Author Topic: CSIS March 2017 report: Beyond the RD-180  (Read 3325 times)

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 48165
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 81654
  • Likes Given: 36933
CSIS March 2017 report: Beyond the RD-180
« on: 03/22/2017 02:52 pm »
May be this is better in space policy?

Report is attached, first saw it cited here:

Quote
Eric Berger‏Verified account @SciGuySpace 6m6 minutes ago

New @CSIS report: If the BE-4 engine's hot-fire test is successful, it is the obvious choice to succeed the RD-180. https://t.co/vVVy2U1jer

https://twitter.com/SciGuySpace/status/844575492766347265

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 48165
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 81654
  • Likes Given: 36933
Re: CSIS March 2017 report: Beyond the RD-180
« Reply #1 on: 03/22/2017 03:15 pm »
https://www.csis.org/analysis/beyond-rd-180

Quote
Beyond the RD-180

March 21, 2017
This report explores how the United States came to depend on the Russian RD-180 rocket engine as part of the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) program, realistic options for the engine’s replacement in the coming decade, and potential space launch acquisition strategies for the future. The first section provides an overview of the history of the development and evolution of EELV, including the early origins of both the RD-180 and the EELV program, as well as the EELV acquisition strategy, the creation of the United Launch Alliance, and the entry of other private competitors to the launch market. The second section discusses the more recent controversy over the RD-180 in the U.S. Congress after Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014, including recent efforts to cap the number of Russian engines that U.S. companies can acquire. The third section describes five options to transition from the RD-180 that could be implemented within several years. These options include the oft-cited “drop-in replacement” option, using new engines on new launch systems and using currently available alternative launch vehicles. The last section discusses planning for the future of space launch acquisition. This discussion includes: challenges to the current strategy, the major considerations in developing a renewed acquisition strategy, and a few specific examples of what a new national security space launch acquisition strategy could look like.
 
While the details for how and when the RD-180 will be replaced are not yet settled, the consensus within the U.S. Congress and executive branch remains that the United States must end its reliance on the RD-180. This report explains the impetus for finding an alternative engine, explores the options that are available going forward, and describes the challenges that will be placed on the federal government and the private sector in doing so.

Offline TrevorMonty

Re: CSIS March 2017 report: Beyond the RD-180
« Reply #2 on: 03/22/2017 03:54 pm »
No mention of OA NGLV in report.

Offline russianhalo117

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8755
  • Liked: 4672
  • Likes Given: 768
Re: CSIS March 2017 report: Beyond the RD-180
« Reply #3 on: 03/22/2017 04:21 pm »
No mention of OA NGLV in report.
That is because OA NGLV is only in internal study and its fate as to whether to proceed or not is slated to be decided around the June 2017 timeframe per OA IR transcripts. If OA proceeds with its NGLV then you can expect it to be added into the next report.

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 48165
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 81654
  • Likes Given: 36933
Re: CSIS March 2017 report: Beyond the RD-180
« Reply #4 on: 03/22/2017 06:56 pm »
No mention of New Glenn either, although I imagine that's at least as advanced as Vulcan and probably more secure in its funding!

I wonder if they approached Blue Origin? Did Blue say, or was it assumed, that they have no interest in certification/competing for government launches?

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6257
  • Liked: 4164
  • Likes Given: 6078
Re: CSIS March 2017 report: Beyond the RD-180
« Reply #5 on: 03/22/2017 07:05 pm »
Three policy assumptions in the analysis(p15ff):
Quote
The first assumption is that the requirement to end the U.S. military’s use of the RD-180 engine by 2022 or sooner, as specified in the FY17 NDAA, will remain in effect.
Quote
The second assumption is that the United States will continue its policy of maintaining two independent vehicles for national security space launch.
Quote
The third assumption is that SpaceX’s family of Falcon launch vehicles (including the Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy) will be one of the launch vehicles used by the U.S. military.

Quote
This analysis is therefore focused on which options are available for a second independent launch vehicle in addition to the Falcon family of vehicles.

But we all know what is meant by 'assume'
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline Rik ISS-fan

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1519
  • the Netherlands
  • Liked: 617
  • Likes Given: 211
Re: CSIS March 2017 report: Beyond the RD-180
« Reply #6 on: 03/22/2017 07:47 pm »
That is because OA NGLV is only in internal study and its fate as to whether to proceed or not is slated to be decided around the June 2017 timeframe per OA IR transcripts. If OA proceeds with its NGLV then you can expect it to be added into the next report.

If I'm not mistaken, this is not true. Orbital ATK is studying it for a DoD contract.
The ablative nozzle extension for BE-3U is also part of that program.
And SpaceX go a contract for a higher performance upperstage, if I'm not mistaken.

Could the two launchers on this BO tweet be on the same scale? AKA a single BE-4 engine New Glenn with a BE-3U; RL-10C /CECE, XCOR... upper-stage.
« Last Edit: 03/22/2017 08:24 pm by Rik ISS-fan »

Offline AlexP

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 113
  • Liked: 202
  • Likes Given: 74
Re: CSIS March 2017 report: Beyond the RD-180
« Reply #7 on: 03/22/2017 09:43 pm »
If I'm not mistaken, this is not true. Orbital ATK is studying it for a DoD contract.
The ablative nozzle extension for BE-3U is also part of that program.
And SpaceX go a contract for a higher performance upperstage, if I'm not mistaken.

Could the two launchers on this BO tweet be on the same scale? AKA a single BE-4 engine New Glenn with a BE-3U; RL-10C /CECE, XCOR... upper-stage.
No, if you enlarge the picture you can see that the left hand vehicle is labelled as New Shepard (and there's a person pictured beside each vehicle for scale).

Offline russianhalo117

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8755
  • Liked: 4672
  • Likes Given: 768
Re: CSIS March 2017 report: Beyond the RD-180
« Reply #8 on: 03/23/2017 12:48 am »
That is because OA NGLV is only in internal study and its fate as to whether to proceed or not is slated to be decided around the June 2017 timeframe per OA IR transcripts. If OA proceeds with its NGLV then you can expect it to be added into the next report.

If I'm not mistaken, this is not true. Orbital ATK is studying it for a DoD contract.
The ablative nozzle extension for BE-3U is also part of that program.
And SpaceX go a contract for a higher performance upperstage, if I'm not mistaken.

Could the two launchers on this BO tweet be on the same scale? AKA a single BE-4 engine New Glenn with a BE-3U; RL-10C /CECE, XCOR... upper-stage.
That is not what the Investor Relations info says BE-3U-EN is a separate programme as is CBS and GEM-63XL. The proposal is to put everything together with BE-3U and BE-3U-EN as options.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1