The Battle For Supremacy: Rocket Lab VS Stoke Nova 

Peter Beck of Rocket Lab in a recent interview discussed the challenges of making the second stage reusable, stating, "Suppose, yeah. It's just not that conducive. The rocket equations don't favor it. We trade so much to keep the fairing on the first stage. Like putting the fairing on the second stage, you just end up much larger, and your payload suffers horrendously. Heat tiling, reentries, and all those things come into play. Actually, you're in orbit now, so you have to time your orbital re-entry point. There's no point in just landing it back in an African desert; you have to land it back where you care. You've got a whole re-entry bit to deal with from an orbital targeting standpoint, which is all doable. Never say never because I've learned my lesson. At this point, we're focused on making a really efficient, high-performance, and low-cost upper stage. The reality is that 70% of the cost of the vehicle is in the first stage, true with Electron and Neutron. The majority of the cost is in the first stage, so that makes the most sense to try and reuse. If you can make the second stage as affordable as possible, then the economics start to get pretty fuzzy. That's one of the reasons why the second stage is hung inside the first stage because, as I said before, it doesn't have to carry the structural load of the vehicle, and there's no material in it. If there's no material, there's no cost in it."

Criticism Neutron is too small for modern space industry yet Electron launches basically every 2 weeks.... The tooth pick rocket. ok

The Stoke solution is so clever I hope potential funders can see that also. I'm sure the size of the Stoke rocket is to do with being as big as it needs to be to get useful payloads, but balanced with being a good startup R&D size. It remains to be seen how much a single engine multiple nozzle outlet second stage can scale up when they get on their feet with quick turn around infrastructure. They might be happy with being the most cost effective launch vehicle for smaller payloads. I think in current form Starship will be as quick a turnaround as Elon would like by swooping return stages for inspected and refurbished ones waiting near the pad.

Why do people mention Rocket companies as competitors at all when they've yet to go orbital even one time? 😂 Not even Bezos or, Relativity have been orbital. They're both backed by billions.

5,000 kg to LEO, makes NOVA a small-lift rocket, an ELECTRON challenger, not a NEUTRON competitor. NOVA could not earn more than 15 to 20 million per launch. NEUTRON could earn $60 million per launch.

Congrats on hitting 4k subscribers

The heat is on (pun intended) once stokespace can demonstrate during a real life test that their concept of re-entry cooling can really work. Until then this is nothing more than an interesting concept that is not more plausible than something like the spin cannon for launching satellites without rockets. Investors seem to think the same which is why they have not collected as much capital yet. During a potential space company bubble at the stock market that i see coming from 2025 onwards, they will most likely do an IPO in order to collect more money and secure funding their idea.

tory bruno over peter beck , yea that was a clean survey; why didn't anyone let me know about it so I can vote 1000 times

The unique design of stoke space is very intriguing. I’m not convinced it will be viable or reliable. One thing about that design is that you have cold fluids running through the heat shield but where is the cold fluid running for the engine nozzles? I think if they don’t quit or go bankrupt they could probably get it to work but at the end of the day the total weight to orbit might be so small to negate using this approach. With a much larger rocket this might be more viable too. They could pivot like all other rocket companies to a larger design once they showcase this approach could be viable. Also it should be noted that Starship will also be growing. Elon said it would be 140 meter tall rather than 118 meter tall. I personally think it needs to be wider too for starship because doing 10 refuels is not ideal for a moon or mars mission. Being bigger should allow them to reduce this.

Starship Is the largest to reach orbit! Not "Will be the largest"

Spacex was initially going to use ablative cooling for starship but abandoned it to go to the more traditional heat tiles.

The problem I have with Stoke is they are going straight for fully reusable rocket instead of starting with much easier expandable or partially reusable. SpaceX started with small expandable rocket then medium expandable rocket then they made it partiality reusable and only now they are working on fully reusable rocket. Same with Rocket Lab they started with small expandable rocket and only later made it partially reusable while also working on medium partially reusable rocket now. They took it step by step starting with relatively easy expandable rocket meanwhile Stoke is going straight for the hardest thing without first doing anything easier, this is why I think they'll fail.

Dave, you hit the key PRO of STOKE's NOVA rocket, 1st and 2nd stage REUSABLE, and the key CON, 5,000 kg to LEO, which makes NOVA a small-lift rocket, an ELECTRON challenger, not a NEUTRON competitor. You mention NO GIMBLE of the engines. Maybe you mean the 2nd stage single vacuum engine. If the 1st stage, 7x engines don't GIMBLE, the rocket has to turns round its midline axis. NOVA might get $15 million a launch, and could do rideshare. But not the $60 million per launch NEUTRON could get, and other medium-lift rockets.

To me this is too gimmicky.

Great vid

For this small a LV I don't think payload penalty justifies reuse of US for upmass only. If they can start returning stuff from space eg manufacrtured goods then there is the additional revenue for downmass which changes economics. When a downmass market appears then watch other launch providers persue it with reuseable US. Having both a ultralight expendable and reuseable upper stages gives best of both worlds, pick right US for mission.

Yay. Thanx for a Stoke vid - i stand by my prediction in a previous that “they will do something” in 2024. Oh. I also made an Astra and Spinlaunch 2024 prediction in that comment…. I’m standing by those predictions as well 😁

Great vid 👌 Alway a good idea to keep up to date on all of the space industry.

How will the Neutron first stage handle reentry? Is it just that the "fatter" profile of Neutron will cut the speed of reentry so that the heat will be manageable by the carbon composite construction of stage one?

Excellent stuff bro

A thing that I didn't like about rocket lab is that they did so many changes to neutron. From gas generator to full flow. From 8T to LEO, to 13T. From shock absorbers to retractable landing legs. They chasing a moving target. With that approach, more delays will come. If Nova stick to the plan, they will be able to have something to show before rocket lab.

Cheers Dave

Great video ❤

Solid data and helpful analysis. Thanks sir!

Falcon 9 is not heavy lift. The most it has ever flown is 17T

I also wonder how F9 engines bells (a “fragile” part) can hit the upper atmosphere at mach 3+ and shatter… F9 bleeds from mach 3+ to subsonic with engine bells *forward*…. When i went to kindergarten, cones, and not trombones, were considered more aerodynamic…..

Peter should buy them out. It'd fit nicely in the Neutron