Author Topic: Application of Starliner outside of Commercial Crew?  (Read 11509 times)

Offline douglas100

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2134
  • Liked: 209
  • Likes Given: 94
Re: Application of Starliner outside of Commercial Crew?
« Reply #20 on: 05/24/2016 07:59 AM »

...Now beyond LEO things start to look a little more even as the separate service module would allow them to easily add more capability without as many changes to the reentry vehicle.

Agreed, but, for example, the LAS system would have to be reworked to allow for a much  heavier service module. A BEO version of Starliner would probably be substantially different from the current one.
Douglas Clark

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26452
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 6377
  • Likes Given: 4638
Re: Application of Starliner outside of Commercial Crew?
« Reply #21 on: 05/24/2016 05:25 PM »

...Now beyond LEO things start to look a little more even as the separate service module would allow them to easily add more capability without as many changes to the reentry vehicle.

Agreed, but, for example, the LAS system would have to be reworked to allow for a much  heavier service module. A BEO version of Starliner would probably be substantially different from the current one.
Or you have a detachable propulsion stage instead of embiggening the service module.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline brickmack

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 210
  • USA
  • Liked: 65
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: Application of Starliner outside of Commercial Crew?
« Reply #22 on: 05/24/2016 05:41 PM »

...Now beyond LEO things start to look a little more even as the separate service module would allow them to easily add more capability without as many changes to the reentry vehicle.

Agreed, but, for example, the LAS system would have to be reworked to allow for a much  heavier service module. A BEO version of Starliner would probably be substantially different from the current one.

They'd also need to fit solar panels or something on there, batteries aren't gonna cut it. Easiest way would probably be a separate propulsion module that can be ditched in an abort (along the lines of this http://www.russianspaceweb.com/images/spacecraft/manned/soyuz/soyuz_acts_fregat_1.jpg). Or use ACES? After orbital refueling it should have plenty of fuel left for lunar orbital insertion, then separate Starliner to do the rest of its mission

Offline TrevorMonty


...Now beyond LEO things start to look a little more even as the separate service module would allow them to easily add more capability without as many changes to the reentry vehicle.

Agreed, but, for example, the LAS system would have to be reworked to allow for a much  heavier service module. A BEO version of Starliner would probably be substantially different from the current one.

They'd also need to fit solar panels or something on there, batteries aren't gonna cut it. Easiest way would probably be a separate propulsion module that can be ditched in an abort (along the lines of this http://www.russianspaceweb.com/images/spacecraft/manned/soyuz/soyuz_acts_fregat_1.jpg). Or use ACES? After orbital refueling it should have plenty of fuel left for lunar orbital insertion, then separate Starliner to do the rest of its mission
ULA actually proposed using ACES with Orion. Most of the existing service module functionality was to be provided by ACES, resulting in a small cheaper service module.
In case of existing Starliner this would work for cargo missions.

Offline VIY

  • Member
  • Posts: 22
  • Liked: 13
  • Likes Given: 13
Re: Application of Starliner outside of Commercial Crew?
« Reply #24 on: 06/14/2017 11:12 PM »
Now that the Boing build X37b is going to fly on F9, what are the chances for CST 100 to also try a flight on F9? Is it hardwired to Atlas V, or can use other launchers? The reason? Similar to USAF, NASA may want to have more options avaliable, especially if Vulcan is delayed or does not materialize at all.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31067
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 9229
  • Likes Given: 295
Re: Application of Starliner outside of Commercial Crew?
« Reply #25 on: 06/15/2017 01:27 AM »
Now that the Boing build X37b is going to fly on F9, what are the chances for CST 100 to also try a flight on F9? Is it hardwired to Atlas V, or can use other launchers? The reason? Similar to USAF, NASA may want to have more options avaliable, especially if Vulcan is delayed or does not materialize at all.

just because Boeing builds both has no bearing on the matter.  What X-37 does is unrelated to CST-100.
« Last Edit: 06/15/2017 01:28 AM by Jim »

Offline Eerie

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 737
  • Liked: 98
  • Likes Given: 6
Re: Application of Starliner outside of Commercial Crew?
« Reply #26 on: 06/15/2017 12:54 PM »
Now that the Boing build X37b is going to fly on F9, what are the chances for CST 100 to also try a flight on F9? Is it hardwired to Atlas V, or can use other launchers? The reason? Similar to USAF, NASA may want to have more options avaliable, especially if Vulcan is delayed or does not materialize at all.

