Author Topic: "Americanized" Ariane 5  (Read 15010 times)

Offline Ronsmytheiii

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23394
  • Liked: 1879
  • Likes Given: 1023
"Americanized" Ariane 5
« on: 03/20/2014 10:39 pm »
Full story is on how Arianespace wants to compete for US government payloads:

http://www.parabolicarc.com/2014/03/18/arianespace-compete-american-market/

But note this quote:

Quote
“We are quite sure we would be in a position to offer the best solutions for customers and the taxpayers.  And if it comes to a question of employment, we are ready to see how we can ‘Americanize’ our launcher.”

US government usually has security issues for payloads in addition to ITAR, so I would imagine it would launch from the US.  Might Arianespace push for a familiar concept that already "Americanizes" Ariane 5?

Offline simonbp

  • Science Guy
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7138
  • Liked: 314
  • Likes Given: 183
Re: "Americanized" Ariane 5
« Reply #1 on: 03/21/2014 12:34 am »
I believe they would need to get 51% American-built components to do that. Antares is about as close as you can get with Russian first stage engines and Ukranian-built first stage tankage. Atlas V is next with Russian engines and Swiss 5-meter faring (based on the A5 faring).

My guess would be to keep the basic Ariane outline, but with a US-make core stage tanks and SRBs and European first stage engines, upper stage, and faring. That's not as ridiculous as it could be, especially if you 9x Aerojet Atlas V boosters, Delta II-style. But finding a US airframer to build the core stage would not be easy; IMHO Northrup is the most logical choice, if they actually want to do it.

Offline Prober

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10348
  • Save the spin....I'm keeping you honest!
  • Nevada
  • Liked: 721
  • Likes Given: 729
Re: "Americanized" Ariane 5
« Reply #2 on: 03/21/2014 01:01 am »
I believe they would need to get 51% American-built components to do that. Antares is about as close as you can get with Russian first stage engines and Ukranian-built first stage tankage. Atlas V is next with Russian engines and Swiss 5-meter faring (based on the A5 faring).


The Atlas V engine is NOT a Russian engine.   30% of the engine parts were designed for the Atlas V. 
2017 - Everything Old is New Again.
"I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant..." --Isoroku Yamamoto

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: "Americanized" Ariane 5
« Reply #3 on: 03/21/2014 01:22 am »

The Atlas V engine is NOT a Russian engine.   30% of the engine parts were designed for the Atlas V. 

Yes, it is.  100% Russian content.  the above 30% is still Russian supplied.

Offline Prober

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10348
  • Save the spin....I'm keeping you honest!
  • Nevada
  • Liked: 721
  • Likes Given: 729
Re: "Americanized" Ariane 5
« Reply #4 on: 03/21/2014 01:29 am »
Full story is on how Arianespace wants to compete for US government payloads:

http://www.parabolicarc.com/2014/03/18/arianespace-compete-american-market/

But note this quote:

Quote
“We are quite sure we would be in a position to offer the best solutions for customers and the taxpayers.  And if it comes to a question of employment, we are ready to see how we can ‘Americanize’ our launcher.”

US government usually has security issues for payloads in addition to ITAR, so I would imagine it would launch from the US.  Might Arianespace push for a familiar concept that already "Americanizes" Ariane 5?

better if a check is cut to help out Dream Chaser :)
2017 - Everything Old is New Again.
"I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant..." --Isoroku Yamamoto

Offline Prober

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10348
  • Save the spin....I'm keeping you honest!
  • Nevada
  • Liked: 721
  • Likes Given: 729
Re: "Americanized" Ariane 5
« Reply #5 on: 03/21/2014 01:54 am »

Yes, it is.  100% Russian content.  the above 30% is still Russian supplied.

That's a very important 30% that was needed to bring the engine up to American standards.

Manufactured by a Russian Contractor, the design is a hybrid with only 70% being in common with the Russian engine the RD-170.

This is the "pure" Russian engine http://www.astronautix.com/engines/rd170.htm


Was the Soviet/Russian engine designed to run on us RP-1?

Compare the specifications of the RD-170 vs RD-180.   The Pdf of the RD-180 is posted

How about the throttling etc ?

Jim the RD-180 is not your dad's Russian engine  ;D






 
« Last Edit: 03/21/2014 01:57 am by Prober »
2017 - Everything Old is New Again.
"I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant..." --Isoroku Yamamoto

Offline simonbp

  • Science Guy
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7138
  • Liked: 314
  • Likes Given: 183
Re: "Americanized" Ariane 5
« Reply #6 on: 03/21/2014 02:19 am »
Jim's point is still valid; as far as the US government is concerned, RD-180 is 100% foreign content. It doesn't matter if it's a special order from Russia, it's still all foreign content.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: "Americanized" Ariane 5
« Reply #7 on: 03/21/2014 02:51 am »

1.  That's a very important 30% that was needed to bring the engine up to American standards.

2.  Manufactured by a Russian Contractor, the design is a hybrid with only 70% being in common with the Russian engine the RD-170.

3.  This is the "pure" Russian engine http://www.astronautix.com/engines/rd170.htm

4.  Was the Soviet/Russian engine designed to run on us RP-1?

5.  Compare the specifications of the RD-170 vs RD-180.   The Pdf of the RD-180 is posted

6.  How about the throttling etc ?

7.   the RD-180 is not your dad's Russian engine

1.  No, it is not to bring it up to American standards.  As the RD-180 is 1/2 RD-170, it doesn't mean that two RD-180's are bolted together.  The 30% is necessary to complete the design to that "1/2" RD-170 can work as a standalone.  see next post

2.  Doesn't matter that it is a hybrid, it is all Russian

3.  RD-180 is just as pure.

4.  Has no bearing on subject

5.  Again, had no bearing

6. See above.

7.  It is just as much a Russian as my father's.  The fact that its application is for an American rocket still doesn't matter. 

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: "Americanized" Ariane 5
« Reply #8 on: 03/21/2014 02:59 am »
The first rail car is the analogy of the  RD-170.  The two beds are like two sets of two nozzles.  Now split the car into two operational flat cars.  In order to do that, the center truck (rail wheel assembly) has to be removed and a truck similar to ones on the ends has to be added and the part of the car that was near the center has to be modified to be like the other end. This is the new 30%, which makes the functional "RD-180" rail car.
« Last Edit: 03/21/2014 03:01 am by Jim »

Offline Remes

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 434
  • Germany
  • Liked: 246
  • Likes Given: 142
Re: "Americanized" Ariane 5
« Reply #9 on: 03/22/2014 05:34 pm »
SLS, Atlas, Delta, Falcon, Antares, some smaller one, ... how many rockets does the US need and does it need one more?

It seems to me that companies are fighting for launches. So even if the Ariane would be 100% build in US (every tax dollar is spent on US citizens) what payloads would it be good for? Which payloads are waiting for this rocket?

Then looking at the Arianespace point of view: First of all, how would they transfer knowledge about products used in the Ariane 5 to the US? Ariane 5 is build by more than 100 single companies across Europe. The knowledge lies within the companies and is not the intellectual property of ESA, the EU or anyone else.

Given they do transfer the knowlede to the US, they build every single part in the US. Where is the benefit? There is no advantage in terms of economy of scale. Copying all production locations in the US is just building one more standing army. If it is just about growing/increasing turnover/increasing profit/bla bla bla, well, that's not my department.

Launch industry is very much dependent on government money. And I guess, every one wants his tax dollars to be mainly spend on local products. So no Ariane in the US and no Delta in Europe.

Offline M129K

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 823
    • "a historian too many" blog.
  • Liked: 71
  • Likes Given: 290
Re: "Americanized" Ariane 5
« Reply #10 on: 03/22/2014 05:46 pm »
Ariane already fails at it's main purpose, which is independent European access to space. European government payloads being launched on Soyuz and Falcon 9 are prime examples of this. Why would they even look at "Americanizing" it, no longer making it an independent European launcher?

Offline M129K

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 823
    • "a historian too many" blog.
  • Liked: 71
  • Likes Given: 290
Re: "Americanized" Ariane 5
« Reply #11 on: 03/22/2014 05:49 pm »
My guess would be to keep the basic Ariane outline, but with a US-make core stage tanks and SRBs and European first stage engines, upper stage, and faring. That's not as ridiculous as it could be, especially if you 9x Aerojet Atlas V boosters, Delta II-style. But finding a US airframer to build the core stage would not be easy; IMHO Northrup is the most logical choice, if they actually want to do it.
Ariane's core is top-lifted, and the thrust of the boosters is transferred through the forward skirt on top of the core. Using smaller Atlas V boosters would require a core redesign and significantly increase empty mass.

