice flyers, given how many pilots they killed, it is not surprising. Bede Aircraft also seems to be where Burt Rutan learned the bad habits that made SpaceshipOne basically a one trick pony and led to the problems of SpaceshipTwo.
Tom Hope you are well. Homebuilts extinguish a lot of lives every year simply because 1) some of the plans are horrible and 2) the ones that are not are built by people who cannot help but try and be an engineer and “re work” the thing) and 3 people who do not know how to test fly airpalnes. there are a few that are just to tricky for ordinary or less than ordinary ones but the first two kill the most followed by the third.
I think Rutan built SS1 to do what it did and had really no concept that it would do anything else. SS2 is about like SLS. it was harder to do than expected
the BD 5 Prop and Jet were typical Jim Bede. Jim was always euphemistic as he and the rest of the GA crowd chased the magic machine that would give Bonanza performance on a 172 funding level 🙂 to bad we dont have Salvage 1 🙂
Yes, both Jim Bede and Burt Rutan believed in the Field of Dreams approach when designing aircraft.
oh yes. add to that list Elon Musk. I’ve met Musk twice (just to shake hands), Bede numerous times, Rutan more. They are all quite accomplished people Rutan did/does some very novel designs, Bede really designed the Yankee which Grumman thought was quite innovative. Chuck Sewall who is revered in the Tomcat community had nothing but praise for that design as well as Bede. Musk is clearly a talented engineer, smart guy, has had some amazing success with the Falcon series (after a pretty poor start).
Rutan least of all of them. but they all three need the crowd. Go watch Elon with Tim Dodd…its the same look of “they love me” that Rutan and Bede would get at Oshkosh as they talked about various things. they all have this messianic sort of attachment to what their dreams are.
Musk has to believe the Mars thing. but in his lucid moments he must know. its never going to happen. so should the more sane folks in his “field”
Tim Dodd isn’t exactly a wide-eyed fanboy. He understands the engineering and can also explain it to lay people. Musk respects both things.
No he is a fan boy. he might “understand ” engineering but his explanations are always skewed toward a positive presentation for SpaceX. we all are fan boys on somethings. or have a need to believe no matter what evidence counters that belief. and thats ok as long as people recognize it and it tempers their actual grasp on reality . I am a fan boy of Ronaldus the great. But as time has moved on I can recognize that some of his beliefs were flawed and hurt the country. Some of them helped it massively. in other words I can recognize he made mistakes…and as I have gotten older I can recognize that my questioning of those issues as a “child” were appropriate.
Dodd really believes Musk and his Mars thing. Just an inability to connect with reality 🙂
Jim Bede wasn’t trying to design the A380 or even the G5 so I fail to see what your point is about the BD-5. It’s also pretty obvious that even after more than one fully reusable rocket is operational, you aren’t going to believe they either work or make money. It’s a good thing impressing you isn’t on anyone’s critical path in the NewSpace rocket patch.
The “Small as he could make it” bothers me. I would like to see the trades made and decisions taken that led to that statement. Though recognizing that I don’t have a right to that information and it is just a like.
Not even in the cheap seats peeking through the fence, if seems to me that a smaller vehicle could have retired many of the development problems with methane Raptor and Starship. Including the hassles with various permitting and GSE roadblocks. I wonder if a 9+1 Raptor configuration following the successful Falcon layout could have been flying by now.
Though without the proprietary information within various companies, I think of alternate decisions as a matter of course on every single vehicle. Could rapidly change my mind with more info, or maybe not depending.
I don’t have the wherewithal to judge such matters. It’s also true that Musk’s assertion is underqualified. What is his minimum payload criterion? If it’s 100 tons then there’s your primary size driver right there. Is time a primary constraint? He’s 50 and no Adonis. How many development cycles does he have left?
But SpaceX is the only company to execute on partial reuse, and they have fully executed on it, to the point where they are lapping the rest of the world on mass to orbit per anum. In that regard, everyone else is just blowing smoke. So when Musk says this is as small as we can go, I’m inclined to accept that assertion. Who is more credible?
