Author Topic: ATK ULA Proposal  (Read 80603 times)

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15394
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 8567
  • Likes Given: 1356
ATK ULA Proposal
« on: 09/23/2014 04:08 pm »
ATK has proposed an unspecified solid motor solution to replace RD-180. 

http://atk.mediaroom.com/2014-09-23-ATK-Offers-Solid-Solution-to-U-S-Air-Forces-RD-180-Replacement-Request

 - Ed Kyle

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6809
  • California
  • Liked: 8485
  • Likes Given: 5384
Re: ATK ULA Proposal
« Reply #1 on: 09/23/2014 04:17 pm »
I'm curious about the specifics, but it does feel like a "square peg in a round hole" kind of solution.

Offline butters

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2399
  • Liked: 1693
  • Likes Given: 598
Re: ATK ULA Proposal
« Reply #2 on: 09/23/2014 04:21 pm »
Does ULA get to make the selection (e.g. their preference for BE-4) or will it be dictated to them by the Air Force?

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6809
  • California
  • Liked: 8485
  • Likes Given: 5384
Re: ATK ULA Proposal
« Reply #3 on: 09/23/2014 04:29 pm »
It sounds like ULA has already made their decision.

That does of course make this an interesting scenario if ULA on their own made a decision before Congress awarding funds for an "RD-180 replacement program" - such a multi-billion $ award would presumably have to be competed. I guess they don't need the congressional funds?

Offline Zed_Noir

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5490
  • Canada
  • Liked: 1809
  • Likes Given: 1302
Re: ATK ULA Proposal
« Reply #4 on: 09/23/2014 04:56 pm »
Guessing the ATK SRM proposal will be something around the size of the advance booster for the SLS. Or am I mistaken?
 
It sounds like ULA has already made their decision.
Looks that way. Project development completion pressure IMO. Have to keep pace with the Hawthorne folks.

Quote
That does of course make this an interesting scenario if ULA on their own made a decision before Congress awarding funds for an "RD-180 replacement program" - such a multi-billion $ award would presumably have to be competed. I guess they don't need the congressional funds?
Blue & ULA (aka Blue United  :)) ) have the Bezos piggy bank.

Offline ChrisWilson68

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5266
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 4992
  • Likes Given: 6459
Re: ATK ULA Proposal
« Reply #5 on: 09/23/2014 04:58 pm »
It sounds like ULA has already made their decision.

That does of course make this an interesting scenario if ULA on their own made a decision before Congress awarding funds for an "RD-180 replacement program" - such a multi-billion $ award would presumably have to be competed. I guess they don't need the congressional funds?

Perhaps the whole reason ULA made an announcement now about partnering with Blue Origin is to try to head off that competition and/or political pressure to accept ATK or some other solution.  I can imagine ULA might be alarmed to have Congress dictating the process to decide who gets to design their future launch vehicles.  They might well be eager to seize control of their own destiny.

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10586
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 4548
  • Likes Given: 13523
Re: ATK ULA Proposal
« Reply #6 on: 09/23/2014 05:03 pm »
Sounds a bit like Liberty 2.0...
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator

Offline M129K

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 823
    • "a historian too many" blog.
  • Liked: 71
  • Likes Given: 290
Re: ATK ULA Proposal
« Reply #7 on: 09/23/2014 07:24 pm »
I'm getting flashbacks to the Ariane 6 trade studies from this...

But if selected (really big if) how would this affect CST-100?

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15394
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 8567
  • Likes Given: 1356
Re: ATK ULA Proposal
« Reply #8 on: 09/23/2014 07:34 pm »
I'm curious about the specifics, but it does feel like a "square peg in a round hole" kind of solution.
It is easy to conjure up an Atlas 401 replacement.  I can imagine two composite case solid stages topped by Centaur that could weigh maybe 15% less than Atlas 401.  (That would be a sweet little rocket.)  The problem is getting to a cost effective solution for the full range from Atlas 411 to 551.

 - Ed Kyle
« Last Edit: 09/23/2014 07:37 pm by edkyle99 »

Offline R7

  • Propulsophile
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2725
    • Don't worry.. we can still be fans of OSC and SNC
  • Liked: 992
  • Likes Given: 668
Re: ATK ULA Proposal
« Reply #9 on: 09/23/2014 07:36 pm »
Uh oh, is spirit of the Stick restless again. Do the right thing, call an exorcist.
AD·ASTRA·ASTRORVM·GRATIA

Offline M129K

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 823
    • "a historian too many" blog.
  • Liked: 71
  • Likes Given: 290
Re: ATK ULA Proposal
« Reply #10 on: 09/23/2014 07:36 pm »
Solid core plus solid strap ons isn't unheard of and is definitely doable. I actually got this pic from your site, Ed.

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15394
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 8567
  • Likes Given: 1356
Re: ATK ULA Proposal
« Reply #11 on: 09/23/2014 07:50 pm »
Solid core plus solid strap ons isn't unheard of and is definitely doable.
Here's an example of the challenge.  To go from a 401 to a 551 in GTO capability while keeping the second solid stage and the Centaur third stage identical means roughly tripling the propellant burned during the first stage of flight.  That's hard to do with smaller strap-on solids. 

 - Ed Kyle
« Last Edit: 09/23/2014 08:18 pm by edkyle99 »

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37449
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21466
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: ATK ULA Proposal
« Reply #12 on: 09/23/2014 07:56 pm »

But if selected (really big if) how would this affect CST-100?

CST-100 is flying on an Atlas V.

Offline RocketmanUS

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2226
  • USA
  • Liked: 71
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: ATK ULA Proposal
« Reply #13 on: 09/23/2014 08:00 pm »
No in flight throttle control with all solid 1st stage.

BE-4 looks to have far more flexibility for the future over all solid. Including an all liquid ( no solid strap on ) 1st stage.


But if selected (really big if) how would this affect CST-100?

CST-100 is flying on an Atlas V.
Is that the test flight? What about after when Atlas V's 1st stage is replaced? Then CST-100 would be launched on that new 1st stage?

What do you think is over all better BE-4 or ATK all solid?
« Last Edit: 09/23/2014 08:03 pm by RocketmanUS »

Offline TrevorMonty

Re: ATK ULA Proposal
« Reply #14 on: 09/23/2014 08:05 pm »
The mostly likely LV for this engine will be the Antares, if they can get government funding to develop it all the better for ATK.

This would leave the Aerojet AR1 engine without a LV.
« Last Edit: 09/23/2014 08:06 pm by TrevorMonty »

Offline R7

  • Propulsophile
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2725
    • Don't worry.. we can still be fans of OSC and SNC
  • Liked: 992
  • Likes Given: 668
Re: ATK ULA Proposal
« Reply #15 on: 09/23/2014 08:05 pm »
No in flight throttle control with all solid 1st stage.

It could use grain geometry to produce preset throttling curve like SRBs did (=thrust dropped during maxQ then increased again).
AD·ASTRA·ASTRORVM·GRATIA

Offline PahTo

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1698
  • Port Angeles
  • Liked: 271
  • Likes Given: 1194
Re: ATK ULA Proposal
« Reply #16 on: 09/23/2014 08:14 pm »

Is that the test flight? What about after when Atlas V's 1st stage is replaced? Then CST-100 would be launched on that new 1st stage?


If you do independent checking of dates for expected/planned/hoped first flight of the new Blue-ULA LV, and then read Dr Sowers' responses to various questions, you'll know that the entire current Crew contract (2-6 flights)  should be  covered by the Atlas V (not sure if you have L2, but much is public knowledge/threads).  Note the Atlas V 1st stage won't be replaced, it'll be an entirely new LV (though likely with existing upper stage for some time after the new core flies).  One step at a time...

Offline RocketmanUS

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2226
  • USA
  • Liked: 71
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: ATK ULA Proposal
« Reply #17 on: 09/23/2014 08:18 pm »
No in flight throttle control with all solid 1st stage.

It could use grain geometry to produce preset throttling curve like SRBs did (=thrust dropped during maxQ then increased again).
In flight, not predetermined. Each solid would have to be made per flight mission then?


Is that the test flight? What about after when Atlas V's 1st stage is replaced? Then CST-100 would be launched on that new 1st stage?


If you do independent checking of dates for expected/planned/hoped first flight of the new Blue-ULA LV, and then read Dr Sowers' responses to various questions, you'll know that the entire current Crew contract (2-6 flights)  should be  covered by the Atlas V (not sure if you have L2, but much is public knowledge/threads).  Note the Atlas V 1st stage won't be replaced, it'll be an entirely new LV (though likely with existing upper stage for some time after the new core flies).  One step at a time...
If they have the RD-180's for the crew flights ( and they just might get them ). But after that the new vehicle would be in place to take over CST-100 launches. What would you prefer BE-4 or ATK solid for crewed CST-100 flights?

Offline clongton

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12053
  • Connecticut
    • Direct Launcher
  • Liked: 7349
  • Likes Given: 3749
Re: ATK ULA Proposal
« Reply #18 on: 09/23/2014 08:23 pm »

But if selected (really big if) how would this affect CST-100?

CST-100 is flying on an Atlas V.

Can't fly CST-100 on it unless all the vibration dampening mechanisms are included in the Atlas re-design that were worked out for Ares-I.
Chuck - DIRECT co-founder
I started my career on the Saturn-V F-1A engine

Offline PahTo

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1698
  • Port Angeles
  • Liked: 271
  • Likes Given: 1194
Re: ATK ULA Proposal
« Reply #19 on: 09/23/2014 08:24 pm »
If they have the RD-180's for the crew flights ( and they just might get them ). But after that the new vehicle would be in place to take over CST-100 launches. What would you prefer BE-4 or ATK solid for crewed CST-100 flights?

By that time, the whole game may have changed, but all things being equal, I'd much prefer the BE-4 powered stage.
Note I am not a politician, nor am I involved directly with any of the companies involved; though I am an armchair spaceflight enthusiast.

Tags:
 

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