Quote from: manboy on 12/13/2013 10:54 pmHere you gohttp://events.aviationweek.com/html/ad13/Nov%2013_Mulholland.pdfOn page 4 of this presentation it mentions "Solar Panels (Mission Kit)" pictured on the bottom of the service module. Is this a new development as I thought the CST-100 was battery only... Or is this an option for longer duration missions or something?
Here you gohttp://events.aviationweek.com/html/ad13/Nov%2013_Mulholland.pdf
Former astro @BoeingDefense’s Chris Ferguson flies on-orbit, docking and entry scenarios in the CST-100 simulator. pic.twitter.com/NvJxd4akvK
Quote from: USFdon on 12/16/2013 04:32 pmQuote from: manboy on 12/13/2013 10:54 pmHere you gohttp://events.aviationweek.com/html/ad13/Nov%2013_Mulholland.pdfOn page 4 of this presentation it mentions "Solar Panels (Mission Kit)" pictured on the bottom of the service module. Is this a new development as I thought the CST-100 was battery only... Or is this an option for longer duration missions or something?Noticed that as well and believe its a good move on their part. My only issue might be the location of the Solar panels. Won't they get damaged by the thrusters?
from @Commercial_CrewQuoteFormer astro @BoeingDefense’s Chris Ferguson flies on-orbit, docking and entry scenarios in the CST-100 simulator. pic.twitter.com/NvJxd4akvK
So the Atlas configuration foreseen to launch CST-100 is now 522 (2 boosters, dual engine centaur)?
Quote from: Oli on 01/26/2014 11:44 pmSo the Atlas configuration foreseen to launch CST-100 is now 522 (2 boosters, dual engine centaur)?what is the cost for the two SRB's? do the SRB's increase or decrease reliability?
Quote from: BrightLight on 01/27/2014 01:04 amQuote from: Oli on 01/26/2014 11:44 pmSo the Atlas configuration foreseen to launch CST-100 is now 522 (2 boosters, dual engine centaur)?what is the cost for the two SRB's? do the SRB's increase or decrease reliability?Decreases. But I'm curious what caused the change - has the CST-100 mass grown so much in the last year?
Quote from: Lars_J on 01/27/2014 01:16 amQuote from: BrightLight on 01/27/2014 01:04 amQuote from: Oli on 01/26/2014 11:44 pmSo the Atlas configuration foreseen to launch CST-100 is now 522 (2 boosters, dual engine centaur)?what is the cost for the two SRB's? do the SRB's increase or decrease reliability?Decreases. But I'm curious what caused the change - has the CST-100 mass grown so much in the last year?so its possible that the reliability of the LV decreases compared to a Atlas V 402 and the cost increases - compared to the SNC DC - hmmm,.
...do the SRB's increase or decrease reliability?
Quote from: BrightLight...do the SRB's increase or decrease reliability?It may provide engine-out capability for dual-engine centaur, then it would increase reliability.
Centaur doesn't have engine out capability
Quote from: arachnitect on 01/26/2014 06:28 pmfrom @Commercial_CrewQuoteFormer astro @BoeingDefense’s Chris Ferguson flies on-orbit, docking and entry scenarios in the CST-100 simulator. pic.twitter.com/NvJxd4akvK Have not seen the same from the competition
@Star One,I'm not sure but I think some of it this extra thrust requirement comes from compensating for the mass of the 5m fairing around the Centaur. I believe that CST-100 has turned out heavier than initially projected too.
So why does this need the 522 configuration yet DC can use the no doubt cheaper 402 configuration?