Offline Remes

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 434
  • Germany
  • Liked: 246
  • Likes Given: 142
Re: "Americanized" Ariane 5
« Reply #12 on: 03/22/2014 06:21 pm »
Ariane already fails at it's main purpose, which is independent European access to space. European government payloads being launched on Soyuz and Falcon 9 are prime examples of this. Why would they even look at "Americanizing" it, no longer making it an independent European launcher?

The launcher is independent (in terms of most parts are produced in Europe with raw materials delivered from all over the world). If I'm not mistaken the OBC is an Actel Chip (albeit european intellectual ip, or better said: based on free sparc design). The first upper stage had propellant valves produced in the us. Integrated Circuits coming from most likely all the world). Nevertheless, nothing used on Ariane, which couldn't be sourced within one or two years from europe.

Ariane 5 is just too big for most payloads. SES is a european operator, which is free to choose who is launching it's payloads. Doesn't make Ariane 5 dependent. A whole bunch of russian rockets is used to launch european payloads (e.g. Swarm). Simply it's cheaper and Ariane 5 is completely over dimensioned.

And I wouldn't assume that "americanizing" Ariane 5 would mean, that Europe drops this launcher.

Offline M129K

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 823
    • "a historian too many" blog.
  • Liked: 71
  • Likes Given: 290
Re: "Americanized" Ariane 5
« Reply #13 on: 03/22/2014 06:37 pm »
And I wouldn't assume that "americanizing" Ariane 5 would mean, that Europe drops this launcher.
No, but it would mean it would no longer be fully European. The main purpose of Ariane is allowing European governments to launch payloads without being dependent on other countries. Placing the majority of the manufacturing of Ariane 5 outside of Europe would completely defeat this purpose.

European governments launching on Russian rockets are just further examples over the frustration many have with Ariane 5. Placing the production outside of Europe would only make it worse.

Offline Ronsmytheiii

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23394
  • Liked: 1879
  • Likes Given: 1023
Re: "Americanized" Ariane 5
« Reply #14 on: 03/22/2014 06:53 pm »
Ariane's core is top-lifted, and the thrust of the boosters is transferred through the forward skirt on top of the core. Using smaller Atlas V boosters would require a core redesign and significantly increase empty mass.

The only American launch vehicle that uses top-lifting boosters is SLS , but arent the new boosters too big for Ariane 5?


Offline M129K

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 823
    • "a historian too many" blog.
  • Liked: 71
  • Likes Given: 290
Re: "Americanized" Ariane 5
« Reply #15 on: 03/22/2014 07:05 pm »

The only American launch vehicle that uses top-lifting boosters is SLS , but arent the new boosters too big for Ariane 5?
They're far too big. A single RSRMV is bigger than two Ariane 5 EAPs together.

Offline JMSC

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 112
  • Liked: 42
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: "Americanized" Ariane 5
« Reply #16 on: 03/23/2014 12:33 am »
In a March 19, Spaceflight Now interview Stephen Israel defined his proposal as, "We are quite sure we can come with the best solution for institutional customers, for American taxpayers, and even for jobs because if the market was to open, we would be ready to have some American content on the rocket if ESA allows us to do so."  So he is quite clearly floating a trial balloon to bring the US on as something of a junior partner in exchange for allowing Arianespace to compete for US government payloads.  So the question is what kind of US content would Arianespace have to add in order to be allowed to compete.  The Buy America Act requires that US content needs to be at least 51% or else Arianespace would need a waiver, which could be granted by DoD and NASA for their respective payloads.  So he could use an RS-68 for the main stage, replace the planned Vinci with an RL-10 for the upper stage, assemble the thing in Florida where he would likely have to launch it and call it the Euro Delta IV or get waiver from the Buy America Act.  Nah!

I really don't think this idea will fly, there is no easy way to add enough US content to the Ariane V without essentially developing  a new rocket and with four domestic rocket families for medium to large payloads (Falcon, Atlas V, Delta IV, and Antares) as well as the Athena, Pegasus, and Minotaur for light payloads there is hardly a justification for DoD or NASA to waive the requirements of the Buy America Act.  This idea likely won't go any farther than a few speeches from Mr. Israel.

