Author Topic: Orbital ATK NGL Rocket UPDATES/DISCUSSION  (Read 92277 times)

Offline Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8853
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 10187
  • Likes Given: 11915
Re: Orbital ATK NGL Rocket UPDATES/DISCUSSION
« Reply #60 on: 06/30/2017 01:19 am »

... And they don't have experience being a launch provider....

Pegasus. Taurus. Minotaur. Antares.

Thanks for pointing that out, and I've edited my post to correct my oversight. I think I was only thinking of the ATK part of Orbital ATK.
If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

Offline douglas100

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2177
  • Liked: 227
  • Likes Given: 105
Re: Orbital ATK NGL Rocket UPDATES/DISCUSSION
« Reply #61 on: 06/30/2017 09:49 am »
You're welcome. I don't think there's any doubt they could do NGL technically and operationally. It's the business case that's problematic.
Douglas Clark

Offline Kabloona

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4846
  • Velocitas Eradico
  • Fortress of Solitude
  • Liked: 3429
  • Likes Given: 741
Re: Orbital ATK NGL Rocket UPDATES/DISCUSSION
« Reply #62 on: 06/30/2017 10:29 pm »
It all depends on on how silo'd (separated) off the Orbital and ATK parts of the company are. OATK hasn't exactly warmly embraced Antares until perhaps recently. Also, past history of an organization is no guarantee that the current employees have retained that skill-set. There are lots of examples of that.
David Thompson, Orbital co-founder, is at the helm of this merged company.  He moved Scott Lehr, from the ATK side of the house, into the lead of Orbital ATK’s Flight Systems Group, which is developing NGL (and operating Antares, Pegasus, Minotaur, etc.).  It seems to me to have been a purposeful move designed to help tear down the old walls.

No guarantees, but this merger seems to me to have many synergies.  Motor builder joins company that uses motors. 

 - Ed Kyle

The merger can also be seen as the next logical step after the "joint venture" model that Orbital and Hercules used to develop Pegasus, in which the companies shared development costs/responsibilities and profits, IIRC.

So if Pegasus was the fruit of a liaison between Orbital and Hercules, NGL will/would be the fruit of a real marriage of Orbital and ATK.

I guess Dave Thompson et al figured the Pegasus joint venture experience was positive enough the take the plunge with ATK.

Offline Archibald

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2611
  • Liked: 499
  • Likes Given: 1096
Re: Orbital ATK NGL Rocket UPDATES/DISCUSSION
« Reply #63 on: 07/01/2017 10:26 am »
I keep reading "LNG rocket" hence a rocket running on liquid natural gas (refueled and launched from a LNG ship ?)  ;D
« Last Edit: 07/01/2017 10:27 am by Archibald »
Han shot first and Gwynne Shotwell !

Offline Rik ISS-fan

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1515
  • the Netherlands
  • Liked: 612
  • Likes Given: 211
Re: Orbital ATK NGL Rocket UPDATES/DISCUSSION
« Reply #64 on: 07/03/2017 05:26 am »
I keep reading "LNG rocket" hence a rocket running on liquid natural gas (refueled and launched from a LNG ship ?)  ;D

What do you think about a expendable TSTO with BE-4U engine upper-stage? (Instead of Castor300+BE-3UEN 3th stage)
Could LOx and LNG alu or plastic COPV propallent tanks be produced using the same tooling as for the Castor X00 solid casings?
« Last Edit: 07/03/2017 05:40 am by Rik ISS-fan »

Offline Ronsmytheiii

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23394
  • Liked: 1879
  • Likes Given: 1020
Re: Orbital ATK NGL Rocket UPDATES/DISCUSSION
« Reply #65 on: 07/04/2017 10:59 am »
The Be3U powered US would be the most challenging for OA as they don't have LH experience. Nothing poaching engineers from ULA or Blue couldn't fix. Blue may even offer help if it results in BE3 sales.

They might not even need to poach guys from ULA, there is a lot of talent being let go in ULA's downsizing efforts that can be scooped up easily (and cheaply).

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15377
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 8530
  • Likes Given: 1351
Re: Orbital ATK NGL Rocket UPDATES/DISCUSSION
« Reply #66 on: 07/07/2017 07:11 pm »
Systems Engineering position (among several) for ULA Vulcan and Orbital ATK Next Generation Launcher (NGL) USAF New Entrant Certification in Los Angeles, CA.  This is likely a job for a contractor working for the Space and Missile Systems Center (SMC) in El Segundo, CA at Los Angeles Air Force Base.
https://www.linkedin.com/jobs/view/388507126

 - Ed Kyle
« Last Edit: 07/07/2017 07:14 pm by edkyle99 »

Offline russianhalo117

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8749
  • Liked: 4660
  • Likes Given: 768
Re: Orbital ATK NGL Rocket UPDATES/DISCUSSION
« Reply #67 on: 07/07/2017 11:17 pm »
Systems Engineering position (among several) for ULA Vulcan and Orbital ATK Next Generation Launcher (NGL) USAF New Entrant Certification in Los Angeles, CA.  This is likely a job for a contractor working for the Space and Missile Systems Center (SMC) in El Segundo, CA at Los Angeles Air Force Base.
https://www.linkedin.com/jobs/view/388507126

 - Ed Kyle
My cousin whom works at LAAFB says the position is based out of LAAFB but is a mobile position with varying job sites/locations. My cousin says that security clearance would likely be needed, but to check for the job listing in USAJobs for details (https://dod.usajobs.gov/ and http://godefense.cpms.osd.mil/).

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8142
  • Liked: 6799
  • Likes Given: 2963
Re: Orbital ATK NGL Rocket UPDATES/DISCUSSION
« Reply #68 on: 07/17/2017 12:45 pm »
Dates for static fire testing and operation of the heavy version:

Quote
Orbital ATK plans to compete its proposed NGL intermediate- and heavy-lift rockets in future Air Force competitions. So far, the company has passed crucial design reviews and is working toward a static fire of its four-segment heavy-lift booster in about 2022. The company expects that rocket to be operational in 2024.

Orbital ATK sees NGL as a natural progression from its smaller rockets, such as Pegasus and Antares. Antares currently delivers supplies for NASA to the International Space Station.

“We have made very incremental steps in improving our capability,” said Mark Pieczynski, vice president of business development and strategy for Orbital ATK’s flight systems group. “We’re now ready to move into the intermediate and heavy class.”

Orbital ATK and the Air Force together are investing more than $200 million to develop the launch system.

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-heavy-lift-rockets-20170716-htmlstory.html

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8142
  • Liked: 6799
  • Likes Given: 2963
Re: Orbital ATK NGL Rocket UPDATES/DISCUSSION
« Reply #69 on: 07/17/2017 12:56 pm »
I keep reading "LNG rocket" hence a rocket running on liquid natural gas (refueled and launched from a LNG ship ?)  ;D

What do you think about a expendable TSTO with BE-4U engine upper-stage? (Instead of Castor300+BE-3UEN 3th stage)
Could LOx and LNG alu or plastic COPV propallent tanks be produced using the same tooling as for the Castor X00 solid casings?

That would be great for LEO, slightly better than the 3-stage in fact. But the heavy, low impulse upper stage hurts high energy performance. With BE-4 upper the NGL 500 XL would get about 8,000 kg to GTO, while the Castor 300 + BE-3U upper stage pair would get 12,000 kg.

Offline Rebel44

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 565
  • Liked: 546
  • Likes Given: 2012
Re: Orbital ATK NGL Rocket UPDATES/DISCUSSION
« Reply #70 on: 07/30/2017 09:45 pm »
IMO:

OATKs business plan for NGLV is to hope for competitor(s) to fail - otherwise there wont be enough launches to make money on NGLV.

US DoD wants 2 providers and based on LVs in development (or already operational) we will likely see LVs from:
SpaceX
ULA
OATK
Blue Origin (if they decide to go for for these payloads)

DoD/NRO would have no objections to having more than 2 options, but they wont save 3rd or 4th player if/when they get into trouble, so IMO business plan for NGLV is very weak.

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47936
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 81286
  • Likes Given: 36776
Re: Orbital ATK NGL Rocket UPDATES/DISCUSSION
« Reply #71 on: 08/03/2017 01:43 pm »
Quote
Jeff Foust‏ @jeff_foust 2m2 minutes ago

[Orbital ATK's David] Thompson: expecting joint go/no-go decision with the Air Force late this year or early next year on next phase of Next Generation Launcher.

https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/893104270689611776

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8142
  • Liked: 6799
  • Likes Given: 2963
Re: Orbital ATK NGL Rocket UPDATES/DISCUSSION
« Reply #72 on: 08/03/2017 02:54 pm »
Is there a reason the Ares 1 vibration issues won't also be a problem on NGL? The XL version is pretty similar in design.

Offline russianhalo117

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8749
  • Liked: 4660
  • Likes Given: 768
Re: Orbital ATK NGL Rocket UPDATES/DISCUSSION
« Reply #73 on: 08/03/2017 04:31 pm »
Is there a reason the Ares 1 vibration issues won't also be a problem on NGL? The XL version is pretty similar in design.

Different stage lengths for starters.

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8142
  • Liked: 6799
  • Likes Given: 2963
Re: Orbital ATK NGL Rocket UPDATES/DISCUSSION
« Reply #74 on: 08/03/2017 07:25 pm »
Is there a reason the Ares 1 vibration issues won't also be a problem on NGL? The XL version is pretty similar in design.

Different stage lengths for starters.

The NGL 500 XL has the same size motors as the STS SRBs, which experienced significant thrust oscillation that was largely damped by the stiffness ET thrust beam and the mass of the ET. NGL doesn't have a ET or a thrust beam.

It is also the same size as the Ares 1-X booster, which apparently didn't have any significant problems related to thrust oscillation.

Offline russianhalo117

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8749
  • Liked: 4660
  • Likes Given: 768
Re: Orbital ATK NGL Rocket UPDATES/DISCUSSION
« Reply #75 on: 08/03/2017 11:18 pm »
Is there a reason the Ares 1 vibration issues won't also be a problem on NGL? The XL version is pretty similar in design.

Different stage lengths for starters.

The NGL 500 XL has the same size motors as the STS SRBs, which experienced significant thrust oscillation that was largely damped by the stiffness ET thrust beam and the mass of the ET. NGL doesn't have a ET or a thrust beam.

It is also the same size as the Ares 1-X booster, which apparently didn't have any significant problems related to thrust oscillation.
Boosters being used have the Lessons learned from Constellation and other changes from SLS booster tests. OA 2016 Motor catalog refers to Castor 300, 600, 900, 1200 as versions available and other documents and presentations reference 3 of the 4 configurations with the programme..

Offline Sam Ho

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 815
  • Liked: 575
  • Likes Given: 71
Re: Orbital ATK NGL Rocket UPDATES/DISCUSSION
« Reply #76 on: 08/04/2017 12:42 am »
From the earnings call today:
Quote
In our flight systems segment, the company and the Air Force are now in the second year of what may well be a thought year, jointly funded program to create a new intermediate and large class launch vehicle.

As I mentioned before, our objective, our joint objective is to develop a family of vehicles capable of launching both defense as well as commercial and scientific satellites that are larger heavier than those that can be accommodated by our current Antares rocket and have those new launchers ready for initial flights in 2020 or 2021.

Our investments last year and this year together with those of the Air Force that covered the preliminary phases of design and facility expansion, we're expecting a joint go no go between the Air Force and Orbital ATK late this year or early next year concerning the next phase to actually move into full-scale development and testing of these vehicles in advance of commencing production and launch operations around the end of the decade.
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4094384-orbital-atks-oa-ceo-dave-thompson-q2-2017-results-earnings-call-transcript

Offline Mike Jones

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 101
  • Latvia
  • Liked: 34
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Orbital ATK NGL Rocket UPDATES/DISCUSSION
« Reply #77 on: 08/11/2017 05:49 pm »
Did Orbital-ATK select their cryogenic upper stage supplier ? Blue Origin or aerojet-rocketdyne (+ a partner for the rest of the stage) ?

Offline rayleighscatter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1098
  • Maryland
  • Liked: 565
  • Likes Given: 238
Re: Orbital ATK NGL Rocket UPDATES/DISCUSSION
« Reply #78 on: 11/07/2017 10:35 pm »
And pictures of the segment.


Offline Rik ISS-fan

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1515
  • the Netherlands
  • Liked: 612
  • Likes Given: 211
Re: Orbital ATK NGL Rocket UPDATES/DISCUSSION
« Reply #79 on: 11/07/2017 10:42 pm »
From the new NGL Development milestone topic, we can conclude that OATK (NG) is really developing NGL. They have completed a load test and are going to cast and test a inert stage early 2018.

I assume that OATK/NG will use up their supply of Angara tank structures and RS-181 engines, and after that terminate the Antares program. Most likely a version of NGL will take over the role of Antares.
AFAIK NGL 500 is lot heavier rocket than Antares. So to replace Antares a smaller rocket is required.
OATK/NG has multiple solid stage families: Orion50" (32", 38", 48", 75" & 92") GEM40", -48" -60" and -63", Castor 120(XL) 60, -30(B/XL) [92" / 92.1"] and Castor 1200, -600 & -300. With these stages they have developed multiple solid rockets for multiple purposes. Which stages will a NGL replacement for Antares utilize?

I think a Castor 600 + Cryogenic second stage won't work because of to high acceleration forces. 
Possibly a Castor 300 with flat burn profile can work!? (I know: this is a different stage than the Castor 300 second stage!)
A third option is a NGL with Castor 300 2x + Cryogenic 3th stage. NGL 300?
A forth option is a >3 stage full solid rocket. This could be:
- Castor 600 + Castor 300 + Castor 30(XL)
- Castor 300 (s.l. optimized) + Castor 300 + Castor 30(XL)
- Castor 300 + Castor 120 + Castor 30(XL)
Which of the options matches best with the Cygnus ISS resupply missions in your opinion?

OATK/NG also have the Minotaur and Pegasus series of rockets. Earlier I've stated in the Surplus ICBM topic; that I think US small satellite developers and Venture class launch providers could benefit when new upper-stages are developed for the Minotaur rockets. This could be the future for the MARS launch pads, and PSCA)
I'm sorry to point to this, but US small and nano satellite developers can't find US rockets to launch their payloads on. So they rely on PSLV, Soyuz, and Nanoracks deployment form the ISS (only good US launch service).
{off topic} I also criticize Arianespace for their lack of providing a good launch service for small and micro satellites, but they are working on it.{/off topic}
How do you think about using engine developed for Venture class rockets to power liquid upper-stages for NGL and Minotaur rockets?
Which rocket configuration with venture class derived upper-stage could replace Antares?

The CastorX00 family is far beter than the RSRB family in my oppinion. STS and Ariane 4/5 have proven that reusable solids are more expansive than expendable once. Refurbishment of solids is far to dangerous (toxic) and hand labor intensive. The CFRP-casings can be manufactured on automated lines, and all the facilities are already present in Utah.
The 200mln development cost is remarkably low in my opinion. That will have a very good return on investment if the NGL rockets and SLS will use the Castor x00 segments. (makes nearly all missiles cheaper as well)
« Last Edit: 11/08/2017 09:04 am by Rik ISS-fan »

Tags:
 

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