Author Topic: ULA Vulcan Launch Vehicle (as announced/built) - General Discussion Thread 3  (Read 20685 times)

Offline TrevorMonty

 ULA will use rideshare to make extra money from spare capacity. Depending on mission may add SRBs because of rideshare. In 2019 Astrobotics will fly as secondary on Atlas/Cynus mission, centuar does earth departure burn.

Giving rideshares to lunar robotic missions could be nice sideline. A more capable Centuar might even have endurance for TLI, giving nice boost to landed payload.

More capable US more options there are for using spare capacity.

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5186
  • Liked: 3105
  • Likes Given: 4427
ULA will use rideshare to make extra money from spare capacity. Depending on mission may add SRBs because of rideshare. In 2019 Astrobotics will fly as secondary on Atlas/Cynus mission, centuar does earth departure burn.

Giving rideshares to lunar robotic missions could be nice sideline. A more capable Centuar might even have endurance for TLI, giving nice boost to landed payload.

More capable US more options there are for using spare capacity.

Nice rationalization.
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline Sknowball

  • Member
  • Posts: 14
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 0
Not really a surprise after the announced additional 6 months Centaur V adds to Vulcan development, but Tory Bruno did confirm that Vulcan Initial Launch Capability has slipped into 2020.

Quote
The current Vulcan ILC is mid 2020. It will fly with an American engine, replacing Atlasí RD180
https://www.reddit.com/r/BlueOrigin/comments/7pavyi/blue_origins_latest_footage_of_the_be4_engine/dsitdej/

He also provided a small update on the Vulcan CDR.

Quote
@wehavemeco: any update on Vulcanís CDR? Anxiously awaiting.
@torybruno: 2 parts. First part complete and successful
https://twitter.com/torybruno/status/951271568218320896

Online woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7483
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 3266
  • Likes Given: 952
Not really a surprise after the announced additional 6 months Centaur V adds to Vulcan development, but Tory Bruno did confirm that Vulcan Initial Launch Capability has slipped into 2020.

Quote
The current Vulcan ILC is mid 2020. It will fly with an American engine, replacing Atlasí RD180
https://www.reddit.com/r/BlueOrigin/comments/7pavyi/blue_origins_latest_footage_of_the_be4_engine/dsitdej/

He also provided a small update on the Vulcan CDR.

Quote
@wehavemeco: any update on Vulcanís CDR? Anxiously awaiting.
@torybruno: 2 parts. First part complete and successful
https://twitter.com/torybruno/status/951271568218320896

People constantly castigate "that other company from Hawthorne" for having delays. But here is ULA having a six-month delay and things are are (almost eery) quiet.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31497
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 9865
  • Likes Given: 307


People constantly castigate "that other company from Hawthorne" for having delays. But here is ULA having a six-month delay and things are are (almost eery) quiet.

Because there is enough ULA castigation on the rest of the forum

Online woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7483
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 3266
  • Likes Given: 952


People constantly castigate "that other company from Hawthorne" for having delays. But here is ULA having a six-month delay and things are are (almost eery) quiet.

Because there is enough ULA castigation on the rest of the forum
Nice try Jim. That is castigation aimed at ULA mostly for not going for reusability whereas that other company is castigated over just about everything they do.
« Last Edit: 01/12/2018 11:13 AM by woods170 »

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12957
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 3709
  • Likes Given: 634
People constantly castigate "that other company from Hawthorne" for having delays. But here is ULA having a six-month delay and things are are (almost eery) quiet.
That's because we already knew about the delay.  Tory Bruno announced the trade - Centaur 5 for six months time - on twitter a month or two ago.

 - Ed Kyle

Online envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2943
  • Liked: 1372
  • Likes Given: 912
People constantly castigate "that other company from Hawthorne" for having delays. But here is ULA having a six-month delay and things are are (almost eery) quiet.
That's because we already knew about the delay.  Tory Bruno announced the trade - Centaur 5 for six months time - on twitter a month or two ago.

 - Ed Kyle

Was Vulcan late 2019? I don't recall seeing a date, just the year.

