Author Topic: Orbital's Antares Development Update Thread  (Read 1065149 times)

Offline Jason1701

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2232
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 152
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #880 on: 02/18/2011 11:03 pm »
Orbital Sciences Corporation has updated its schedule and milestones for the Taurus II launch vehicle and the Cygnus spacecraft.  The new information can be viewed at http://www.orbital.com/TaurusII/.


Let's see what changed.

-engines and fairing tests extended through Q1 2011
-vehicle 1 testing extended through Q2
-static fire moved to late Q2
-Cygnus testing through Q3
-risk reduction flight moved very slightly to mid-Q3
-COTS flight moved slightly to late-Q4
-CRS flight 1 moved to late Q1 2012

So there hasn't been much slippage of the flight dates.

Online sdsds

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7202
  • “With peace and hope for all mankind.”
  • Seattle
  • Liked: 2050
  • Likes Given: 1962
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #881 on: 02/18/2011 11:49 pm »
Perhaps they'll fly some sort of Cygnus engineering test article on the risk reduction flight?

Yes.  From the July 2010 update (still available on the main Taurus II web page): "For the risk reduction test flight, Taurus II would not carry a full-fidelity Cygnus spacecraft – instead, a payload simulator would be launched to verify the design and flight performance characteristics of Orbital's new medium class launcher."

It would be interesting to know if the payload simulator would be launched into the same orbit as an ISS-bound Cygnus.
— 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 —

Offline ugordan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8520
    • My mainly Cassini image gallery
  • Liked: 3543
  • Likes Given: 759
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #882 on: 02/19/2011 10:01 am »
It would be interesting to know if the payload simulator would be launched into the same orbit as an ISS-bound Cygnus.

Why bother?

Offline kkattula

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3008
  • Melbourne, Australia
  • Liked: 656
  • Likes Given: 116
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #883 on: 02/19/2011 10:42 am »
Wow.  I'm listening to the ORB earnings web cast.  I think I heard them say they made $278M on the CRS contract in CY10.

Which suggests that SpaceX should have received about $240M (in proportion to awarded amount). ($1.9B/1.6B)

That puts a new light on how much NASA contribution has been made to SpaceX overall...a subject for further discussion in the SpaceX forum, I expect.

Then again, given the history of recent NASA programs, would you do any work for them without getting regular payments as you prepare?

Offline HMXHMX

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1709
  • Liked: 2213
  • Likes Given: 662
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #884 on: 02/19/2011 04:38 pm »
Wow.  I'm listening to the ORB earnings web cast.  I think I heard them say they made $278M on the CRS contract in CY10.

Which suggests that SpaceX should have received about $240M (in proportion to awarded amount). ($1.9B/1.6B)

That puts a new light on how much NASA contribution has been made to SpaceX overall...a subject for further discussion in the SpaceX forum, I expect.

Then again, given the history of recent NASA programs, would you do any work for them without getting regular payments as you prepare?

No, I wouldn't, and never have.

There is a reason why I proposed the use of fixed-price hardware milestones funded by an "other transactions" authority (also known as a "Space Act" Agreement) in 2004, as t/Space's contribution to the CE&R contracts.  Our proposal created the momentum for what became COTS, and provided the opportunity for SpaceX and Orbital to develop their respective launchers.  The history of this effort is not well known.

Unfortunately, COTS failed to follow a number of key provisions of our proposal, leading directly to some of the problems we are currently seeing, but that discussion is off topic for this thread.

Offline jongoff

  • Recovering Rocket Plumber/Space Entrepreneur
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6807
  • Lafayette/Broomfield, CO
  • Liked: 3987
  • Likes Given: 1684
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #885 on: 02/19/2011 04:47 pm »
Wow.  I'm listening to the ORB earnings web cast.  I think I heard them say they made $278M on the CRS contract in CY10.

Which suggests that SpaceX should have received about $240M (in proportion to awarded amount). ($1.9B/1.6B)

That puts a new light on how much NASA contribution has been made to SpaceX overall...a subject for further discussion in the SpaceX forum, I expect.

Then again, given the history of recent NASA programs, would you do any work for them without getting regular payments as you prepare?

No, I wouldn't, and never have.

There is a reason why I proposed the use of fixed-price hardware milestones funded by an "other transactions" authority (also known as a "Space Act" Agreement) in 2004, as t/Space's contribution to the CE&R contracts.  Our proposal created the momentum for what became COTS, and provided the opportunity for SpaceX and Orbital to develop their respective launchers.  The history of this effort is not well known.

Unfortunately, COTS failed to follow a number of key provisions of our proposal, leading directly to some of the problems we are currently seeing, but that discussion is off topic for this thread.

Then start a new thread!  :-)

I think I've heard bits of the story from time to time in our discussions over the years, but it would be great to have them in one place.  If you don't want to do it here, I'd love to do it as a guestpost on SB. 

~Jon

Offline HMXHMX

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1709
  • Liked: 2213
  • Likes Given: 662
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #886 on: 02/19/2011 05:18 pm »
Wow.  I'm listening to the ORB earnings web cast.  I think I heard them say they made $278M on the CRS contract in CY10.

Which suggests that SpaceX should have received about $240M (in proportion to awarded amount). ($1.9B/1.6B)

That puts a new light on how much NASA contribution has been made to SpaceX overall...a subject for further discussion in the SpaceX forum, I expect.

Then again, given the history of recent NASA programs, would you do any work for them without getting regular payments as you prepare?

No, I wouldn't, and never have.

There is a reason why I proposed the use of fixed-price hardware milestones funded by an "other transactions" authority (also known as a "Space Act" Agreement) in 2004, as t/Space's contribution to the CE&R contracts.  Our proposal created the momentum for what became COTS, and provided the opportunity for SpaceX and Orbital to develop their respective launchers.  The history of this effort is not well known.

Unfortunately, COTS failed to follow a number of key provisions of our proposal, leading directly to some of the problems we are currently seeing, but that discussion is off topic for this thread.

Then start a new thread!  :-)

I think I've heard bits of the story from time to time in our discussions over the years, but it would be great to have them in one place.  If you don't want to do it here, I'd love to do it as a guestpost on SB. 

~Jon

Maybe after my Space Access 2011 talk in April, which will recount the history.  It's all water under the bridge these days, in any case.

Offline AlexCam

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 124
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #887 on: 02/19/2011 08:52 pm »
Wow.  I'm listening to the ORB earnings web cast.  I think I heard them say they made $278M on the CRS contract in CY10.

Which suggests that SpaceX should have received about $240M (in proportion to awarded amount). ($1.9B/1.6B)


I would believe it is more since they are based on milestone payments and Spacex has more missions further in the integration cycle.

However the per flight contract value for Orbital under CRS is much higher,

Offline A_M_Swallow

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8906
  • South coast of England
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 223
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #888 on: 02/19/2011 09:49 pm »

Maybe after my Space Access 2011 talk in April, which will recount the history.  It's all water under the bridge these days, in any case.

The CCDev2 money is awaiting allocation at the moment.
There are rumours of a CCDev3, consequently its milestones have not been bid yet.

Offline Ronsmytheiii

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23394
  • Liked: 1879
  • Likes Given: 1023
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #889 on: 02/19/2011 09:49 pm »
Wow.  I'm listening to the ORB earnings web cast.  I think I heard them say they made $278M on the CRS contract in CY10.

Which suggests that SpaceX should have received about $240M (in proportion to awarded amount). ($1.9B/1.6B)


I would believe it is more since they are based on milestone payments and Spacex has more missions further in the integration cycle.

However the per flight contract value for Orbital under CRS is much higher,

Cygnus can deliver more pressurized volume, so it receives more money.

Offline ugordan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8520
    • My mainly Cassini image gallery
  • Liked: 3543
  • Likes Given: 759
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #890 on: 02/19/2011 10:10 pm »
Wow.  I'm listening to the ORB earnings web cast.  I think I heard them say they made $278M on the CRS contract in CY10.

Which suggests that SpaceX should have received about $240M (in proportion to awarded amount). ($1.9B/1.6B)


I would believe it is more since they are based on milestone payments and Spacex has more missions further in the integration cycle.

However the per flight contract value for Orbital under CRS is much higher,

Cygnus can deliver more pressurized volume, so it receives more money.

It receives more money because OSC put in a higher cost bid to NASA. Even after you correct for the fact OSC needs fewer flights to reach the 20 ton minimum requirement.
« Last Edit: 02/19/2011 10:45 pm by ugordan »

Online sdsds

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7202
  • “With peace and hope for all mankind.”
  • Seattle
  • Liked: 2050
  • Likes Given: 1962
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #891 on: 02/19/2011 10:36 pm »
The CCDev2 money is awaiting allocation at the moment.
There are rumours of a CCDev3, consequently its milestones have not been bid yet.

More than rumors:
[...] In
spring FY 2012, the CCDev Round 2 awards will be completed and NASA plans to further expand
commercial crew systems under CCDev Round 3 awards. Round 3 awards will support
development, testing, and demonstrations of multiple commercial crew systems for U.S. crew
access to LEO and the ISS.
That's from the 2012 Budget Estimate document (p. 396 of the pdf, labeled ESMD-3).
http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/516675main_NASA_FY12_Budget_Estimates.pdf

From the same document:
Budget Authority, $ in millions
                FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 FY2016
Commercial Crew $850.0 $850.0 $850.0 $850.0 $850.0
— 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 —

Offline spacetraveler

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 687
  • Atlanta, GA
  • Liked: 165
  • Likes Given: 26
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #892 on: 02/21/2011 08:18 pm »
That's from the 2012 Budget Estimate document (p. 396 of the pdf, labeled ESMD-3).
http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/516675main_NASA_FY12_Budget_Estimates.pdf

From the same document:
Budget Authority, $ in millions
                FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 FY2016
Commercial Crew $850.0 $850.0 $850.0 $850.0 $850.0


Those amounts don't mean all that much though given that some key NASA players in Congress have already rejected the President's NASA 2012 budget.

Offline wannamoonbase

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5413
  • Denver, CO
    • U.S. Metric Association
  • Liked: 3112
  • Likes Given: 3862
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #893 on: 02/25/2011 11:17 am »
That's from the 2012 Budget Estimate document (p. 396 of the pdf, labeled ESMD-3).
http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/516675main_NASA_FY12_Budget_Estimates.pdf

From the same document:
Budget Authority, $ in millions
                FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 FY2016
Commercial Crew $850.0 $850.0 $850.0 $850.0 $850.0


Those amounts don't mean all that much though given that some key NASA players in Congress have already rejected the President's NASA 2012 budget.

Let us also consider what pressures will be felt once the last shuttle flies.  The urgency to get American's flying on American rockets will increase after the last shuttle flight.
« Last Edit: 02/25/2011 11:17 am by wannamoonbase »
Wildly optimistic prediction, Superheavy recovery on IFT-4 or IFT-5

Offline Jason1701

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2232
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 152
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #894 on: 03/23/2011 12:51 am »
Another test firing. Sounds like it's for the second Taurus II.

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/technology/features/AJ26_20110319.html

Offline Freddie

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 108
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #895 on: 03/23/2011 08:21 pm »
Orbital Sciences Corporation has posted an update, dated March 2011, at http://www.orbital.com/TaurusII/.

Offline simonbp

  • Science Guy
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7138
  • Liked: 314
  • Likes Given: 183
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #896 on: 03/23/2011 08:26 pm »
Looks like you could fit an entire Pegasus in that faring, including the wings... :)

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #897 on: 03/28/2011 10:55 pm »
Looks like you could fit an entire Pegasus in that faring, including the wings... :)
Looks like it's composite, too! (EDIT:actually, I'm not sure about that, now...) What's it's mass (and what would a typical aluminum fairing of the same size weight)?
« Last Edit: 03/29/2011 03:38 am by Robotbeat »
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Lurker Steve

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1420
  • Liked: 35
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: Taurus II Development News
« Reply #898 on: 03/29/2011 03:10 am »
Orbital Sciences Corporation has posted an update, dated March 2011, at http://www.orbital.com/TaurusII/.

I'm suprized how long it is taking to complete the new facility. The update says the concrete is finally complete, and they are working on the fuel farm.

Is the pad going to be ready if NASA / Congress pays for the risk-reduction flight this summer ?

Online Salo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11336
  • Odessa, Ukraine
  • Liked: 4234
  • Likes Given: 3529

Tags:
 

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