Author Topic: ULA Vulcan Launch Vehicle - General Discussion Thread 2  (Read 400577 times)

Offline john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7581
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 1170
  • Likes Given: 7832
Re: ULA Vulcan Launch Vehicle - General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1580 on: 12/08/2017 12:41 PM »
For those playing "post lawyer" LEO here includes substantial variation on VLEO.

Also, we're talking smallish things in the 400kg size. And they are not in traditional orbits.

Yes, I agree that a Vulcan launch of a single 400KG VLEO sat will not be economic. Duh.

As follow on, I'll predict that Ariane 6 and Vulcan will duke it out for remaining geosats that miss the F9/FH bandwagon.

Not enough for either to crow about. They've got to do better if they expect to fly 6-10 a year. Could be 2-4 a year.
Good points. Very on topic for the future of Vulcan.

While not optimized for LEO (I'd suggest that means anywhere below the inner Van Allan belt) Vulcan has substantial payload capability. If it could deploy a full ring of satellites in one launch at a necessary inclination that would be a significant capability.

Likewise the massive growth of software defined radio means that sigint payloads could be highly flexible. The question becomes "What bands do we need to cover world wide" but "What bands do we need to cover at what times at this inclination" ?

But I would suggest the joker in the pack is the Kessler effect.

More high value military targets in low(ish) Earth orbit --> more likely hood of anti satellite activity --> more risk of debris cascade.  :(

However that would not be an issue for Vulcan.
BFS. The worlds first Methane fueled FFORSC engined CFRP structured A380 sized aerospaceplane tail sitter capable of flying in Earth and Mars atmospheres. BFR. The worlds biggest Methane fueled FFORSC engined CFRP structured booster for BFS. First flight to Mars by end of 2022. Forward looking statements. T&C apply. Believe no one. Run your own numbers. So, you are going to Mars to start a better life? Picture it in your mind. Now say what it is out loud.

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6236
  • Liked: 4057
  • Likes Given: 5570
Re: ULA Vulcan Launch Vehicle - General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1581 on: 12/08/2017 01:44 PM »
For those playing "post lawyer" LEO here includes substantial variation on VLEO.

Also, we're talking smallish things in the 400kg size. And they are not in traditional orbits.

Yes, I agree that a Vulcan launch of a single 400KG VLEO sat will not be economic. Duh.

As follow on, I'll predict that Ariane 6 and Vulcan will duke it out for remaining geosats that miss the F9/FH bandwagon.

Not enough for either to crow about. They've got to do better if they expect to fly 6-10 a year. Could be 2-4 a year.
Good points. Very on topic for the future of Vulcan.

While not optimized for LEO (I'd suggest that means anywhere below the inner Van Allan belt) Vulcan has substantial payload capability. If it could deploy a full ring of satellites in one launch at a necessary inclination that would be a significant capability.

Likewise the massive growth of software defined radio means that sigint payloads could be highly flexible. The question becomes "What bands do we need to cover world wide" but "What bands do we need to cover at what times at this inclination" ?

But I would suggest the joker in the pack is the Kessler effect.

More high value military targets in low(ish) Earth orbit --> more likely hood of anti satellite activity --> more risk of debris cascade.  :(

However that would not be an issue for Vulcan.

On topic, indeed. 
Vulcan needs to serve the market it is entering, not the one some want to remain unchanged forever.

Kessler syndrome is a very real threat, just not sure which approach* is most likely to set it off:
1) send thousands of small-ish sats to do constellation duty, or
2) wave around a very small number of quite juicy targets that are begging to be destroyed by kinematic weapons.

Either way, the risk will be increased.
Hopefully, in the small sat constellation bag of tricks there will be one for debris removal.  Certainly will never be done by a giant orbiting device.

* I reject your premise that having more 'high value' military targets in low orbit invites more a-sat activity.  First of all, the constellation is high value, not any satellite itself.  Second, if you have a thousand platforms collectively doing SBIRS job, for instance, there is zero chance that a-sat removal could be successful.  Not the case where the task is being done by a handful of 'juicy targets'.
« Last Edit: 12/08/2017 03:25 PM by AncientU »
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline MaxTeranous

  • Member
  • Posts: 59
  • Liked: 47
  • Likes Given: 10
Re: ULA Vulcan Launch Vehicle - General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1582 on: 12/08/2017 02:05 PM »
An important point that's not been mentioned yet with regards to launching clusters of satellites is volume issues. Saying that a LV capable of 100 mT to LEO can then launch 100 x 1 mT satellites in one go is over simplifying, if the volume (and shape) of those satellites plus any dispenser is such that only 20 of them fit into the LV's fairing. As fairings are a critical part of a LV's aerodynamic shape, you can't just randomly double their length or width, that sort of thing needs designing at the beginning.

Offline guckyfan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6769
  • Germany
  • Liked: 1797
  • Likes Given: 1787
Re: ULA Vulcan Launch Vehicle - General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1583 on: 12/08/2017 02:13 PM »
If someone wants to launch that many satellites I would assume that they design them in a way that they can be densely packed.

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6236
  • Liked: 4057
  • Likes Given: 5570
Re: ULA Vulcan Launch Vehicle - General Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1584 on: 12/08/2017 03:16 PM »
New Glenn, a Vulcan competitor, is launching 80 OneWeb sats at a go (400 sats, five launches).
At 150 kg or so per satellite, this is only 12tonnes (plus dispenser) while NG is rated at 45t -- so volume limited will be the constraint for everyone it seems.  Soyuz is launching 32-36 each batch IIRC.

No one yet knows exactly what that NG launch will cost, but low $100k range is likely. 
This is typical of the market Vulcan will face.
« Last Edit: 12/08/2017 03:21 PM by AncientU »
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Online Chris Bergin

Long tired thread. Locking so we can go to Thread 3 :)


Here:
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=44390.0
« Last Edit: 12/08/2017 03:29 PM by Chris Bergin »

Tags: