It might help justify crew rating Vulcan if they can use Vulcan Heavy to do lunar missions with an up rated BLEO Starliner. So I can see them developing that at the same time.Right now (or after Starliner has its first crewed mission and after Starship has a successful orbital flight) would be a good time for NASA to start getting industry input for a commercial crew service to Gateway/cislunar. Maybe an RFP.
It might help justify crew rating Vulcan if they can use Vulcan Heavy to do lunar missions with an up rated BLEO Starliner. So I can see them developing that at the same time.
Quote from: Robotbeat on 03/01/2023 08:37 pmIt might help justify crew rating Vulcan if they can use Vulcan Heavy to do lunar missions with an up rated BLEO Starliner. So I can see them developing that at the same time.A minor note on nomenclature: The largest Vulcan is called "Vulcan upgrade", not "Vulcan Heavy". From Wikipedia: "The most powerful Vulcan Centaur will have a Vulcan first stage, a Centaur upper stage with RL10CX engines with a nozzle extension and six SRBs." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulcan_CentaurThe configuration was formerly called "Vulcan Heavy", but the name was changed, presumably to reserve the name "Vulcan Heavy" for a 3-core version that was being investigated.
Quote from: DanClemmensen on 03/01/2023 10:53 pmQuote from: Robotbeat on 03/01/2023 08:37 pmIt might help justify crew rating Vulcan if they can use Vulcan Heavy to do lunar missions with an up rated BLEO Starliner. So I can see them developing that at the same time.A minor note on nomenclature: The largest Vulcan is called "Vulcan upgrade", not "Vulcan Heavy". From Wikipedia: "The most powerful Vulcan Centaur will have a Vulcan first stage, a Centaur upper stage with RL10CX engines with a nozzle extension and six SRBs." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulcan_CentaurThe configuration was formerly called "Vulcan Heavy", but the name was changed, presumably to reserve the name "Vulcan Heavy" for a 3-core version that was being investigated.No, I’m using Vulcan heavy intentionally as I’m referring to the tricore version. (And “Vulcan Heavy” ALWAYS referred to the tricore version.)
Quote from: Robotbeat on 03/01/2023 11:27 pmQuote from: DanClemmensen on 03/01/2023 10:53 pmQuote from: Robotbeat on 03/01/2023 08:37 pmIt might help justify crew rating Vulcan if they can use Vulcan Heavy to do lunar missions with an up rated BLEO Starliner. So I can see them developing that at the same time.A minor note on nomenclature: The largest Vulcan is called "Vulcan upgrade", not "Vulcan Heavy". From Wikipedia: "The most powerful Vulcan Centaur will have a Vulcan first stage, a Centaur upper stage with RL10CX engines with a nozzle extension and six SRBs." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulcan_CentaurThe configuration was formerly called "Vulcan Heavy", but the name was changed, presumably to reserve the name "Vulcan Heavy" for a 3-core version that was being investigated.No, I’m using Vulcan heavy intentionally as I’m referring to the tricore version. (And “Vulcan Heavy” ALWAYS referred to the tricore version.)I became interested in the awhile back, which is why I knew the nomenclature had changed. Here is a version of the ULA data sheet from 2020: https://web.archive.org/web/20200605032023/https://www.ulalaunch.com/docs/default-source/rockets/vulcancentaur.pdfand here is the current version: https://www.ulalaunch.com/docs/default-source/rockets/vulcancentaur.pdfAs you can see, ULA really did refer to the most capable single-stick V6 as "Vulcan Heavy".
Quote from: DanClemmensen on 03/02/2023 01:12 amQuote from: Robotbeat on 03/01/2023 11:27 pmQuote from: DanClemmensen on 03/01/2023 10:53 pmQuote from: Robotbeat on 03/01/2023 08:37 pmIt might help justify crew rating Vulcan if they can use Vulcan Heavy to do lunar missions with an up rated BLEO Starliner. So I can see them developing that at the same time.A minor note on nomenclature: The largest Vulcan is called "Vulcan upgrade", not "Vulcan Heavy". From Wikipedia: "The most powerful Vulcan Centaur will have a Vulcan first stage, a Centaur upper stage with RL10CX engines with a nozzle extension and six SRBs." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulcan_CentaurThe configuration was formerly called "Vulcan Heavy", but the name was changed, presumably to reserve the name "Vulcan Heavy" for a 3-core version that was being investigated.No, I’m using Vulcan heavy intentionally as I’m referring to the tricore version. (And “Vulcan Heavy” ALWAYS referred to the tricore version.)I became interested in the awhile back, which is why I knew the nomenclature had changed. Here is a version of the ULA data sheet from 2020: https://web.archive.org/web/20200605032023/https://www.ulalaunch.com/docs/default-source/rockets/vulcancentaur.pdfand here is the current version: https://www.ulalaunch.com/docs/default-source/rockets/vulcancentaur.pdfAs you can see, ULA really did refer to the most capable single-stick V6 as "Vulcan Heavy".Nope! They referred to it as “Vulcan Centaur Heavy.” And your links confirm it. You’re falsely using “Vulcan heavy” in quotes! That exact phrase is NOT mentioned (except in reference to the tricore variant)!
