Author Topic: Orbitalís Cygnus preparing for the opening salvo to regain US independence  (Read 26127 times)

Offline as58

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 807
  • Liked: 278
  • Likes Given: 180
Quote
The PCM was unloaded from the Antonov An-26

I think it came over on an AN-124

The Thales press release says AN 24, but I believe they meant AN-124

AN-24/26 are relatively small.

Kudos to NSF on being so prolific lately.

Thanks very much! I'll check into the plane.

It's clearly an AN-124.

http://uk.flightaware.com/live/flight/VDA1396

Offline simonbp

Yeah IIRC, Cygnus has about the payload capacity of an AN-26... :)

Offline strangequark

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1074
  • Co-Founder, Tesseract Space
  • San Francisco, CA
  • Liked: 219
  • Likes Given: 12
Hyperbolic title anyone? It's not re-gaining US independence if the launch vehicle uses NK-33/43.

We will be making AJ-26s here; we just haven't run through the Russian stock.

Offline RyanC

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 402
  • SA-506 Launch
  • Liked: 51
  • Likes Given: 9
We will be making AJ-26s here; we just haven't run through the Russian stock.

You mean taking NK-33s from the 1970s, refurbishing them, and giving them a US designed gimbal system then changing the nameplate to read AJ-26?

As for US production of NK-33, I remain highly skeptical that a 30 year old Russian engine can have it's production line restarted in a foreign country that doesn't speak the same language and makes use of a different measurement system in a lot of things.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32428
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 11169
  • Likes Given: 331
We will be making AJ-26s here; we just haven't run through the Russian stock.

You mean taking NK-33s from the 1970s, refurbishing them, and giving them a US designed gimbal system then changing the nameplate to read AJ-26?

As for US production of NK-33, I remain highly skeptical that a 30 year old Russian engine can have it's production line restarted in a foreign country that doesn't speak the same language and makes use of a different measurement system in a lot of things.

The process was already done for the RD-180

Offline Jason1701

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2238
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 39
We will be making AJ-26s here; we just haven't run through the Russian stock.

You mean taking NK-33s from the 1970s, refurbishing them, and giving them a US designed gimbal system then changing the nameplate to read AJ-26?

As for US production of NK-33, I remain highly skeptical that a 30 year old Russian engine can have it's production line restarted in a foreign country that doesn't speak the same language and makes use of a different measurement system in a lot of things.

The process was already done for the RD-180

Have any RD-180s actually been produced in the US?

Offline Nomadd

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3247
  • Boca Chica, Texas
  • Liked: 5390
  • Likes Given: 340
 US independence by using Russian motors to launch Italian modules.

Offline JazzFan

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 206
  • Florida
  • Liked: 27
  • Likes Given: 12
US independence by using Russian motors to launch Italian modules.

How about, to a Chinese space station in the 2022.
« Last Edit: 08/27/2011 01:58 PM by JazzFan »

Offline Antares

  • ABO^2
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5201
  • Done arguing with amateurs
  • Liked: 368
  • Likes Given: 226
This foreign FUD is tiresome and stale.  The same issues have now been rehashed for years.  No new data for the argument.  Can we rise above it?
If I like something on NSF, it's probably because I know it to be accurate.  Every once in a while, it's just something I agree with.  Facts generally receive the former.

Offline strangequark

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1074
  • Co-Founder, Tesseract Space
  • San Francisco, CA
  • Liked: 219
  • Likes Given: 12
You mean taking NK-33s from the 1970s, refurbishing them, and giving them a US designed gimbal system then changing the nameplate to read AJ-26?

As for US production of NK-33, I remain highly skeptical that a 30 year old Russian engine can have it's production line restarted in a foreign country that doesn't speak the same language and makes use of a different measurement system in a lot of things.

No, I mean building them here.

You can be as skeptical as you want. I know with 100% certainty that the AJ-26 can be made here, and I am in a position to know.

Russia using SI has not prevented us from creating a space station with them. Is that the best you can come up with?

To try to bring this back on topic, Orbital using some foreign made components does not negate the fact this this helps restore an independent mode of US station access. Show me an aircraft or spacecraft made in Country X, and there is plenty of it made in Countries Y, Z, Q, W, etc.
« Last Edit: 08/28/2011 04:51 AM by strangequark »

Offline happyflower

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 175
  • Earth
  • Liked: 21
  • Likes Given: 16
Congrats to Orbital's Cygnus team. We all wish you a very successful first flight to the ISS.

Looking forward to seeing both Cygnus and Dragon making regular deliveries to the ISS. People that think the US is going to lose their leadership role in the future of human and cargo space flight better watch out!  ;)

Also I donít understand how procuring components or parts from your European partners casts a shadow on the program here?

Online mmeijeri

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7454
  • Martijn Meijering
  • NL
  • Liked: 76
  • Likes Given: 169
Not to mention that US policy has long been in favour of free trade and the fact that starting with foreign / third party components allows you to work towards producing them yourself if there's a business case for it.
We will be vic-toooooo-ri-ous!!!

Offline Lars_J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6161
  • California
  • Liked: 665
  • Likes Given: 195
To try to bring this back on topic, Orbital using some foreign made components does not negate the fact this this helps restore an independent mode of US station access. Show me an aircraft or spacecraft made in Country X, and there is plenty of it made in Countries Y, Z, Q, W, etc.

Not that I disagree with you in general, but there are examples. There isn't "plenty" of F9 that is made abroad.

Offline strangequark

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1074
  • Co-Founder, Tesseract Space
  • San Francisco, CA
  • Liked: 219
  • Likes Given: 12
To try to bring this back on topic, Orbital using some foreign made components does not negate the fact this this helps restore an independent mode of US station access. Show me an aircraft or spacecraft made in Country X, and there is plenty of it made in Countries Y, Z, Q, W, etc.

Not that I disagree with you in general, but there are examples. There isn't "plenty" of F9 that is made abroad.

Fair enough, and noting that SpaceX's level of vertical integration is a rare beast anywhere in industry these days. And I bet that at least one mission critical component is still made in another country.

Offline Prober

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10313
  • Save the spin....I'm keeping you honest!
  • Nevada
  • Liked: 701
  • Likes Given: 728
To try to bring this back on topic, Orbital using some foreign made components does not negate the fact this this helps restore an independent mode of US station access. Show me an aircraft or spacecraft made in Country X, and there is plenty of it made in Countries Y, Z, Q, W, etc.

Not that I disagree with you in general, but there are examples. There isn't "plenty" of F9 that is made abroad.

Fair enough, and noting that SpaceX's level of vertical integration is a rare beast anywhere in industry these days. And I bet that at least one mission critical component is still made in another country.

Agreed, some of the electronic parts must be.

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

Tags: