meiza - 7/11/2006 4:35 AMQuoteJim - 7/11/2006 3:07 AMOther than structure, Atlas V CCB stage has many of the same systems as the Atlas II and III. The ballon tank is not the only thing that defined Atlas. Interesting. What major systems and approaches for Atlas V came from old Atlas? And what came from Titan? And what were built from scratch?Edit: I realize maybe this is more of a subject for a book rather than a newspost...
Jim - 7/11/2006 3:07 AMOther than structure, Atlas V CCB stage has many of the same systems as the Atlas II and III. The ballon tank is not the only thing that defined Atlas.
Jim - 7/11/2006 6:41 AMAs far as sytems, they all came from Atlas. The avionics came from Atlas.
skywalker - 10/11/2006 12:54 AMQuotemeiza - 7/11/2006 4:35 AMQuoteJim - 7/11/2006 3:07 AMOther than structure, Atlas V CCB stage has many of the same systems as the Atlas II and III. The ballon tank is not the only thing that defined Atlas. Interesting. What major systems and approaches for Atlas V came from old Atlas? And what came from Titan? And what were built from scratch?Edit: I realize maybe this is more of a subject for a book rather than a newspost... QuoteJim - 7/11/2006 6:41 AMAs far as sytems, they all came from Atlas. The avionics came from Atlas.Structure is not a system it just carries the systems, but the structure came from Titan. The systems came from Atlas for a reason (they were simly the best available and proven on Atlas III the best rocket ever designed) same as the structure came from Titan for a reason, someone wanted to "Remember the Titan", GX proved that the balloon tank was cheaper to build, how did that happen. By the way the GX trades were basically commercial and needed to be accurate and the lowest cost.
skywalker - 10/11/2006 1:06 AMAtlas III the best rocket ever designed
bombay - 10/11/2006 8:22 PMThe technological concept most frequently associated with Atlas will always be the thin walled pressure stabalized steel tanks. It was Bossart's brilliance that thought of this and it was this concept that remained as the integral and "unique" part of the rocket design from the MX-774 in the late 40's through the Atlas III into the early 2000's..... The thin walled monocoque tank design, which was and is (for the Centaur) totally and completely unique in the rocket industry is what defined and separated the Atlas (and Centaur) from everything else.
edkyle99 - 10/11/2006 10:17 PMQuotebombay - 10/11/2006 8:22 PMThe technological concept most frequently associated with Atlas will always be the thin walled pressure stabalized steel tanks. It was Bossart's brilliance that thought of this and it was this concept that remained as the integral and "unique" part of the rocket design from the MX-774 in the late 40's through the Atlas III into the early 2000's..... The thin walled monocoque tank design, which was and is (for the Centaur) totally and completely unique in the rocket industry is what defined and separated the Atlas (and Centaur) from everything else. Along with the balloon tank, the one-and-a-half stage design with the separable booster package was a hallmark of Atlas. On Atlas III, the single-stage RD-180 replaced the one-and-a-half stage Rocketdyne propulsion system, which is why I don't compile anything that flew after Atlas IIA(S) in the original "Atlas" category. - Ed Kyle
edkyle99 - 10/11/2006 5:28 PMQuoteskywalker - 10/11/2006 1:06 AMAtlas III the best rocket ever designedAtlas III was pretty good, but I think that Sea Launch Zenit has a pretty good case for "best rocket ever". It is the only launch vehicle in the world able to lift the heaviest 6-tonne comsats into GTO while using just three propulsion stages - and just one type of fuel/oxidizer. It almost launches itself - so automatic that Sea Launch has been able to launch the things steadily using small crews - while at sea a gazillion miles from anywhere. And it flies often. This year, Sea Launch Zenit has been the second most-flown launch vehicle in the world after R-7/Soyuz. Launch Platform Odyssey is tied with Gagarin's Baikonur pad as world's busiest in 2006 to date.- Ed Kyle
Dexter - 10/11/2006 10:02 PMHere is another point to consider in the apparent historical revisionism of the Atlas III.In a published Lockheed paper, http://www.lockheedmartin.com/data/assets/13346.pdfFigure 2 on page 3 of the pdf has a nice little chart on launch cost ($/lb) comparing Atlas V to legacy Atlas vehices.Can anyone guess which Atlas vehicle is missing from the chart??
Dexter - 10/11/2006 10:11 PMHere is another one;http://www.lockheedmartin.com/data/assets/13345.pdfFigure 1, page 3 of the pdf.Same Question.
edkyle99 - 10/11/2006 5:17 PMQuoteskywalker - 10/11/2006 12:54 AMQuotemeiza - 7/11/2006 4:35 AMQuoteJim - 7/11/2006 3:07 AMOther than structure, Atlas V CCB stage has many of the same systems as the Atlas II and III. The ballon tank is not the only thing that defined Atlas. Interesting. What major systems and approaches for Atlas V came from old Atlas? And what came from Titan? And what were built from scratch?Edit: I realize maybe this is more of a subject for a book rather than a newspost... QuoteJim - 7/11/2006 6:41 AMAs far as sytems, they all came from Atlas. The avionics came from Atlas.Structure is not a system it just carries the systems, but the structure came from Titan. The systems came from Atlas for a reason (they were simly the best available and proven on Atlas III the best rocket ever designed) same as the structure came from Titan for a reason, someone wanted to "Remember the Titan", GX proved that the balloon tank was cheaper to build, how did that happen. By the way the GX trades were basically commercial and needed to be accurate and the lowest cost.The original GX was to be powered by a single NK-33 engine. Lockheed Martin got the design changed to something it was already building (the Atlas III "Single Stage Atlas" powered by an RD-180) by investing in the Galaxy Express company. But GX has slipped four or more years behind schedule and the cost of the LPG upper stage engine has more than tripled, leaving Lockheed Martin in the lurch with a promise to supply a stage that it now no longer builds.http://www.geocities.com/launchreport/blog019.html (GX Story)- Ed Kyle
bombay - 10/11/2006 8:22 PM"The Titan V reference is childish, since only the structure is Titan, and the rest of the rest of the systems are Atlas."The Atlas people are clearly very proud of the Atlas heritage and well they should be given how great the old Atlas booster was and the Centaur still is.The technological concept most frequently associated with Atlas will always be the thin walled pressure stabalized steel tanks. It was Bossart's brilliance that thought of this and it was this concept that remained as the integral and "unique" part of the rocket design from the MX-774 in the late 40's through the Atlas III into the early 2000's.The unique aspect of the Atlas had nothing to do with the CCAPS, GSE, PYC, INU, DAU, payload fairing, engine gimbaling capability, or anything else that you care to mention. The thin walled monocoque tank design, which was and is (for the Centaur) totally and completely unique in the rocket industry is what defined and separated the Atlas (and Centaur) from everything else.
skywalker - 11/11/2006 12:38 AMQuoteedkyle99 - 10/11/2006 5:17 PMQuoteskywalker - 10/11/2006 12:54 AMQuotemeiza - 7/11/2006 4:35 AMQuoteJim - 7/11/2006 3:07 AMOther than structure, Atlas V CCB stage has many of the same systems as the Atlas II and III. The ballon tank is not the only thing that defined Atlas. Interesting. What major systems and approaches for Atlas V came from old Atlas? And what came from Titan? And what were built from scratch?Edit: I realize maybe this is more of a subject for a book rather than a newspost... QuoteJim - 7/11/2006 6:41 AMAs far as sytems, they all came from Atlas. The avionics came from Atlas.Structure is not a system it just carries the systems, but the structure came from Titan. The systems came from Atlas for a reason (they were simly the best available and proven on Atlas III the best rocket ever designed) same as the structure came from Titan for a reason, someone wanted to "Remember the Titan", GX proved that the balloon tank was cheaper to build, how did that happen. By the way the GX trades were basically commercial and needed to be accurate and the lowest cost.The original GX was to be powered by a single NK-33 engine. Lockheed Martin got the design changed to something it was already building (the Atlas III "Single Stage Atlas" powered by an RD-180) by investing in the Galaxy Express company. But GX has slipped four or more years behind schedule and the cost of the LPG upper stage engine has more than tripled, leaving Lockheed Martin in the lurch with a promise to supply a stage that it now no longer builds.http://www.geocities.com/launchreport/blog019.html (GX Story)- Ed KyleMy understanding is that LM did NOT want to be a partner originally, that they only wanted to be a sub-contractor, they did not want to invest.What was the designed changed from? The only design LM put out was an A III, but only after a trade study was done to prove it was best cost option.
kevin-rf - 11/11/2006 10:17 AMSo is a Titan I in the same family as a Titan IV? The heritage is there just like the heritage that goes from the MX-774 all the way to the ATLAS 5. If the move to the RD-180 occured while the ATLAS was still an ICBM (now that would be bizzare) would we be argueing the herittage?No one is argueing the heritage of the Thor/Delta. A Delta IV is deffinately not a Thor derived vehicle.
bombay - 11/11/2006 12:30 PMQuotekevin-rf - 11/11/2006 10:17 AMSo is a Titan I in the same family as a Titan IV? The heritage is there just like the heritage that goes from the MX-774 all the way to the ATLAS 5. If the move to the RD-180 occured while the ATLAS was still an ICBM (now that would be bizzare) would we be argueing the herittage?No one is argueing the heritage of the Thor/Delta. A Delta IV is deffinately not a Thor derived vehicle.The Titan from inception consisted of a welded structurally stable aluminum structure with two internal and physically separate propellant tanks. That "core" design never changed. So the Titan I to Titan IV heritage remained intact.As mentioned, steel balloons and Atlas are analogous. The pressure stabalized concept was the most profound differentiator when comparing Atlas to the rest. The Atlas V has a structurally stable aluminum structure as the Titan did. Based on this principal change, the lineage between Atlas V and and what preceded has been broken.