« Last Edit: 03/23/2014 02:52 am by JMSC »

Offline Prober

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10348
  • Save the spin....I'm keeping you honest!
  • Nevada
  • Liked: 721
  • Likes Given: 729
Re: "Americanized" Ariane 5
« Reply #17 on: 03/23/2014 12:55 pm »

I really don't think this idea will fly, there is no easy way to add enough US content to the Ariane V without essentially developing  a new rocket and with four domestic rocket families for medium to large payloads (Falcon, Atlas V, Delta IV, and Antares) as well as the Athena, Pegasus, and Minotaur for light payloads there is hardly a justification for DoD or NASA to waive the requirements of the Buy America Act.  This idea likely won't go any farther than a few speeches from Mr. Israel.

The real need is for crew to ISS.   

The best American content is a spacecraft.    Fill the need with the Dream Chaser ;)
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=33760.0

A 3-4 Operational crew Dream Chaser launched out of Guiana could be a welcome problem fixer.

Launching a test Dream Chaser test vehicle in a time aggressive campaign maybe 2015 would be a win, win.

==================================

or another "thought" 
 
put a hold on the ATV, use that launcher for a late 2014 Dream Chaser test launch?

« Last Edit: 03/23/2014 01:01 pm by Prober »
2017 - Everything Old is New Again.
"I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant..." --Isoroku Yamamoto

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12095
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 18197
  • Likes Given: 12158
Re: "Americanized" Ariane 5
« Reply #18 on: 03/23/2014 02:43 pm »

I really don't think this idea will fly, there is no easy way to add enough US content to the Ariane V without essentially developing  a new rocket and with four domestic rocket families for medium to large payloads (Falcon, Atlas V, Delta IV, and Antares) as well as the Athena, Pegasus, and Minotaur for light payloads there is hardly a justification for DoD or NASA to waive the requirements of the Buy America Act.  This idea likely won't go any farther than a few speeches from Mr. Israel.

The real need is for crew to ISS.   

The best American content is a spacecraft.    Fill the need with the Dream Chaser ;)
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=33760.0

A 3-4 Operational crew Dream Chaser launched out of Guiana could be a welcome problem fixer.

Launching a test Dream Chaser test vehicle in a time aggressive campaign maybe 2015 would be a win, win.

Why launch Dream Chaser on a rocket that would require man-rating while the Dream Chaser vehicle-of-choice (Atlas 5) is already well into the process of man-rating?

Offline JMSC

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 112
  • Liked: 42
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: "Americanized" Ariane 5
« Reply #19 on: 03/23/2014 03:22 pm »

I really don't think this idea will fly, there is no easy way to add enough US content to the Ariane V without essentially developing  a new rocket and with four domestic rocket families for medium to large payloads (Falcon, Atlas V, Delta IV, and Antares) as well as the Athena, Pegasus, and Minotaur for light payloads there is hardly a justification for DoD or NASA to waive the requirements of the Buy America Act.  This idea likely won't go any farther than a few speeches from Mr. Israel.

The real need is for crew to ISS.   

The best American content is a spacecraft.    Fill the need with the Dream Chaser ;)
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=33760.0

A 3-4 Operational crew Dream Chaser launched out of Guiana could be a welcome problem fixer.

Launching a test Dream Chaser test vehicle in a time aggressive campaign maybe 2015 would be a win, win.

Still wouldn't help Arianespace with its desire to gain access to the US government launch market.  Such an agreement could be reached but it would be a cooperative agreement much like the ATV.  NASA as part of the agreement could fly Dreamchaser on Ariane V, or for that matter Orion, but as woods170 pointed out A5 would have to be man rated and the cost would fall on the ESA, and then ESA would likely have to pay for a portion of the flight costs.  It would hardly be worth it for ESA to fund these costs in order to have 1 or 2 cooperative flights a year on A5. 

In the end the real issue Israel has is that by dollar value the US government is the biggest market in the world.  I remember reading a few years back that by dollar value it was almost half of the global total.  With the international launch market Arianespace relies on under seige by Spacex, Russia, China and possibly other competitors Arianespace needs access to other markets with the US government market being the most desirable.  Given the structure of US procurement law and the lack of any desire on the part of US agencies to buy flights from Arianespace I don't see anything changing with regards to US policy.

PS I personally think a Euro Orion or Dreamchaser on A5 is a great idea, but manned spaceflight on A5 isn't part of the ESA's vision for future spaceflight right now.  Besides spending all this money to upgrade A5 now would entirely eliminate the case for developing the A6, the Germans might like the idea but I doubt it has major support in other countries.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0