Author Topic: Orbital: Cygnus Update Thread  (Read 217856 times)

Online woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7511
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 3328
  • Likes Given: 961
Re: Orbital: Cygnus Update Thread
« Reply #360 on: 03/24/2014 06:07 AM »
And then there is this:

http://www.spacenews.com/article/civil-space/39934thales-alenia-space-exec-identifies-ways-to-save-on-next-cygnus-order

Quote
Given that the ninth and final vehicle (pressurized cargo module) under the current order (CRS-1) is now in full assembly and slated for delivery in 2015, production line elements will begin to shut down this year.


Offline Lurker Steve

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1420
  • Liked: 35
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: Orbital: Cygnus Update Thread
« Reply #361 on: 04/01/2014 10:29 PM »
It sounds like that 2 year CRS contract extension will come just at the right time.

Now Thales can keep the PCM assembly line busy for another year or two, so they don't need to shutdown before the follow-on contract comes up. Since there won't be an ATV, I assume the larger capacity Cygnus would be preferred over the Dragon for most of these flights.


Online Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9141
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 5810
  • Likes Given: 3899
Re: Orbital: Cygnus Update Thread
« Reply #362 on: 04/01/2014 11:20 PM »
It sounds like that 2 year CRS contract extension will come just at the right time.

Now Thales can keep the PCM assembly line busy for another year or two, so they don't need to shutdown before the follow-on contract comes up. Since there won't be an ATV, I assume the larger capacity Cygnus would be preferred over the Dragon for most of these flights.

That's an interesting assumption (but not a surprising one from you, Steve)...
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline a_langwich

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 735
  • Liked: 211
  • Likes Given: 48
Re: Orbital: Cygnus Update Thread
« Reply #363 on: 04/01/2014 11:52 PM »
It sounds like that 2 year CRS contract extension will come just at the right time.

Now Thales can keep the PCM assembly line busy for another year or two, so they don't need to shutdown before the follow-on contract comes up. Since there won't be an ATV, I assume the larger capacity Cygnus would be preferred over the Dragon for most of these flights.


From the article, a quote from the Thales Alenia vp:
Quote
“There has been talk of a follow-on order for two to four modules, but with NASA having decided to extend the station’s life to 2024, there are eight years of operations beyond our last delivery, and it is eight years that, unlike the past years, will not have ATV deliveries,” Quaglino said. “So we would expect an order at least as large as the original CRS.”

So this represents the follow-on order, most likely, not the large order they wanted.  I don't think it's as simple as a production line shutdown, but the ability to plan out orders from suppliers and such.

I doubt either Dragon or Cygnus would be heavily preferred, but both may need increasing capacity and/or increasing pace of launch.

Offline Lurker Steve

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1420
  • Liked: 35
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: Orbital: Cygnus Update Thread
« Reply #364 on: 04/02/2014 01:27 PM »
It sounds like that 2 year CRS contract extension will come just at the right time.

Now Thales can keep the PCM assembly line busy for another year or two, so they don't need to shutdown before the follow-on contract comes up. Since there won't be an ATV, I assume the larger capacity Cygnus would be preferred over the Dragon for most of these flights.

That's an interesting assumption (but not a surprising one from you, Steve)...

Well, there is no need to replace any down-mass from the ATV, but there is a huge hole in the up-mass budget.
When NASA is planning logistics, isn't it easier to plan fewer missions with a larger cargo ship ? Fewer missions means less total overhead, right ?

Besides, the anyone but SpaceX in me says they want a vendor who launches on-time. With an increased number of cargo missions, they can't afford multi-week slips in the schedule.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27161
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 7116
  • Likes Given: 4940
Re: Orbital: Cygnus Update Thread
« Reply #365 on: 04/02/2014 03:55 PM »
...the anyone but SpaceX in me says...
Ah-HA! I knew it, I KNEW it! ;)
« Last Edit: 04/02/2014 03:59 PM by Robotbeat »
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Lurker Steve

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1420
  • Liked: 35
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: Orbital: Cygnus Update Thread
« Reply #366 on: 04/02/2014 04:55 PM »
...the anyone but SpaceX in me says...
Ah-HA! I knew it, I KNEW it! ;)

Yep, ever since you went to the dark side

Offline Prober

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10313
  • Save the spin....I'm keeping you honest!
  • Nevada
  • Liked: 700
  • Likes Given: 728
Re: Orbital: Cygnus Update Thread
« Reply #367 on: 04/02/2014 06:13 PM »
...the anyone but SpaceX in me says...
Ah-HA! I knew it, I KNEW it! ;)

Yep, ever since you went to the dark side

Perhaps I can find new ways to motivate him  :D
2017 - Everything Old is New Again.
I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work. ~ by Thomas Alva Edison

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9228
  • Liked: 1194
  • Likes Given: 786
« Last Edit: 07/11/2014 05:38 PM by yg1968 »

Offline Burninate

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1129
  • Liked: 345
  • Likes Given: 72
Re: Orbital: Cygnus Update Thread
« Reply #369 on: 07/12/2014 01:44 AM »
In re: Downmass - Any idea what happened to HEART?

Offline JazzFan

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 197
  • Florida
  • Liked: 20
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: Orbital: Cygnus Update Thread
« Reply #370 on: 07/13/2014 05:40 PM »
Goodbye Antares 120.  Next step is 130 with the Castor 30XL, then upgraded Cygnus.
« Last Edit: 07/13/2014 06:59 PM by JazzFan »

Offline Tomness

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 145
  • Into the abyss will I run
  • Liked: 33
  • Likes Given: 179
Re: Orbital: Cygnus Update Thread
« Reply #371 on: 07/15/2014 12:50 PM »
I am wondering if NASA could do Bi-contract CRS with Orbital and SpaceX. Where Orbital could do a MPLM with Service Module that Shuttles sent up and SpaceX could provide the rocket.

Offline rpapo

  • Cybernetic Mole
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1076
  • Michigan, USA
  • Liked: 490
  • Likes Given: 406
Re: Orbital: Cygnus Update Thread
« Reply #372 on: 07/15/2014 01:15 PM »
I am wondering if NASA could do Bi-contract CRS with Orbital and SpaceX. Where Orbital could do a MPLM with Service Module that Shuttles sent up and SpaceX could provide the rocket.
It wouldn't be too strange, given the fact that SpaceX has already carried stuff built by Orbital for third-party customers.  That said, though, I think SpaceX wants to exercise its Dragon as much as it can.
An Apollo fanboy . . . fifty years ago.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31535
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 9895
  • Likes Given: 308
Re: Orbital: Cygnus Update Thread
« Reply #373 on: 07/15/2014 01:20 PM »
I am wondering if NASA could do Bi-contract CRS with Orbital and SpaceX. Where Orbital could do a MPLM with Service Module that Shuttles sent up and SpaceX could provide the rocket.

No.  The companies would have to do it on their own.  They would have to propose it together.  NASA's conops for cargo delivery to the ISS is to buy a service (items delivered to the ISS hatch).  It is up to the contractors to determine the solution.

Offline Norm38

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1039
  • Liked: 419
  • Likes Given: 573
Re: Orbital: Cygnus Update Thread
« Reply #374 on: 10/27/2014 04:10 PM »
Is there a diagram or data comparing the current Cygnus to the upgrade?  I've just heard it's "bigger" but nothing saying how much bigger.  50%?

Offline Skyrocket

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2095
  • Frankfurt am Main, Germany
  • Liked: 285
  • Likes Given: 69
Re: Orbital: Cygnus Update Thread
« Reply #375 on: 10/27/2014 04:31 PM »
Is there a diagram or data comparing the current Cygnus to the upgrade?  I've just heard it's "bigger" but nothing saying how much bigger.  50%?

This diagram shows the difference in size for the two versions.

Offline AnalogMan

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2951
  • Cambridge, UK
  • Liked: 677
  • Likes Given: 22
Re: Orbital: Cygnus Update Thread
« Reply #376 on: 10/27/2014 04:55 PM »
Here's another slide giving mass capabilities and some dimensions (from a presentation on using Cygnus as a module to augment Orion on BLEO missions).  The first two versions are as used for CRS to ISS.
« Last Edit: 10/27/2014 04:55 PM by AnalogMan »

Offline Norm38

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1039
  • Liked: 419
  • Likes Given: 573
Re: Orbital: Cygnus Update Thread
« Reply #377 on: 10/27/2014 07:13 PM »
I was close.  38% bigger by volume.

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9228
  • Liked: 1194
  • Likes Given: 786
Re: Orbital: Cygnus Update Thread
« Reply #378 on: 01/15/2016 05:02 PM »
During the CRS-2 press conference, it was mentionned that Orbital/ATK has the option of bringing up a spacecraft with unpressurized cargo only.

What might that look like? Like half a Cygnus with one end missing?
« Last Edit: 01/15/2016 05:27 PM by yg1968 »

Offline arachnitect

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1440
  • Liked: 386
  • Likes Given: 460
Re: Orbital: Cygnus Update Thread
« Reply #379 on: 01/15/2016 05:25 PM »
During the CRS-2 press conference, it was mentionned that Orbital/ATK has the option of bringing up a spacecraft with unpressurized cargo only.

What might that look like? Like half a Cygnus with one end missing?

http://space.skyrocket.de/doc_sdat/cygnus-ucm.htm

Basically the Cygnus service module with an ExPRESS Logistics Carrier on it.

Tags: