Author Topic: Funding for a domestic liquid engine in the National Defense authorization bill  (Read 207302 times)

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17266
  • Liked: 7123
  • Likes Given: 3064
Quote
The Strategic Forces subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) will markup its section of the FY2015 National Defense Authorization Act on Wednesday, April 30.  A draft of the subcommittee's portion of the bill provides $220 million to DOD to begin development of a U.S.-built liquid rocket engine to replace the Russian RD-180 engines used for the Atlas V rocket.

http://www.spacepolicyonline.com/news/hasc-subcommittee-proposes-220-million-for-u-s-alternative-to-russias-rd-180-engines
« Last Edit: 04/30/2014 07:16 pm by yg1968 »

Offline JBF

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1459
  • Liked: 472
  • Likes Given: 914
Quote
The Strategic Forces subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) will markup its section of the FY2015 National Defense Authorization Act on Wednesday, April 30.  A draft of the subcommittee's portion of the bill provides $220 million to DOD to begin development of a U.S.-built liquid rocket engine to replace the Russian RD-180 engines used for the Atlas V rocket.

http://www.spacepolicyonline.com/news/hasc-subcommittee-proposes-220-million-for-u-s-alternative-to-russias-rd-180-engines

I hope this get's dropped. There is no reason DoD should be developing another engine to replace the RD-180. If necessary ULA should be paying for it out of the 1 billion in maintenance payments they get.
"In principle, rocket engines are simple, but that’s the last place rocket engines are ever simple." Jeff Bezos

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17266
  • Liked: 7123
  • Likes Given: 3064
See pages 10 (summary) and 51 (provision in the bill) of the PDF of the proposed legislation:

http://docs.house.gov/meetings/AS/AS29/20140430/102126/BILLS-113HR4435ih.pdf

Quote from: summary
Section 16xx—Liquid Rocket Engine Development Program This section would express the sense of Congress that the Secretary of Defense should develop a next-generation liquid rocket engine that is made in the United States, meets the requirements of the national security space community, is developed by not later than 2019, is developed using full and open competition, and is available for purchase by all space launch providers of the United States.

This section would also direct the Secretary of Defense to develop a nextgeneration liquid rocket engine that enables the effective, efficient, and expedient transition from the use of non-allied space launch engines to a domestic alternative for the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle program. Of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act, $220.0 million would be available for the Secretary of Defense to develop a next-generation liquid rocket engine. The Secretary would be required to coordinate with the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, to the extent practicable, to ensure that the rocket engine developed meets objectives that are common to both the national security space community and the civil space program of the United States.

The Secretary, in coordination with the Administrator, would be directed to deliver a report with a plan to carry out the development of the rocket engine, including an analysis of the benefits of using public-private partnerships, the estimated development costs, and identification of the requirements of the program to develop such rocket engine.
« Last Edit: 04/30/2014 07:33 pm by yg1968 »

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10586
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 4548
  • Likes Given: 13523
Why do they need money? ULA  (Mr. Gass) claims that they have demonstrated that they “can” build that “exact” engine... So start knocking them out or I will have to call bovine scatology on that one and lying during testimony....

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/03/spacex-and-ula-eelv-contracts/
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator

Offline ChrisWilson68

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5266
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 4992
  • Likes Given: 6459
I like the irony of a "full and open competition" for a program to help one particular company that is in competition for U.S. national security launches.

Offline VulcanCafe

  • Member
  • Posts: 55
  • Liked: 28
  • Likes Given: 2
Would this US liquid engine requirement not be fulfilled by fully certifying the Falcon 9/Heavy as an EELV?

I could also imagine SpaceX designing an engine, and selling it to ULA for 5x its production cost, and yet below any price ULA could deliver one for...  just for spite and profit (might fund that Mars mission lol) ;)
« Last Edit: 04/30/2014 08:00 pm by VulcanCafe »

Offline ChrisWilson68

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5266
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 4992
  • Likes Given: 6459
Would this US liquid engine requirement not be fulfilled by fully certifying the Falcon 9/Heavy as an EELV?

If it were a requirement for launch capability, yes.  But the article indicates it's intended to replace a specific engine, RD-180.  Presumably that means the specs will be required to match those of RD-180 closely, so no existing SpaceX engine would do, and it wouldn't help Falcon 9 or Falcon Heavy at all.

SpaceX could bid on it if they wanted, which might bring some benefits to SpaceX as a company, but the much bigger benefit is to ULA, which would otherwise have to either retire Atlas V or pay $1 billion out of its own pocket to start up U.S. production of an RD-180 replacement, in the event that Russian engines become unavailable.

Offline newpylong

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1499
  • Liked: 200
  • Likes Given: 343
Would this US liquid engine requirement not be fulfilled by fully certifying the Falcon 9/Heavy as an EELV?

I could also imagine SpaceX designing an engine, and selling it to ULA for 5x its production cost, and yet below any price ULA could deliver one for...  just for spite and profit (might fund that Mars mission lol) ;)

They're going to have enough on their plates building enough Merlins for Falcon missions.

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17266
  • Liked: 7123
  • Likes Given: 3064

Offline beancounter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1249
  • Perth, Western Australia
  • Liked: 106
  • Likes Given: 172
Would this US liquid engine requirement not be fulfilled by fully certifying the Falcon 9/Heavy as an EELV?

I could also imagine SpaceX designing an engine, and selling it to ULA for 5x its production cost, and yet below any price ULA could deliver one for...  just for spite and profit (might fund that Mars mission lol) ;)

They're going to have enough on their plates building enough Merlins for Falcon missions.
Building an existing engine isn't using the same resources as designing an entirely different engine.
Beancounter from DownUnder

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6257
  • Liked: 4164
  • Likes Given: 6078
Would this US liquid engine requirement not be fulfilled by fully certifying the Falcon 9/Heavy as an EELV?

If it were a requirement for launch capability, yes.  But the article indicates it's intended to replace a specific engine, RD-180.  Presumably that means the specs will be required to match those of RD-180 closely, so no existing SpaceX engine would do, and it wouldn't help Falcon 9 or Falcon Heavy at all.

SpaceX could bid on it if they wanted, which might bring some benefits to SpaceX as a company, but the much bigger benefit is to ULA, which would otherwise have to either retire Atlas V or pay $1 billion out of its own pocket to start up U.S. production of an RD-180 replacement, in the event that Russian engines become unavailable.
Similar situation to building advanced boosters for the SLS.  SpaceX is hell bent down a path that will negate the need for a RD-180 replacement as well as advanced boosters.  Why pay attention to this distraction?
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline butters

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2399
  • Liked: 1692
  • Likes Given: 597
ULA has 2.5 years worth of RD-180s. I highly doubt it would be possible (for Rocketdyne-Aerojet or SpaceX or anybody else) to develop a comparable engine to operational capability within that timeframe. If the stockpile of RD-180s dries up, then ULA is going to have to ramp up Delta IV instead. They may even have to dip into their $1B mission assurance stipend to cover the higher cost. Boo hoo.

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15391
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 8565
  • Likes Given: 1356
ULA has 2.5 years worth of RD-180s. I highly doubt it would be possible (for Rocketdyne-Aerojet or SpaceX or anybody else) to develop a comparable engine to operational capability within that timeframe. If the stockpile of RD-180s dries up, then ULA is going to have to ramp up Delta IV instead. They may even have to dip into their $1B mission assurance stipend to cover the higher cost. Boo hoo.
The plan calls for development of a U.S. engine available in 2019.  The current RD-180 contract pays for deliveries through 2018.  In short, the plan is not designed to quickly stop RD-180 use, or to replace it two years from now.  The plan is to replace it several years down the road, after Energomash has fulfilled its contract deliveries.

 - Ed Kyle
« Last Edit: 05/02/2014 05:05 pm by edkyle99 »

Offline bad_astra

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1926
  • Liked: 316
  • Likes Given: 553
This makes no sense. The justification for two EELV familes was redudnacy. Well they have that. They have Delta IV. If Delta IV is not cost competetive with other launchers, whose fault is that? Not the taxpayers.

"Contact Light" -Buzz Aldrin

Offline Lobo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6915
  • Spokane, WA
  • Liked: 672
  • Likes Given: 437
Would this US liquid engine requirement not be fulfilled by fully certifying the Falcon 9/Heavy as an EELV?

I could also imagine SpaceX designing an engine, and selling it to ULA for 5x its production cost, and yet below any price ULA could deliver one for...  just for spite and profit (might fund that Mars mission lol) ;)

They're going to have enough on their plates building enough Merlins for Falcon missions.

And why would SpaceX have any interest in helping ULA compete against them?

Offline Lobo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6915
  • Spokane, WA
  • Liked: 672
  • Likes Given: 437
ULA has 2.5 years worth of RD-180s. I highly doubt it would be possible (for Rocketdyne-Aerojet or SpaceX or anybody else) to develop a comparable engine to operational capability within that timeframe. If the stockpile of RD-180s dries up, then ULA is going to have to ramp up Delta IV instead. They may even have to dip into their $1B mission assurance stipend to cover the higher cost. Boo hoo.

