Astrobotic and United Launch Alliance Announce Mission to the MoonJuly 26, 2017Rust Belt Company, Astrobotic selects ULA to launch its Peregrine Lander in 2019 for lunar mission 50 years after Apollo 11Pittsburgh, PA – Astrobotic and United Launch Alliance (ULA) proudly announce today that Astrobotic’s Peregrine Lunar Lander will be onboard a ULA launch vehicle in 2019, during the 50th anniversary of Apollo 11.“Astrobotic is thrilled to select a ULA launch vehicle as the means to get Peregrine to the Moon,” said John Thornton, CEO of Astrobotic. “By launching with ULA, Astrobotic can rest assured our payload customers will ride on a proven launch vehicle with a solid track record of success. Together, our two organizations will honor the past and trail blaze the lunar future.”This effort is a big step in realizing Astrobotic’s goal of creating a Rust Belt based international gateway to the Moon. The Peregrine Lunar Lander will fly 35 kilograms of customer payloads on its first mission, with the option to upgrade to 265 kilograms on future missions. Already 11 deals from six nations have been signed for this 2019 mission. The first mission in 2019 will serve as a key demonstration of service for NASA, international space agencies, and companies looking to carry out missions to the Moon. This announcement comes as Astrobotic continues to advance Peregrine toward flight, with the preliminary design review of the vehicle having already taken place in November 2016.“Technical credibility and signed deals remain key differentiators for Astrobotic as a lunar delivery company. Our customers and partners know that our 10 years of lunar lander development work has made us the world leader in this market,” said Thornton.“We are thrilled that Astrobotic has selected ULA to launch the Peregrine Lander to the Moon,” said ULA president and CEO, Tory Bruno. “The Moon is the next great frontier, but in a different way than when Neil Armstrong landed there. Enabling technologies like those from Astrobotic will allow people to live and work in the space between here and the Moon and take advantage of all those resources in a way that is sustainable.”ULA joins a world-class team of mission partners led by Astrobotic. These partners include NASA, who is providing Astrobotic access to some of the best spacecraft engineers and facilities in the world, as part of NASA’s Lunar CATALYST Program; Airbus DS, who brings world-class spacecraft experience in human spaceflight and exploration and leverages previous lander development work with the European Space Agency; and Deutsche Post DHL Group, the world’s leading mail and logistics company, who is the “Official Logistics Provider for Astrobotic’s First Mission to the Moon.”
Gunter Krebs @Skyrocket71Which launch vehicle? Atlas-V-401 or the last Delta-II? Dedicated or shared launch?
ULA @ulalaunch#AtlasV, configuration TBD.
QuoteGunter Krebs @Skyrocket71Which launch vehicle? Atlas-V-401 or the last Delta-II? Dedicated or shared launch?QuoteULA @ulalaunch#AtlasV, configuration TBD.
Quote from: Kryten on 07/26/2017 05:40 pmQuoteGunter Krebs @Skyrocket71Which launch vehicle? Atlas-V-401 or the last Delta-II? Dedicated or shared launch?QuoteULA @ulalaunch#AtlasV, configuration TBD.All slots on on the DII's are assigned, so only Atlas ridesharing on Centaur Aft Bulkhead Carrier or on another attach point or ESPA. A DIV flight is also possible as their are rideshare slots on several flights but Primary payloads from certain customers decrease that likelihood.
Quote from: russianhalo117 on 07/26/2017 05:56 pmQuote from: Kryten on 07/26/2017 05:40 pmQuoteGunter Krebs @Skyrocket71Which launch vehicle? Atlas-V-401 or the last Delta-II? Dedicated or shared launch?QuoteULA @ulalaunch#AtlasV, configuration TBD.All slots on on the DII's are assigned, so only Atlas ridesharing on Centaur Aft Bulkhead Carrier or on another attach point or ESPA. A DIV flight is also possible as their are rideshare slots on several flights but Primary payloads from certain customers decrease that likelihood.IIRC, one last unassigned DII is available (hypothetically), but as Atlas-V is confirmed, this possibility needs no more investigation. Peregrine is also too large for Centaur Aft Bulkhead Carrier or ESPA. Nevertheless a shared mission with a smaller satellite is possible, as Peregrine performs Trans Lunar Injection by its own propulsion system, but requires some kind of dual launch adaptor.
Published on 14 Aug 2017Astrobotic’s Peregrine Lunar Lander will launch onboard a ULA launch vehicle in 2019, during the 50th anniversary of Apollo 11. This effort is a big step in realizing Astrobotic’s goal of creating a Rust Belt based international gateway to the Moon. The Peregrine Lunar Lander will fly 35 kilograms of customer payloads on its first mission, with the option to upgrade to 265 kilograms on future missions.
Its launching on an AV-531 with a Cygnus as the primary payload.
Glancing through the payload guide I'm wondering why the 2nd and 3rd missions that are also staging from LEO go up in payload so dramatically from the 35 kg? Is it just extra margin?The Atlas V's various configurations could open up a lot of options to fit the lander in and not for a lot of cost. Depending on available capacity left over from the primary payload the cost increase should be as low as $6 or 7M for one extra SRB for launch to LEO on a Atlas 4x1. If the launch vehicle needs to get bumped up to 4 SRB's or more of course than the 5m fairing comes into play but I doubt they would force that change. Payload adapters may of course drive that cost up.Quickly taking a few numbers from payload guide and website I get the following mass for the lander:Dry mass: 284.5 kgProp mass: 450 kgPayload (1st mission): 35 kgTotal: 769.5 kgWell within the added capacity of a single SRB if needed.
Quote from: GWH on 07/26/2017 08:24 pmGlancing through the payload guide I'm wondering why the 2nd and 3rd missions that are also staging from LEO go up in payload so dramatically from the 35 kg? Is it just extra margin?The Atlas V's various configurations could open up a lot of options to fit the lander in and not for a lot of cost. Depending on available capacity left over from the primary payload the cost increase should be as low as $6 or 7M for one extra SRB for launch to LEO on a Atlas 4x1. If the launch vehicle needs to get bumped up to 4 SRB's or more of course than the 5m fairing comes into play but I doubt they would force that change. Payload adapters may of course drive that cost up.Quickly taking a few numbers from payload guide and website I get the following mass for the lander:Dry mass: 284.5 kgProp mass: 450 kgPayload (1st mission): 35 kgTotal: 769.5 kgWell within the added capacity of a single SRB if needed.Revisiting my post and in light of the new information on launch vehicle a couple things are clear: - Given the wet/dry mass ratios it should have been clear that the lander taking itself from LEO simply isn't going to happen- The launch capabilities for a ride share in this case is 3 SRBs and a 5m fairing up from the standard Atlas 401 with an Antares, costing $31M more for the flight.
The Cygnus on Atlas 401 typically requires the extra extended 4m fairing on the Atlas. The cost increase is $8-12M to go to 5m depending on length required.The additional SRBs cost $20-21M.Even at $31M I don't think a dedicated launch vehicle would be available at that price.
How will this impact on scheduling? Having to have a coinciding lunar and ISS launch window, which fits in with the ISS VV schedule, seems like a headache. I get that there's some flexibility in that Centaur can loiter for a couple of hours, and Cygnus can loiter for a good few days (?) prior to berthing as well. Anyone with more knowledge of launch windows around?
Isn't the PSLV $15 million? When I Google it's cost this is the figure I get returned.
Quote from: Welsh Dragon on 08/15/2017 04:58 pmHow will this impact on scheduling? Having to have a coinciding lunar and ISS launch window, which fits in with the ISS VV schedule, seems like a headache. I get that there's some flexibility in that Centaur can loiter for a couple of hours, and Cygnus can loiter for a good few days (?) prior to berthing as well. Anyone with more knowledge of launch windows around?I think the ISS launch window will be the controlling factor. Once Cygnus and the adapter have separated, the Centaur just needs to inject Peregrine into a highly elliptical orbit with an apogee near the Moon's orbit. This should be possible within a couple of hours of achieving parking orbit so Centaur won't have to loiter for more than an hour or so. It doesn't matter at that point where the Moon actually is in its orbit. Peregrine probably has enough prop to phase its orbit to intercept the Moon after a number of orbits. See for example how LCROSS did it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LCROSS(Disclaimer: just an amateur. There are folk on this forum who can give you a more technical reply and correct any mistakes I've made.)
Actually, looking at the Astrobiotic Payload User Guide (which I should have done before!), it mentions a 6-33 day LEO hold followed by TLI (page 31). I suspect that is compatible with your proposed trajectory, the 6-33 days being the phasing, with a small TLI by the lander to refine trajectory? This is what the graphic seems to suggest anyway.
