logo
#

Latest news with #Aerospace

A SpaceX rocket exploded in the night. Are Musk's 2026 Mars ambitions further out of reach?
A SpaceX rocket exploded in the night. Are Musk's 2026 Mars ambitions further out of reach?

CNN

time11 hours ago

  • Science
  • CNN

A SpaceX rocket exploded in the night. Are Musk's 2026 Mars ambitions further out of reach?

(CNN) — The explosion of a SpaceX Starship vehicle during a routine ground test Wednesday sent out a shock wave of fire and smoke that appeared to engulf the company's launch facilities in Starbase, Texas. The mishap raised questions about the company's ability to hash out significant design and engineering challenges on a vehicle considered crucial to SpaceX's founding goal of eventually carrying convoys of people to Mars. When SpaceX CEO Elon Musk spoke to employees in South Texas in late May, aiming to once again stoke support for his Mars ambitions, he emphasized the metric by which he would gauge success: 'Progress is measured by the timeline to establishing a self-sustaining civilization on Mars.' Later in his speech — which Musk gave two days after the company's most recently launched Starship prototype failed upon reentry, marking the third premature ending for a test flight this year — he spelled out the exact timeline SpaceX would chase. The road map hinges on specific deadlines dictated by the laws of physics, thanks to just how far Earth is from the red planet. The distance between Earth and Mars can range from about 35 million miles to 250 million miles (56 million kilometers to 400 million kilometers), depending on where each planet lies in its orbital path around the sun. To save time and fuel costs, missions aiming to visit the red planet must wait until it's at its ideal point relative to Earth — prime alignment opportunities, otherwise known as a 'Mars transfer windows,' that span a few weeks and occur only about every 26 months. The next window, during which the travel time to Mars is cut down from over a year to just six to nine months, is coming up in late 2026. Musk's road map suggests SpaceX hopes to send up to five uncrewed Starship vehicles loaded with cargo to Mars during that time. But there are several major concerns that SpaceX will need to address before its first cargo ship sets out for the red planet, and Wednesday's explosion — Starship's fourth so far this year — may be evidence of that. Musk spoke to the feasibility of reaching Mars in 2026 during that May speech, saying that he imagined there was only a '50/50 chance' SpaceX could get a Starship spacecraft to Mars next year. Before the 2026 Mars transfer window opens, SpaceX plans to debut another upgraded version of the Starship spacecraft and Super Heavy rocket booster — which together make up the most powerful launch system ever constructed. On the new Starship system, both the first-stage booster and upper-stage ship will be slightly larger and together will be able to carry 661,387 pounds (300 metric tons) of propellant. It's a substantial upgrade similar to the one SpaceX debuted earlier this year, Starship Version 2, which added 25% more propellant capacity compared with earlier test flight models. And SpaceX has struggled to get Version 2 to perform as expected: The first two test flights, carried out in January and March, each failed minutes after takeoff, raining debris near populated islands east of Florida. The last test flight in May made it farther into flight, but the Starship spacecraft lost control before reentry, leading to a nail-biting, uncontrolled descent into the Indian Ocean. Related live story SpaceX megarocket gets farther in test than last two flights, but loses control on reentry to Earth And Wednesday's explosion during a routine ground test raises even more concerns about how long it will take SpaceX to fine-tune Starship's design and guarantee it can transport cargo or humans safely. The company hasn't revealed how much of a setback it might be for the vehicle or its launch facilities. Preliminary data suggested the explosion was caused by a gas tank that exploded, Musk said in a social media post. The tank 'failed below its proof pressure,' he said, meaning that prior stress tests and the known properties of the tank suggested it should have survived the scenario. It's potentially a unique problem that has never been observed before. During his May 29 speech, Musk emphasized that introducing even more upgrades and further stretching Starship's size is crucial to long-term success. 'It takes three major iterations of any major new technology to have it really work well,' Musk told employees during his Starship update. Musk has said he hopes the updated Starship will make its flight debut by the end of the year. But even if the new version pulls off a pristine test flight along the same suborbital route where SpaceX has carried out previous Starship test missions, it won't guarantee the vehicle is ready for an interplanetary excursion. That's because, even with added fuel capacity, Starship must be topped off with more propellant after it reaches space to make the long trip to Mars. SpaceX plans to do this by launching a series of tankers, or Starship vehicles designed to carry batches of fuel and oxidizer. Those tankers would rendezvous with the Starship while it idles in Earth's orbit, transferring thousands of pounds of propellant and delivering the fuel the vehicle needs to continue its journey deeper into the solar system. Notably, transferring fuel between two vehicles in space has never been done before. 'We've never done that. Nobody's done that — transferring fuel from one spacecraft to another in orbit autonomously,' said Bruce Jakosky, a professor emeritus of geological sciences at the University of Colorado Boulder's Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics. 'That's difficult,' Jakosky added, especially considering the Starship vehicle runs on cryogenic fuels — essentially oxygen and methane that are kept at temperatures so cold they liquify. And in the microgravity environment of orbit, that fuel can float about in its tank rather than settling in one place. So, among myriad other technical difficulties, SpaceX will likely have to devise pumps or motors that can effectively funnel the fuel from one ship to another. Currently, it's not even clear how many tankers SpaceX would need to launch to give one Starship vehicle enough gas for a trip to Mars. (In prior estimates, NASA personnel and third-party experts projected it may take roughly one dozen Starship tankers for a moon mission.) In his speech, Musk said that he believed in-space fuel transfer would be 'technically feasible.' SpaceX will not attempt to carry out its first tanker flight test before next year, Musk added. Even after SpaceX sorts out the propellant transfer problem, they'll face another significant technological question: How will Starship survive the trip down to the surface of Mars? Musk last month called this issue 'one of the toughest problems to solve.' 'No one has ever developed a truly reusable orbital heat shield so that is extremely difficult to do,' he said. 'This will be something that we'll be working on for a few years, I think, to keep honing.' Vehicles that need to safely land on planetary bodies while traveling at orbital speeds must have a component called a heat shield — a special coating on the vehicle's exterior that serves as a buffer to the scorching temperatures generated by the process of entering a planet's atmosphere. On Mars, one crucial problem is the air: It's almost entirely made up of carbon dioxide. When Starship slams into Mars' atmosphere, it will violently compress the air in front of it and create searing temperatures. And the conditions of reentry are so intense that the process literally rips electrons away from atoms and splits molecules, turning the carbon dioxide into carbon and oxygen — the latter of which may start to 'oxidize' or essentially incinerate the spacecraft's heat shield, Musk said. Reentry on Mars will actually produce more heat-shield-destroying oxygen than the process of returning to Earth, Musk noted. Starship's heat shield will ultimately need to be durable enough to survive both types of reentry, potentially multiple times. While the odds of SpaceX solving all the necessary technical quandaries in time to send a cargo-filled Starship to Mars at the end of next year are likely small, even larger problems must be solved later down the road. If SpaceX wants to send humans to the red planet, for example, the company must figure out how to ensure Starship's exterior can keep people safe from the deadly radiation that will shower down throughout the six-month journey. Life support systems with plenty of breathable air would need to be on board. As Musk put it, every single human need must be accounted for. 'You can't be missing even, like, the equivalent of vitamin C,' he said. Once a Starship vehicle reaches its destination, it would likely need to top off its fuel at a Martian depot before returning home — another feat that presents enormous technological challenges. The idea that enough infrastructure will exist on Mars by 2029 — or 2031, as Musk has said in prior social media posts — to make such a crewed mission possible is outlandish. Still, industry experts say SpaceX's bold ambitions spark both excitement and skepticism. 'I am a fan of what SpaceX is trying to do. I totally subscribe to this vision of a multi-planetary society,' said Olivier de Weck, the Apollo Program Professor of Astronautics and Engineering Systems at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 'But it's a logistical problem first and foremost. And what's lacking to me is the thought about the cycling, the fuel production — and the return to Earth.' But Phil Metzger, a planetary physicist with the Florida Space Institute, emphasized that SpaceX does tend to deliver on its promises, even if it's a few years behind schedule. 'I feel like they got unlucky on some of their (Starship test flight failures), having the types of failures they had the last three in a row,' Metzger said. 'Considering their design and development philosophy, I think they're still within the window of expected outcomes.' But, Metzger added, 'we're reaching the point where you start to worry.'

