There certainly appears to be progress on prepping the 2nd stage manufacturing capability, but it seems like far less work has been done on the Liberty the spacecraft. (BTW, couldn't they have a different name for the LV and spacecraft?) The spacecraft was only announced recently, with the only hardware in sight being the composite pressure hull test article completed under the Orion program. (of course, I am basing this only on what has been shown to the public, there might be far more work done...)The use of a composite pressure hull is actually something that should slow down the vehicle development. Had they picked a typical pressure hull, LM could simply make a lighter version of what the first Orion flight hardware they just shipped to KSC this week. But with the composite pressure hull, there are more unknowns, it would seem. (why else would it have been turned down for Orion?)Apparently ATK was involved in the construction of that composite test article, so it might be the primary explanation. But it doesn't seem to be the quick and easy (relatively) option, so I'm very curious to see how quickly ATK/LM is planning to meet the milestones that would be a part of the CCiCap award for the spacecraft if selected.
ATK will build a second “Ares I” style Mobile Launcher (ML), following the repurposing of the first ML to the SLS program.
It will be transported to the pad via one of the Crawler Transporters, following launch vehicle integration inside the Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB).
QuoteATK will build a second “Ares I” style Mobile Launcher (ML), following the repurposing of the first ML to the SLS program.I hope ATK will have to purchase that ML for $0.5b which went into building it?QuoteIt will be transported to the pad via one of the Crawler Transporters, following launch vehicle integration inside the Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB).And crawlers too?Somehow I doubt it. Knowing these guys, they will lobby for getting it all free of charge.
1. Could the Liberty second stage be a mechanism for ESA to pay for some of its ISS utilization given the impending demise of ATV?2. Could that, along with utilization of LC39, be a political calculation to enhance the chances of securing NASA funding?3. I like that idea better than an ATV derived service module for Orion.
Quote from: gospacex on 07/05/2012 09:32 amQuoteATK will build a second “Ares I” style Mobile Launcher (ML), following the repurposing of the first ML to the SLS program.I hope ATK will have to purchase that ML for $0.5b which went into building it?QuoteIt will be transported to the pad via one of the Crawler Transporters, following launch vehicle integration inside the Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB).And crawlers too?Somehow I doubt it. Knowing these guys, they will lobby for getting it all free of charge.I think building another ML will be much cheaper without the design work and without the NASA paperwork.
Really appreciate the nice words! GoSpaceX - SpaceX have lobbyists too you know
Quote from: Chris Bergin on 07/05/2012 11:09 amReally appreciate the nice words! GoSpaceX - SpaceX have lobbyists too you know SpaceX lobbyists did not lobby for disasters called CxP and Ares I which cost US 5 years and $10b wasted.
Quote from: gospacex on 07/05/2012 11:44 amQuote from: Chris Bergin on 07/05/2012 11:09 amReally appreciate the nice words! GoSpaceX - SpaceX have lobbyists too you know SpaceX lobbyists did not lobby for disasters called CxP and Ares I which cost US 5 years and $10b wasted.If you're going to blame ATK for that, go back to page 1 of 49237239 on the forum and start over again, because you're sounding like you're sobbing into your cornflakes with this now. Want to blame someone for that? Blame ESAS, then blame NASA, then blame Congress.