Quote from: Steven Pietrobon on 06/01/2018 07:51 amQuote from: john smith 19 on 06/01/2018 07:30 amTBH is "Omega" any more real that Liberty/NGL?They are building first stage hardware, so that is pretty real. No so sure on the hydrolox stage.The way I see it, Omega is as real as Vulcan at this point
Quote from: john smith 19 on 06/01/2018 07:30 amTBH is "Omega" any more real that Liberty/NGL?They are building first stage hardware, so that is pretty real. No so sure on the hydrolox stage.
TBH is "Omega" any more real that Liberty/NGL?
Quote from: edkyle99 on 06/01/2018 05:18 pmThe way I see it, Omega is as real as Vulcan at this point Looking at its history, (then) ATK has only really offered Liberty/NGL/Omega as a proposal for someone else to fund. I've seen no suggestion that their management wants to develop a launcher out of their own pocket. ... The proposed launch date, therefore, should be read as "if we receive full funding", and no-one is reaching for their wallet.By contrast, ULA management seems to believe they need to develop Vulcan, and that they need to fund it in-house; their biggest hold-up is that Boeing/LM aren't very enthusiastic.
The way I see it, Omega is as real as Vulcan at this point
Quote from: Steven Pietrobon on 06/01/2018 07:51 amQuote from: john smith 19 on 06/01/2018 07:30 amTBH is "Omega" any more real that Liberty/NGL?They are building first stage hardware, so that is pretty real. No so sure on the hydrolox stage.The way I see it, Omega is as real as Vulcan at this point - maybe even more real since Orbital ATK has firmly decided and announced about all of its propulsion options while we're still waiting to hear about BE-4 versus AR-1. Contract competition will weed out all but two of the three or more competitors in a year or two, but until then it is all real. - Ed Kyle
Quote from: edkyle99 on 06/01/2018 05:18 pmQuote from: Steven Pietrobon on 06/01/2018 07:51 amQuote from: john smith 19 on 06/01/2018 07:30 amTBH is "Omega" any more real that Liberty/NGL?They are building first stage hardware, so that is pretty real. No so sure on the hydrolox stage.The way I see it, Omega is as real as Vulcan at this point Looking at its history, (then) ATK has only really offered Liberty/NGL/Omega as a proposal for someone else to fund. I've seen no suggestion that their management wants to develop a launcher out of their own pocket. ... By contrast, ULA management seems to believe they need to develop Vulcan, and that they need to fund it in-house; their biggest hold-up is that Boeing/LM aren't very enthusiastic.
[...]
Quote from: edkyle99 on 06/02/2018 11:31 pm[...]You're doing that thing you do, again. There's a huge difference bewteen getting a launch contract and getting your entire development specifically funded. Pretending they are the same makes honest discussion impossible.
==============================================================Vehicle 1st Flt TransLunar TransMars GTO-1800 ==============================================================Falcon Heavy 2018 6,900 kg* 5,565 kg* 8,000 kgFalcon 9 Block 5 2018 3,440 kg* 2,535 kg* 5,500 kgFalcon 9 Block 5-X 2018 ~5,500 kg 4,020 kg 8,300 kgFalcon Heavy-X 2018 15,340 kg* 16,800 kg 26,700 kgSLS Blk 1 2020? 25,900 kg 19,500 kg N/AVulcan Centaur 562 2020? ~10,800 kg ~8,600 kg 13,300 kgNew Glenn 2 Stg 2021? ~16,000 kg? ~13,200 kg? ~21,400 kg?Omega 5xx 2021? ~6,000 kg ~4,700 kg 10,100 kgBFR 2021? 0 kg? 0 kg? ~20,000 kg?BFR-X 2021? ~55,000 kg? ~35,000 kg? ~80,000 kg?Vulcan 56x Heavy 2023? ~13,500 kg ~10,000 kg 16,500 kgSLS Blk 1B 2024? 39,000 kg 32,000 kg N/AOmega 5xxXL 2024? ~10,300 kg ~8,200 kg ~14,700 kgVulcan 56x ACES 2024? ~14,000 kg? ~10,500 kg? ~17,200 kg?New Glenn 3 Stg 2025? ~23,000 kg? ~20,200 kg? ~28,600 kg?SLS Blk 2 2028? >45,000 kg >37,600 kg N/A=============================================================="X" Denotes Expendable Version*data from NASA LSP, does not include full vehicle performanceUpdated 08-23-18
@envy887Any performance numbers for Falcon Heavy with center core expended only?
Updated with recent events:1 - Vulcan Centaur will debut in 2020 with a 562 and a 54 t upper stage prop load.https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=44390.msg1840531#msg18405312 - Vulcan Centaur Heavy (Centaur V+ Long) will have ACES prop load but without IVF and notionally debut 2023https://www.ulalaunch.com/docs/default-source/evolution/vulcan-centaur-overview-17may2018.pdf3 - NASA LSP updated Falcon Heavy Block 5 (and possibly Falcon 9) performance numbers. Added 3,440 kg (F9 ASDS), 6,900 kg (FH reusable) and 15,340 kg (FH expendable) to a TLI at C3=-1.1 km2/s2, and 5,565 kg (FH reusable) and 2,535 (F9 ASDS) to a TMI of C3=7.0 km2/s2==============================================================Vehicle 1st Flt TransLunar TransMars GTO-1800 ==============================================================Falcon Heavy 2018 6,900 kg* 5,565 kg* 8,000 kgFalcon 9 Block 5 2018 3,440 kg* 2,535 kg* 5,500 kgFalcon 9 Block 5-X 2018 ~5,500 kg 4,020 kg 8,300 kgFalcon Heavy-X 2018 15,340 kg* 16,800 kg 26,700 kgSLS Blk 1 2020? 25,900 kg 19,500 kg N/AVulcan Centaur 562 2020? ~10,800 kg ~8,600 kg 13,300 kgNew Glenn 2 Stg 2021? ~16,000 kg? ~13,200 kg? ~21,400 kg?Omega 5xx 2021? ~6,000 kg ~4,700 kg 10,100 kgBFR 2021? 0 kg? 0 kg? ~20,000 kg?BFR-X 2021? ~55,000 kg? ~35,000 kg? ~80,000 kg?Vulcan 56x Heavy 2023? ~13,500 kg ~10,000 kg 16,500 kgSLS Blk 1B 2024? 39,000 kg 32,000 kg N/AOmega 5xxXL 2024? ~10,300 kg ~8,200 kg ~14,700 kgVulcan 56x ACES 2024? ~14,000 kg? ~10,500 kg? ~17,200 kg?New Glenn 3 Stg 2025? ~23,000 kg? ~20,200 kg? ~28,600 kg?SLS Blk 2 2028? >45,000 kg >37,600 kg N/A=============================================================="X" Denotes Expendable Version*data from NASA LSP, does not include full vehicle performanceUpdated 08-23-18
==============================================================Vehicle 1st Flt TransLunar TransMars GTO-1800 ==============================================================Falcon Heavy 2018 6,900 kg* 5,565 kg* 8,000 kgFalcon Heavy-X 2018 15,340 kg* 16,800 kg 26,700 kg=============================================================="X" Denotes Expendable Version *data from NASA LSP, does not include full vehicle performance
SLS Block-1 25.9 tSLS Block-1B 39 tSLS Block-2 45 tt=tonne or metric ton=1000 kilogramIs there any conceivable scenario where any entity would require and use SLS to get a payload out of the Earths atmosphere simply due to its lifting capacity?
Could this chart be updated to reflect the new conditions. Someone said FH expendable can do 20,300 kg to TLI now. Also, New Glenn, initially is not going to have a 3rd stage. ULA is not developing ACES, at least for now. SLS is not developing block 1B and an upper stage is in doubt.
Quote from: spacenut on 03/04/2020 02:31 pmCould this chart be updated to reflect the new conditions. Someone said FH expendable can do 20,300 kg to TLI now. Also, New Glenn, initially is not going to have a 3rd stage. ULA is not developing ACES, at least for now. SLS is not developing block 1B and an upper stage is in doubt.I doubt that's true, at least without a high energy upper stage.Rule of thumb is 1/3 LEO mass for high energy upper stage and 1/4 LEO mass for medium energy e.g. lox/kerosene.Max LEO mass for Falcon Heavy expendable is 63 tonnes
SLS is not developing block 1B and an upper stage is in doubt.
Updated with recent events:1 - Vulcan Centaur will debut in 2020 with a 562 and a 54 t upper stage prop load.https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=44390.msg1840531#msg18405312 - Vulcan Centaur Heavy (Centaur V+ Long) will have ACES prop load but without IVF and notionally debut 2023https://www.ulalaunch.com/docs/default-source/evolution/vulcan-centaur-overview-17may2018.pdf
So to build a decent upper stage for SLS would require another billion or so dollars. IF, NASA instead gave SpaceX 1/3 of this money for a 5.2m Metholox upper stage, the same length as the existing stage. And IF, NASA gave 1/3 of this money to Blue Origin to develop their 3 stage New Glenn. And IF, NASA gave ULA 1/3 of this money to develop ACES.