Bruno said the number of U.S. military and intelligence satellite launches would likely drop in coming years to about five launches a year from 10 to 12, with the smaller number to be split among two or more rivals."We have to ... access commercial and civil opportunities. (We) cannot survive on two launches a year," Bruno told a lunch meeting hosted by the Washington Space Business Roundtable.
I wish that ULA had not been given authority to nab these RD-180s. I believe it would have been better for the company in the long run to have dealt with the lack of Energomash engines in some more clever way. This result disappoints.
Space Ghost, what's your opinion on the engine itself and a hypothetical world where it isn't Russian - if you can humour me for a few minutes?
I wish that ULA had not been given authority to nab these RD-180s. I believe it would have been better for the company in the long run to have dealt with the lack of Energomash engines in some more clever way. This result disappoints. - Ed Kyle
If only the RD-180 was - say, JD-180 (Japan) or maybe even AD-180 (Australia ) then would that change things? Fantastic engine, I wish the USA had the ability to build it.
Foreign policy situation has created exploitable opportunities for international (especially Russian) cooperation
Quote from: vapour_nudge on 12/28/2015 08:28 amIf only the RD-180 was - say, JD-180 (Japan) or maybe even AD-180 (Australia ) then would that change things? Fantastic engine, I wish the USA had the ability to build it.It is extremely difficult to recreate in our minds today the thinking of the researchers and decision-makers of the early 1990s. In part that's because we've almost totally forgotten about some things that seemed so incredibly important back then.I attach here a pdf of the slides used in a briefing to Congressional staffers in 1994. It describes what DoD called their "Space Launch Modernization Plan." Of particular interest is the section starting on page 40 describing "option 2", which was selected and became EELV. I draw particular attention though to a few earlier places where Russian engine technology is mentioned.In the "Facts of Life" section, on p. 25:QuoteForeign policy situation has created exploitable opportunities for international (especially Russian) cooperationIn the "Options" section:The "Space Launch Technology Revitalization" slide (p. 35)The "DoD/NASA technology coordination" slide (p. 36)It's difficult to understand these outside the context. Flipping through the entire stack of slides might be worthwhile....
I still don't understand why thy don't replumb either Atlas or a 5m core with at least 5 H-1/RS-27's.
RD Amross "pretty confident" it will garner more RD-180 orders from ULA.https://sputniknews.com/science/201704051052308344-rd180-russia-us/ - Ed Kyle