CST 100 and Dragon 2 are supposed to provide redundancy. That's why they launch on different rockets. There's no point in putting CST 100 on Falcon.

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7994
  • Australia
  • Liked: 2709
  • Likes Given: 655
Re: Application of Starliner outside of Commercial Crew?
« Reply #27 on: 06/15/2017 11:00 PM »
CST 100 and Dragon 2 are supposed to provide redundancy. That's why they launch on different rockets. There's no point in putting CST 100 on Falcon.

What if a problem is found in Dragon and there's no Atlas capacity?

Jeff Bezos has billions to spend on rockets and can go at whatever pace he likes! Wow! What pace is he going at? The slowest possible.

Offline VIY

  • Member
  • Posts: 22
  • Liked: 13
  • Likes Given: 13
Re: Application of Starliner outside of Commercial Crew?
« Reply #28 on: 06/16/2017 12:09 AM »
Now that the Boing build X37b is going to fly on F9, what are the chances for CST 100 to also try a flight on F9? Is it hardwired to Atlas V, or can use other launchers? The reason? Similar to USAF, NASA may want to have more options avaliable, especially if Vulcan is delayed or does not materialize at all.

just because Boeing builds both has no bearing on the matter.  What X-37 does is unrelated to CST-100.
Agreed. The connection was mostly psychological. My question was mostly if CST-100 can fly on other vehicles or is strictly designed for Atlas V? Can it be launched on F9 or is too heavy or too wide, aerodynamically unsuitable?

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8984
  • Liked: 1093
  • Likes Given: 730
Re: Application of Starliner outside of Commercial Crew?
« Reply #29 on: 06/16/2017 12:10 AM »
One thing, I have been wondering about is if the CST-100 can easily be upgraded in order to be used for crewed transportation to the deep space gateway?

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8984
  • Liked: 1093
  • Likes Given: 730
Re: Application of Starliner outside of Commercial Crew?
« Reply #30 on: 06/16/2017 12:13 AM »
Now that the Boing build X37b is going to fly on F9, what are the chances for CST 100 to also try a flight on F9? Is it hardwired to Atlas V, or can use other launchers? The reason? Similar to USAF, NASA may want to have more options avaliable, especially if Vulcan is delayed or does not materialize at all.

just because Boeing builds both has no bearing on the matter.  What X-37 does is unrelated to CST-100.
Agreed. The connection was mostly psychological. My question was mostly if CST-100 can fly on other vehicles or is strictly designed for Atlas V? Can it be launched on F9 or is too heavy or too wide, aerodynamically unsuitable?

Boeing has said a number of times that the CST-100 was launch vehicle agnostic. But to my knowledge, there is no plan to launch it on anything but an Atlas V.

Offline TrevorMonty

One thing, I have been wondering about is if the CST-100 can easily be upgraded in order to be used for crewed transportation to the deep space gateway?
Not according to Boeing on fiso podcast a couple years ago.
One of biggest issues is lack of DV. It is not simply job of enlarging service module as LAS isn't designed for extra mass.

Offline docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4193
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 1367
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Application of Starliner outside of Commercial Crew?
« Reply #32 on: 06/16/2017 05:28 AM »
Now that the Boing build X37b is going to fly on F9, what are the chances for CST 100 to also try a flight on F9? Is it hardwired to Atlas V, or can use other launchers? The reason? Similar to USAF, NASA may want to have more options avaliable, especially if Vulcan is delayed or does not materialize at all.

CST 100 and Dragon 2 are supposed to provide redundancy. That's why they launch on different rockets. There's no point in putting CST 100 on Falcon.

John Mulholland, Boeing VP and program manager for Commercial Programs (2013)

http://m.aviationweek.com/awin/boeing-spacex-detail-capsule-test-plans

Quote
>
Boeing's plan calls for the first two launches to be on an Atlas, but the company has not ruled out other launchers, including the Falcon 9 developed by CCiCAP rival Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX). It's got to be compatible with others and we continue to have discussions with SpaceX because once the Falcon 9 has enough flights under its belt and is safe enough to fly crew, we feel we can make that business decision. We'll be going over [to SpaceX] soon to see what it will take to make sure our new vehicle is compatible with the Falcon 9. If the price point stays extremely attractive then that is the smart thing to do.
>
DM

Offline Patchouli

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4137
  • Liked: 105
  • Likes Given: 192
Re: Application of Starliner outside of Commercial Crew?
« Reply #33 on: 06/16/2017 05:40 AM »
One thing, I have been wondering about is if the CST-100 can easily be upgraded in order to be used for crewed transportation to the deep space gateway?
Not according to Boeing on fiso podcast a couple years ago.
One of biggest issues is lack of DV. It is not simply job of enlarging service module as LAS isn't designed for extra mass.

