Author Topic: All Solid Motor Antares  (Read 30001 times)

Offline Dante80

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 886
  • Athens : Greece
  • Liked: 810
  • Likes Given: 503
Re: All Solid Motor Antares
« Reply #40 on: 01/16/2016 07:25 PM »
Lets see.

For D IVH equivalent performance...

S0 2-6 GEM-63XL SRMS
S1 4 or 5 segment SRB
S2 2-4 BE-3UEN hydrolox stage.

Its something like Liberty with SRMs attached?
« Last Edit: 01/16/2016 07:26 PM by Dante80 »

Offline Oli

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2215
  • Liked: 415
  • Likes Given: 57
Re: All Solid Motor Antares
« Reply #41 on: 01/16/2016 08:19 PM »
Lets see.

For D IVH equivalent performance...

S0 2-6 GEM-63XL SRMS
S1 4 or 5 segment SRB
S2 2-4 BE-3UEN hydrolox stage.

Its something like Liberty with SRMs attached?

More like ~900t solid first stage, ~300t solid second stage and ~80t hydrolox third stage. Or something like that. But yeah, big segmented solids, likely.

But in my little super simplistic (!) cost model a hydrolox second stage would be slightly preferable to a solid second stage. Makes the rocket smaller.

« Last Edit: 01/16/2016 08:27 PM by Oli »

Online edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12888
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 3942
  • Likes Given: 754
Re: All Solid Motor Antares
« Reply #42 on: 01/17/2016 04:46 AM »
I don't expect a many-segment SRB-like booster for this one.  It should be possible to use a couple of single-SRB segment-sized ~200 tonne serial motor/stages, topped by a 50-70 tonne BE3U LH2 stage, to get EELV Medium performance.  This assumes composite case motors with better than SRB performance.  Adding multiple GEM63XL strap-ons, or making the first stage a two-segment motor, might get Heavy capabilities.  A Medium rocket might weigh 500 tonnes.  Only a Heavy would need to gross 900 tonnes or more.

 - Ed Kyle
« Last Edit: 01/17/2016 04:48 AM by edkyle99 »

Offline TrevorMonty

Re: All Solid Motor Antares
« Reply #43 on: 01/17/2016 08:02 AM »
I don't expect a many-segment SRB-like booster for this one.  It should be possible to use a couple of single-SRB segment-sized ~200 tonne serial motor/stages, topped by a 50-70 tonne BE3U LH2 stage, to get EELV Medium performance.  This assumes composite case motors with better than SRB performance.  Adding multiple GEM63XL strap-ons, or making the first stage a two-segment motor, might get Heavy capabilities.  A Medium rocket might weigh 500 tonnes.  Only a Heavy would need to gross 900 tonnes or more.

 - Ed Kyle
One of articles mention OrbitalATK were going after medium to heavy EELV class so Atlas 401- D4H and maybe a little beyond.

Offline TrevorMonty

Re: All Solid Motor Antares
« Reply #44 on: 01/17/2016 08:12 AM »
ULA have been pushing fact that ACES can deliver satellites direct to GEO. If both OrbitalATK Blue US and SpaceX Raptor US can do this then commercial satellite operators can allow for it in their satellite designs.

Not having to provide propulsion from GTO to GEO saves a considerable mass and can potentially save $10Ms on built price.


Offline arachnitect

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1440
  • Liked: 387
  • Likes Given: 462
Re: All Solid Motor Antares
« Reply #45 on: 01/17/2016 07:37 PM »
So where would this fly from, especially in 2019 as they claim is possible?

LC-39B? What else is even possible?

At VAFB I assume they'd have to wait for a ULA pad. SLC-2 or SLC-6?

Honestly, it's hard to believe OrbitalATK when they say they want into the EELV market.

Offline rayleighscatter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1033
  • Maryland
  • Liked: 480
  • Likes Given: 228
Re: All Solid Motor Antares
« Reply #46 on: 01/17/2016 08:00 PM »
SLC-2, SLC-8, LP-0B, LC-39B, LC-36, LC-46, Kwajalean, Kodiak...

There's really not a lack of big concrete slabs for rent.
« Last Edit: 01/17/2016 08:02 PM by rayleighscatter »

Online edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12888
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 3942
  • Likes Given: 754
Re: All Solid Motor Antares
« Reply #47 on: 01/18/2016 12:25 AM »
SLC-2, SLC-8, LP-0B, LC-39B, LC-36, LC-46, Kwajalean, Kodiak...

There's really not a lack of big concrete slabs for rent.
Blue Origin has taken SLC 36.  Orbital ATK has already reserved SLC 46 for a Minotaur 4 launch.  Lockheed Martin is planning to launch Athena from Kodiak. 

The only places probably able to handle really big solid motors are probably LC 39B, LC 39A, SLC 40, SLC 41, SLC 4E, and SLC 6, which all already have users.

 - Ed Kyle

Offline rayleighscatter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1033
  • Maryland
  • Liked: 480
  • Likes Given: 228
Re: All Solid Motor Antares
« Reply #48 on: 01/18/2016 12:33 AM »
SLC-2, SLC-8, LP-0B, LC-39B, LC-36, LC-46, Kwajalean, Kodiak...

There's really not a lack of big concrete slabs for rent.
Blue Origin has taken SLC 36. 
Should make it a good place for BE-3 support.

OA has managed so far without any pads, they've been happy enough to lease them as needed.

Offline RocketGoBoom

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 242
  • Idaho
  • Liked: 212
  • Likes Given: 215
Re: All Solid Motor Antares
« Reply #49 on: 01/18/2016 02:36 AM »
According to the SpaceNews article, the proposed new Orbital ATK rocket would be going after the Air Force EELV launches.

From purely a market share standpoint, it is really difficult to imagine how both ULA and Orbital ATK can survive on such a low launch rate per year. Back in May of 2015 the CEO of ULA said that in future years he expects the launch rate to decline to about 5 or 6 per year. And he said that he expects ULA to win only 2 or 3 per year of that reduced launch rate. Therefore ULA must lower costs and enter the commercial launch market because they cannot survive on 2 or 3 government launches per year. (his quote)

So how would there be enough launches per year for hypothetically three players (ULA, SpaceX and Orbital) going after a total of 5 or 6 Air Force EELV launches per year? SX has a broad mix of customers, they don't care.

I have difficulty seeing a business case for Orbital entering this limited Air Force EELV market.
« Last Edit: 01/18/2016 02:38 AM by RocketGoBoom »

Offline TrevorMonty

Re: All Solid Motor Antares
« Reply #50 on: 01/18/2016 04:01 AM »
Launch is only a part of Orbital ATK business so a low launch rate is not big issue. Having a LV allows them to offer a complete build and launch package for their commercial satellites.


Online edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12888
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 3942
  • Likes Given: 754
Re: All Solid Motor Antares
« Reply #51 on: 01/18/2016 02:39 PM »
From purely a market share standpoint, it is really difficult to imagine how both ULA and Orbital ATK can survive on such a low launch rate per year. Back in May of 2015 the CEO of ULA said that in future years he expects the launch rate to decline to about 5 or 6 per year. And he said that he expects ULA to win only 2 or 3 per year of that reduced launch rate. Therefore ULA must lower costs and enter the commercial launch market because they cannot survive on 2 or 3 government launches per year. (his quote)

So how would there be enough launches per year for hypothetically three players (ULA, SpaceX and Orbital) going after a total of 5 or 6 Air Force EELV launches per year? SX has a broad mix of customers, they don't care.
My guess is that Bruno doesn't believe that 5-6 per year is going to the be long-term number.  Government launches run in cycles, with more recently to refurbish the GPS constellation, etc.  There will likely be a soft year or few, but it will inevitably pick up again.  NASA has its own needs for ISS and other things. 

I wonder about the even longer term.  There might be space junk cleanup work.  More importantly there might be a need to defend and replace orbital assets in the event of conflict, cold or hot.  The country with the most delta-v wins.

 - Ed Kyle

Offline abaddon

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1720
  • Liked: 1197
  • Likes Given: 1023
Re: All Solid Motor Antares
« Reply #52 on: 01/18/2016 03:48 PM »
Launch is only a part of Orbital ATK business so a low launch rate is not big issue. Having a LV allows them to offer a complete build and launch package for their commercial satellites.
Does OrbitalATK build anything heavy enough to require a Delta IV Heavy equivalent, though?  Seems like Antares-class should cover that pretty adequately, especially with a BE-3 upper stage.

[EDIT] Corrected as I did mean the Heavy variant of the Delta IV
« Last Edit: 01/19/2016 01:40 PM by abaddon »

Offline notsorandom

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1717
  • Ohio
  • Liked: 412
  • Likes Given: 91
Re: All Solid Motor Antares
« Reply #53 on: 01/18/2016 06:59 PM »
Launch is only a part of Orbital ATK business so a low launch rate is not big issue. Having a LV allows them to offer a complete build and launch package for their commercial satellites.
Does OrbitalATK build anything heavy enough to require a Delta IV equivalent, though?  Seems like Antares-class should cover that pretty adequately, especially with a BE-3 upper stage.
According to Gunter's page the Antares-232 can lift 2750kg to GTO which is less than some of the satellites OrbitalATK builds. SES-8 which is a an OrbitalATK GEOStar-2.4 satellite has a mass of 3,170kg. Assuming you mean Delta IV heavy then Cygnus might want to spread its wings beyond low Earth orbit one of these days. But aside from big spy satellites there are not many payloads that need the lift capacity of the Delta IV heavy.

Offline Patchouli

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4400
  • Liked: 182
  • Likes Given: 359
Re: All Solid Motor Antares
« Reply #54 on: 01/19/2016 04:30 AM »
The spacenews article suggests Delta Heavy class performance.

That would require some huge solids.

They might want to go for a core with BE-3Us instead of a solid second stage.

One SRM off SLS plus a high energy upper stage with two BE-3Us could easily get you 20+ metric tons LEO.
« Last Edit: 01/19/2016 04:33 AM by Patchouli »

Offline abaddon

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1720
  • Liked: 1197
  • Likes Given: 1023
Re: All Solid Motor Antares
« Reply #55 on: 01/19/2016 01:41 PM »
According to Gunter's page the Antares-232 can lift 2750kg to GTO which is less than some of the satellites OrbitalATK builds. SES-8 which is a an OrbitalATK GEOStar-2.4 satellite has a mass of 3,170kg. Assuming you mean Delta IV heavy then Cygnus might want to spread its wings beyond low Earth orbit one of these days. But aside from big spy satellites there are not many payloads that need the lift capacity of the Delta IV heavy.
Exactly, and I would assume that adding a BE-3 based upper stage to the Antares would allow it to easily cover the satellites you cite.  Going after a very small heavy lift market seems odd to me.  I don't really think there's much possibility in OrbitalATK actually doing that, personally.

Offline baldusi

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7437
  • Buenos Aires, Argentina
  • Liked: 1446
  • Likes Given: 4499
Re: All Solid Motor Antares
« Reply #56 on: 01/19/2016 03:25 PM »
Launch is only a part of Orbital ATK business so a low launch rate is not big issue. Having a LV allows them to offer a complete build and launch package for their commercial satellites.
Does OrbitalATK build anything heavy enough to require a Delta IV equivalent, though?  Seems like Antares-class should cover that pretty adequately, especially with a BE-3 upper stage.
According to Gunter's page the Antares-232 can lift 2750kg to GTO which is less than some of the satellites OrbitalATK builds. SES-8 which is a an OrbitalATK GEOStar-2.4 satellite has a mass of 3,170kg. Assuming you mean Delta IV heavy then Cygnus might want to spread its wings beyond low Earth orbit one of these days. But aside from big spy satellites there are not many payloads that need the lift capacity of the Delta IV heavy.
You have to consider that Antares launches from Wallops, which at 37.5 latitude has an extra 9 degrees of penalty to GSO than the Cape. If they are doing a new LV for EELV then they will have to launch from CCAF and VAFB. That's an EELV requirement.

Offline Rummy

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 126
  • CA
  • Liked: 24
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: All Solid Motor Antares
« Reply #57 on: 01/19/2016 04:29 PM »
According to Gunter's page the Antares-232 can lift 2750kg to GTO which is less than some of the satellites OrbitalATK builds. SES-8 which is a an OrbitalATK GEOStar-2.4 satellite has a mass of 3,170kg. Assuming you mean Delta IV heavy then Cygnus might want to spread its wings beyond low Earth orbit one of these days. But aside from big spy satellites there are not many payloads that need the lift capacity of the Delta IV heavy.
Exactly, and I would assume that adding a BE-3 based upper stage to the Antares would allow it to easily cover the satellites you cite.  Going after a very small heavy lift market seems odd to me.  I don't really think there's much possibility in OrbitalATK actually doing that, personally.

Why not?  It sure seems like they could be competitive in the EELV market.  Especially when you consider that the AF will pay premium for at least two launch providers.

Offline TrevorMonty

Re: All Solid Motor Antares
« Reply #58 on: 01/19/2016 05:48 PM »
Launch is only a part of Orbital ATK business so a low launch rate is not big issue. Having a LV allows them to offer a complete build and launch package for their commercial satellites.
Does OrbitalATK build anything heavy enough to require a Delta IV equivalent, though?  Seems like Antares-class should cover that pretty adequately, especially with a BE-3 upper stage.
According to Gunter's page the Antares-232 can lift 2750kg to GTO which is less than some of the satellites OrbitalATK builds. SES-8 which is a an OrbitalATK GEOStar-2.4 satellite has a mass of 3,170kg. Assuming you mean Delta IV heavy then Cygnus might want to spread its wings beyond low Earth orbit one of these days. But aside from big spy satellites there are not many payloads that need the lift capacity of the Delta IV heavy.
You have to consider that Antares launches from Wallops, which at 37.5 latitude has an extra 9 degrees of penalty to GSO than the Cape. If they are doing a new LV for EELV then they will have to launch from CCAF and VAFB. That's an EELV requirement.
Jim reckons Wallops can't support large solids, so a new Florida pad looks likely. Does ask question what will become of Wallops and liquid Antares. Orbital would want to rationalize to one LV and ideally one pad.

Offline Burninate

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1134
  • Liked: 351
  • Likes Given: 73
Re: All Solid Motor Antares
« Reply #59 on: 01/19/2016 06:43 PM »
So, will it be like the solid motor Antares design Orbital-ATK was looking at last year, or something more like one of the Ariane 6 proposals?

 - Ed Kyle

Something in between, perhaps? I'm thinking two solid stages topped by a 3rd HydroLox stage, powered by a BE-3U. The "intermediate to heavy class" part makes me think that this core could be flanked by two 1st stages as boosters for the "heavy" variant, thus making it similar to the Ariane 6 concept. But I could be off base.

Quote
In a Jan. 14 press release, the company said it would develop a “solid rocket propulsion system.”

“All the best features of solid motors, including operational reliability, high lift-off thrust, shorter development schedules and, importantly, affordability have improved over time with the advancement of new technologies,” Charlie Precourt, vice president and general manager of Orbital ATK’s propulsion systems division, said in the release. “This means we can offer the Air Force a low technical risk and very cost-competitive American-made propulsion alternative.”

Specifically, Orbital ATK will combine the Air Force money with at least $31 million, and as much as $124 million, of its own to develop the GEM 63XL strap-on solid rocket motor, the Common Booster Segment solid rocket motor, and an extendable nozzle for Blue Origin’s BE-3U upper stage engine.

Blue Origin uses the BE-3 for its New Shepard suborbital rocket. The BE-3 also is one of three upper-stage engines United Launch Alliance is considering for Vulcan, the Denver company’s next-generation rocket.

The SSRB seems a little heavy (91t structural mass in the 4-seg) to bring it all the way up with a light hydrogen stage, and putting a lot of dV in the hydrogen stage in turn would make for a very large tank.

How about a three-stager combining three propellants:
SSRB: 12,000kN
BE-4 methalox: 2,400kN
BE-3U hydrolox: 490kN
« Last Edit: 01/19/2016 06:49 PM by Burninate »

Tags: