Author Topic: ESA European Heavy Lift Launcher (EHLL), PROTEIN program  (Read 6045 times)

Offline Asteroza

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2836
  • Liked: 1084
  • Likes Given: 33
So with the recent flurry of news regarding cost-benefit studies for ESA SPS under the SOLARIS program, there is a tender due in September for a study called PROTEIN for a new EU superheavy rocket architecture to support the SPS effort, supposedly with EHLL operating by 2035.

They want something that can launch 10,000t a year.

https://esastar-publication-ext.sso.esa.int/ESATenderActions/details/45216

for reference, the EU SPS program SOLARIS

https://www.esa.int/Enabling_Support/Space_Engineering_Technology/SOLARIS

Offline Steven Pietrobon

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39218
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 32738
  • Likes Given: 8196
Re: ESA European Heavy Lift Launcher (EHLL), PROTEIN program
« Reply #1 on: 08/20/2022 03:51 am »
Here's the video. The launcher looks a bit familiar, but I don't think three engines will work, as the centre engine will have too much thrust for landing! A boost-back burn is shown.

« Last Edit: 08/20/2022 03:52 am by Steven Pietrobon »
Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #1:  Engineering is done with numbers.  Analysis without numbers is only an opinion.

Offline Asteroza

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2836
  • Liked: 1084
  • Likes Given: 33
Re: ESA European Heavy Lift Launcher (EHLL), PROTEIN program
« Reply #2 on: 08/20/2022 05:08 am »
The depicted launcher above I think is either Themis or the Maiaspace launcher (a Themis derivative vehicle), so I don't believe the depicted vehicle is EHLL, just a visual stand-in. The SPS designs haven't fully crystalized out either, so we are just seeing placeholder imagery.

They need something like Starship or New Glenn to get near a 10,000t/year cadence.

The PROTEIN study looks like it is going to decide if ESA wants something like "EU Starship" or perhaps something different. Elon is infecting everyone with Starship fever.

Offline hektor

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2706
  • Liked: 1193
  • Likes Given: 54
Re: ESA European Heavy Lift Launcher (EHLL), PROTEIN program
« Reply #3 on: 08/20/2022 10:08 am »
For the US solar power studies of the 70s wasnt there a huge winged Boeing "Space Freighter" TSTO to launch it ?

Answering to myself

Boeing Space Freighter

Here we go... 424 t of payload to LEO so  with 2 launches a month the ESA requirement is met...
« Last Edit: 08/20/2022 10:14 am by hektor »

Offline Barley

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1009
  • Liked: 669
  • Likes Given: 369
Re: ESA European Heavy Lift Launcher (EHLL), PROTEIN program
« Reply #4 on: 08/20/2022 04:02 pm »
Here's the video. The launcher looks a bit familiar, but I don't think three engines will work, as the centre engine will have too much thrust for landing! A boost-back burn is shown.

What is your criteria for "too much thrust for landing"?  I am not aware of any theoretical upper limit, higher minimum thrust and acceleration make control more challenging, but not impossible.

Offline JayWee

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 997
  • Liked: 992
  • Likes Given: 1838
Re: ESA European Heavy Lift Launcher (EHLL), PROTEIN program
« Reply #5 on: 08/20/2022 06:16 pm »
Here's the video. The launcher looks a bit familiar, but I don't think three engines will work, as the centre engine will have too much thrust for landing! A boost-back burn is shown.

What is your criteria for "too much thrust for landing"?  I am not aware of any theoretical upper limit, higher minimum thrust and acceleration make control more challenging, but not impossible.
Theoretically, as thrust goes to infinity, the thrust time required to zero the vertical velocity goes to zero. In a real-engine, there's a certain minimal time for startup+thrust+shutdown. Especially a turbopump driven one.
Therefore, there is, indeed, a maximal practical landing engine thrust given by the stage dry mass.

Besides, given that we are likely looking at a 100t+ launcher, the engine would likely have to be bigger than the F-1.
« Last Edit: 08/20/2022 06:21 pm by JayWee »

Offline Barley

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1009
  • Liked: 669
  • Likes Given: 369
Re: ESA European Heavy Lift Launcher (EHLL), PROTEIN program
« Reply #6 on: 08/22/2022 04:46 pm »
Here's the video. The launcher looks a bit familiar, but I don't think three engines will work, as the centre engine will have too much thrust for landing! A boost-back burn is shown.

What is your criteria for "too much thrust for landing"?  I am not aware of any theoretical upper limit, higher minimum thrust and acceleration make control more challenging, but not impossible.
Theoretically, as thrust goes to infinity, the thrust time required to zero the vertical velocity goes to zero. In a real-engine, there's a certain minimal time for startup+thrust+shutdown. Especially a turbopump driven one.
Therefore, there is, indeed, a maximal practical landing engine thrust given by the stage dry mass.

Besides, given that we are likely looking at a 100t+ launcher, the engine would likely have to be bigger than the F-1.
First, F9 can land using 3 out of 10 engines.  In that context landing on 1 out of 3 engines does not seem even slightly extreme.

Second, If you are going to posit an engine with infinite thrust you may as well posit an engine with infinitesimal start up time.  The two conditions are equally possible.  And neither is anywhere near what is actually relevant here.

Offline Steven Pietrobon

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39218
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 32738
  • Likes Given: 8196
Re: ESA European Heavy Lift Launcher (EHLL), PROTEIN program
« Reply #7 on: 08/23/2022 06:27 am »
First, F9 can land using 3 out of 10 engines.  In that context landing on 1 out of 3 engines does not seem even slightly extreme.

Yes, but the three engine burn is only for a short time before switching to a single engine for the actual landing. Even so, this technique is not very reliable and all the recent landings are done with one engine. I believe the reason for not using three engine landings is that the reduced burn time does not give enough time to react to all the random variables during landing (wind speed, acceleration, velocity, position and thrust).
Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #1:  Engineering is done with numbers.  Analysis without numbers is only an opinion.

Offline daedalus1

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 929
  • uk
  • Liked: 478
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: ESA European Heavy Lift Launcher (EHLL), PROTEIN program
« Reply #8 on: 08/23/2022 06:33 am »
Most of this discussion is about Falcon 9 lol

Offline su27k

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6414
  • Liked: 9100
  • Likes Given: 885
Re: ESA European Heavy Lift Launcher (EHLL), PROTEIN program
« Reply #9 on: 08/23/2022 06:50 am »
For the US solar power studies of the 70s wasnt there a huge winged Boeing "Space Freighter" TSTO to launch it ?

Answering to myself

Boeing Space Freighter

Here we go... 424 t of payload to LEO so  with 2 launches a month the ESA requirement is met...

Note TSTO is not the only launch option considered back then, there's also the Rockwell Star-raker, a HTHL SSTO. Boeing also proposed a VTVL SSTO concept nicknamed "Big Onion".
« Last Edit: 08/23/2022 06:50 am by su27k »

Offline Asteroza

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2836
  • Liked: 1084
  • Likes Given: 33
Re: ESA European Heavy Lift Launcher (EHLL), PROTEIN program
« Reply #10 on: 05/08/2023 06:43 am »
PROTEIN moving along

https://commercialisation.esa.int/2023/05/protein-the-new-european-heavy-lift-launcher-study/

Quote
ESA has secured contracts both with ArianeGroup and Rocket Factory Augsburg which will last until September 2023.

Offline hektor

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2706
  • Liked: 1193
  • Likes Given: 54
Re: ESA European Heavy Lift Launcher (EHLL), PROTEIN program
« Reply #11 on: 05/08/2023 07:27 am »
First, F9 can land using 3 out of 10 engines.  In that context landing on 1 out of 3 engines does not seem even slightly extreme.

Yes, but the three engine burn is only for a short time before switching to a single engine for the actual landing. Even so, this technique is not very reliable and all the recent landings are done with one engine. I believe the reason for not using three engine landings is that the reduced burn time does not give enough time to react to all the random variables during landing (wind speed, acceleration, velocity, position and thrust).

Seems that SpaceX has switched to three engines landing for the recent launches with the short nozzle.

Offline floss

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 549
  • Liked: 33
  • Likes Given: 131
Re: ESA European Heavy Lift Launcher (EHLL), PROTEIN program
« Reply #12 on: 05/25/2023 12:34 pm »
It would be far better to get the silicon for the solar arrays from the moon than spend about 100 billion in a new launcher and use the solar power to make antimatter .

Earth has more than enough resorces to look after itself .nothing made in space should be shipped to earth but benefit humans in space .

Tags: EHLL PROTEIN 
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1