Just read reuse paper.Their autonomous engine return system uses a couple of engine pods attached to a fuel tank/stage. I'm guessing the engine pods detach and fly back using a prop or jet engine. In theory this system should be scalable, add extra pods for heavier payloads. They a not quite as simple as bolt on SRBs but should be easier to attach/intergrate than SMART and Ariane 6 systems.ULA are partnering with NASA on SMART system, this is win win for both companies. The paper on distributed launch system (in orbit refuelling), described two versions, a Centuar and ACES version. If ULA can prove this system on the IVF Centuar first then there maybe a case for retiring D4H, before ACES is ready.
JonYou misunderstood my post.They are still doing SMART system with parachute and mid air recovery.Autonomous Engine Recovery is their long term plan. Look at ULA technology timeline slide on the Business of Space video, 36min mark.
http://www.ulalaunch.com/uploads/docs/Published_Papers/Human_Rating/Commercial_Crew_Abort_System_AIAASpace_2015.pdf -- I didn't read this one in detail, but it's good to see that in the end all the BS spread about Atlas V's safety for crew launch back in the ESAS days has gone the way of the dinosaurs.
Quote from: TrevorMonty on 09/07/2015 05:13 amJonYou misunderstood my post.They are still doing SMART system with parachute and mid air recovery.Autonomous Engine Recovery is their long term plan. Look at ULA technology timeline slide on the Business of Space video, 36min mark.Huh. I'll have to ask them for clarification.~Jon
ULA are partnering with NASA on SMART system, this is win win for both companies.
I'm having trouble understanding Table 1 in the "Distributed Launch - Enabling Beyond LEO Missions" paper. It shows performance of various vehicles to various trajectories. One of the trajectories is shown as "20 km^2/sec^2" (note that's positive not negative 20) and is parenthetically labeled as "GSO". What is the meaning of this please?
That make any sense?
Quote from: jongoff on 09/08/2015 04:20 amThat make any sense?Yes, thanks! From your explanation I see that it takes approximately equivalent amounts of delta-v to reach either C3=20 or GSO. As atonement for being so dense about this I attempted to calculate the Hohmann transfer delta-v requirement. It looks to me like LEO to GSO requires ~3.9 km/s -- close enough anyway.
The implication of that is that ACES isn't required to meet any of the EELV requirements. True?
Quote from: sdsds on 09/09/2015 05:07 amThe implication of that is that ACES isn't required to meet any of the EELV requirements. True?Yes.The scope of Vulcan seems to have been set as a single stage development/change out (and surrounding facilities/mfr/CONOPs changes) gets you all of the capabilities of both EELVs. So you get all you currently require from risking just that. Smart.
Only if the customer will go for a two launch option.