They started working with Blue on BE-4 in late 2014, and unveiled the vehicle design in early 2015. 5 years and some months seems pretty typical for a mostly new LV development program.
« Last Edit: 01/12/2018 03:16 PM by envy887 »

Offline oldAtlas_Eguy

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3243
  • Florida
  • Liked: 1628
  • Likes Given: 179
People constantly castigate "that other company from Hawthorne" for having delays. But here is ULA having a six-month delay and things are are (almost eery) quiet.
That's because we already knew about the delay.  Tory Bruno announced the trade - Centaur 5 for six months time - on twitter a month or two ago.

 - Ed Kyle

Was Vulcan late 2019? I don't recall seeing a date, just the year.

They started working with Blue on BE-4 in late 2014, and unveiled the vehicle design in early 2015. 5 years and some months seems pretty typical for a mostly new LV development program.
5+ years is the new typical development program period for a new commercial medium/heavy (20mt+) LV. SpaceX's is the one push this lower but not by much and as the vehicle SpaceX is design increases in complexity and size so do the development period. Vulcan/Centaur V is not that complex of a system. And in fact will probably have less complexity than the Atlas/Centaur. So a 5 year development is what one would expect. Also they should not have much schedule slippage for that same reason. They announce almost 2 years ago a 2019 first launch so a 6 month slip after 2 years of design work and some significant plan changes in the developemnt is quite good schedule management. ULA has always been excellent in their ability to manage their schedules and to predict highly accurate planning dates.

Offline clongton

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10323
  • Connecticut
    • Direct Launcher
  • Liked: 2147
  • Likes Given: 682
Was Vulcan late 2019? I don't recall seeing a date, just the year.

When Vulcan was first announced, ULA said first flight was NET 2019 - no quarter given.
« Last Edit: 01/12/2018 07:50 PM by clongton »
Chuck - DIRECT co-founder
I started my career on the Saturn-V F-1A engine

Offline TrevorMonty

ULA are at mercy of engine designers Blue  or AJR, which are totally out of ULA control.
They can't start bending metal on booster till engine us picked and its performance proven.

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4830
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 3476
  • Likes Given: 1126
Quote
@torybruno are you afraid that the constant rate of success will be hauled with the introduction of a whole new rocket not entirely based in Lockheed/Boeing...
https://twitter.com/astro_zach/status/951995804297949186

Quote
Yes, but the rocket is only half of the equation
https://twitter.com/torybruno/status/951998937975566336

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5186
  • Liked: 3105
  • Likes Given: 4427


Don't think ULA plus AJR is competitive.  Neither has adjusted to the realities of today's and tomorrow's market

No, people are just over hyping the "realities of today's and tomorrow's market".  Most don't know what they are talking about and just repost the same unsupported biased opinions.

Stephane Isreal, for instance...
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=31484.msg1771157#msg1771157
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31497
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 9865
  • Likes Given: 307


Don't think ULA plus AJR is competitive.  Neither has adjusted to the realities of today's and tomorrow's market

No, people are just over hyping the "realities of today's and tomorrow's market".  Most don't know what they are talking about and just repost the same unsupported biased opinions.

Stephane Isreal, for instance...
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=31484.msg1771157#msg1771157

No, just you

Offline john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6401
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 870
  • Likes Given: 5496

It is different though. The potential engineering value of returning a booster for inspection is extremely high, since it can result in fixing a failure mode that saves a future billion dollar payload or prevent a stand-down and RTF costing hundreds of millions.

Excess margin is also valuable in case of an anomaly. A multi-engine upper stage would have engine-out redundancy and extra delta-v to insure against booster shortfalls like the DIVH first flight failure and OA-6 close call. Landing margins for a booster provide the same thing, but is also different because it can also enable reuse (the choice to reuse or not reuse isn't necessarily made before the flight).
True.