Quote from: Robotbeat on 03/02/2023 05:47 amQuote from: DanClemmensen on 03/02/2023 01:12 amAs you can see, ULA really did refer to the most capable single-stick V6 as "Vulcan Heavy".Nope! They referred to it as “Vulcan Centaur Heavy.” And your links confirm it. You’re falsely using “Vulcan heavy” in quotes! That exact phrase is NOT mentioned (except in reference to the tricore variant)!Can we put a “heavy” pin in this argument before it gets out of hand?
Quote from: DanClemmensen on 03/02/2023 01:12 amAs you can see, ULA really did refer to the most capable single-stick V6 as "Vulcan Heavy".Nope! They referred to it as “Vulcan Centaur Heavy.” And your links confirm it. You’re falsely using “Vulcan heavy” in quotes! That exact phrase is NOT mentioned (except in reference to the tricore variant)!
As you can see, ULA really did refer to the most capable single-stick V6 as "Vulcan Heavy".
Quote from: ZachS09 on 03/02/2023 12:43 pmQuote from: Robotbeat on 03/02/2023 05:47 amQuote from: DanClemmensen on 03/02/2023 01:12 amAs you can see, ULA really did refer to the most capable single-stick V6 as "Vulcan Heavy".Nope! They referred to it as “Vulcan Centaur Heavy.” And your links confirm it. You’re falsely using “Vulcan heavy” in quotes! That exact phrase is NOT mentioned (except in reference to the tricore variant)!Can we put a “heavy” pin in this argument before it gets out of hand?One pin by itself or three pins clustered together?
Quote from: Robotbeat on 03/01/2023 08:37 pmIt might help justify crew rating Vulcan if they can use Vulcan Heavy to do lunar missions with an up rated BLEO Starliner. So I can see them developing that at the same time.Right now (or after Starliner has its first crewed mission and after Starship has a successful orbital flight) would be a good time for NASA to start getting industry input for a commercial crew service to Gateway/cislunar. Maybe an RFP.That would make SLS redundant. Something ULA may well do in future with new owners whoever they are.
Quote from: TrevorMonty on 03/01/2023 10:39 pmQuote from: Robotbeat on 03/01/2023 08:37 pmIt might help justify crew rating Vulcan if they can use Vulcan Heavy to do lunar missions with an up rated BLEO Starliner. So I can see them developing that at the same time.Right now (or after Starliner has its first crewed mission and after Starship has a successful orbital flight) would be a good time for NASA to start getting industry input for a commercial crew service to Gateway/cislunar. Maybe an RFP.That would make SLS redundant. Something ULA may well do in future with new owners whoever they are.With Blue Origin having recently won a contract from NASA to become the second company to provide lunar landing services for the Artemis program, any talk of proposing to use the Vulcan Heavy to conduct lunar missions involving an uprated Starliner will be definitely out of the question if Blue Origin decides to develop a larger version of the New Glenn to carry a cargo spacecraft to haul supplies to the Gateway Lunar Station.
With Blue Origin having recently won a contract from NASA to become the second company to provide lunar landing services for the Artemis program, any talk of proposing to use the Vulcan Heavy to conduct lunar missions involving an uprated Starliner will be definitely out of the question if Blue Origin decides to develop a larger version of the New Glenn to carry a cargo spacecraft to haul supplies to the Gateway Lunar Station.
Do you think we might see Starliner on New Glenn? There hasn't been any more talk of man-rating Vulcan from NASA, Boeing, or ULA. At least that I've seen. Particularly if either Lockheed is buying Boeing out of ULA, or Blue is buying ULA, it might make sense for Being to just move to New Glenn, which is being man-rated from the start. An entirely different provider is also possible; the Firefly/NG MLV has grown to 16mT to LEO now, so it could probably launch Starliner.
Both Vulcan and New Glenn have been designed with human rating in mind, and both could be certified as such by NASA with probably a very similar level of difficulty / cost.
Quote from: whitelancer64 on 05/25/2023 05:57 pmBoth Vulcan and New Glenn have been designed with human rating in mind, and both could be certified as such by NASA with probably a very similar level of difficulty / cost.Still, New Glenn should be 'cheaper' to crew-certify, because Bezos will probably pay for it, rather than Boeing or ULA having too.
ULA has already certified Atlas for Starliner doing same for Vulcan shouldn't be hard. Be surprised if they didn't allow for it in the design. ULA also has crew access tower on the pad.
Quote from: JEF_300 on 05/25/2023 06:47 pmQuote from: whitelancer64 on 05/25/2023 05:57 pmBoth Vulcan and New Glenn have been designed with human rating in mind, and both could be certified as such by NASA with probably a very similar level of difficulty / cost.Still, New Glenn should be 'cheaper' to crew-certify, because Bezos will probably pay for it, rather than Boeing or ULA having too.can't say that
