Will Ares replace Delta IV or Atlas V

[EE Scott]

That article was strangely/poorly written.  If DoD truly needs NASA to utilize EELVs for cost savings, this should just mean that ULA should be hustling their collective arse's to win as much NASA business as possible going forward.  EELV flights need not just be crew rotation, they can and should be cargo upmass and even  significant downmass capability back to the station after STS retirement.  At any rate, the DoD should be more sophisticated than being shocked and unprepared when a poorly designed and much criticized program such as CxP gets cancelled.  What, they didn't consider that possibility?

[William Barton]

It would make more sense, given the cancellation of Constellation, to delete one of the two EELVs.   

Actually, no it wouldn't. And that would be stupider than canceling CxP.  The commercial crew is going to require more EELV's. 

If the costs are going up due to a too-low flight rate, then building more of one and none of the other should address the problem.  Crew launch for ISS rotation will only add, what, two flights a year?

And why not?  This Administration has stopped missile defense, F-22, C-17, Constellation, maybe F-35, etc.  Why not keep cutting all the way to the bone?

 - Ed Kyle

Given the above, I wouldn't be surprised to see Delta IV deleted, and an order come down mandating a permanent decision to procure RD-180s from Russia, no domestic production ever. With Taurus II and Atlas V flying foreign engines, US liquid rocket capability will be smaller engines only, Merlin-C, Kestrel, and RL-10.

[Jim]

Given the above, I wouldn't be surprised to see Delta IV deleted,

Can't be, it has a critical west coast capability

[ugordan]

Given the above, I wouldn't be surprised to see Delta IV deleted, and an order come down mandating a permanent decision to procure RD-180s from Russia, no domestic production ever.

What happens to DoD's assured access to space then if RD-180 has a stand-down for one reason or another? Also, why would Delta IV be deleted when it's the only EELV that currently has an operational Heavy version?

This thread is based on an article over a year old and it's pretty obvious now that the only thing that's gone is Ares I itself.

[infocat13]

 attached document has good budget numbers on Ares I VS EELV's.
EELV's win.
see page 40 and 41 on the document( page 53 on PDF viewer)
if its industrial base issues we are worried about fly a Delta with a 1.5 or three segment shuttle SRB.
3 CBC's + 2 SRB

[Jim]

if its industrial base issues we are worried about fly a Delta with a 1.5 or three segment shuttle SRB.
3 CBC's + 2 SRB

SRB and Delta have the wrong interfaces.   SRB lifts from the top and Delta IV is designed to be lifted from the bottom

[Downix]

It would make more sense, given the cancellation of Constellation, to delete one of the two EELVs.   

Actually, no it wouldn't. And that would be stupider than canceling CxP.  The commercial crew is going to require more EELV's. 

If the costs are going up due to a too-low flight rate, then building more of one and none of the other should address the problem.  Crew launch for ISS rotation will only add, what, two flights a year?

And why not?  This Administration has stopped missile defense, F-22, C-17, Constellation, maybe F-35, etc.  Why not keep cutting all the way to the bone?

 - Ed Kyle

Given the above, I wouldn't be surprised to see Delta IV deleted, and an order come down mandating a permanent decision to procure RD-180s from Russia, no domestic production ever. With Taurus II and Atlas V flying foreign engines, US liquid rocket capability will be smaller engines only, Merlin-C, Kestrel, and RL-10.

What you call cuts are also called wasteful pork which needed to be excised from the budget. 

[William Barton]

It would make more sense, given the cancellation of Constellation, to delete one of the two EELVs.   

Actually, no it wouldn't. And that would be stupider than canceling CxP.  The commercial crew is going to require more EELV's. 

If the costs are going up due to a too-low flight rate, then building more of one and none of the other should address the problem.  Crew launch for ISS rotation will only add, what, two flights a year?

And why not?  This Administration has stopped missile defense, F-22, C-17, Constellation, maybe F-35, etc.  Why not keep cutting all the way to the bone?

 - Ed Kyle

Given the above, I wouldn't be surprised to see Delta IV deleted, and an order come down mandating a permanent decision to procure RD-180s from Russia, no domestic production ever. With Taurus II and Atlas V flying foreign engines, US liquid rocket capability will be smaller engines only, Merlin-C, Kestrel, and RL-10.

What you call cuts are also called wasteful pork which needed to be excised from the budget. 

Good luck with that! After you've raised the trillion dollars you'll need to found a viable major new political party, run offices in all the local, state, and federal election, won several governorships, a majority in both houses of Congress, and become President, I predict you will succeed. Until then, no more than the sound of the wind in the trees. Of course, If *I* could raise a trillion dollars, I wouldn't bother. I'd just round up 10,000 volunteers and leave for Mars...

[kevin-rf]

If you really wanted to save money on EELV's you would come up with a pad that can launch all the EELV's from a single site Wallops comes to mind

One pad, high flight rate, all the orbits!

[infocat13]

if its industrial base issues we are worried about fly a Delta with a 1.5 or three segment shuttle SRB.
3 CBC's + 2 SRB

SRB and Delta have the wrong interfaces.   SRB lifts from the top and Delta IV is designed to be lifted from the bottom

ok , I see, thanks
the GEM's must translate their thrust from the bottom of the Delta stack ?
ditto Atlas?

[Jim]

if its industrial base issues we are worried about fly a Delta with a 1.5 or three segment shuttle SRB.
3 CBC's + 2 SRB

SRB and Delta have the wrong interfaces.   SRB lifts from the top and Delta IV is designed to be lifted from the bottom

ok , I see, thanks
the GEM's must translate their thrust from the bottom of the Delta stack ?
ditto Atlas?

Yes, and more important, same for the strap on cores for the Heavies.

[infocat13]

if its industrial base issues we are worried about fly a Delta with a 1.5 or three segment shuttle SRB.
3 CBC's + 2 SRB

SRB and Delta have the wrong interfaces.   SRB lifts from the top and Delta IV is designed to be lifted from the bottom

ok , I see, thanks
the GEM's must translate their thrust from the bottom of the Delta stack ?
ditto Atlas?

Yes, and more important, same for the strap on cores for the Heavies.

speaking of CBC's the aerospace corporation paper on page 29 (42 on the PDF) speaks of the same issues as today's aviation space week on SRB industrial base issues.Figure 10 on the attached document below shows a possible answer,a ET derived central core with 6 or 7 Delta CBC's, and another with two 4 segment SRB's and 3 Delta CBC's
since the chart on page 40 suggests no savings on a delta IV with a J2X powered second stage then going with a delta IV for crew launch with a RL-10 upper stage, then it makes since for those of you who would lobby congress for a hybrid EELV/constellation system to ask for this HLV!
This Ares heavy lifter with Delta CBC's would make since if it did not have an upper stage or if it did it also was RL-10 powered.( many of you have posted about RL-10 powered upper stages)

This would be a massive buy of RS-68's and RL-10's as well as Delta CBC's ! This would benefit the DOD and commercial community
I have divided the aerospace corp estimate of 14 "configuration 5" Delta  ISS flights from figure 14 with the $8 billion estimated operations and production costs and have come up with just a tad over $500 million per launch

[Antares]

This thread hurts my head.  Frankenrockets, half truths and poor policies, oh my!

[Nate_Trost]

This thread hurts my head.  Frankenrockets, half truths and poor policies, oh my!

Let's have the Delta IV and Atlas V swap engines for a weekend! It'll be like Freaky Friday!