The press release does not indicate how many RS-25 engines will be manufactured under the $1.16 Billion dollar contract. Anyone know?
And in other news, Aerojet-Rocketdyne was just awarded their contract to reopen the RS-25 production line.http://www.satprnews.com/2015/11/24/nasa-and-aerojet-rocketdyne-to-restart-production-of-the-rs-25-engine-for-the-space-launch-system/
Quote from: Todd Martin on 11/24/2015 01:25 pmThe press release does not indicate how many RS-25 engines will be manufactured under the $1.16 Billion dollar contract. Anyone know?This contract is for re-developing the RS-25 to suit the SLS requirements beyond the 16 re-purposed STS SSME's. The contract can be modified to include the construction of 6 new engines.
Ah lovely, a billion dollars for no flying hardware. This is the kind of contract that Aerojet Rocketdyne dreams of. Right up their alley, now they can kick the can down the road for a few more years until they close up shop.
Quote from: Lars-J on 11/24/2015 05:15 pmAh lovely, a billion dollars for no flying hardware. This is the kind of contract that Aerojet Rocketdyne dreams of. Right up their alley, now they can kick the can down the road for a few more years until they close up shop.I can't help but think that most of these new engines will end up parked in front of various museums around the USA after the SLS program is cancelled due to unsustainable costs.
Quote from: RocketGoBoom on 11/25/2015 01:25 amQuote from: Lars-J on 11/24/2015 05:15 pmAh lovely, a billion dollars for no flying hardware. This is the kind of contract that Aerojet Rocketdyne dreams of. Right up their alley, now they can kick the can down the road for a few more years until they close up shop.I can't help but think that most of these new engines will end up parked in front of various museums around the USA after the SLS program is cancelled due to unsustainable costs.But this contract doesn't even produce any engines at all, that's my issue. SLS would have to go really well for them to issue a follow-up contract to actually build the engines that might one day end up as museum pieces.
Quote from: Lars-J on 11/25/2015 01:37 amQuote from: RocketGoBoom on 11/25/2015 01:25 amQuote from: Lars-J on 11/24/2015 05:15 pmAh lovely, a billion dollars for no flying hardware. This is the kind of contract that Aerojet Rocketdyne dreams of. Right up their alley, now they can kick the can down the road for a few more years until they close up shop.I can't help but think that most of these new engines will end up parked in front of various museums around the USA after the SLS program is cancelled due to unsustainable costs.But this contract doesn't even produce any engines at all, that's my issue. SLS would have to go really well for them to issue a follow-up contract to actually build the engines that might one day end up as museum pieces.Do we really need this kind blabber in every SLS thread? SLS has progressed farther than opponents were saying even just couple years ago.
Most prominent of all the possible upgrades is the Brazed Tube Nozzle. That is currently the most time-consuming and expensive element in the SSME. It consists of 1080 separate tubes, each carefully formed with continually changing diameter and circular/elliptical shape along its entire length. These tubes are then brazed together into the shape we all know, and a jacket is then mounted around them for support, plus forward and aft ducts and other tubing. The whole operation involves intensive human touch-labour throughout, so this is an extremely expensive and inefficient way of making things. The Brazed Tube Nozzle approach is the reason for the current production "bottleneck" which restricts production to a maximum of 12 units per year.If the Nozzle were replaced with a Channel Wall Nozzle, the part count and the touch labor would be *massively* reduced and the production bottleneck effectively removed -- with just one change.This change alone, while certainly not a trivial change, should reduce the cost of the SSME by about ~20%. It is therefore one of the most significant single upgrades under consideration.
A few years ago, Ross said the following:Quote from: kraisee on 12/30/2009 06:00 amMost prominent of all the possible upgrades is the Brazed Tube Nozzle. That is currently the most time-consuming and expensive element in the SSME. It consists of 1080 separate tubes, each carefully formed with continually changing diameter and circular/elliptical shape along its entire length. These tubes are then brazed together into the shape we all know, and a jacket is then mounted around them for support, plus forward and aft ducts and other tubing. The whole operation involves intensive human touch-labour throughout, so this is an extremely expensive and inefficient way of making things. The Brazed Tube Nozzle approach is the reason for the current production "bottleneck" which restricts production to a maximum of 12 units per year.If the Nozzle were replaced with a Channel Wall Nozzle, the part count and the touch labor would be *massively* reduced and the production bottleneck effectively removed -- with just one change.This change alone, while certainly not a trivial change, should reduce the cost of the SSME by about ~20%. It is therefore one of the most significant single upgrades under consideration.Has there been any progress on this front?