Anyone thinking I have more credibility than Musk ain’t firing on all cylinders. My concern is in the development cycle of possibly trying to do too many new things at once. I could be proved wrong shortly.
“Small as he could make it” to settle Mars… Robotic systems and even a “flags and footsteps” mission could probably make it in a smaller vehicle. But you need to be able to land 50 to 100 tons on Mars or the Moon to make any progress on permanent settlement. You are only able to shrink a bulldozer so much before it becomes useless.
For the operational vehicles I agree. I worry about sheer size slowing development too much. Along with trying several new things at once. My concerns are similar to your thoughts on Matagorda as a better option.
If the various improvements with Raptor class over the Falcon/Merlin pan out, it seems that a revenue vehicle would be turning profit even while Starship/Superheavy is working out bugs and launch sites
Yes, Elon Musk basically is going for the fences. Let’s hope he hits it.?
I can hope he hits it even while being concerned about some things. I still have almost a year and a half to lose my dinner bet with Duheagle. I just don’t see operational before 1 Jan 2024, but I’ll pay up with a smile if wrong.
Musk’s likely failure mode is that he has done almost nothing really to retire the risk of as you put it “trying several new things at once”, I dont think he has the mass margine
Musk isn’t trying to chase the pointless goal of an SSTO. Starship is a two-stage rocket for exactly that reason. The mass margins of the individual stages continue to improve with every iteration. The newest Super Heavy grid fins, for example, are several metric tons lighter than the originals on B4. 33 Raptor 2s are more than five metric tons lighter than 29 Raptor 1s. S24 is appreciably lighter than S20 with smaller flaps and 2.4 tonnes less engine mass while the engines crank out 40% more thrust. Mass margin isn’t a problem.
Starship is hardly the first time SpaceX has pursued several new things at once. And it is several times as large, and hugely better capitalized, than it was when previously doing multiple new things at once. Not to mention that Musk also benefits from the experience of his other major company, Tesla, which has also had to pursue many new things at once and continues to do so.
Unlike some, I don’t see my concerns or disagreements as being legitimate restrictions on the actions of others. Only when/if I get skin in the game do I get some say so in a project.
“Small as he could make it” to settle Mars”
Oh gee you really believe that stuff dont you ? wow
Nope, it’s what Elon Musk believes.
If you ever want to understand fish, you need to think like them. You may not like to eat worms but fish do.?
And you really don’t – wow.
I suspect the numbers were something along the lines of needing to spend 75 – 80% of what it is taking to get Starship up and running to do the same for a significantly smaller vehicle, then one would still have spend a whole lot more to scale it up. I can easily see where it would make more sense to go directly for the sort of form factor needed to pursue the main objective – settling Mars – and save the time and money – especially the time – needed to work up to something like Starship in phases. The Falcons already constituted a very appreciable such “phase” by themselves.
Both of us are estimating based on our own world views and experiences. I am attempting to label my guesses/estimates as such, this being one.
I suspect that the 9+1 or so smaller vehicle would be more in the 30-40% range. More importantly, it could likely have avoided some of the faux environmentalist problems and GSE scaling issues. It is quite possible that it could have been flying with Raptor 1s last year and be in revenue service right now. If the various estimates of cost savings are correct, it could be launching double the Falcon payload on significantly less cost today even as we argue.
The operational experience base with Raptor and methane could be expanding right now with lessons learned going into the larger ship. There should be less hand wringing about a ship apparently similar to Falcon launching from Vandenberg, the Cape, and diverse other sites. I also speculate that developing the two vehicles would not cost all that much more than just the one, and if gotchas were found in the smaller, it might even be cheaper.
We’ll never know who might have been right – if either was – as neither of us was, or is, in charge. The Starship die is cast.
True. We are also discussing decisions that would have been made years ago. Changing now would likely not be feasible even if it would have made sense in the original
Edit. Decided to argue. If you win the bet, and Starship flies more in 2024 than Falcon does in 2022, then I would say you are right
And properly so. Both Ferris and Mueller are going way out on a limb on this one. But Terran-1 is due to fly soon so at least one mid-course data point should be in-hand before long.