This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spaceflight, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of spaceflight on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpaceflightWikipedia:WikiProject SpaceflightTemplate:WikiProject Spaceflightspaceflight articles
Several rockets are listed as 'meeting objectives' and therefore classified as 'successful' when the recovery parachutes failed to deploy correctly (or indeed at all) causing ballistic impact of the rocket components. Unfortunately the only press reports for these launches were press-releases by Starchaser Industries and therefore there appear to be no citations available from authoritative sources. Many undisputably unsuccessful launches (e.g. [[1]]) are missing from this list. StuartLivings (talk) 07:56, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It is indeed quite suspicious that several numbers are missing from the launch list. For example, the launch of Tempest-4 would imply the launch of Tempest-3, however, Starchaser never wrote about any launch with this number. I suppose that Tempest-3 for example was the failed launch that took place on February 4th 2015: https://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-england-31126820 (Same as 1, just seen from a different angle.)
Even most of the launches that were deemed 'sucessful' by Starchaser did never reach the altitudes that they were supposed to achieve.
I'll definitly soon add this information to the description of alleged successes.
Do you think it would be acceptable if the aforementioned launch of 'Tempest-3' would be added to the list as 'unnumbered Tempest launch' or something along the line? Darkcoucou (talk) 22:25, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"The world's first privately funded fully re-usable two stage research rocket" By July 2000 the private rocket industry and hobby in the UK was very established. Hundreds of amateur and professional two stage research rockets had been flown by this time. StuartLivings (talk) 07:56, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, Starchaser seems no more sophisticated than an average HPR hobbiest. The article could plausibly fall afoul of the "notability" guidelines. 2601:647:6480:B640:F022:415A:B35E:9B3C (talk) 02:46, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"it is the largest rocket launched from British soil" Reports of this rocket size vary greatly (StuartLivings (talk) 07:56, 4 August 2021 (UTC)):[reply]
I suspect that the height given in Source 4 is just the height of a proposed, never built rocket that unfortunately shares the same name with the one that was actually launched. The rocket given in the report is a two-stage liquid fed rocket with four strap-on boosters, while the one that was actually launched was a single-stage rocket powered by a cluster of solid rocket motors. Nevertheless, sadly news sources can not agree on the height of the rocket that was actually launched.
In reference to Skybolt 2: "met all objectives", the video at [[5]] shows parachute deployment failure, rocket separation and ballistic impact of the lower section. StuartLivings (talk) 07:56, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
