On August 24, 1995, SMSC awarded EELV Phase I concept validation contracts to four contractor teams led by Alliant Techsystems Aerospace Systems Group of Magna, UT; Boeing Expendable Launch Systems (then known as McDonnell Douglas Aerospace-West) of Huntington Beach, CA; Boeing Missiles & Space Division of Seattle, WA; and Lockheed Martin Astronautics Group of Denver, CO. Each of the 15-month, $30 million contracts called for developing cost- and risk-reduction concepts for upgrades to existing launchers and their ground support infrastructure.The Air Force made its down-select on December 20, 1996, and awarded EELV pre-development engineering and manufacturing contracts to the teams of Boeing Expendable Launch Systems and Lockheed Martin Astronautics for Delta IV and Atlas V. The two $60 million firm fixed contracts were scheduled for completion by May 1998.
Jim - 3/10/2006 8:38 AMThe USAF didn't want solids.
GraphGuy - 3/10/2006 3:20 PMQuoteJim - 3/10/2006 8:38 AMThe USAF didn't want solids.I assume you mean Solids for the main stage? Atlas V seems to like solids.
PurduesUSAFguy - 10/10/2006 6:38 PMIt's a shame that the USAF was anti-solid, it seems to me that the ATK EELV stood the greatest chance of being the cheapest to produce given the simplicity of solid rockets.
Calphor - 5/10/2006 5:53 AMAs a quick reminder, ATK had not purchased Thiokol at the time of the original EELV contract awards. ATK had purchased Hercules, who was, at that time, the manufacturer of the Trident D5 missile and the prime on the by then cancelled ASRM. It would be logical that the EELV proposal was a derivative of ASRM (I don't have definitive knowledge of that). Thiokol was not purchased by ATK until 2001.
meiza - 10/10/2006 7:37 PMQuoteCalphor - 5/10/2006 5:53 AMAs a quick reminder, ATK had not purchased Thiokol at the time of the original EELV contract awards. ATK had purchased Hercules, who was, at that time, the manufacturer of the Trident D5 missile and the prime on the by then cancelled ASRM. It would be logical that the EELV proposal was a derivative of ASRM (I don't have definitive knowledge of that). Thiokol was not purchased by ATK until 2001.Ah, sorry, I was a bit lost on these mergers, I should have written Alliant EELV proposal as topic of course.But why was USAF anti-solid then? Titan IV used big solids. And surely huge amounts of other USAF hardware has solid rockets in them, smaller of course. But they should have been familiar with the technology at least.And thanks for the pic, Gunter!
Jim - 10/10/2006 5:55 PMQuotePurduesUSAFguy - 10/10/2006 6:38 PMIt's a shame that the USAF was anti-solid, it seems to me that the ATK EELV stood the greatest chance of being the cheapest to produce given the simplicity of solid rockets.Not true. It still needed upperstages