Author Topic: Lockheed Martin's "Jupiter" reusable space tug, CRS-2 bid  (Read 116727 times)

Offline A_M_Swallow

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8906
  • South coast of England
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 223
Re: Lockheed Martin's "Jupiter" reusable space tug, CRS-2 bid
« Reply #60 on: 03/14/2015 10:45 pm »
I do not see the advantage of Jupiter for flights to the ISS and LEO Bigelow spacestations. The LV could just go straight there. However it will be useful for flights to GEO and EML-1/2.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35739
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 19903
  • Likes Given: 10379
Re: Lockheed Martin's "Jupiter" reusable space tug, CRS-2 bid
« Reply #61 on: 03/14/2015 10:51 pm »
For the record, Dawn is an Orbital bus and certainly counts as interplanetary. OrbitalATK could do a Jupiter-style tug if they wanted to.
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 fgonella

  • Member
  • Posts: 35
  • Liked: 11
  • Likes Given: 0
The advantage is that any cargo vessel needs a SM with avionics, engine, solar arrays, attitude controls, etc... For most cargo capsules, a perfectly working SM is ditched every mission. The beauty of Jupiter is that you have just one SM for all the missions. And you also save a huge mass each launch.

Offline Darkseraph

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 700
  • Liked: 459
  • Likes Given: 147
Re: Lockheed Martin's "Jupiter" reusable space tug, CRS-2 bid
« Reply #63 on: 03/14/2015 11:44 pm »
Apart from all that, the real advantage here is future applications. The Antares/Cygnus system works most of the time, but it's a dead end technologically. Assets that keep in space permanently the most expensive parts and lower recurring mass are valuable. I believe in space applications is where the future is, not the 10 mins of fireworks from the ground (even if launcher reusability pans out!)

Integrating solar electric propulsion to these systems is exciting. I think 2015 is the year SEP really came of age, with the successful Dawn mission and Boeings two all electric sats being placed into orbit by SpaceX.

I've like to know the dimensions and pressurized volume of the exoliner though. :)
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." R.P.Feynman

Offline A_M_Swallow

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8906
  • South coast of England
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 223
Re: Lockheed Martin's "Jupiter" reusable space tug, CRS-2 bid
« Reply #64 on: 03/15/2015 12:34 am »
I suspect that Lockheed Martin will need to loss lead on this contract to cover the development cost of the Jupiter. It will have to make the profit on CRS-3 or some other contract. This will put the management under extreme financial pressure, so do not be surprised if proposals for all sorts of new uses for Jupiters appear in 2-3 years time.

Offline go4mars

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3748
  • Earth
  • Liked: 158
  • Likes Given: 3463
Re: Lockheed Martin's "Jupiter" reusable space tug, CRS-2 bid
« Reply #65 on: 03/15/2015 01:53 am »
They mention Mars on their website.  Fantastic!

I like the versatility of this proposal.  This is their longbox crew cab 4seats-wide dually pickup truck for space.
« Last Edit: 03/15/2015 01:55 am by go4mars »
Elasmotherium; hurlyburly Doggerlandic Jentilak steeds insouciantly gallop in viridescent taiga, eluding deluginal Burckle's abyssal excavation.

Online TrevorMonty

I can see a requirement for modifications to Centuar to make this work. Communications link between Jupiter  and Centuar so Jupiter can control Centuar during docking maneuvers.
« Last Edit: 03/15/2015 02:28 am by TrevorMonty »

Offline Steam Chaser

  • Member
  • Posts: 83
  • Liked: 23
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Lockheed Martin's "Jupiter" reusable space tug, CRS-2 bid
« Reply #67 on: 03/15/2015 02:35 am »
I suspect that Lockheed Martin will need to loss lead on this contract to cover the development cost of the Jupiter. It will have to make the profit on CRS-3 or some other contract. This will put the management under extreme financial pressure, so do not be surprised if proposals for all sorts of new uses for Jupiters appear in 2-3 years time.

Of course it all depends on what the development cost is, and what their bid is.  This is from the beginning of the CRS-2 RFP:

The guaranteed minimum value for any awarded contract is six (6) cargo resupply service missions with the capabilities defined for the awarded mission in Table I.A.3-1, Mission Capabilities for the Standard Resupply Services Missions.  The total maximum value of any contract awarded will be $14 billion. The total amount of all task orders under all contracts awarded shall not exceed $14 billion.


