Quote from: DanClemmensen on 07/29/2025 05:13 amQuote from: sdsds on 07/29/2025 04:57 amLooking at potential Orion flights other than those where NASA currently plans to use ESA-provided service modules, is Wikipedia correct in saying surplus Shuttle AJ10-190 OMS engines aren't the only option and specifically, that "four alternate engine designs are under consideration for later flights, thought to include the AJ10-118k?"Which Wikipedia article has this. I do not see it in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orion_(spacecraft)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Service_Module#Design
Quote from: sdsds on 07/29/2025 04:57 amLooking at potential Orion flights other than those where NASA currently plans to use ESA-provided service modules, is Wikipedia correct in saying surplus Shuttle AJ10-190 OMS engines aren't the only option and specifically, that "four alternate engine designs are under consideration for later flights, thought to include the AJ10-118k?"Which Wikipedia article has this. I do not see it in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orion_(spacecraft)
Looking at potential Orion flights other than those where NASA currently plans to use ESA-provided service modules, is Wikipedia correct in saying surplus Shuttle AJ10-190 OMS engines aren't the only option and specifically, that "four alternate engine designs are under consideration for later flights, thought to include the AJ10-118k?"
[...]For ESM-7 and beyond, NASA has a contract with Aerojet to produce a new engine called the OME.
There is no mystery here.There are Shuttle engines OMS-E available for ESM-1 to 6.For ESM-7 and beyond, NASA has a contract with Aerojet to produce a new engine called the OME.
Quote from: catdlr on 09/13/2025 07:39 pm and besides, what happened to Orion IV? Right now Orion III, IV and V are in the O&C and Lockheed will be working on them, with greater or lesser intensity, I suppose.
and besides, what happened to Orion IV?
Private mission study a step toward offering Orion as a service
BioAstra@bioastra·Sep 30The future of biomedical space research just took a giant leap forward.Two leaders in their fields are joining forces to change what’s possible. @bioastra , pioneers in biomedical solutions for space exploration and survival on Earth, and Lockheed Martin Space, specialists in mission operations and spacecraft systems, are aiming to deliver groundbreaking research to space - and bring our discoveries back to Earth. Just announced at @IAC2025sydney, BioAstra and @LMSpace are exploring the development of a commercial crewed mission around the Moon that would enable deep-space biomedical research to accelerate discoveries that improve healthcare on Earth.By working together, we hope to advance our understanding of biological adaptation, aging, and immunity in deep space and take the first steps towards making this vision a reality.
The announcement above is beyond the scope of the NASA Artemis project. Discussing how this new use of the Orion, what service module will support it, and what launch vehicle will be used to lift it to LEO and make this venture profitable may be beyond the scope of this "Beyond-LEO HSF - Constellation" thread. If you want, I could create a new thread in the commercial section of the forum. Let me know.Tony
Lockheed is also examining alternatives to the Space Launch System for flying Orion. That would likely involve a dual-launch approach, with one launch carrying Orion and the other a transfer stage that dock in low Earth orbit before going to the moon or on other deep space missions.
Why not the famous option Super Heavy + expendable upper stage instead of a dual launch ?
Quote from: catdlr on 10/02/2025 06:05 amThe announcement above is beyond the scope of the NASA Artemis project. Discussing how this new use of the Orion, what service module will support it, and what launch vehicle will be used to lift it to LEO and make this venture profitable may be beyond the scope of this "Beyond-LEO HSF - Constellation" thread. If you want, I could create a new thread in the commercial section of the forum. Let me know.TonyIt is the "Orion and Exploration vehicles" section in the Beyond-LEO HSF subforum, for a crewed circumlunar mission utilizing Orion. Why wouldn't it be a good fit here? The rest of the Commercial section mostly, if not entirely, deals with launchers, some unmanned (mostly LEO) spacecraft, and a few crewed LEO initiatives...
Quote from: hektor on 10/02/2025 07:36 amWhy not the famous option Super Heavy + expendable upper stage instead of a dual launch ?Super Heavy stages too low and too slow for an expendable upper stage to put Orion in a LEO parking orbit AND then propel the stack towards the Moon. Even with a payload as light as Orion (~ 25 metric tons). Same for direct injection.Remember: the impressive mass-to-orbit figures of Starship go away if you don't do orbital refueling.Dual FH launches would be the way to go. First launch puts a fully fueled LT Centaur V in LEO. Second launch puts crewed Orion in LEO. LT Centaur V and Orion then dock in LEO. LT Centaur V then performs the TLI burn.