A SpaceX rocket exploded in the night. Are Musk's 2026 Mars ambitions further out of reach?
A SpaceX rocket exploded in the night. Are Musk's 2026 Mars ambitions further out of reach?

CNN

time11 hours ago

  • Science
  • CNN

A SpaceX rocket exploded in the night. Are Musk's 2026 Mars ambitions further out of reach?

(CNN) — The explosion of a SpaceX Starship vehicle during a routine ground test Wednesday sent out a shock wave of fire and smoke that appeared to engulf the company's launch facilities in Starbase, Texas. The mishap raised questions about the company's ability to hash out significant design and engineering challenges on a vehicle considered crucial to SpaceX's founding goal of eventually carrying convoys of people to Mars. When SpaceX CEO Elon Musk spoke to employees in South Texas in late May, aiming to once again stoke support for his Mars ambitions, he emphasized the metric by which he would gauge success: 'Progress is measured by the timeline to establishing a self-sustaining civilization on Mars.' Later in his speech — which Musk gave two days after the company's most recently launched Starship prototype failed upon reentry, marking the third premature ending for a test flight this year — he spelled out the exact timeline SpaceX would chase. The road map hinges on specific deadlines dictated by the laws of physics, thanks to just how far Earth is from the red planet. The distance between Earth and Mars can range from about 35 million miles to 250 million miles (56 million kilometers to 400 million kilometers), depending on where each planet lies in its orbital path around the sun. To save time and fuel costs, missions aiming to visit the red planet must wait until it's at its ideal point relative to Earth — prime alignment opportunities, otherwise known as a 'Mars transfer windows,' that span a few weeks and occur only about every 26 months. The next window, during which the travel time to Mars is cut down from over a year to just six to nine months, is coming up in late 2026. Musk's road map suggests SpaceX hopes to send up to five uncrewed Starship vehicles loaded with cargo to Mars during that time. But there are several major concerns that SpaceX will need to address before its first cargo ship sets out for the red planet, and Wednesday's explosion — Starship's fourth so far this year — may be evidence of that. Musk spoke to the feasibility of reaching Mars in 2026 during that May speech, saying that he imagined there was only a '50/50 chance' SpaceX could get a Starship spacecraft to Mars next year. Before the 2026 Mars transfer window opens, SpaceX plans to debut another upgraded version of the Starship spacecraft and Super Heavy rocket booster — which together make up the most powerful launch system ever constructed. On the new Starship system, both the first-stage booster and upper-stage ship will be slightly larger and together will be able to carry 661,387 pounds (300 metric tons) of propellant. It's a substantial upgrade similar to the one SpaceX debuted earlier this year, Starship Version 2, which added 25% more propellant capacity compared with earlier test flight models. And SpaceX has struggled to get Version 2 to perform as expected: The first two test flights, carried out in January and March, each failed minutes after takeoff, raining debris near populated islands east of Florida. The last test flight in May made it farther into flight, but the Starship spacecraft lost control before reentry, leading to a nail-biting, uncontrolled descent into the Indian Ocean. Related live story SpaceX megarocket gets farther in test than last two flights, but loses control on reentry to Earth And Wednesday's explosion during a routine ground test raises even more concerns about how long it will take SpaceX to fine-tune Starship's design and guarantee it can transport cargo or humans safely. The company hasn't revealed how much of a setback it might be for the vehicle or its launch facilities. Preliminary data suggested the explosion was caused by a gas tank that exploded, Musk said in a social media post. The tank 'failed below its proof pressure,' he said, meaning that prior stress tests and the known properties of the tank suggested it should have survived the scenario. It's potentially a unique problem that has never been observed before. During his May 29 speech, Musk emphasized that introducing even more upgrades and further stretching Starship's size is crucial to long-term success. 'It takes three major iterations of any major new technology to have it really work well,' Musk told employees during his Starship update. Musk has said he hopes the updated Starship will make its flight debut by the end of the year. But even if the new version pulls off a pristine test flight along the same suborbital route where SpaceX has carried out previous Starship test missions, it won't guarantee the vehicle is ready for an interplanetary excursion. That's because, even with added fuel capacity, Starship must be topped off with more propellant after it reaches space to make the long trip to Mars. SpaceX plans to do this by launching a series of tankers, or Starship vehicles designed to carry batches of fuel and oxidizer. Those tankers would rendezvous with the Starship while it idles in Earth's orbit, transferring thousands of pounds of propellant and delivering the fuel the vehicle needs to continue its journey deeper into the solar system. Notably, transferring fuel between two vehicles in space has never been done before. 