For now, ULA's focus is on scaling up Vulcan flight rates. That means that the company's goal of reusing the BE-4 engines on its rocket—the plan is to separate the engine section, and capture the engines with a helicopter as they descend to Earth—will take a backseat for now."In terms of our engine recovery, that is going to happen within a handful of years," Bruno said. "I don't want to say exactly when because it's part of the contract we have with one of our customers at this time, and we're not releasing the details of that. But it will take a couple of years to actually be reusing the engine."
LOFTID was one of the most interesting missions I've ever kept up with. Really genius idea, and I hope it gets implemented with Vulcan to save engines in the future.
Thanks. It will. In full scale engineering development now
Is it safe to assume there will be a LOFTID-2 mission with the full scale version? If so, on a Vulcan, or is there room on an upcoming Atlas V mission? Or go for broke with BE-4 recovery?
Yes. Vulcan. Yes
WHAT’S FLOATING ON THE LAKE?LOFTID MODEL In the lake at this year’s Space Symposium, we see a full-scale model (~6 meters) of the Low-Earth Orbit Flight Test of an Inflatable Decelerator or LOFTID. Launched on a ULA Atlas V rocket on Nov. 10, 2022, LOFTID is a cross-cutting aeroshell approximately 6 meters or 20 feet in diameter. LOFTID separated from the Atlas V on a reentry trajectory from low-Earth orbit to demonstrate the inflatable aeroshell or heat shield’s ability to slow down and survive re-entry. Demonstrating this technology in these conditions is relevant to many potential applications, including landing large payloads on Mars and engine reuse on ULA’s new Vulcan rocket.
22 tonnes re-entry mass for the engine section? Really?
Quote from: kevinof on 04/20/2023 09:13 am22 tonnes re-entry mass for the engine section? Really? 22.7 metric tons (50,000 lbs), if the number from the ULA infographic is to be believed. That is either a typo, or those engines, the engine section, and the LOFTID systems are built like panzers.
After SMART enters service, will the recovered engines be shipped all the way back to ULA's factory, or would you do integration at the launch site?
The first ones will likely go back, but the steady state plan is to inspect, refurb, and reinstall at the Cape
Reuse technique is driven by architecture, which is driven by mission. Low energy (LEO optimized) missions, favor recovering the complete first stage. High enrgy optimizes at a very different architecture, favoring component (FS engine) recovery. Easy to grasp looking at staging
Aka 100% reusability is not a goal for ULA?
Our goals are centered on our customers’ needs. If future customer needs demand an additional vehicle more optimized for low energy orbits, which comes at the expense of high energy orbit performance, then we will develop one and implement the reuse technique that is most appropriate for that architecture.
Wouldn't it make sense for ULA to make a reusable first stage that could either be fit with a LEO optimized expendable second stage, or a high-energy orbit optimized expendable second (and possibly third stage)?
Vulcan first…
Tory, what is the velocity at Stage Sep on Vulcan?
Payload mass and config matter, but you can assume 20,000 mph is typical.
necessary justify the extra development costs if you're cheap enough. Also in some case you just need a specific service which one or other LV's doesnt have.What I see is that the cheaper LV's are enabling small, cheaper payloads not more big or GEO/GTO satellites.
Incorrect. The small LV market has almost completely collapsed. There was a brief tick up with small sat experiments and demos, but those quickly moved over to heavy launch vehicles as ride-shares at lower cost. There will be room for 1 or 2 micro launchers, but no more.
I think you misunderstood me. I mean cheaper launch options (let it be rideshare or standalone) lowers the bar to enter the satellite market but in general we don't have significantly more med and large $500M-$1B+ payloads. Specially not on high energy orbits.
Quote from: FutureSpaceTourist on 09/03/2023 05:42 amReuse technique is driven by architecture, which is driven by mission. Low energy (LEO optimized) missions, favor recovering the complete first stage. High enrgy optimizes at a very different architecture, favoring component (FS engine) recovery. Easy to grasp looking at stagingFor high energy orbits, the graph only shows the flyback option and fails to show the performance gained by landing downrange. This is what SpaceX does and Rocketlab plan to do with their vehicles, so I think ULA also needs to consider this.
Quote from: Steven Pietrobon on 09/05/2023 07:10 amQuote from: FutureSpaceTourist on 09/03/2023 05:42 amReuse technique is driven by architecture, which is driven by mission. Low energy (LEO optimized) missions, favor recovering the complete first stage. High enrgy optimizes at a very different architecture, favoring component (FS engine) recovery. Easy to grasp looking at stagingFor high energy orbits, the graph only shows the flyback option and fails to show the performance gained by landing downrange. This is what SpaceX does and Rocketlab plan to do with their vehicles, so I think ULA also needs to consider this.They are recovering engines downrange.
LOFTID test 2022, no payload only instruments.1224 kg, diameter 6m, weight by area of cone 58m^2 10m ~ 163m^2 ~ 3.4T