That's a lot more than CRS-1, presumably because of the number of years and the need to fill in for ATV.  I'd imagine it's also why it piqued the interest of Lockheed Martin this time.  If we suppose they're only hoping to split a contract win with a couple other competitors, even if the combined winning bids don't quite get to $14B, they could still be looking at $3B or $4B of business with CRS-2.

You might compare the amount spent by Orbital (NASA and internal funds combined) for Antares and Cygnus.  It wasn't all that much, as these things go.  Jupiter/Exoliner is larger and more complicated than Cygnus, probably making them more expensive to develop than it, but in its favor LM won't have to go to the trouble of building or demonstrating a new rocket and associated ground systems like Orbital did.

I have no idea what the actual development or operations costs would be but suppose LM gets a $3B contract for 1 mission per year over 7 years.  Suppose development costs $500M (the original cost on the NASA side for COTS for Falcon 9, Antares, Dragon, Cygnus, and RpK's work, before that value was supplemented with things like the Antares demo mission).  Suppose the tug costs $500M to actually build and operate.  Suppose each Exoliner and Atlas V pair cost $200M together.  Then the cost to develop and operate it for CRS-2 is $2.4B, and LM comes out ahead.

Of course LM is already suggesting that they'll try to do non-CRS-2 work with the hardware while doing the CRS-2 missions (like launching and deploying secondary satellites and hosting instrument payloads), so even if the actual figures aren't as favorable to LM as the ones I made up above, they still might come out ahead during the CRS-2 missions.  Either way, if they win a CRS-2 contract I'm sure they'll try to get more business for the system whether or not they take a loss during CRS-2 itself.

Offline baldusi

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8337
  • Buenos Aires, Argentina
  • Liked: 2511
  • Likes Given: 7967
Re: Lockheed Martin's "Jupiter" reusable space tug, CRS-2 bid
« Reply #68 on: 03/15/2015 01:25 pm »
Well, this has been discussed before. I even talked about a similar concept but using mostly SEP tugs that could supply power and station keeping to the station while attached. Using both chemical and electrical engines would allow the tug to also supply DAM reaction capabilities. But they just went for the tug approach. Which is pretty reasonable since the ISS was not designed for the other concept. Integration is almost too easy and once you have the tug up, changing LV is almost trivial. In fact, a standardized way of doing this would allow for two compatible solutions.
I do believe that if this concept is not selected for CRS-2 (which I believe could get at least on flight), it will be very seriously look into by Bigelow.

Offline HIP2BSQRE

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 668
  • Liked: 46
  • Likes Given: 14
Re: Lockheed Martin's "Jupiter" reusable space tug, CRS-2 bid
« Reply #69 on: 03/15/2015 02:13 pm »
Well, this has been discussed before. I even talked about a similar concept but using mostly SEP tugs that could supply power and station keeping to the station while attached. Using both chemical and electrical engines would allow the tug to also supply DAM reaction capabilities. But they just went for the tug approach. Which is pretty reasonable since the ISS was not designed for the other concept. Integration is almost too easy and once you have the tug up, changing LV is almost trivial. In fact, a standardized way of doing this would allow for two compatible solutions.
I do believe that if this concept is not selected for CRS-2 (which I believe could get at least on flight), it will be very seriously look into by Bigelow.

Why would Bigelow want to look at the concept?

Offline S.Paulissen

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 441
  • Boston
  • Liked: 332
  • Likes Given: 509
Re: Lockheed Martin's "Jupiter" reusable space tug, CRS-2 bid
« Reply #70 on: 03/15/2015 04:27 pm »
To build the inevitable space hotel! Er... space station I mean.
"An expert is a person who has found out by his own painful experience all the mistakes that one can make in a very narrow field." -Niels Bohr
Poster previously known as Exclavion going by his real name now.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35739
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 19903
  • Likes Given: 10379
Re: Lockheed Martin's "Jupiter" reusable space tug, CRS-2 bid
« Reply #71 on: 03/15/2015 06:08 pm »
Well, this has been discussed before. I even talked about a similar concept but using mostly SEP tugs that could supply power and station keeping to the station while attached. Using both chemical and electrical engines would allow the tug to also supply DAM reaction capabilities. But they just went for the tug approach. Which is pretty reasonable since the ISS was not designed for the other concept. Integration is almost too easy and once you have the tug up, changing LV is almost trivial. In fact, a standardized way of doing this would allow for two compatible solutions.
I do believe that if this concept is not selected for CRS-2 (which I believe could get at least on flight), it will be very seriously look into by Bigelow.

Why would Bigelow want to look at the concept?
Because it should be a lot cheaper than sending up supplies any other way (provided you use a F9 or FH or whatever the cheapest launch vehicle is), and it can do water and propellant transfer.

Also, it's even better beyond LEO, since you can launch supplies to LEO on a cheap (mostly) RLV like FHR to get its full performance (which is what, 40-50t with reuse? no doubt there'll be minor upgrades to claw back to 50t even with reuse) but get the full benefit of electric propulsion's much higher Isp.

So you have a huge logistics payload launched for about $1000/kg to LEO, then delivered to a Bigelow lunar orbit (EML1/2/DRO/LLO/whathaveyou) for (say) $2000/kg, and you don't have to pay for a really expensive spacecraft bus each time nor do you need to service a reentry craft.

That logistics load could be the propellant needed to land the Bigelow modules on the Moon or whatever, since the tug is also capable of propellant transfer.

And remember that Bigelow was talking about multiple times the logistics flights of ISS at one time. This concept allows you to streamline and cheapen that cost dramatically and reduce the complexity of resupply (due to fewer flights) at the same time.
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 MattMason

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1029
  • Space Enthusiast
  • Indiana
  • Liked: 745
  • Likes Given: 1742
Re: Lockheed Martin's "Jupiter" reusable space tug, CRS-2 bid
« Reply #72 on: 03/15/2015 06:19 pm »
Well, this has been discussed before. I even talked about a similar concept but using mostly SEP tugs that could supply power and station keeping to the station while attached. Using both chemical and electrical engines would allow the tug to also supply DAM reaction capabilities. But they just went for the tug approach. Which is pretty reasonable since the ISS was not designed for the other concept. Integration is almost too easy and once you have the tug up, changing LV is almost trivial. In fact, a standardized way of doing this would allow for two compatible solutions.
I do believe that if this concept is not selected for CRS-2 (which I believe could get at least on flight), it will be very seriously look into by Bigelow.

Why would Bigelow want to look at the concept?
Because it should be a lot cheaper than sending up supplies any other way (provided you use a F9 or FH or whatever the cheapest launch vehicle is), and it can do water and propellant transfer.

Also, it's even better beyond LEO, since you can launch supplies to LEO on a cheap (mostly) RLV like FHR to get its full performance (which is what, 40-50t with reuse? no doubt there'll be minor upgrades to claw back to 50t even with reuse) but get the full benefit of electric propulsion's much higher Isp.

So you have a huge logistics payload launched for about $1000/kg to LEO, then delivered to a Bigelow lunar orbit (EML1/2/DRO/LLO/whathaveyou) for (say) $2000/kg, and you don't have to pay for a really expensive spacecraft bus each time nor do you need to service a reentry craft.

That logistics load could be the propellant needed to land the Bigelow modules on the Moon or whatever, since the tug is also capable of propellant transfer.

And remember that Bigelow was talking about multiple times the logistics flights of ISS at one time. This concept allows you to streamline and cheapen that cost dramatically and reduce the complexity of resupply (due to fewer flights) at the same time.

I love this idea. It's not just yet another cargo container vehicle. It's a reusable system that could form the LEO infrastructure that not only services ISS but outlives it to aid its successors.

Jupiter does some of what the Shuttle Orbiters do in terms of cargo movement, especially with the ingenious arm. With its own fuel supply, the idea of using it for satellite rescue (placed in bad orbit, for instance) or even repair, as well as ISS boosting and future station construction...I think Lockheed has a winner here.
"Why is the logo on the side of a rocket so important?"
"So you can find the pieces." -Jim, the Steely Eyed

Offline nadreck

With its own fuel supply, the idea of using it for satellite rescue (placed in bad orbit, for instance) or even repair, as well as ISS boosting and future station construction...I think Lockheed has a winner here.

I see the satellite disposal market and the tender market being a potentially large and lucrative one. I think that anything in an orbit above about 400-500km should have deorbit contingency forced upon it and if it is not built in, the cost of doing it from something like a Jupiter craft should be taxed onto it somehow, and if it is built in, then a reasonable insurance cost to use something like the Jupiter craft should be taxed on to it.
It is all well and good to quote those things that made it past your confirmation bias that other people wrote, but this is a discussion board damnit! Let us know what you think! And why!

Offline Moe Grills

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 780
  • Liked: 27
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Lockheed Martin's "Jupiter" reusable space tug, CRS-2 bid
« Reply #74 on: 03/15/2015 07:12 pm »
Well, this has been discussed before. I even talked about a similar concept but using mostly SEP tugs that could supply power and station keeping to the station while attached. Using both chemical and electrical engines would allow the tug to also supply DAM reaction capabilities. But they just went for the tug approach. Which is pretty reasonable since the ISS was not designed for the other concept. Integration is almost too easy and once you have the tug up, changing LV is almost trivial. In fact, a standardized way of doing this would allow for two compatible solutions.
I do believe that if this concept is not selected for CRS-2 (which I believe could get at least on flight), it will be very seriously look into by Bigelow.

Why would Bigelow want to look at the concept?

Bigelow has dreamed of setting up a Moonbase with inflatable modules for years.  But to turn dreams into a viable project and a functioning reality you have to plan to move a whole load of inflatable modules, life-support supplies, lunar-surface machinery, power-source equipment, and lunar-landing systems COMBINED (something like 50 metric tons mass total, MINIMUM) from LEO to LLO.
And that requires a space tug (like the Lockheed Martin "Jupiter" space tug); one that Mr. Bigelow can afford to acquire or rent. He's got a brain on his shoulders.
BTW, I stated 50 metric tons as the value of the total mass of the hardware and propellant that Mr. Bigelow's planned Moonbase project would initially require; that's how much mass an FH can haul into LEO, and he's obviously taken that into consideration. Again, Mr. Bigelow is no dummy.
« Last Edit: 03/15/2015 07:22 pm by Moe Grills »

Online TrevorMonty

VASIMR has a video showing how they attach small solid motor de orbit modules to spent upper stages. This could be a job for a SEP Jupiter.

Offline cdleonard

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 114
  • Liked: 51
  • Likes Given: 75
Re: Lockheed Martin's "Jupiter" reusable space tug, CRS-2 bid
« Reply #76 on: 03/15/2015 08:11 pm »
Is there any indication that they are planning a variant of Jupiter with electric propulsion? Until they do this tug is very limited in what it can do.

Between missions it will be stuck idling near the ISS in a high-inclination LEO orbit. It can't do stuff like rescue or deorbit satellites because it will probably lack the delta-V to reach them.

Offline nadreck

Is there any indication that they are planning a variant of Jupiter with electric propulsion?

http://aviationweek.com/space/jupiter-space-tug-could-deliver-cargo-moon

Quote
A win in the CRS-2 competition will hasten the development, including the addition of solar-electric propulsion for missions beyond LEO, but the team plans to continue the work with or without the ISS cargo contract, he says.

Quote
For missions to geostationary orbit and beyond, the company has a concept it calls “Jupiter Electric” that uses solar-electric Hall thrusters designed as an upgrade for the Lockheed Martin A2100 commercial satellite bus.

“The only addition to this is the A2100 Hall-current thruster packs that we put on,” Crocker says. “It would actually be more packs than are on our A2100, but those are being designed, built and flight qualified right now.”
It is all well and good to quote those things that made it past your confirmation bias that other people wrote, but this is a discussion board damnit! Let us know what you think! And why!

Offline HIP2BSQRE

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 668
  • Liked: 46
  • Likes Given: 14
Re: Lockheed Martin's "Jupiter" reusable space tug, CRS-2 bid
« Reply #78 on: 03/16/2015 05:02 am »
Why the announcement now?  Bids were due in Dec  - so what has LM got to gain by making this announcememt - why not wait till you have a contract?  How much is LM "investing" in this project without NASA?  How long have they been working on it?  What stage of development is LM?

Offline HIP2BSQRE

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 668
  • Liked: 46
  • Likes Given: 14
Re: Lockheed Martin's "Jupiter" reusable space tug, CRS-2 bid
« Reply #79 on: 03/16/2015 05:09 am »
There are only so many ports on the ISS - Jupiter comes and is filled with trash then its SpaceX's turn...what does Jupiter do now - wait around for the next Atlas launch that maybe many months away?

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement SkyTale Software GmbH
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0