Author Topic: Orbital's Antares Development Update Thread  (Read 1065228 times)

Offline pippin

  • Regular
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2575
  • Liked: 312
  • Likes Given: 45
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #100 on: 07/12/2009 10:17 am »

It's very bad for the whole industry that it doesn't yet make sense to fit something like a Centaur on a Taurus II and be able to adapt it to meet whatever avionics spec OSC may have.

No, it isn't.   That isn't how the rest of industry works. Airbus avionics don't work in a Boeing plane.  Airbus wings don't work in a Boeing plane.
Look at my post, that wasn't my point. Wings are also a bad example because it's a structure not a subsystem.
Quote
An upper stage is an end unit and too high of level for interchangeability.   Taurus II can have a LH2 stage using RL-10 engines and Honeywell gyros.   Just like an Airbus and 747 can use the same GE engines and have some of the same Collins components.

Err.. Yes. Wasn't that what I said? OK the phrase you quote may have been a bit off that point, wanted to refer to but read the rest of my post.
The auto industry analogy would be: buy the structure, the engine and integrated avionics from three suppliers to your spec and integrate the stuff.
You gain economies of scale if you can distribute development costs across a broader range of uses. I don't know how much dev. cost is in the structure but there must be a lot in avionics and engines and it will be worthwhile to share that. And probably the best way to do that is by having the same supplier delivering that stuff to several applications and not starting each development all over again with each vehicles. There are many more launch vehicles around than it makes sense to have different avionics systems and engines.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37441
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #101 on: 07/12/2009 12:11 pm »

It's very bad for the whole industry that it doesn't yet make sense to fit something like a Centaur on a Taurus II and be able to adapt it to meet whatever avionics spec OSC may have.

No, it isn't.   That isn't how the rest of industry works. Airbus avionics don't work in a Boeing plane.  Airbus wings don't work in a Boeing plane.
Look at my post, that wasn't my point. Wings are also a bad example because it's a structure not a subsystem.


So are propellant tanks.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37441
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #102 on: 07/12/2009 12:17 pm »

The auto industry analogy would be: buy the structure, the engine and integrated avionics

Those are the root of the disagreement.

A.  The structure is what most manufacturers do inhouse.
2.  No issues with engines, they are from outside.
III.  It can't be obtained "integrated".  It affects the lower stages and there are unique requirements.  Procurement by the component is at the right level

Offline agman25

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 452
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #103 on: 07/12/2009 04:32 pm »
I bet there are GM vehicles with Ford engines.

These are the types of statements I will not abide.  Don't say things you have no basis for.  Besides, there aren't.

This is not relevant to anything being discussed here but Ford's with GM engines has already happened.
http://www.autocar.co.uk/CarReviews/FirstDrives/Ford-Ka-1.3-TDCi-Zetec/235680/
But since then GM has sold Opel. Auto companies share engines, gearboxes and components all the time. BMW's use GM transmissions and Peugeot engines (for the MINI).

Offline Antares

  • ABO^2
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5181
  • Done arguing with amateurs
  • Liked: 371
  • Likes Given: 228
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #104 on: 07/12/2009 04:52 pm »
None in America.  I'll stick with knowing rockets worldwide and leave the cars to others, m'kay.  However, thanks, agman.  You provided evidence on which an "I bet" statement might be proved.  That's all I'm asking.  Tighten up the debate skills.
If I like something on NSF, it's probably because I know it to be accurate.  Every once in a while, it's just something I agree with.  Facts generally receive the former.

Offline Verio Fryar

  • Member
  • Member
  • Posts: 54
  • Liked: 18
  • Likes Given: 350
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #105 on: 07/13/2009 09:46 am »
None in America.
Perhaps that is one of the reasons of the sorry state of USA's car manufacturers. ;)

Offline antonioe

  • PONTIFEX MAXIMVS
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1077
  • Virginia is for (space) lovers
  • Liked: 43
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #106 on: 07/13/2009 06:50 pm »
Gee... I used to complain that the Elon "Musk Q&A - Updates SpaceX status on Falcon and Dragon" thread had become an all-purpose, multiple-subject flaming thread...

Now I see that the "T II Development" thread is addressing the problems of the U.S. automotive industry... probably a lot more relevant to this country's future than a poor little old MLV, I guess! :)
ARS LONGA, VITA BREVIS...

Offline Cretan126

  • Pointy end up? Check.
  • Member
  • Posts: 94
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #107 on: 07/13/2009 07:12 pm »
Gee... I used to complain that the Elon "Musk Q&A - Updates SpaceX status on Falcon and Dragon" thread had become an all-purpose, multiple-subject flaming thread...

Now I see that the "T II Development" thread is addressing the problems of the U.S. automotive industry... probably a lot more relevant to this country's future than a poor little old MLV, I guess! :)

You mean Taurus II isn't the next generation mid-sized Ford?  Our bad.....  ;-)

Offline yinzer

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1509
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #108 on: 07/13/2009 07:13 pm »
Gee... I used to complain that the Elon "Musk Q&A - Updates SpaceX status on Falcon and Dragon" thread had become an all-purpose, multiple-subject flaming thread...

Now I see that the "T II Development" thread is addressing the problems of the U.S. automotive industry... probably a lot more relevant to this country's future than a poor little old MLV, I guess! :)

Be the change you wish to see in the world :)  How's the development going?  Was the GAO report too pessimistic?
California 2008 - taking rights from people and giving rights to chickens.

Offline Ben the Space Brit

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7206
  • A spaceflight fan
  • London, UK
  • Liked: 806
  • Likes Given: 900
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #109 on: 07/13/2009 07:40 pm »
You mean Taurus II isn't the next generation mid-sized Ford?  Our bad.....  ;-)

Actually... I think that Ford did have a model called 'Taurus' once. :D
« Last Edit: 07/13/2009 07:40 pm by Ben the Space Brit »
"Oops! I left the silly thing in reverse!" - Duck Dodgers

~*~*~*~

The Space Shuttle Program - 1981-2011

The time for words has passed; The time has come to put up or shut up!
DON'T PROPAGANDISE, FLY!!!

Offline antonioe

  • PONTIFEX MAXIMVS
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1077
  • Virginia is for (space) lovers
  • Liked: 43
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #110 on: 07/13/2009 07:43 pm »
He was referring to the "II"...
ARS LONGA, VITA BREVIS...

Offline antonioe

  • PONTIFEX MAXIMVS
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1077
  • Virginia is for (space) lovers
  • Liked: 43
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #111 on: 07/13/2009 07:44 pm »
Was the GAO report too pessimistic?

You kidding?  For GAO standards ("Good News is No News") that was an outrageously optimistic report!!! :D
ARS LONGA, VITA BREVIS...

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8823
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1318
  • Likes Given: 306
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #112 on: 07/13/2009 08:33 pm »
Will the Taurus II even be street legal? Last thing I wanna do is be cruising down the highway and see it in the mirror coming like a bat out of hell ...

Go Taurus II...
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Offline Nomadd

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8840
  • Lower 48
  • Liked: 60431
  • Likes Given: 1305
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #113 on: 07/13/2009 08:47 pm »
 Ford also had the Falcon.
Those who danced were thought to be quite insane by those who couldn't hear the music.

Offline kevin-rf

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8823
  • Overlooking the path Mary's little Lamb took..
  • Liked: 1318
  • Likes Given: 306
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #114 on: 07/14/2009 02:46 am »

We'll have fun, fun, fun until antonioe takes the Taurus II away...
If you're happy and you know it,
It's your med's!

Offline bad_astra

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1926
  • Liked: 316
  • Likes Given: 553
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #115 on: 07/14/2009 07:35 pm »
Now if only OSC can get Sir Jackie Stewart to do a Taurus II commercial.
"Contact Light" -Buzz Aldrin

Online Dmitry_V_home

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 513
  • City of Toglliatti, Samara region, Russia
  • Liked: 666
  • Likes Given: 133
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #116 on: 07/15/2009 05:01 pm »
Hhhmmm... By my calculations, with a cryogenic stage (with two RL-10A3) Taurus II could put into  ISS-orbit more than 9000 kg of a payload...

Offline William Barton

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3487
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #117 on: 07/15/2009 05:05 pm »
Ford also had the Falcon.

I think you're onto something. Now, if only Kistler had thought to rechristen K-1 as the Ranger...

Offline Ronsmytheiii

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23394
  • Liked: 1879
  • Likes Given: 1023
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #118 on: 08/03/2009 02:50 am »
Quote
An academic symposium will be held this fall to explore the potential of what officials are calling "Virginia's Spaceplex" in the Wallops Island area.

Accomack County and state officials met with representatives from several state universities Wednesday in Richmond to hear preliminary proposals for a concept study for the Wallops area, which would emphasize developing a vision for its potential and which eventually would lead to an economic impact analysis and concrete recommendations.

The county last week issued a request for proposals for the study, saying it will aid in marketing efforts for Wallops area enterprises. But by the end of yesterday's meeting at the Virginia Economic Development Partnership, the group decided to take a broader approach and to concentrate on three different aspects of planning for growth in the area: to plan for immediate needs related Orbital Sciences Corp.'s Taurus II project; to hold a symposium; and to do comprehensive long-range planning.

http://www.delmarvanow.com/article/20090801/ESN01/908010302

Offline NUAETIUS

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 427
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #119 on: 08/06/2009 02:50 am »
Entirely cool Taurus II / Cygnus

Ok how did Orbital get so much cooler video than SpaceX?  Elon must be chaped

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBya5YAUm5k&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fspaceports.blogspot.com%2F2009%2F08%2Fyoutube-video-above-is-animation-of.html&feature=player_embedded
« Last Edit: 08/06/2009 02:52 am by NUAETIUS »
“It has long been recognized that the formation of a committee is a powerful technique for avoiding responsibility, deferring difficult decisions and averting blame….while at the same time maintaining a semblance of action.” Augustine's Law - Norm Augustine

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0