Author Topic: Is Atlas "the American Soyuz?"  (Read 9350 times)

Offline Antares

  • ABO^2
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5181
  • Done arguing with amateurs
  • Liked: 371
  • Likes Given: 228
Is Atlas "the American Soyuz?"
« on: 11/01/2007 04:33 am »
I was at dinner with a bunch of NASA-types a while back.  Lo and behold, the guy across the table from me was an astronaut.  I told him about my feelings on crew rating (fig leaf, Atlas > SDLV) and asked how the corps views it.  I talked about the long flight history of Atlas.  He asked me, "So is Atlas the American Soyuz?"  I didn't have a good answer.

What say you?
If I like something on NSF, it's probably because I know it to be accurate.  Every once in a while, it's just something I agree with.  Facts generally receive the former.

Offline CFE

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 722
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Is Atlas "the American Soyuz?"
« Reply #1 on: 11/01/2007 05:20 am »
I guess the answer depends on what the qualities are, in your view, that define the Soyuz launcher.  The ones I see are 1) longevity, 2) reliability, and 3) frequency of launch.

I don't view Atlas as coming even to the standards set by Soyuz, but it's a lot closer to Soyuz levels of longevity and launch frequency than most other American launchers.  Soyuz has been flying with minimal changes since 1966, derived from 1957's R-7.  Atlas has been flying since 1957, but the current design has little heritage with the original.  Atlas has also achieved a pretty high reliability rate, with no complete failures for the Atlas II, III or V.  Frankly, the recent history of Atlas (over the last decade) is better than that of Soyuz.

The area where Soyuz has the clear advantage is launch rate.  The Atlas launch rate is being kept low for a variety of factors (existence of a domestic competitor, NASA resistance to human-rated Atlas, challenging competitive environment in the global market, etc.)  Soyuz is the only Soviet/Russian launcher in its class, due to the command economy of the USSR at the time of its development.  Atlas has to compete with Delta domestically, as well as more affordable boosters being offered abroad (Long March 2 comes to mind.)  It remains to be seen whether ULA's employees and facilities could sustain the same launch rate as Soyuz, even if the demand was present.
"Black Zones" never stopped NASA from flying the shuttle.

Offline NotGncDude

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 485
  • V
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Is Atlas "the American Soyuz?"
« Reply #2 on: 11/01/2007 07:31 am »
I say gray area, mostly because it's still too early (for Atlas V). Looks like a great rocket so far though.
It's more powerful, and also more expensive. I'm not sure is in the same category.

Offline brihath

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 891
  • Liked: 53
  • Likes Given: 28
Re: Is Atlas "the American Soyuz?"
« Reply #3 on: 11/01/2007 12:54 pm »
I would vote no on the question, as the original Atlas doesn't exist any more, whereas the Soyuz is still the same basic launcher as the R-7, as well as launch infrastructure, which along with the flight rate accounts for the lower cost per vehicle.  If you really want to compare reliability, I suggest starting with the Atlas V.  A caveat, however- the shorter flight history doesn't lend itself well to the comparison.

Probably, a better comparison is Thor/Delta family with Soyuz- more direct heritage and a largely unchanged launch infrastructure.  Not including Delta IV, though.

Offline meiza

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3067
  • Where Be Dragons
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Is Atlas "the American Soyuz?"
« Reply #4 on: 11/01/2007 01:23 pm »
In one sense it is: it's an all-liquid medium sized launcher. Astronauts always tell how much smoother the Soyuz ride is than the Shuttle since there are no solids... :) (Though staging is violent.)
I think it's a good comparison from the astronaut point of view: Atlas V is closer to Soyuz than it is to the STS.
If the Soyuz engine upgrades go forward, it could be even more valid. (And some have already been done). The tankage style will still be old in the Soyuz. Maybe they'd upgrade that next. (Remember how Atlas updated the engine and then the tankage) :)

Online edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15391
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 8566
  • Likes Given: 1356
RE: Is Atlas "the American Soyuz?"
« Reply #5 on: 11/01/2007 01:30 pm »
No. Absolutely no.  

Atlas is gone.  The balloon tanks are gone.  The stage-and-a-half design is history, as is the Rocketdyne powerplant.  Atlas last flew in 2004, completing a lifetime that included 576 launches, 320 of which were orbital attempts.  

The machine now usurping the "Atlas" name has only flown 11 times with one failure, with its first launch in 2002.  R-7/Soyuz has flown 1,727 times since its first launch in 1957 - 50 years ago.  "Atlas" 5 is optimized to boost satellites to geosynchronous transfer orbit.  R-7/Soyuz is predominately a low earth orbit launcher, although it has versions with four stages that can perform deeper space missions.  Etc.  

 - Ed Kyle

Offline William Barton

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3487
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Is Atlas "the American Soyuz?"
« Reply #6 on: 11/01/2007 01:49 pm »
I'm not sure what doesn't count as apples-to-oranges in this vein, but I agree the current Atlas seems pretty much "in name only." If you wanted a man-rated and massively-uprated-over-time early ICBM I'd nominate Titan II and its sequelae. No idea how many launches the Titan II/III/IV had over the decades, but Titan II made 10 manned launches, and the Titan IIIC was supposed to be man-rated for MOL. Solids or no, that seems to look the most like R7/Soyuz for history. Somewhere out in the Multiverse there's a place where Apollo never happened and a Gemini/MOL/Titan-based US space program would bear an uncanny resemblance to what the Soviets did in the real world.

Offline clongton

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12053
  • Connecticut
    • Direct Launcher
  • Liked: 7348
  • Likes Given: 3749
Re: Is Atlas "the American Soyuz?"
« Reply #7 on: 11/01/2007 02:02 pm »
I have to agree with Ed

Without commenting on the capabilities of the current Atlas, it is not the Atlas that had any line-of-sight heritage. That Atlas is gone. The current Atlas only has 5 years of history, while the current Soyuz has 50. The current Atlas is using Russian engines that didn’t exist only a few years ago. The current Soyuz is using engines with a 50-year heritage. On so on.

While the current Soyuz is certainly not the R-7 it came from 50 years ago, it is directly related thru history, program, and technological development and upgrade over a 50-year time period of continuous manned and unmanned operations. The current Atlas is only 5 years old. There are too many differences to put it in the same category.
Chuck - DIRECT co-founder
I started my career on the Saturn-V F-1A engine

Offline meiza

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3067
  • Where Be Dragons
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Is Atlas "the American Soyuz?"
« Reply #8 on: 11/01/2007 02:29 pm »
Of course not from a historical point of view, but looking at the future of human spaceflight, and asking a question:
Could Atlas 5 be America's Soyuz?

It could, handily.

Offline clongton

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12053
  • Connecticut
    • Direct Launcher
  • Liked: 7348
  • Likes Given: 3749
Re: Is Atlas "the American Soyuz?"
« Reply #9 on: 11/01/2007 02:45 pm »
Quote
meiza - 1/11/2007  11:29 AM

Of course not from a historical point of view, but looking at the future of human spaceflight, and asking a question:
Could Atlas 5 be America's Soyuz?

It could, handily.
The question was "IS" the Atlas the the American Soyuz, not "Could It Be" the American Soyuz.
From the perspective of the original question, I stick with my previous answer: no
From the perspective of the future potential, I say "possibly yes". It's too soon in its flight history to see if the longevity is sustainable, but it certainly could be.
Chuck - DIRECT co-founder
I started my career on the Saturn-V F-1A engine

Offline meiza

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3067
  • Where Be Dragons
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Is Atlas "the American Soyuz?"
« Reply #10 on: 11/01/2007 03:09 pm »
From current US launchers existing right now, compared to the Soyuz that exists right now, Atlas 5 is still the closest. Delta 2 is too small. Delta IV is the second closest.

Offline MartianBase

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 209
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: Is Atlas "the American Soyuz?"
« Reply #11 on: 11/02/2007 01:54 pm »
The big difference between the Atlas and Soyuz is there is no pride and prestige behind the current Atlas. Its got a wonderful record, its launching sats and planetary probes but it gets no political recognition largely because of the Russian engine connection. The public had pride in the Gemini Titan, STS, Mercury Atlas, they had a pride and love of the SaturnV...but they have no feeling for this rocket and until we see an Americanization of the RD engines the politicians and US public will remain ignorant and indifferent about this rocket (rumor has it that some 'informed' politicians would like to see it canceled).

Offline Antares

  • ABO^2
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5181
  • Done arguing with amateurs
  • Liked: 371
  • Likes Given: 228
Re: Is Atlas "the American Soyuz?"
« Reply #12 on: 11/02/2007 05:42 pm »
My intent is to stay neutral since I posed the question and honestly don't know where I fall.

But I have to call out that last one: That's a false analogy about pride in Atlas.  "The public" has no pride in Delta either.  Its engine is, well, 95% American made.

I wonder, too, if the average vodka swiller in the Moscow metro has any pride in Soyuz either.
If I like something on NSF, it's probably because I know it to be accurate.  Every once in a while, it's just something I agree with.  Facts generally receive the former.

Offline publiusr

  • Elite Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1539
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Is Atlas "the American Soyuz?"
« Reply #13 on: 11/02/2007 05:58 pm »
The original design for Atlas, before the shrinking of the warheads, could be considered an R-7?Soyuz launcher equivalent. Atlas IIAS could only put a little more than R-7, 8.6 tons ass opposed to R-7's 8 tons. So the last of the original Atlas could only be considered equal to what R-7 could do all along.


Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: Is Atlas "the American Soyuz?"
« Reply #14 on: 11/02/2007 08:27 pm »
The question is not about mass to orbit.  It is in use, variety and applications

Offline mike robel

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2304
  • Merritt Island, FL
  • Liked: 369
  • Likes Given: 260
Re: Is Atlas "the American Soyuz?"
« Reply #15 on: 11/02/2007 09:19 pm »
I would have to say no.  Only 4 manned flights.  Discontinued use of the booster. Lack of oomph in the early versions.

I suppose the shuttle might come close.  It has had a relaitvly long run of manned flights, with little modification.  And, like the R-7, it looks like a kludge of parts to me.  Saturn I could have been, but this is about Atlas vs Soyuz.  So, not only is Atlas not the equivelent of Soyuz, we have nothing in the game.

Offline hop

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3352
  • Liked: 553
  • Likes Given: 891
RE: Is Atlas "the American Soyuz?"
« Reply #16 on: 11/02/2007 09:22 pm »
Quote
edkyle99 - 1/11/2007  7:30 AM

No. Absolutely no.  
Agreed. The histories are different enough that the comparison doesn't seem useful. That isn't a slight toward either one.
Quote
Atlas is gone.  The balloon tanks are gone.  The stage-and-a-half design is history, as is the Rocketdyne powerplant.  Atlas last flew in 2004, completing a lifetime that included 576 launches, 320 of which were orbital attempts.  
One thing they do share is highly visible examples of clever, "outside the box" engineering. Atlas had stage-and-half and balloon tanks, R7 has it's unique launch tower. Both of these were great successes in their time, but have fallen by the wayside in modern designs.

Online edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15391
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 8566
  • Likes Given: 1356
Re: Is Atlas "the American Soyuz?"
« Reply #17 on: 11/02/2007 11:10 pm »
Quote
mike robel - 2/11/2007  5:19 PM

So, not only is Atlas not the equivelent of Soyuz, we have nothing in the game.

I think that the only thing that comes close for the U.S. is the Thor family.  Thor-related vehicles have flown 700 times now, including suborbital flights, and it is the second most-often-flown orbital launch vehicle of all time after R-7.  Unlike R-7, Thor never carried a human, but it did just about everything else.  Most notably, Thor launch a hoard of Corona spy satellites during the early years, which did the same job as the Zenit spy satellites launched by R-7.  Together, these two satellite types probably account for a majority of the orbital spacecraft ever flown.

 - Ed Kyle

  • Guest
RE: Is Atlas "the American Soyuz?"
« Reply #18 on: 11/03/2007 02:32 am »

Quote
Antares - 1/11/2007  12:33 AM  I was at dinner with a bunch of NASA-types a while back.  Lo and behold, the guy across the table from me was an astronaut.  I told him about my feelings on crew rating (fig leaf, Atlas > SDLV) and asked how the corps views it.  I talked about the long flight history of Atlas.  He asked me, "So is Atlas the American Soyuz?"  I didn't have a good answer.  What say you?

Could this more be a question of parallels - e.g. qualitative not quantitative? Atlas and Soyuz share similar gestation as ICBM's, they shrank with warhead improvements, they were supplanted by storable propellant ICBM's, they became work horses that put both manned and unmanned payloads in orbit for decades, used for interplanetary probes, and recent been incrementally "evolved".

Can see the argument for "yes" as each served roughly the same role for respective country. An administrator and/or program manager would say "yes". An accountant/analyst/politcal staffer would say "definitely yes".

Can see the argument for "no" as technologically very different design approaches with very different component selections - "night" and "day". Radically different development environment and motivations - driven by relative strengths of each country. A project manager and/or aerospace engineer would say "no, you're nuts".


Offline CFE

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 722
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: Is Atlas "the American Soyuz?"
« Reply #19 on: 11/03/2007 04:55 am »
Quote
edkyle99 - 1/11/2007  8:30 AM

The balloon tanks are gone.  

The balloon tanks are still present in the Centaur upper stage (which was developed from the original Atlas.)

It remains to be seen how much longer Centaur will remain in production.  Perhaps ICES will come down the pipeline in a few years, providing Delta & Atlas with a common upper stage.
"Black Zones" never stopped NASA from flying the shuttle.

Offline kraisee

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10560
  • Liked: 807
  • Likes Given: 40
Re: Is Atlas "the American Soyuz?"
« Reply #20 on: 11/03/2007 05:38 am »
I don't think America has any equivalent to Soyuz on any of the logical scales of measurement.

The "closest" is Thor/Delta, which still continues some lineage in the Delta-II today, though not the Delta-IV.

But even that system is still a long way from being compared to Soyuz on any reasonable scale.

Atlas (again not including the most modern variant) would probably be next in line, but that line of heritage has been ended already.

There was some lineage leading from the German V-2 through Redstone, Jupiter-C, Juno and into Saturn-1, thus into Saturn-V which is an impressive heritage, although still a completely different thing.

Ross.
"The meek shall inherit the Earth -- the rest of us will go to the stars"
-Robert A. Heinlein

Offline yinzer

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1509
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Is Atlas "the American Soyuz?"
« Reply #21 on: 11/03/2007 06:55 am »
It depends on what you consider to be the essential Soyuz characteristics.  If you consider "used for a long period of time with minimal changes", then there isn't really an American Soyuz.  The American approach has been continual launch vehicle development, with the three largely similar lower stage families of Titan, Atlas, and Thor/Delta, and a wide variety of upper stages, Agena being the most popular.  The Thor/Delta family has flown about as many times as the Atlas and Titan combined, while the Agena was the most popular of the upper stages.

If anything is the American Soyuz, I'd think it'd have to be the Thor/Delta family, but even that's stretching it a bit.
California 2008 - taking rights from people and giving rights to chickens.

Offline Antares

  • ABO^2
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5181
  • Done arguing with amateurs
  • Liked: 371
  • Likes Given: 228
Re: Is Atlas "the American Soyuz?"
« Reply #22 on: 11/03/2007 03:09 pm »
I was thinking about it from an evolutionary and robustness lens, but the question is open to interpretation.  Someone from the 60s who hadn't seen the rocket in the interim could look at the telemetry measurement IDs from AV-11 (at least for prop) and know what s/he was looking at.  Also, a consideration is the continuity of personnel so that even if the design changes the lessons learned live on.

I know virtually nothing about Soyuz especially how much it changed from the original, hence the question.
If I like something on NSF, it's probably because I know it to be accurate.  Every once in a while, it's just something I agree with.  Facts generally receive the former.

Tags:
 

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