Probably the biggest disadvantage of a pusher type LAS though it needs a mission module for longer missions anyway so maybe that can also supply the needed delta V.

Maybe something derived from the Delta-K stage with a Cygnus module in front.
« Last Edit: 06/16/2017 05:44 AM by Patchouli »

Online woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6974
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 2458
  • Likes Given: 753
Re: Application of Starliner outside of Commercial Crew?
« Reply #34 on: 06/16/2017 06:14 AM »
CST 100 and Dragon 2 are supposed to provide redundancy. That's why they launch on different rockets. There's no point in putting CST 100 on Falcon.

What if a problem is found in Dragon AND there's no Atlas capacity?


Emphasis mine.
That's the day h*ll freezes over.

Seriously, the one remaining obstacle for Atlas 5 to keep flying has just been wiped out by US Congress. Atlas 5 will continue to be around for a long time IMO, regardless of Vulcan and Falcon 9. As long as there is government business, there will be Atlas 5 capacity.

The only potentially viable reason to stick Starliner on top of a Falcon 9 is cost. But the recent Cygnus missions on Atlas 5 point to the fact that, when necessary, Atlas 5 can be cost-efficient enough.
« Last Edit: 06/16/2017 01:03 PM by woods170 »

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2234
  • Liked: 973
  • Likes Given: 644
Re: Application of Starliner outside of Commercial Crew?
« Reply #35 on: 06/17/2017 01:27 PM »
CST 100 and Dragon 2 are supposed to provide redundancy. That's why they launch on different rockets. There's no point in putting CST 100 on Falcon.

What if a problem is found in Dragon AND there's no Atlas capacity?


Emphasis mine.
That's the day h*ll freezes over.

Seriously, the one remaining obstacle for Atlas 5 to keep flying has just been wiped out by US Congress. Atlas 5 will continue to be around for a long time IMO, regardless of Vulcan and Falcon 9. As long as there is government business, there will be Atlas 5 capacity.

The only potentially viable reason to stick Starliner on top of a Falcon 9 is cost. But the recent Cygnus missions on Atlas 5 point to the fact that, when necessary, Atlas 5 can be cost-efficient enough.

Atlas V is gone as soon as Congress figures out they can get at least 2 redundant launch vehicles that are certified, cheaper, and as capable. Which might be 2022, or it might be never.

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4306
  • Liked: 2579
  • Likes Given: 3605
Re: Application of Starliner outside of Commercial Crew?
« Reply #36 on: 06/17/2017 05:47 PM »
One thing, I have been wondering about is if the CST-100 can easily be upgraded in order to be used for crewed transportation to the deep space gateway?

Don't think existing heat shield design is rated beyond LEO returns, but that of course could be one of the needed upgrades for DSG service.  If Boeing wanted to do such trips, or even supply cis-Lunar 'tourist' flights, FH would be a low cost option.  Vulcan ACES would be terrific if/when available. NG could be an option someday, too.  Boeing should be free to launch on whatever vehicle it chooses for other markets than Commercial Crew.
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Online woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6974
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 2458
  • Likes Given: 753
Re: Application of Starliner outside of Commercial Crew?
« Reply #37 on: 06/17/2017 09:46 PM »
CST 100 and Dragon 2 are supposed to provide redundancy. That's why they launch on different rockets. There's no point in putting CST 100 on Falcon.

What if a problem is found in Dragon AND there's no Atlas capacity?


Emphasis mine.
That's the day h*ll freezes over.

Seriously, the one remaining obstacle for Atlas 5 to keep flying has just been wiped out by US Congress. Atlas 5 will continue to be around for a long time IMO, regardless of Vulcan and Falcon 9. As long as there is government business, there will be Atlas 5 capacity.

The only potentially viable reason to stick Starliner on top of a Falcon 9 is cost. But the recent Cygnus missions on Atlas 5 point to the fact that, when necessary, Atlas 5 can be cost-efficient enough.

Atlas V is gone as soon as Congress figures out they can get at least 2 redundant launch vehicles that are certified, cheaper, and as capable. Which might be 2022, or it might be never.
Gone soon? It will still be flying at least six years from now.

Tags: