Which new heavy/superheavy LV is first to reach orbit?

[space_snap828]

Very unpopular opinion, but of the options, the rocket with the most hardware completed (that I've seen) is the SLS. Honestly, SLS has a ton of problems that could set it back beyond the other options, but it is the only one with all stages (slowly) approaching completion.

[birdman]

Very unpopular opinion, but of the options, the rocket with the most hardware completed (that I've seen) is the SLS. Honestly, SLS has a ton of problems that could set it back beyond the other options, but it is the only one with all stages (slowly) approaching completion.

It's definitely further along than others are, but think about how long it took to get there.

Even though many parts are already flight-proven from Shuttle days, it's still taken 5+ years from the first relatively concrete plans to now... when it's not even that close to being done. Close-er than others, sure, but not that close still.

And then you look at something like SS/SH and others to an extent, many of them were still years away from existing even as ideas (ITS =/= SS/SH imo) when SLS was (relatively) fully planned and being constructed... yet they're still aiming to fly before it, and not unreasonably. SS/SH, in less than 2 years, has gone almost as far as SLS has in 5, and showing no signs of slowing down.

[nicp]

I voted New Glenn. Not a fan really because they have spent lots of $$$ and haven't put so much as a ship's peanut into orbit, though I am sure they have good engineers.

They will get there I expect, perhaps it will snowball rather suddenly.

[envy887]

I was more contrarian than I thought by voting for Vulcan, with SLS being a close second. I doubt SLS is going to fly in 2020, in spite of their new promises, and I wouldn't be surprised if it slipped enough that Vulcan wins. I'm positive Vulcan is going to fly before New Glenn -- it's just a lot further along the design process and not as ambitious or big or complicated. As far as Starship goes, I'm skeptical it will be flying before summer of 2021 either. They're doing a crude, simplified hopper right now, but there's a ton of work from here to an operating Starship/SuperHeavy. I just don't see it flying before Vulcan.

~Jon

Is Vulcan a 25+ metric tonne launcher, though? Vulcan Heavy with Centaur 5+ Long is well over 25 t to LEO, but I rather doubt that version will fly at all before 2022. I'm not sure how many SRBs they need to get to 25 t to LEO with the initial Centaur 5, or whether that version will be able to get 25 t to LEO at all without an enhanced upper stage.

If a Vulcan 522 flying an 8 t demosat to GTO counts, then Starship reaching LEO with a wheel of cheese and no booster is in the same boat.

[nathan.tehrani]

Very unpopular opinion, but of the options, the rocket with the most hardware completed (that I've seen) is the SLS. Honestly, SLS has a ton of problems that could set it back beyond the other options, but it is the only one with all stages (slowly) approaching completion.

Unpopular or not, it's reality. SLS is past design and fabrication and is in integration and test right now. SpaceX is still making changes to the main architecture of SS/SH and only a few months ago decided what to even build it out of.

[Joris]

Unpopular or not, it's reality. SLS is past design and fabrication and is in integration and test right now. SpaceX is still making changes to the main architecture of SS/SH and only a few months ago decided what to even build it out of.

I was thinking the same thing, which is why I voted none before 2022, because that thing isn't gonna fly anytime soon.

[envy887]

Very unpopular opinion, but of the options, the rocket with the most hardware completed (that I've seen) is the SLS. Honestly, SLS has a ton of problems that could set it back beyond the other options, but it is the only one with all stages (slowly) approaching completion.

Unpopular or not, it's reality. SLS is past design and fabrication and is in integration and test right now. SpaceX is still making changes to the main architecture of SS/SH and only a few months ago decided what to even build it out of.

SpaceX is also integrating and testing the first flight (albeit suborbital only) Starship. That they only decided what to build it out of a few months ago says a lot more about the relative speed of each organization than it does about the chances of an orbital flight of either system before 2022.

[nathan.tehrani]

All it is is just a big metal Grasshopper!

[envy887]

All it is is just a big metal Grasshopper!

Not sure what your point is with that statement. Grasshopper was actual flight-capable Falcon hardware, built with most of the same parts using the same processes on the same tooling as the real orbital Falcon 9 v1.0. Starhopper, if  anything, is less advanced than that - but it still shows how far along SpaceX is and how fast they are moving compared to some of the competition that had a significant head start.

[jongoff]

Is Vulcan a 25+ metric tonne launcher, though? Vulcan Heavy with Centaur 5+ Long is well over 25 t to LEO, but I rather doubt that version will fly at all before 2022. I'm not sure how many SRBs they need to get to 25 t to LEO with the initial Centaur 5, or whether that version will be able to get 25 t to LEO at all without an enhanced upper stage.

I'm pretty sure Vulcan with the initial version of Centaur V should be able to get to 25mT to LEO with a standard number of strapons. I don't think they'd need Centaur V+ Long to get there. Though I could be wrong. We haven't actually been very involved with ULA for over a year.

As for whether they would fly a Vulcan with 25mT payload before 2022, that's less likely. But if the stock Centaur V with a standard number of stapons will get you to 25mT, I'd still count it.

If a Vulcan 522 flying an 8 t demosat to GTO counts, then Starship reaching LEO with a wheel of cheese and no booster is in the same boat.

So long as the Starship could realistically put 25mT worth of cargo into orbit with the configuration that flies the cheese, I'd count it to. And I just don't think that such a Startship is going to fly before 2022. There's a heck of a long way from their current StarHopper to a super Saturn V class orbital launch vehicle. More than 2.5yrs worth of distance IMO, based on their past experience with much easier launch vehicles.

~Jon

[envy887]

Is Vulcan a 25+ metric tonne launcher, though? Vulcan Heavy with Centaur 5+ Long is well over 25 t to LEO, but I rather doubt that version will fly at all before 2022. I'm not sure how many SRBs they need to get to 25 t to LEO with the initial Centaur 5, or whether that version will be able to get 25 t to LEO at all without an enhanced upper stage.

I'm pretty sure Vulcan with the initial version of Centaur V should be able to get to 25mT to LEO with a standard number of strapons. I don't think they'd need Centaur V+ Long to get there. Though I could be wrong. We haven't actually been very involved with ULA for over a year.

As for whether they would fly a Vulcan with 25mT payload before 2022, that's less likely. But if the stock Centaur V with a standard number of stapons will get you to 25mT, I'd still count it.

If a Vulcan 522 flying an 8 t demosat to GTO counts, then Starship reaching LEO with a wheel of cheese and no booster is in the same boat.

So long as the Starship could realistically put 25mT worth of cargo into orbit with the configuration that flies the cheese, I'd count it to. And I just don't think that such a Startship is going to fly before 2022. There's a heck of a long way from their current StarHopper to a super Saturn V class orbital launch vehicle. More than 2.5yrs worth of distance IMO, based on their past experience with much easier launch vehicles.

~Jon

Reviewing the Vulcan thread further back, it looks like the 6 SRB version with the regular upper stage will get over 25 t, but the 4 SRB version probably will not.

I don't think it's implausible that Starship could SSTO 25 t to LEO by burning its landing fuel on ascent. Though I doubt SpaceX would ever do that, they might go to orbit and back with no real payload just to test of the heatshield or whatever. Starship itself is much smaller than Saturn V and actually quite a bit smaller than Falcon Heavy, and simpler in some ways (fewer stages) but more complex in others.

[oldAtlas_Eguy]

I voted SS/SH because their build rate is a new flight vehicle is one every 6 months in serial production. The first full SS orbital version prototype will be flight ready ~ July 2019. It will likely incorporate lessons learned almost all of which is software but some mechanical/structural possibly as well from the Starhopper #1 flight tests. What this all portends is a full orbital reaching SS flight vehicle ready by #3 by Jan 2020. Add a SH hopper #1 test vehicle followed in ~6 months by a operational SH vehicle #2  by around July 2020 that can carry the SS #3 then this stack would be doing its first orbital demo around October 2020. (Expect a 3 month timeframe to work out processing and integration.)

Therefore I predict SS/SH to reach full 25+mt orbital capability by end of year 2020. SLS chances of doing the same or sooner is by Bridenstine mentions that to reach goal of launching in 2020 they must do program schedule changes by deleting/combining tests to reach launch by EOY 2020.

[SimonFD]

I voted New Glenn as I think, as someone else has already said, that it will pop up and launch as if out of nowhere.
My heart want Starship/Super Heavy but my head says Blue with an SLS a slight possibility

[TrevorMonty]

I was more contrarian than I thought by voting for Vulcan, with SLS being a close second. I doubt SLS is going to fly in 2020, in spite of their new promises, and I wouldn't be surprised if it slipped enough that Vulcan wins. I'm positive Vulcan is going to fly before New Glenn -- it's just a lot further along the design process and not as ambitious or big or complicated. As far as Starship goes, I'm skeptical it will be flying before summer of 2021 either. They're doing a crude, simplified hopper right now, but there's a ton of work from here to an operating Starship/SuperHeavy. I just don't see it flying before Vulcan.

~Jon

I vote Vulcan, using lot of flight proven hardware (Centuar, Avionics, SRBs) and very experienced LV company. Pads exist just need modifying. Only thing that could delay them is any problems with Be4.

Original Centuar version is all they need to retire D4H, which is priority as its lot of overheads for low flight rate LV.

I can see a case for flying both Centuar versions, with smaller cheaper version for lower performance missions.

[spacenut]

Vulcan is dependent on BE-4 from Blue Origin which is still in testing.  Vulcan will depend on how fast BE-4 can be flight ready.  Raptor from SpaceX seems to already be ready for flight testing. 

As for SLS, if they cut some testing out, as they are already saying they will, they may be ready by next year.  However if they have a screw up and loose the rocket, SLS will be doomed, especially when these others come on line. 

[ncb1397]

I don't think it's implausible that Starship could SSTO 25 t to LEO by burning its landing fuel on ascent.

Pixel measuring the ITS 2016 presentation delta-v/payload map suggests not even ITS could do it on paper which was much larger.

[jadebenn]

I am going to be insufferably smug when the SLS flies first 1-3 years from now and I point back to this thread.

Of course, I'm not a hypocrite: feel free to rub this statement into my face if history doesn't vindicate it. But I'm pretty confident it will.

[speedevil]

I don't think it's implausible that Starship could SSTO 25 t to LEO by burning its landing fuel on ascent.

Pixel measuring the ITS 2016 presentation delta-v/payload map suggests not even ITS could do it on paper which was much larger.

I don't think you can remotely safely do this.
Neither the 2016 or 17 presentations specified this was a bare unoutfitted spaceship.
The dear.moon presentation specifically raises extreme doubts about taking the '85 ton' number as canon for IAC2017, for example as it can't do the presented mission as it doesn't have enough delta-v unless you assume it's quite a bit lighter.

I note Elon recently gave a mass of 40 tons dry for a 3 engine 'kicker' - which would be around 50 tons with all engines.

If you are not trying to recover it, a 25 ton payload to LEO 'cheaper than a falcon 9' stage starship-minimum SSTO seems not excluded.
(May it not happen for other reasons, sure).

[envy887]

I am going to be insufferably smug when the SLS flies first 1-3 years from now and I point back to this thread.

Of course, I'm not a hypocrite: feel free to rub this statement into my face if history doesn't vindicate it. But I'm pretty confident it will.

I don't see any reason to be smug about it. SLS started years earlier than any of the other rockets listed, didn't develop anything new of note, had many billions of dollars more funding, and all of NASA's considerable design, test, and validation resources. By all rights (and by law) it should have been flying years ago.

The results of this poll simply represent the feeling that the current gross ineptitude in management and execution displayed on the SLS program will continue for a while longer.

[hkultala]

I don't think it's implausible that Starship could SSTO 25 t to LEO by burning its landing fuel on ascent.

Pixel measuring the ITS 2016 presentation delta-v/payload map suggests not even ITS could do it on paper which was much larger.

Why are all ITS/BFR/SS threadsp polluted by this offtopic-SSTO madness?


Having 9.3km/s of delta-v does not guarantee ability to SSTO. The 2016 version definitely could not SSTO because of it did not have enough atmospheric engines to take off safely with any reasonable amount of fuel. it would had had to used only partially filled tanks, having maybe only about 7km/s of delta-v with fuel if could lift with, and it would still had had terrible gravity losses.