|
Chris Bergin
|
|
« on: 04/01/2008 09:31 PM » |
|
U.S. Air Force Awards United Launch Alliance MUOS Satellite Launch
Denver, Colo., (April 1, 2007) - The U.S. Air Force Space and Missile Systems Center awarded United Launch Alliance a contract modification to perform the launch services for the U.S. Navy's first Mobile User Objective System (MUOS) satellite aboard an Atlas V Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle. The anticipated launch date is the first quarter of 2010 from Space Launch Complex 41 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Fla.
MUOS is a next-generation narrowband tactical satellite communications system designed to provide significantly improved and assured communications for U.S. forces on the move. The system will deliver simultaneous voice, video and data, as well as improve service to legacy users of the Navy's Ultra High Frequency Follow-On (UHF F/O) system currently on-orbit.
"United Launch Alliance is proud to continue our long partnership with the Navy, which includes the successful launch of four UHF F/O satellites on Atlas within the last decade," said Jim Sponnick, ULA vice president of Atlas programs. "Cost-effective assured access to space is our continuing commitment to the U.S. government, and we are looking forward to working with the Air Force, the Navy and Lockheed Martin Space Systems to launch this latest technology for the mobile war fighter."
Lockheed Martin Space Systems, Sunnyvale, Calif., is the prime contractor and systems integrator for the MUOS program. The Navy's Program Executive Office for Space Systems, Chantilly, Va., and its Communications Satellite Program Office, San Diego, Calif., are responsible for the MUOS program.
ULA program management, engineering, test and mission support functions are headquartered in Denver, Colo. and are supported by transition employees in Huntington Beach, Calif. Manufacturing, assembly and integration operations are located at Decatur, Ala., Harlingen, Texas, San Diego, Calif., and Denver, Colo. Launch operations are located at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Fla., and Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif.
PENTAGON ANNOUNCEMENT:
Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co. of Littleton, Colo., is being awarded a modified firm fixed price contract for $124,100,000. This modification is issued to purchase launch services from Lockheed Martin Co. under the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle Program and Atlas medium-plus rocket (Atlas 5510 to launch the Mobile Users Objective System (MUOS)-1 Satellite. At this time $124,100,000 has been obligated. El Segundo, Calif., is the contracting activity (FA8816-06-C-0004, Modification Number P00002).
|
|
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
« on: 04/01/2008 09:31 PM » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Antares
|
|
« Reply #1 on: 04/04/2008 04:27 AM » |
|
Those in the know: is this a typical Air Force launch (government) or a typical Navy launch (commercial)? The press releases seem to be vaguely in conflict. One says ULA, the other LMSSC.
|
|
|
|
WHAP
|
|
« Reply #2 on: 04/04/2008 04:50 AM » |
|
This contract does not appear to be part of any EELV "buy", but procured commercially through LM Commercial Launch Services, which is probably part of SSC. It's possible that $124.1 million is full price for a 551, but that seems really low.
|
|
|
|
rocketmantitan
|
|
« Reply #3 on: 04/04/2008 04:55 AM » |
|
MUOS was one of the satellites planned for the EELV Buy 3 to be conducted by the Air Force. Unlike the UHF Follow On satellites, MUOS uses the same contracts as used by the Air Force and NRO. And while it is ULA that will produce the booster and do mission integration, launch ops, etc, the EELV contracts are still legally between USAF and Lockheed Martin (and Boeing). ULA doesn't have the systems in place, yet, for the old contracts to be transferred (novated) to them. Once the contracts are transferred, then it will be the AF contracting with ULA. Tough to capture in a press release these specific details -- if the public affairs people write "Lockheed Martin", then people ask why it isn't "ULA". And vice versa.
|
|
|
|
Analyst
|
|
« Reply #4 on: 04/04/2008 07:00 AM » |
|
Does this really require an 551? How heavy is this satellite? UHF sats (HS-601) worked just fine with Atlas 2.
Analyst
|
|
|
|
Analyst
|
|
« Reply #5 on: 04/05/2008 06:30 AM » |
|
pad rat - 4/4/2008 6:11 PM
S/C mass = 13,000 lb. It's the most massive A2100 built by LM to date. UFOs massed no more than 3500 lb. 13,000 lb. Didn't know they are this heavy. Much more capable I assume so you need less. Thanks. Analyst
|
|
|
|
FunFlying
|
|
« Reply #6 on: 04/10/2008 11:41 AM » |
|
Wow, $124.1m for a Atlas 551. This sounds like a great price. Based on performance numbers quoted on this site before this results in $3,043/lb to LEO. Or if one could get a 552 for the same price $2,674/lb. Sounds very competitive.
|
|
|
|
Analyst
|
|
« Reply #7 on: 04/10/2008 01:02 PM » |
|
FunFlying - 10/4/2008 1:41 PM
Wow, $124.1m for a Atlas 551. This sounds like a great price. Based on performance numbers quoted on this site before this results in $3,043/lb to LEO. Or if one could get a 552 for the same price $2,674/lb. Sounds very competitive. Remember the government pays many hundred million each year just for the capability (fixed), independent of launches or not. So these are variable costs at best. Analyst
|
|
|
|
kevin-rf
|
|
« Reply #8 on: 04/10/2008 01:34 PM » |
|
FunFlying - 10/4/2008 7:41 AM
Wow, $124.1m for a Atlas 551. This sounds like a great price. Based on performance numbers quoted on this site before this results in $3,043/lb to LEO. Or if one could get a 552 for the same price $2,674/lb. Sounds very competitive. I thought the 2 engine centaur requires a large amount of engineering work since the current 1 engine uses electrical not hydraulic actuators that the old two engine centaur used.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Targeteer
|
|
« Reply #10 on: 01/30/2012 05:27 PM » |
|
|
|
|
|
William Graham
|
|
« Reply #11 on: 01/30/2012 11:31 PM » |
|
For the record, according to both Jonathan and Gunter's launch statistics, I believe this will the the 200th flight of a Centaur upper stage (excluding mockups).
|
|
|
|
|
|
kevin-rf
|
|
« Reply #13 on: 02/07/2012 02:08 AM » |
|
I assume the smallest Delta IV this can fly on is a Heavy. So how much is being saved flying it on an Atlas 551?
Still amazed, an Atlas 551 that is not being used for a BEO mission and Atlas shrugged ...
Off topic, but are any other Atlas 551 missions on the books?
|
|
|
|
edkyle99
|
|
« Reply #14 on: 02/07/2012 02:21 AM » |
|
For the record, according to both Jonathan and Gunter's launch statistics, I believe this will the the 200th flight of a Centaur upper stage (excluding mockups).
That's what I have, with the following count as of now.
Vehicle Launch Total(Failures)
===================================
Atlas Centaur 148(15)
Atlas V 28(1)
Titan IIIE 7(1)
Titan 401A 9(1)
Titan 401B 7(1)
-----------------------------------
Total 199(19)
===================================
12 of the 19 failures involved Centaur stages in some way. These included propulsion, structural, control, and guidance/control system failures. Of the 12 Centaur failures, 9 were on Atlas Centaur and one each were on Atlas V, Titan IIIE, and Titan 401B - the latter was the infamous bad software load in 1999. The 12 Centaur failures were distributed during the following decades. 1960s 5 1970s 2 1980s 1 1990s 3 2000s 1 - Ed Kyle
|
|
|
|
