Vulcan VC2S 1st launch - Peregrine Lander - CCSFS SLC-41 - NET mid-December 2023

[FutureSpaceTourist]

No nozzle extension?

https://twitter.com/torybruno/status/1621635589014691841

They are already inside the rather cavernous interstage (several people can literally stand up and walk around in there).  They’re be installed on the RL10s now that the Centaur V is mated.

[Vettedrmr]

I personally do not think that Vulcan integrated testing, on-pad WDR, then hot fire, will take much longer than a month or so, ...

Don't forget that BE-4 isn't qualified yet.  Flight insurance, FAA launch license, ULA, etc. are looking expectantly at BO to get that done.

[zubenelgenubi]

It looks like Vulcan's debut launch is NET May 2023. That, and more tidbits, in this look at where we are with one of the most anticipated rocket launches of the year. [Feb 3]

https://arstechnica.com/science/2023/02/when-will-united-launch-alliances-vulcan-rocket-fly/
[Feb 3]

Circa one month SLC-41 turnaround after CFT launch aboard Atlas V?  That tracks.

NASA's Joel Montalbano says they're targeting mid-April for the Boeing CST-100 Starliner crewed test flight, with Ax-2 later in the second quarter.

Still in talks with Roscosmos for integrated crews (seat barters between Soyuz and Crew Dragon) for fall missions. [Jan 25]

(USSF-51 NET June = Q2 2023, but the annual quarter-of-launch news is 4 months old.  ViaSat-3 EMEA could be next in "summer 2023.")


Assuming circa one month minimum turn-around at SLC-41, Atlas V/Vulcan Eastern Range [SLC-41] in the next few months of 2023:
Mid April                             Starliner CFT
NET mid May                     Peregrine/2x Kuiper
NET mid June                    USSF-51
Summer/NET mid July?   ViaSat-3 EMEA

[FutureSpaceTourist]

https://twitter.com/torybruno/status/1621998686816567296

3 missions:  A pair of Amazon Kuiper demo sats to LEO. Then the Peregrine lander to the lunar surface. And finally, a @celestisflights memorial to a large, elliptical, heliocentric orbit, sailing deep space until the end of time.

[DanClemmensen]

3 missions:  A pair of Amazon Kuiper demo sats to LEO. Then the Peregrine lander to the lunar surface. And finally, a @celestisflights memorial to a large, elliptical, heliocentric orbit, sailing deep space until the end of time.

What's the context? is this supposed to be missions in calendar 2023?

[Bean Kenobi]

3 missions:  A pair of Amazon Kuiper demo sats to LEO. Then the Peregrine lander to the lunar surface. And finally, a @celestisflights memorial to a large, elliptical, heliocentric orbit, sailing deep space until the end of time.

What's the context? is this supposed to be missions in calendar 2023?

They are all payloads of 1st Vulcan flight. Original question was "What is the objective of this mission ?".

[mandrewa]

It looks like Vulcan's debut launch is NET May 2023. That, and more tidbits, in this look at where we are with one of the most anticipated rocket launches of the year. [Feb 3]

https://arstechnica.com/science/2023/02/when-will-united-launch-alliances-vulcan-rocket-fly/
[Feb 3]

There's no mention in Eric Berger's article of certification (ie. qualification testing) of the BE-4 engine as something that needs to be done before the first launch of the Vulcan Centaur.  Is this a hint?

[Robert_the_Doll]

https://twitter.com/torybruno/status/1622088715119038466

[Robert_the_Doll]

https://twitter.com/torybruno/status/1621999175503331328?cxt=HHwWgIDSnYHqv4ItAAAA

[Vettedrmr]

There's no mention in Eric Berger's article of certification (ie. qualification testing) of the BE-4 engine as something that needs to be done before the first launch of the Vulcan Centaur.  Is this a hint?

https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/08/blue-origins-powerful-be-4-engine-is-more-than-four-years-late-heres-why/

I went doing some old searching and found Berger's old article from 2021 where he describes the approach of concurrent qual and acceptance tests.  I've not read anything that says ULA and their customers have accepted the additional risk of flying a vehicle without engines that have completed qual testing.

[russianhalo117]

It looks like Vulcan's debut launch is NET May 2023. That, and more tidbits, in this look at where we are with one of the most anticipated rocket launches of the year. [Feb 3]

https://arstechnica.com/science/2023/02/when-will-united-launch-alliances-vulcan-rocket-fly/
[Feb 3]

There's no mention in Eric Berger's article of certification (ie. qualification testing) of the BE-4 engine as something that needs to be done before the first launch of the Vulcan Centaur.  Is this a hint?

The qualification testing programme for all vehicle hardware has long been completed. The Flight Readiness Firing that VC-001 will perform is a flight certification test objective for the Flight Certification Testing programme to meet both NSSL2 and NSLP-2 flight certification requirements before their payloads can be allowed to fly onboard. People, they who know who they are, can correct my wording and add additional information as needed.

[Vettedrmr]

I've not seen nor heard anything on the BE-4 engines passing their qualification tests.  And considering both ULA and BO made press releases when they passed their acceptance tests (an easier test set), I fully expect them to let the public know when BE-4 passes qual tests.

[russianhalo117]

I've not seen nor heard anything on the BE-4 engines passing their qualification tests.  And considering both ULA and BO made press releases when they passed their acceptance tests (an easier test set), I fully expect them to let the public know when BE-4 passes qual tests.

If they had not passed they would not be stacking for an FRF and then going into final data review for flight followed by starting the actual mision launch campaign. They may or may not choose to release such information to the public as remember that updating the public is not a priority. The government and their customers are their priority right now. Anything published to be public realms is bonus materials to us. Someone can FOIA it though if you have the time.

[Vettedrmr]

I've not seen nor heard anything on the BE-4 engines passing their qualification tests.  And considering both ULA and BO made press releases when they passed their acceptance tests (an easier test set), I fully expect them to let the public know when BE-4 passes qual tests.

If they had not passed they would not be stacking for an FRF and then going into final data review for flight followed by starting the actual mision launch campaign. They may or may not choose to release such information to the public as remember that updating the public is not a priority. The government and their customers are their priority right now. Anything published to be public realms is bonus materials to us. Someone can FOIA it though if you have the time.

You should read the article I referenced: That's exactly what they are doing.  That's the risk/reward of concurrent testing: you get to integrate sooner, but you run the risk of having to do rework or (more sinisterly) downgrade your qual tests to "pass" them so you can fly.

And again, as I mentioned above, both ULA and BO announced to the public the passing of the ATPs; why would they NOT do that for qual tests, especially since it's a milestone towards first flight?

[mandrewa]

There's no mention in Eric Berger's article of certification (ie. qualification testing) of the BE-4 engine as something that needs to be done before the first launch of the Vulcan Centaur.  Is this a hint?

https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/08/blue-origins-powerful-be-4-engine-is-more-than-four-years-late-heres-why/

I went doing some old searching and found Berger's old article from 2021 where he describes the approach of concurrent qual and acceptance tests.  I've not read anything that says ULA and their customers have accepted the additional risk of flying a vehicle without engines that have completed qual testing.

That's what I thought also.  But Eric Berger obviously knows about the qualification test.  And for that matter, Jeff Foust recently wrote an article about the things that remain to be done before the first Vulcan Centaur mission can launch and he also failed to say anything about the qualification test for the BE-4.

It's just a hunch, but I think something is going on.  And I believe russianhalo117 just confirmed that.

[russianhalo117]

I've not seen nor heard anything on the BE-4 engines passing their qualification tests.  And considering both ULA and BO made press releases when they passed their acceptance tests (an easier test set), I fully expect them to let the public know when BE-4 passes qual tests.

If they had not passed they would not be stacking for an FRF and then going into final data review for flight followed by starting the actual mision launch campaign. They may or may not choose to release such information to the public as remember that updating the public is not a priority. The government and their customers are their priority right now. Anything published to be public realms is bonus materials to us. Someone can FOIA it though if you have the time.

You should read the article I referenced: That's exactly what they are doing.  That's the risk/reward of concurrent testing: you get to integrate sooner, but you run the risk of having to do rework or (more sinisterly) downgrade your qual tests to "pass" them so you can fly.

And again, as I mentioned above, both ULA and BO announced to the public the passing of the ATPs; why would they NOT do that for qual tests, especially since it's a milestone towards first flight?

Qual tests are done with qualification/development engines. Acceptance and gren run run testing are done with flight engines. Again the testing has already occurred in the past  and we have moved on to the flight readiness firing test with acceptance tested flight engines. Qualification testing with the development engine series created contention at the time so they limited what they said publicly.