'We've never done that. Nobody's done that — transferring fuel from one spacecraft to another in orbit autonomously,' said Bruce Jakosky, a professor emeritus of geological sciences at the University of Colorado Boulder's Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics. 'That's difficult,' Jakosky added, especially considering the Starship vehicle runs on cryogenic fuels — essentially oxygen and methane that are kept at temperatures so cold they liquify. And in the microgravity environment of orbit, that fuel can float about in its tank rather than settling in one place. So, among myriad other technical difficulties, SpaceX will likely have to devise pumps or motors that can effectively funnel the fuel from one ship to another. Currently, it's not even clear how many tankers SpaceX would need to launch to give one Starship vehicle enough gas for a trip to Mars. (In prior estimates, NASA personnel and third-party experts projected it may take roughly one dozen Starship tankers for a moon mission.) In his speech, Musk said that he believed in-space fuel transfer would be 'technically feasible.' SpaceX will not attempt to carry out its first tanker flight test before next year, Musk added. Even after SpaceX sorts out the propellant transfer problem, they'll face another significant technological question: How will Starship survive the trip down to the surface of Mars? Musk last month called this issue 'one of the toughest problems to solve.' 'No one has ever developed a truly reusable orbital heat shield so that is extremely difficult to do,' he said. 'This will be something that we'll be working on for a few years, I think, to keep honing.' Vehicles that need to safely land on planetary bodies while traveling at orbital speeds must have a component called a heat shield — a special coating on the vehicle's exterior that serves as a buffer to the scorching temperatures generated by the process of entering a planet's atmosphere. On Mars, one crucial problem is the air: It's almost entirely made up of carbon dioxide. When Starship slams into Mars' atmosphere, it will violently compress the air in front of it and create searing temperatures. And the conditions of reentry are so intense that the process literally rips electrons away from atoms and splits molecules, turning the carbon dioxide into carbon and oxygen — the latter of which may start to 'oxidize' or essentially incinerate the spacecraft's heat shield, Musk said. Reentry on Mars will actually produce more heat-shield-destroying oxygen than the process of returning to Earth, Musk noted. Starship's heat shield will ultimately need to be durable enough to survive both types of reentry, potentially multiple times. While the odds of SpaceX solving all the necessary technical quandaries in time to send a cargo-filled Starship to Mars at the end of next year are likely small, even larger problems must be solved later down the road. If SpaceX wants to send humans to the red planet, for example, the company must figure out how to ensure Starship's exterior can keep people safe from the deadly radiation that will shower down throughout the six-month journey. Life support systems with plenty of breathable air would need to be on board. As Musk put it, every single human need must be accounted for. 'You can't be missing even, like, the equivalent of vitamin C,' he said. Once a Starship vehicle reaches its destination, it would likely need to top off its fuel at a Martian depot before returning home — another feat that presents enormous technological challenges. The idea that enough infrastructure will exist on Mars by 2029 — or 2031, as Musk has said in prior social media posts — to make such a crewed mission possible is outlandish. Still, industry experts say SpaceX's bold ambitions spark both excitement and skepticism. 'I am a fan of what SpaceX is trying to do. I totally subscribe to this vision of a multi-planetary society,' said Olivier de Weck, the Apollo Program Professor of Astronautics and Engineering Systems at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 'But it's a logistical problem first and foremost. And what's lacking to me is the thought about the cycling, the fuel production — and the return to Earth.' But Phil Metzger, a planetary physicist with the Florida Space Institute, emphasized that SpaceX does tend to deliver on its promises, even if it's a few years behind schedule. 'I feel like they got unlucky on some of their (Starship test flight failures), having the types of failures they had the last three in a row,' Metzger said. 'Considering their design and development philosophy, I think they're still within the window of expected outcomes.' But, Metzger added, 'we're reaching the point where you start to worry.'

A SpaceX rocket exploded in the night. Are Musk's 2026 Mars ambitions further out of reach?
A SpaceX rocket exploded in the night. Are Musk's 2026 Mars ambitions further out of reach?

CNN

time11 hours ago

  • Science
  • CNN

A SpaceX rocket exploded in the night. Are Musk's 2026 Mars ambitions further out of reach?

(CNN) — The explosion of a SpaceX Starship vehicle during a routine ground test Wednesday sent out a shock wave of fire and smoke that appeared to engulf the company's launch facilities in Starbase, Texas. The mishap raised questions about the company's ability to hash out significant design and engineering challenges on a vehicle considered crucial to SpaceX's founding goal of eventually carrying convoys of people to Mars. When SpaceX CEO Elon Musk spoke to employees in South Texas in late May, aiming to once again stoke support for his Mars ambitions, he emphasized the metric by which he would gauge success: 'Progress is measured by the timeline to establishing a self-sustaining civilization on Mars.' Later in his speech — which Musk gave two days after the company's most recently launched Starship prototype failed upon reentry, marking the third premature ending for a test flight this year — he spelled out the exact timeline SpaceX would chase. The road map hinges on specific deadlines dictated by the laws of physics, thanks to just how far Earth is from the red planet. The distance between Earth and Mars can range from about 35 million miles to 250 million miles (56 million kilometers to 400 million kilometers), depending on where each planet lies in its orbital path around the sun. To save time and fuel costs, missions aiming to visit the red planet must wait until it's at its ideal point relative to Earth — prime alignment opportunities, otherwise known as a 'Mars transfer windows,' that span a few weeks and occur only about every 26 months. The next window, during which the travel time to Mars is cut down from over a year to just six to nine months, is coming up in late 2026. Musk's road map suggests SpaceX hopes to send up to five uncrewed Starship vehicles loaded with cargo to Mars during that time. But there are several major concerns that SpaceX will need to address before its first cargo ship sets out for the red planet, and Wednesday's explosion — Starship's fourth so far this year — may be evidence of that. Musk spoke to the feasibility of reaching Mars in 2026 during that May speech, saying that he imagined there was only a '50/50 chance' SpaceX could get a Starship spacecraft to Mars next year. Before the 2026 Mars transfer window opens, SpaceX plans to debut another upgraded version of the Starship spacecraft and Super Heavy rocket booster — which together make up the most powerful launch system ever constructed. On the new Starship system, both the first-stage booster and upper-stage ship will be slightly larger and together will be able to carry 661,387 pounds (300 metric tons) of propellant. It's a substantial upgrade similar to the one SpaceX debuted earlier this year, Starship Version 2, which added 25% more propellant capacity compared with earlier test flight models. And SpaceX has struggled to get Version 2 to perform as expected: The first two test flights, carried out in January and March, each failed minutes after takeoff, raining debris near populated islands east of Florida. The last test flight in May made it farther into flight, but the Starship spacecraft lost control before reentry, leading to a nail-biting, uncontrolled descent into the Indian Ocean. Related live story SpaceX megarocket gets farther in test than last two flights, but loses control on reentry to Earth And Wednesday's explosion during a routine ground test raises even more concerns about how long it will take SpaceX to fine-tune Starship's design and guarantee it can transport cargo or humans safely. The company hasn't revealed how much of a setback it might be for the vehicle or its launch facilities. Preliminary data suggested the explosion was caused by a gas tank that exploded, Musk said in a social media post. The tank 'failed below its proof pressure,' he said, meaning that prior stress tests and the known properties of the tank suggested it should have survived the scenario. It's potentially a unique problem that has never been observed before. During his May 29 speech, Musk emphasized that introducing even more upgrades and further stretching Starship's size is crucial to long-term success. 'It takes three major iterations of any major new technology to have it really work well,' Musk told employees during his Starship update. Musk has said he hopes the updated Starship will make its flight debut by the end of the year. But even if the new version pulls off a pristine test flight along the same suborbital route where SpaceX has carried out previous Starship test missions, it won't guarantee the vehicle is ready for an interplanetary excursion. That's because, even with added fuel capacity, Starship must be topped off with more propellant after it reaches space to make the long trip to Mars. SpaceX plans to do this by launching a series of tankers, or Starship vehicles designed to carry batches of fuel and oxidizer. Those tankers would rendezvous with the Starship while it idles in Earth's orbit, transferring thousands of pounds of propellant and delivering the fuel the vehicle needs to continue its journey deeper into the solar system. Notably, transferring fuel between two vehicles in space has never been done before. 'We've never done that. Nobody's done that — transferring fuel from one spacecraft to another in orbit autonomously,' said Bruce Jakosky, a professor emeritus of geological sciences at the University of Colorado Boulder's Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics. 'That's difficult,' Jakosky added, especially considering the Starship vehicle runs on cryogenic fuels — essentially oxygen and methane that are kept at temperatures so cold they liquify. And in the microgravity environment of orbit, that fuel can float about in its tank rather than settling in one place. So, among myriad other technical difficulties, SpaceX will likely have to devise pumps or motors that can effectively funnel the fuel from one ship to another. Currently, it's not even clear how many tankers SpaceX would need to launch to give one Starship vehicle enough gas for a trip to Mars. (In prior estimates, NASA personnel and third-party experts projected it may take roughly one dozen Starship tankers for a moon mission.) In his speech, Musk said that he believed in-space fuel transfer would be 'technically feasible.' SpaceX will not attempt to carry out its first tanker flight test before next year, Musk added. Even after SpaceX sorts out the propellant transfer problem, they'll face another significant technological question: How will Starship survive the trip down to the surface of Mars? Musk last month called this issue 'one of the toughest problems to solve.' 'No one has ever developed a truly reusable orbital heat shield so that is extremely difficult to do,' he said. 'This will be something that we'll be working on for a few years, I think, to keep honing.' Vehicles that need to safely land on planetary bodies while traveling at orbital speeds must have a component called a heat shield — a special coating on the vehicle's exterior that serves as a buffer to the scorching temperatures generated by the process of entering a planet's atmosphere. On Mars, one crucial problem is the air: It's almost entirely made up of carbon dioxide. When Starship slams into Mars' atmosphere, it will violently compress the air in front of it and create searing temperatures. And the conditions of reentry are so intense that the process literally rips electrons away from atoms and splits molecules, turning the carbon dioxide into carbon and oxygen — the latter of which may start to 'oxidize' or essentially incinerate the spacecraft's heat shield, Musk said. Reentry on Mars will actually produce more heat-shield-destroying oxygen than the process of returning to Earth, Musk noted. Starship's heat shield will ultimately need to be durable enough to survive both types of reentry, potentially multiple times. While the odds of SpaceX solving all the necessary technical quandaries in time to send a cargo-filled Starship to Mars at the end of next year are likely small, even larger problems must be solved later down the road. If SpaceX wants to send humans to the red planet, for example, the company must figure out how to ensure Starship's exterior can keep people safe from the deadly radiation that will shower down throughout the six-month journey. Life support systems with plenty of breathable air would need to be on board. As Musk put it, every single human need must be accounted for. 'You can't be missing even, like, the equivalent of vitamin C,' he said. Once a Starship vehicle reaches its destination, it would likely need to top off its fuel at a Martian depot before returning home — another feat that presents enormous technological challenges. The idea that enough infrastructure will exist on Mars by 2029 — or 2031, as Musk has said in prior social media posts — to make such a crewed mission possible is outlandish. Still, industry experts say SpaceX's bold ambitions spark both excitement and skepticism. 'I am a fan of what SpaceX is trying to do. I totally subscribe to this vision of a multi-planetary society,' said Olivier de Weck, the Apollo Program Professor of Astronautics and Engineering Systems at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 'But it's a logistical problem first and foremost. And what's lacking to me is the thought about the cycling, the fuel production — and the return to Earth.' But Phil Metzger, a planetary physicist with the Florida Space Institute, emphasized that SpaceX does tend to deliver on its promises, even if it's a few years behind schedule. 'I feel like they got unlucky on some of their (Starship test flight failures), having the types of failures they had the last three in a row,' Metzger said. 'Considering their design and development philosophy, I think they're still within the window of expected outcomes.' But, Metzger added, 'we're reaching the point where you start to worry.'

Is Increased Focus on Hypersonic Tech Opening New Doors for Rocket Lab?
Is Increased Focus on Hypersonic Tech Opening New Doors for Rocket Lab?

Globe and Mail

time12 hours ago

  • Business
  • Globe and Mail

Is Increased Focus on Hypersonic Tech Opening New Doors for Rocket Lab?

In recent years, the rapid development and adoption of hypersonic technology across industries, from aerospace and defense to space exploration, have opened new growth avenues for Rocket Lab USA RKLB, a key player in hypersonic testing with its HASTE launch system. With commercial firms and government agencies ramping up investments in advanced hypersonic systems to bolster space access and national security, RKLB remains well-positioned to capitalize on this accelerating technological shift. Notably, Rocket Lab's HAEST (Hypersonic accelerator suborbital test electron) is a suborbital testbed launch vehicle that provides reliable, high-cadence flight test opportunities needed to boost hypersonic and suborbital system technology development. In April 2025, Rocket Lab secured a contract from Kratos Defense to conduct a full-scale hypersonic test flight for the U.S. Department of Defense. Additionally, RKLB's HASTE platform has been included in two major defense frameworks — the $46 billion Enterprise-Wide Agile Acquisition Contract with the U.S. Air Force and the UK Ministry of Defence's £1 billion ($1.3 billion) Hypersonic Technologies & Capability Development Framework. These programs allow Rocket Lab to compete for launch and engineering services in advancing hypersonic technologies. The inclusion across both U.S. and UK initiatives underscores the growing demand for HASTE in defense testing and is likely to significantly boost Rocket Lab's future revenue stream. While HASTE has not yet won any purely commercial contract, its demonstrated reliability and cadence in the defense sector may soon open doors to non-defense payload opportunities. Other Stocks Focusing on Hypersonic As increased investment in hypersonic technology has become a global trend lately, with nations like the United States, the United Kingdom, and China significantly boosting funding for research and development in this tech, other stocks like Lockheed Martin LMT and RTX Corp. RTX are also indulging in advanced hypersonic technology developments. Notably, Lockheed Martin has been developing highly advanced hypersonic technology for the past 60 years. To this end, the company is currently working in partnership with DARPA, the U.S. Air Force, the U.S. Army, and the U.S. Navy to transition hypersonic concepts to operational reality. LMT's Conventional Prompt Strike is a hypersonic boost-glide missile currently under development, which boasts the capability to provide longer range, shorter flight times, and high survivability against enemy defenses. On the other hand, RTX is working across its business and domains to move advanced hypersonic capabilities from creation to testing and into the hands of warfighters at top speed. RTX is currently involved in the design of the Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile, which leverages Northrop Grumman's scramjet propulsion to travel at more than five times the speed of sound and cover vast distances in minutes. The U.S. Air Force currently expects this missile to be operational by fiscal 2027. The Zacks Rundown for RKLB Shares of RKLB have surged 467.2% in the past year compared with the industry 's 40.9% growth. The company's shares are trading at a premium on a relative basis, with its forward 12-month Price/Sales being 17.85X compared with its industry's average of 9.65X. The Zacks Consensus Estimate for RKLB's 2025 and 2026 earnings has improved over the past 60 days. RKLB currently carries a Zacks Rank #3 (Hold). You can see the complete list of today's Zacks #1 Rank (Strong Buy) stocks here. Only $1 to See All Zacks' Buys and Sells We're not kidding. Several years ago, we shocked our members by offering them 30-day access to all our picks for the total sum of only $1. No obligation to spend another cent. Thousands have taken advantage of this opportunity. Thousands did not - they thought there must be a catch. Yes, we do have a reason. We want you to get acquainted with our portfolio services like Surprise Trader, Stocks Under $10, Technology Innovators, and more, that closed 256 positions with double- and triple-digit gains in 2024 alone. See Stocks Now >> Want the latest recommendations from Zacks Investment Research? Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report Lockheed Martin Corporation (LMT): Free Stock Analysis Report Rocket Lab Corporation (RKLB): Free Stock Analysis Report

Archer Aviation (NYSE:ACHR) Partners With Jetex To Expand Global Air Taxi Network
Archer Aviation (NYSE:ACHR) Partners With Jetex To Expand Global Air Taxi Network

Yahoo

time12 hours ago

  • Business
  • Yahoo

Archer Aviation (NYSE:ACHR) Partners With Jetex To Expand Global Air Taxi Network

Archer Aviation has recently announced a strategic partnership with Jetex, aimed at expanding its infrastructure for air taxi operations globally, starting with the UAE. This collaboration, alongside other initiatives like partnerships in Indonesia and New York, aligns with the company's ambitious global expansion strategy. Within the last quarter, Archer's stock price increased by 23%, a movement that may have been influenced by these positive developments, especially in a flat market environment. Although the market rose 10% over the past year, Archer's robust partnerships and product advancements likely added weight to its notable quarterly performance. Archer Aviation has 4 warning signs (and 2 which are concerning) we think you should know about. Find companies with promising cash flow potential yet trading below their fair value. Over the past year, Archer Aviation's total shareholder return reached 233.33%, highlighting a substantial increase and outpacing both the US Aerospace & Defense industry and the broader market. Comparatively, the industry achieved a return of 33.4% and the market returned 9.9% during the same timeframe. This growth suggests a positive reception to the company's ongoing partnerships and expansion efforts. The strategic collaborations, particularly in the UAE, New York, and Indonesia, may bolster Archer's revenue and earnings forecasts, despite its current unprofitable status. Analysts project a robust 58.1% annual revenue growth, which is significantly higher than the US market's expected growth. This aligns with the company's ambitious global expansion activities outlined in recent announcements. Regarding valuation, Archer's current share price represents a 17% discount to the consensus analyst price target of $11.94, indicating potential for future appreciation if forecasts align with strategic execution. However, with a Price-To-Book Ratio of 6.4x, it remains more expensive compared to the US Aerospace & Defense industry average of 3.3x, which investors should consider when evaluating Archer's future prospects. Our comprehensive valuation report raises the possibility that Archer Aviation is priced lower than what may be justified by its financials. This article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned. Companies discussed in this article include NYSE:ACHR. This article was originally published by Simply Wall St. Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team@ Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store