Hacker News Reader

Comment by curuinor | Hacker News Reader

Wait, isn't Rocket Lab an american company, and they're just locating the rocket in NZ?

Founders were Kiwis but HQ is in California...

It is what US client states have to do to succeed. The US, sensibly, put its own interests first and dictates US content limits and export controls but the closest allies give up the most in the relationship. Rocket Lab has found a really sensible compromise that satisfies US hegemony and still allows high tech industry development in NZ. I am sure countries like the UK, Australia and Canada are watching.

Is a Kiwi rocket company that is forced to be half based in the US to satisfy US legislation any more American than an American rocket company that uses Russian built engines and other components sourced from Europe? The flag waving denies the reality that space is a global industry.

The rocket uses a fair amount of ITAR-restricted technology, which means that they needed a pretty robust US-based organization and engine manufacturing. The company also sold a bunch of suborbital rocket launches to the US government before they raised money to build an orbital rocket. And the money mostly came from US-based VCs. All of these details feed into the company HQ being in the US, but a majority of their employees appear to be in NZ.

ITAR restricts US parts. It does not apply to non US technology sources although Wassenar and MTCR are multilateral. It would be possible to make rockets with no ITAR covered parts. After all that's what Russia France and China have.

Russian and Chinese rockets are definitely covered by ITAR. ITAR isn't a trade barrier or patent protection. It doesn't care about national origin. It applies to all export of relevant technologies from the US. So if you imported a Russian rocket into the US, its further export would be a violation of ITAR rules regardless of where that rocket first came from.

Right, but if you are importing a Russian rocket to somewhere not US, you don't have to worry.

Most of them work out by the Auckland airport. A really good friend of mine works there as an engineer. He works some absolutely insane hours. I couldn't do it personally, but they all really believe in rockets and they've had some amazing success.

Mission Control was in Auckland.They used to be an NZ company but incorporated in the US to get a launch license as it was apparently much easier as a US company. Most of their work and staff is still in NZ

As mentioned yesterday in the live cast, design and manufacturing is happening in Huntington Beach, California, then it is shipped to New Zealand.

Engines and avionics, but the rocket bodies, fairings, etc., are made in NZ and final assembly is there. In this interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nj9BncsgvuQ the CEO talks about how that has been advantageous because apparently there's a large talent pool in carbon composite fabrication in NZ, and that while there are eventually plans to also launch from the US, when they do they'll still be making bodies in NZ and shipping them, and doing final assembly with US-made engines on the US side for those launches.

> apparently there's a large talent pool in carbon composite fabrication in NZ

Wonder how much of that was from building faster yachts for Team New Zealand?

Yep, the America's Cup success lead to recognition of NZ's somewhat burgeoning super-yacht industry, which in turn fed back more talented craftsman, fabricators, designers.

Speaking of carbon composite fabrication talent in NZ, I remember at an airshow in NZ a few years ago there was a company making a helicopter with an entirely composite airframe. Not sure what ended up happening to it, but it was interesting to see such cutting edge technology coming coming out of such a small company with minimal funding.

John Britten's superbike in the 1990s was also a pioneer for all sorts of composite manufacturing

Us Kiwis have always been good at that kind of thing though. There's actually a very healthy aviation technology and manufacturing industry here, especially for such a small country.

Was just listening to an interview with Peter Beck. He clarifies the US-NZ question. Short answer is it is both, I had my proportions off with being more (3/4) American now. It's been American company since 2012. The US factory is 3 times larger than the NZ factory and makes stuff we're can't do here.

https://podcast.radionz.co.nz/mnr/mnr-20181112-0826-rocket_l...

It's more of a New Zealand company with enough presence in the US to be legal for ITAR purposes.

How do you get to that? Their rockets are designed and manufactured in the US. Their money has largely been from the US. They're incorporated in the US. They're using US technology and engineering.

That's a long ways from the minimal contribution you're implying.

see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_Lab

The manufacturing is in New Zealand. I don't know about design, but I understood that design is also done in New Zealand. They received money from the US and they cooperated with NASA, and for that they needed to have facilities in the US, but I don't know how much.

They now opened a second launch facility in the US, but that is not a large operation compared to design, manufacturing and testing the rockets.

Articles from the past make it sound like a New Zealand company with a corporate structure that is a legal fiction to be legal in the US.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&...

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/07/29/kiwi_company_rocket...

Engines and avionics are manufactured in Huntington Beach.

https://everydayastronaut.com/inside-rocketlab/

Reply on news.ycombinator.com