Well that's exciting. Good to see Atlas V pressed into ISS duty, and it'll be very nice to have ISS get a 3rd supply chain now that ATV is done flying. And even better, once all the upfront work is done, it stays done. If Antares ever had another stand down, Orbital could quickly order up another Atlas V to give Cygnus a ride.
Quote from: Norm38 on 03/02/2015 09:34 pmWell that's exciting. Good to see Atlas V pressed into ISS duty, and it'll be very nice to have ISS get a 3rd supply chain now that ATV is done flying. And even better, once all the upfront work is done, it stays done. If Antares ever had another stand down, Orbital could quickly order up another Atlas V to give Cygnus a ride.What 3rd supply chain?Post-shuttle there were Soyuz (yes, it carries a very moderate amount of cargo as well), Progress, ATV, HTV, Cygnus and Dragon. That's six.ATV goes away. That leaves five. Cygnus is still part of the supply chain, regardless of the launcher.
Quote from: woods170 on 03/03/2015 07:21 amQuote from: Norm38 on 03/02/2015 09:34 pmWell that's exciting. Good to see Atlas V pressed into ISS duty, and it'll be very nice to have ISS get a 3rd supply chain now that ATV is done flying. And even better, once all the upfront work is done, it stays done. If Antares ever had another stand down, Orbital could quickly order up another Atlas V to give Cygnus a ride.What 3rd supply chain?Post-shuttle there were Soyuz (yes, it carries a very moderate amount of cargo as well), Progress, ATV, HTV, Cygnus and Dragon. That's six.ATV goes away. That leaves five. Cygnus is still part of the supply chain, regardless of the launcher.I understand the understated count. The Japanese H-II TV has flown quite infrequently (last time was August 2013), and we don't generally associate a crew transfer as also a cargo launch, and probably we shouldn't since it can never carry as much as the unmanned transfers, but often priority equipment/experiments.There's also the matter of CST-100 cargo flights, as well, but that's the future.
Quote from: MattMason on 03/03/2015 04:34 pmQuote from: woods170 on 03/03/2015 07:21 amQuote from: Norm38 on 03/02/2015 09:34 pmWell that's exciting. Good to see Atlas V pressed into ISS duty, and it'll be very nice to have ISS get a 3rd supply chain now that ATV is done flying. And even better, once all the upfront work is done, it stays done. If Antares ever had another stand down, Orbital could quickly order up another Atlas V to give Cygnus a ride.What 3rd supply chain?Post-shuttle there were Soyuz (yes, it carries a very moderate amount of cargo as well), Progress, ATV, HTV, Cygnus and Dragon. That's six.ATV goes away. That leaves five. Cygnus is still part of the supply chain, regardless of the launcher.I understand the understated count. The Japanese H-II TV has flown quite infrequently (last time was August 2013), and we don't generally associate a crew transfer as also a cargo launch, and probably we shouldn't since it can never carry as much as the unmanned transfers, but often priority equipment/experiments.There's also the matter of CST-100 cargo flights, as well, but that's the future.Don't agree on your HTV stance. HTV flies per a pre-determined manifesto and is a vital part of the ISS supply chains. So much so in fact that NASA and JAXA have agreed to fly two additional HTV's beyond the original five. Dismissing HTV as an independent supply chain because it supposedly flies "quite infrequently" equals to dismissing Japan as an ISS partner in USOS. Quite insulting IMO.It also foregoes the fact that HTV currently provides the only means of delivery of external ORU's, other than Dragon. And HTV carries an amount of internal cargo (by volume), directly to the USOS section of the ISS, that is similar to Cygnus.But I digress. My original point stands: Cygnus on Atlas V does not constitute a third supply chain, for two reasons.- It fits in the existing supply chain of Cygnus-on-Antares with the only exception being the one-time swap of launch vehicle.- There are at least five existing supply chains, for cargo, not two or three.
Will this be the first time an Atlas V has launched out of the Cape in a north-easterly azimuth? I assume all previous launches have been due East(?) Thx.
Is this to be the first extended Cygnus?
No. Deke Slayton was already named for Cygnus CRS Orb-3 last October. Just because the spacecraft was destroyed in the explosion, it doesn't mean that the same name can be used for the next mission.
Quote from: longdrivechampion102 on 03/04/2015 05:00 pmNo. Deke Slayton was already named for Cygnus CRS Orb-3 last October. Just because the spacecraft was destroyed in the explosion, it doesn't mean that the same name can be used for the next mission."Deke Slayton II". And why not? Deke's astronaut career seemed finished, but he staged a comeback for a happy "rookie" flight.Perhaps a better approach would be to assign or announce informal or numerical names only once orbit is achieved. NASA used to do this for some missions. JAXA and ESA have done or are doing the same. - Ed Kyle