AJR would likely be the only outfit that could/would do it.
SpaceX would have no interesting in helping ULA compete, and they already have a major engine development program going.

AJR has all the plans for NK-33, and obviously have talking about producing either domestic AJ-500's or dual chamber AJ-1E6's.
I'm still unclear on if they have the plans and rights to build domestic RD-180's...or did that remain with Pratt & Whitney?  Or maybe it's still in negotiation? Not quite sure.

Anyway, they seem the best bet to produce a domestic ORSC kerolox replacement for RD-180 in one manner or the other. 

Offline Prober

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10348
  • Save the spin....I'm keeping you honest!
  • Nevada
  • Liked: 721
  • Likes Given: 729
ULA has 2.5 years worth of RD-180s. I highly doubt it would be possible (for Rocketdyne-Aerojet or SpaceX or anybody else) to develop a comparable engine to operational capability within that timeframe. If the stockpile of RD-180s dries up, then ULA is going to have to ramp up Delta IV instead. They may even have to dip into their $1B mission assurance stipend to cover the higher cost. Boo hoo.
The plan calls for development of a U.S. engine available in 2019.  The current RD-180 contract pays for deliveries through 2018.  In short, the plan is not designed to quickly stop RD-180 use, or to replace it two years from now.  The plan is to replace it several years down the road, after Energomash has fulfilled its contract deliveries.

 - Ed Kyle

So your saying the SpaceX injunction isn't factored into this yet?

220 million should be bumped up to maybe 350 million quick then to get the ball rolling.

Has anyone looked into this?   Is this an open bidding deal ?   See lots of un answered questions.

2017 - Everything Old is New Again.
"I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant..." --Isoroku Yamamoto

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15391
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 8565
  • Likes Given: 1356
ULA has 2.5 years worth of RD-180s. I highly doubt it would be possible (for Rocketdyne-Aerojet or SpaceX or anybody else) to develop a comparable engine to operational capability within that timeframe. If the stockpile of RD-180s dries up, then ULA is going to have to ramp up Delta IV instead. They may even have to dip into their $1B mission assurance stipend to cover the higher cost. Boo hoo.
The plan calls for development of a U.S. engine available in 2019.  The current RD-180 contract pays for deliveries through 2018.  In short, the plan is not designed to quickly stop RD-180 use, or to replace it two years from now.  The plan is to replace it several years down the road, after Energomash has fulfilled its contract deliveries.

 - Ed Kyle

So your saying the SpaceX injunction isn't factored into this yet?
Keep in mind that SpaceX did not request the injunction.  Regardless, the proposed bill intends to fund a new U.S. engine - an effort that in this case is expected to take five years.  The injunction timing is likely unrelated, and at any rate the injunction will likely soon be lifted and should have no long term effect on RD-180 deliveries.

 - Ed Kyle

Offline Prober

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10348
  • Save the spin....I'm keeping you honest!
  • Nevada
  • Liked: 721
  • Likes Given: 729
ULA has 2.5 years worth of RD-180s. I highly doubt it would be possible (for Rocketdyne-Aerojet or SpaceX or anybody else) to develop a comparable engine to operational capability within that timeframe. If the stockpile of RD-180s dries up, then ULA is going to have to ramp up Delta IV instead. They may even have to dip into their $1B mission assurance stipend to cover the higher cost. Boo hoo.
The plan calls for development of a U.S. engine available in 2019.  The current RD-180 contract pays for deliveries through 2018.  In short, the plan is not designed to quickly stop RD-180 use, or to replace it two years from now.  The plan is to replace it several years down the road, after Energomash has fulfilled its contract deliveries.

 - Ed Kyle

So your saying the SpaceX injunction isn't factored into this yet?
Keep in mind that SpaceX did not request the injunction.   - Ed Kyle

Sorry Ed, SpaceX put the "Russian Engine" before the court and asked for relief.   The SpaceX injunction correct.
2017 - Everything Old is New Again.
"I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant..." --Isoroku Yamamoto

Offline butters

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2399
  • Liked: 1692
  • Likes Given: 597
Sorry Ed, SpaceX put the "Russian Engine" before the court and asked for relief.   The SpaceX injunction correct.


This is tiresome. SpaceX brought up the Russian engine in their complaint as a means of questioning the block buy, since the defense appropriations rules include demonstrating that a proposed block buy is in the interests of national security. They didn't ask for an injunction and it is plainly incorrect to suggest that they did.
« Last Edit: 05/03/2014 12:51 am by butters »

Tags:
 

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