ARCA Unveils the World’s first Single-Stage-to-Orbit Rocket

Published: 31 Mar , 2017

Since the beginning of the Space Age, scientists have relied on multi-stage rockets in order to put spacecraft and payloads into orbit. The same technology has allowed for missions farther into space, sending robotic spacecraft to every planet in the Solar System, and astronauts to the Moon. But looking to the future, it is clear that new ideas will be needed in order to cut costs and expand launch services.

Hence why the ARCA Space Corporation has developed a concept for a single-stage-to-orbit (SSTO) rocket. It’s known as the Haas 2CA, the latest in  a series of rockets being developed by the New Mexico-based aerospace company. If all goes as planned, this rocket will be the first SSTO rocket in history, meaning it will be able to place payloads and crew into Earth’s orbit relying on only one stage with one engine.

The rocket was unveiled on Tuesday, March 28th, at their company headquarters in Las Cruces. The rocket is currently seeking FAA approval, and ARCA is working diligently to get it ready for its test launch in 2018 – which will take place at NASA’s Wallops Flight Facility located on Virginia’s eastern shore. If successful, the company hopes to use this rocket to deploy small satellites to orbit in the coming decade.

Artist’s impression of the Haas 2C rocket ascending into orbit. Credit: ARCA

Established in 1999 by a group of Romanian rocket enthusiasts (led by company CEO Dumitru Popescu), ARCA’s original focus was on balloon-launched rockets. In the course of the company’s history, ARCA has launched two stratospheric rockets, four large scale stratospheric balloons, and has been awarded some lucrative governmental contracts to test aerospace and space exploration technologies.

In 2003, the company joined the $10 million Ansari X Prize Competition and began work on their first demonstrator rocket. Known as the Demonstrator 2B – a single stage suborbital rocket – the rocket was successfully launched on September 9th, 2004, from Cape Midia Air Force Base. In the years that followed, they expanded their repertoire to include other concepts – like the Helen rocket, the Stabilo crewed vehicle, and the Excelsior Aerospike.

In 2013, ARCA was contracted by the European Space Agency (ESA) to create a Drop Test Vehicle (DTV) that would test the atmospheric deceleration parachutes being used by the Schiaperelli lander (as part of the ExoMars mission). Being the same weight and using the same parachute deployment systems as Schiaperelli, the DTV conducted a freefall exercise which simulated the dynamic pressure conditions of entering the Martian atmosphere

In that same year, ARCA relocated to New Mexico, where they have continued working on their rocket series and other aerospace ventures from their headquarters at the Las Cruces Airport. It was here that they introduced the Haas rocket series – named in honor of Austrian-Romanian rocketry pioneer Conrad Haas – which now consists of the Haas 2B and 2C rockets.

The Haas 2CA rocket berthed at ARCA’s headqaurters at Las Cruces Air Port in Las Cruces, New Mexico. Credit: ARCA

The 2B is a proven concept, designed for suborbital flight for the sake of space tourism. But as of this week, the 2C is now part of ARCA’s rocket family. Relying on single stage and single Executor engine, this rocket will small satellites into orbit. The rocket is fueled by hydrogen peroxide and kerosene (which combines to create a nontoxic fuel), and measures (53 feet) long and (5 feet) in diameter.

The 2C weights about 550 kg (1210 pounds) empty, and 16280 kg (35,887 pounds) when fully fueled. It will also be able to provide 22900 kg (50,500 lbs) of thrust at sea level, and about 33,565 kg (74,000 lbs) in a vacuum. In this configuration, the rocket is capable of delivering 100kg (220lbs) to Low Earth Orbit (LEO), at a cost of $1 million per launch (or $10,000/kg; $4,545/lb).

This is several times what SpaceX can do with its Falcon 9 rocket, which can deliver 22,800 km payloads to orbit for $62 million a launch – which works out to about $2719/kg or $1233/lb. However, one must take into account that the Falcon 9 is a heavier launch vehicle, and that there are additional issues that come into play where larger launch vehicles are concerned. As Dumitru Popescu told Universe Today via email:

“With the Haas 2C, the customer can launch on the desired orbit parameter, when he/she wants. Basically, the launch will be tailored on the customer needs. A more fair comparison will be between the Haas 2CA and Falcon 1 and Electron. Falcon 1 had a launch cost of $6.7 millions for a proposed payload of 670kg, or a demonstrated one of 180kg. In the best case scenario, this leads us to the same price of $10,000/kg. In the case of the Electron rocket, the cost per launch is $4.9 million for a 150kg payload. This leads us to a price of a $32.600/kg. Falcon 1, Electron, Haas 2CA have their market and a comparison with a big launcher isn’t fair in my opinion. Overall, if we will be able to keep this price, the Haas 2CA, at $1 million/launch will become the cheapest launcher in history.”

Artist’s impression of the Haas 2C rocket, shown in its launch (top) and deployment configurations (bottom). Credit: ARCA

In addition, the Haas 2C rocket benefits from the fact that it is cheaper and easier to manufacture, and that it’s SSTO configuration offers greater flexibility and reliability. 

“In the case of staged rockets, we are literally talking about more rockets combined in one vehicle to achieve orbit,” said Popsecu. “It is definitely more cost effective to operate one rocket than a vehicle made of multiple rockets, as it requires less time, less qualified manpower and less demanding transport and launch operations. The SSTO may also offer the possibility to launch from an inland spaceport, as there are no first stages that will fall on the ground after burnout.”

To prepare the rocket for its 2018 launch, ARCA is currently collaborating with NASA through its Cooperative Opportunity Program and with the help of the Ames, Kennedy, Marshall,  Stennis, and Johnson Space Centers. Popescu is also entering into discussions with the New Mexico Spaceport Authority to conduct launches from Spaceport America, and is looking to secure a partnership with a US defense agency.

If all goes well, this little aerospace company will be making spaceflight history. As Popescu said in a company press release:

“When the Haas 2CA rocket launches, it will be the first rocket in history to place itself entirely into orbit. This opens new frontiers for exploration of the Solar System as the rocket can be refueled in-orbit and re-utilize its aerospike engine thus eliminating the need for additional upper stages. After the full qualification, the vehicle could be operated from inland spaceports as there are no stages that fall on the ground at burnout. Staged rockets, even though they provide more payload performance for the same takeoff mass, are less reliable because of an increased number of parts due to flight events requested by staging and ignition of the upper stage engine. Also, staged rockets are deemed to be more expensive because they are literally made up of more than one rocket. Manufacturing and assembling more rockets in one launcher requires more, time, money, and personnel. The SSTO technology, once implemented, will increase the space flight responsiveness and lower the cost to values expected by the industry for decades. This rocket will also be the fastest vehicle to reach orbit, taking less than 5 minutes.”

In addition, the aerospace industry will have another company looking to lower the costs of launches and expanding domestic launch capability. Be sure to check out the company’s video detailing the Haas 2C and its unique characteristics:

Further Reading: ARCA

, , , , , , ,

4 Responses

  1. BillGawne says:

    How does this compare to the Delta Clipper project? I realize only the DC/X proof of concept vehicle ever got built, but it was intended to pave the way for the DC-1, which this SSTO rocket appears to be in the same ball park with. Are we finally seeing the realization of the DC-1 here? Or is this a significantly different vehicle?

    • CommanderBill says:

      I think the VentureStar would be similar to the Haas 2CA. The VentureStar was a single stage to orbit ship that used an Aerospike rocket engine. It had a proposed carbon composite structure much like the Haas 2CA. The X-33 was the concept demonstrator.

      How the VentureStar differed from the Haas 2CA is in size and capability. The VentureStar was meant as a replacement of the Space Shuttle. It was manned, much larger than the Haas 2CA, reusable and used O2/H2 as fuel and oxidizer.

      The VentureStar program was canceled in 2001.

  2. Alionel says:

    That’s the question I have. This is a small startup company and from what I have seen of the aerospike engines they required an incredible amount of money and complex engineering, machinery and precision to build.

    I wonder if modern manufacturing has come a long enough way for something like this to actually be built by a small company. We know just about any small startup can build a bell shape engine in a hangar with a small team these days, but from my understanding, this engine is a different beast. The machining of the actual parts is one thing, and that was difficult enough, requiring precision castings, but the cooling design and materials used where they were dunking parts in for multiple coatings seem to be really complex to manufacture and required meticulous handcrafting and precision.

    I wonder if 3D printing can be of help here. I think the biggest breakthrough would be if they can figure out how to take a half a billion dollar project, and even at small scale, scale it down to under a million to manufacture and build. Now granted they can rely on all of that past experience and wouldn’t be starting from scratch, but still, difficult is an understatement. The scaling down of such a massive project would be the major accomplishment. And if they want to build one affordably, that’s what they’re going to need to figure out.

    • Aubri says:

      I don’t think aerospikes are particularly hard to build, they’re just less well understood than the bell exhausts we’ve been building for half a century. Ater all, the X-33’s lost funding after some very embarrassing failures of the wing and cryogenic fuel tank structures, not the engine, and the ARCA design has neither.

      I haven’t researched this, but I have this feeling that the 35% efficiency increase isn’t quite accurate when comparing against a 2-stage design with nozzles optimized for each flight regime. I’d totally buy it if we’re talking about the same bell nozzle running from ground to orbit, but that was only really a thing for the Space Shuttle, and it had the SRBs to provide the bulk of its thrust at launch.

      I’d also note that as an expendable launch vehicle, the Haas 2CA also has much less stringent engineering requirements than the Venturestar — they can use simplified elements like ablative nozzles which wouldn’t do on a reusable design.

Comments are closed.