And yet, apart from earlier versions of Centaur, I know of no multi engine upper stage currently flying. :(

Needless to say that complicates any planning for recovery and reuse quite a bit, given the mass changes between fully loaded and nearly empty.
"Solids are a branch of fireworks, not rocketry. :-) :-) ", Henry Spencer 1/28/11  Averse to bold? You must be in marketing."It's all in the sequencing" K. Mattingly.  STS-Keeping most of the stakeholders happy most of the time.
So you're going to Mars to seek a better life. What does that mean to you? Always spot a fanbois by how they react to their idols failures.

Offline john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6401
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 870
  • Likes Given: 5496
Was Vulcan late 2019? I don't recall seeing a date, just the year.

When Vulcan was first announced, ULA said first flight was NET 2019 - no quarter given.
And they were right.  :(

Not Earlier Than 2019 is indeed 2020.

Admittedly there is more of a sense of urgency with ULA's financial position WRT the parents, but that seems quite a well scheduled programme.

IMHO The Joker in this pack is the funding,  and wheather the parents are still forcing them to do Q to Q requests. If they'd gone to a less piecemeal approach I imagine there would have some kind of formal announcement by now, as it would suggest a big increase in confidence of ULA's plans to execute.

Or there was and I missed it?
"Solids are a branch of fireworks, not rocketry. :-) :-) ", Henry Spencer 1/28/11  Averse to bold? You must be in marketing."It's all in the sequencing" K. Mattingly.  STS-Keeping most of the stakeholders happy most of the time.
So you're going to Mars to seek a better life. What does that mean to you? Always spot a fanbois by how they react to their idols failures.

Offline meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7893
  • N. California
  • Liked: 4140
  • Likes Given: 843
Not really a surprise after the announced additional 6 months Centaur V adds to Vulcan development, but Tory Bruno did confirm that Vulcan Initial Launch Capability has slipped into 2020.

Quote
The current Vulcan ILC is mid 2020. It will fly with an American engine, replacing Atlasí RD180
https://www.reddit.com/r/BlueOrigin/comments/7pavyi/blue_origins_latest_footage_of_the_be4_engine/dsitdej/

He also provided a small update on the Vulcan CDR.

Quote
@wehavemeco: any update on Vulcanís CDR? Anxiously awaiting.
@torybruno: 2 parts. First part complete and successful
https://twitter.com/torybruno/status/951271568218320896

People constantly castigate "that other company from Hawthorne" for having delays. But here is ULA having a six-month delay and things are are (almost eery) quiet.
Just look at what the three "nextgen" programs bring to the table, and it's pretty obvious:

An EELV (with an uncertain path to partial reusability), a large "mostly reusable" rocket with some path to full reusability, and a fully reusable launch system + spaceship.

The EELV is simply less interesting to most observers, and so 6 months here or there generate a lot less excitement.
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31497
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 9865
  • Likes Given: 307

The EELV is simply less interesting to most observers, and so 6 months here or there generate a lot less excitement.

They fly more interesting missions than GTO comsats or station resupply.   

Too many people are caught up in the means with the ends are more important.  I don't care how I get my packages.

Offline meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7893
  • N. California
  • Liked: 4140
  • Likes Given: 843

The EELV is simply less interesting to most observers, and so 6 months here or there generate a lot less excitement.

They fly more interesting missions than GTO comsats or station resupply.   

Too many people are caught up in the means with the ends are more important.  I don't care how I get my packages.
You're comparing today's EELV to F9.

I'm comparing Vulcan to NG to BFS, and the interest level they generate. 

BFS will fly some pretty interesting missions...
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline clongton

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10323
  • Connecticut
    • Direct Launcher
  • Liked: 2147
  • Likes Given: 682
The EELV is simply less interesting to most observers, and so 6 months here or there generate a lot less excitement.

There's no such thing as a less interesting EELV. Customers are interested in whatever launch vehicle best fits their need for a specific launch. They don't care how many engines it has, what color it's painted, who makes the vehicle or if it has 2 or 5 stages. They are only interested in an appropriate launch service and whatever EELV fits their needs becomes the choice.
« Last Edit: 01/13/2018 08:08 PM by clongton »
Chuck - DIRECT co-founder
I started my career on the Saturn-V F-1A engine

Tags: