We have begun fabrication work with refractory (high melting temperature) C-103 alloy. This Columbium (Niobium) alloy is the most common material used to make “Radiation Cooled” (otherwise uncooled) rocket motors. It is used in all long life spacecraft motors, and was very visible in the webcasts of the SpaceX Falcon 1 launch vehicle. The entire engine and nozzle of the Falcon 1 second stage are made from this material. It glowed red during the launch. This is, however, far below the service temperature limit of this alloy. It retains usable strength to at least 3000 degrees F (1648 C), well above the “White Hot” melting point of Iron!

This alloy is an essential replacement for the Stainless Steel in our current Hydrogen Peroxide – Methanol motors. Switching to high concentration Peroxide will push the combustion temperature much higher than the Steel can handle. The combustion temperature of the Peroxide fuel is relatively modest (compared to LOX reactions), but the performance is good for a “Storable” propellant. Peroxide gives Specific Impulse virtually identical to “Nitrogen Tetroxide” combustion with the same fuel component, with low toxicity and lower combustion temperature.

Using this allow will allow us to continue to use our simple, reliable, no moving part motor designs with higher performance fuel. The high concentration peroxide will allow acceleration to near escape velocity, orbital insertion at the Moon, and landing with an overall ten to one mass ratio: 10 kg landed on the Moon starting with 100 kg in Earth Orbit. The very low mass of our fuel tanks and control systems make these numbers quite achievable. I had not initially anticipated that we would be able to win the Google Lunar X PRIZE starting with only 1/10 of the Falcon 1 Payload mass in orbit, but that now seems to be a HIGH estimate of the requirement.

The C-103 alloy is surprising easy to form and work with. It resembles a sheet of Stainless Steel, but is as soft as a sheet of annealed Iron. Reportedly, it can be reliably TIG welded in shielding gas, and we will attempt that soon.

Our development strategy remains “Last Stage First!”. A deeply embedded “Mantra” in the professional Space Community is that a “Second Stage ALWAYS Costs More than the First Stage.” There are reasons why this is a tolerable - and possibly optimum situation. However, it is not automatically true, and certainly was not true for the “Juno 1”, used to launch the US “Explorer 1” in 1958. Given that “Mantra”, only success with the upper stages and guidance systems of our GLXP system will make “Professional” evaluation of our plans meaningful, with proper emphasis on the dominant, “Off the Shelf” launch cost to orbit. At some point, even visionary investors usually get input from “Professionals”.