[edzieba]

I've not seen nor heard anything on the BE-4 engines passing their qualification tests.  And considering both ULA and BO made press releases when they passed their acceptance tests (an easier test set), I fully expect them to let the public know when BE-4 passes qual tests.

If they had not passed they would not be stacking for an FRF and then going into final data review for flight followed by starting the actual mision launch campaign. They may or may not choose to release such information to the public as remember that updating the public is not a priority. The government and their customers are their priority right now. Anything published to be public realms is bonus materials to us. Someone can FOIA it though if you have the time.

You should read the article I referenced: That's exactly what they are doing.  That's the risk/reward of concurrent testing: you get to integrate sooner, but you run the risk of having to do rework or (more sinisterly) downgrade your qual tests to "pass" them so you can fly.

And again, as I mentioned above, both ULA and BO announced to the public the passing of the ATPs; why would they NOT do that for qual tests, especially since it's a milestone towards first flight?

Qual tests are done with qualification/development engines. Acceptance and gren run run testing are done with flight engines. Again the testing has already occurred in the past  and we have moved on to the flight readiness firing test with acceptance tested flight engines. Qualification testing with the development engine series created contention at the time so they limited what they said publicly.

No, though BE-4's scheduling can easily cause confusion:
- The first two final (flight) design BE-4 engines off of the line were manufactured, acceptance test fired, then shipped to ULA for integration. Those engines are currently mounted to Vulcan.
- The second one/two (usually referred to as two) BE-4 engines to be manufactured are earmarked for Qualification testing of the final BE-4 design. Either Qual testing has yet to complete, or both ULA and BO are keeping very silent on completion of Qual testing. We assume Qual testing to be underway due to there being the occasional fresh plume mark spotted at XEEx.
- This "ship, then Qual" schedule was chosen under the assumption that as long as the engines pass Qual testing, ULA would spend the time taken for that Qual testing integrating the flight engines with Vulcan and getting ready for launch, rather than sitting with an engineless booster for a few months before starting work.
- If for some reason the engines do not pass Qual testing, then there is some additional time required to destack, repack, ship back to Decatur, remove the engines, then implement any fixes (or wait for new engines). That is the schedule risk taken by mounting engines of a design that has not yet completed Qualification testing.
- Vulcan will NOT fly without Qual testing being completed. That is a risk nobody is willing to take.

[DanClemmensen]

- If for some reason the engines do not pass Qual testing, then there is some additional time required to destack, repack, ship back to Decatur, remove the engines, then implement any fixes (or wait for new engines). That is the schedule risk taken by mounting engines of a design that has not yet completed Qualification testing.

True if ULA has no way to replace engines  near SLC-41, e.g., in the VIF or the SPOC.
Shipping back to Decatur is 8 days each way, and presumably destack/repack takes a few days each way, plus the actual work, so at least a month if done very aggressively.

The big problem would be if the qual testing reveals a design flaw that is harder to fix, and actual new engines with the new design are needed. They must have evaluated the probability of this as being extremely low.  OTOH, even if the probability is completely unknown, ULA doesn't have anything better to do, so they may be proceeding on the chance it might work.

I really hope the engine(s) pass the qual tests and we get to see this rocket launch soon.

[Vettedrmr]

True if ULA has no way to replace engines  near SLC-41, e.g., in the VIF or the SPOC.
Shipping back to Decatur is 8 days each way, and presumably destack/repack takes a few days each way, plus the actual work, so at least a month if done very aggressively.

The big problem would be if the qual testing reveals a design flaw that is harder to fix, and actual new engines with the new design are needed. They must have evaluated the probability of this as being extremely low.  OTOH, even if the probability is completely unknown, ULA doesn't have anything better to do, so they may be proceeding on the chance it might work.

I really hope the engine(s) pass the qual tests and we get to see this rocket launch soon.

Not only that, but normally you'd also have to re-run ATP on the new design configuration.  Another avenue for moving forward is to limit the engine's performance envelope to work around whatever the qual test failure revealed.  Now, if it's just a software change then maybe ATPs don't have to be re-run (the qual tests will exercise the new SW).

But like you said, what else does the Vulcan team at ULA have to do?

[FutureSpaceTourist]

https://twitter.com/torybruno/status/1622636725293174784

I thought you guys might enjoy a #ToryTimelapse from stacking the Amazing Centaur V last week on top the #VulcanRocket Booster.  #CountdowntoVulcan