Idle Speculation (why should SpaceX threads have all the fun?):Antares first stage is in same family as Zenit-3SL; dimensions are same or smaller.Antares is integrated horizontally and erected at pad as required by Sea Launch operations.Antares is advertised as a "Delta II" class vehicle but doesn't have a polar orbit capability (required for many or most potential Antares payloads). There are difficulties associated with all west coast launch site options; Vandenberg is crowded, Kodiak has logistical and environmental constraints, and Kwajalein is worse than Kodiak. Sea Launch would offer all inclinations and a minor performance boost for low inclination orbits (or GSO if Orbital wants to develop that capability for Antares). Sea Launch would probably appreciate spreading their fixed costs over more launches.I'm just curious how much effort would be required to adapt Odyssey and Sea Launch Commander. New launch mount and strongback would be needed, probably a HIF at Long Beach as well.There's a million reasons this wouldn't work; what are the technical showstoppers?
1. Antares is integrated horizontally and erected at pad as required by Sea Launch operations.2. Antares is advertised as a "Delta II" class vehicle but doesn't have a polar orbit capability (required for many or most potential Antares payloads). 3. There are difficulties associated with all west coast launch site options; Vandenberg is crowded, 4. Sea Launch would probably appreciate spreading their fixed costs over more launches.
1. I got a better one to have "fun" with.....talks fail and Russia is forced to move all its launches to "Russia".Ukraine or Orbital or both teamed up talk about using the Zenit launch pads of Land launch. 3. Only difference is using Aerojet engines.
Quote from: Prober on 01/03/2013 06:19 pm1. I got a better one to have "fun" with.....talks fail and Russia is forced to move all its launches to "Russia".Ukraine or Orbital or both teamed up talk about using the Zenit launch pads of Land launch. 3. Only difference is using Aerojet engines.1. There is nothing that would force the move2. No benefit to Orbital or Ukraine. 3. There are more differences
Quote from: Jim on 01/03/2013 06:34 pmQuote from: Prober on 01/03/2013 06:19 pm1. I got a better one to have "fun" with.....talks fail and Russia is forced to move all its launches to "Russia".Ukraine or Orbital or both teamed up talk about using the Zenit launch pads of Land launch. 3. Only difference is using Aerojet engines.1. There is nothing that would force the move2. No benefit to Orbital or Ukraine. 3. There are more differencesKazakhstan mulls ending Russia's cosmodrome lease
Quote from: Prober on 01/04/2013 03:36 amQuote from: Jim on 01/03/2013 06:34 pmQuote from: Prober on 01/03/2013 06:19 pm1. I got a better one to have "fun" with.....talks fail and Russia is forced to move all its launches to "Russia".Ukraine or Orbital or both teamed up talk about using the Zenit launch pads of Land launch. 3. Only difference is using Aerojet engines.1. There is nothing that would force the move2. No benefit to Orbital or Ukraine. 3. There are more differencesKazakhstan mulls ending Russia's cosmodrome leaseAnd how does that change what I said.That doesn't affect SealaunchThe Land launch pads won't be available to them
That is up to the Kazakhstan gov to say. Note I didn't say SeaLaunch, I said Landlaunch.SeaLaunch will prob go with a pure Russian rocket in the future. Sure that might be a fight Russia vs Ukraine. This IMHO, is only a few years off.
If Kazakhstan ended the Cosmodrome lease, Russia may just invade them. Seriously, they may.More likely, they'll exert geopolitical influence (and their sizable intelligence capability) to keep the lease going.
Quote from: Robotbeat on 01/04/2013 06:35 pmIf Kazakhstan ended the Cosmodrome lease, Russia may just invade them. Seriously, they may.More likely, they'll exert geopolitical influence (and their sizable intelligence capability) to keep the lease going.Kazakhstan isn't Georgia. Look it up on a map, bad idea. As above, there are other places to build a cosmodrome.
Quote from: arachnitect on 12/31/2012 09:35 pm1. Antares is integrated horizontally and erected at pad as required by Sea Launch operations.2. Antares is advertised as a "Delta II" class vehicle but doesn't have a polar orbit capability (required for many or most potential Antares payloads). 3. There are difficulties associated with all west coast launch site options; Vandenberg is crowded, 4. Sea Launch would probably appreciate spreading their fixed costs over more launches.1. The solid motor second stage may cause issues2. Sun synchronous orbits are obtainable from WFF>3. Not really. There are places for a pad. 4. There isn't really available slots for other launches. Also, doubt the pad and LCC could be dual compatible.
And no, Sealaunch is not going to a pure Russian rocket.
Quote from: Jim on 01/04/2013 03:06 pmAnd no, Sealaunch is not going to a pure Russian rocket.You think? Not if Mr. Lopota has anything to say about it. The only little problem that's holding up his plans is the lack of actual rocket factory under his control (his own factory is too small). How do you know he's not repurposing an abandoned warehouse right as we type this?
Mr. Lapota is Energia's president. The current owner of Sea Launch. And they have been dreaming of replacing the Zenit with their own Energia-K. Une interesting point is, that for those dimensions I've seen, they were using 4.1m instead of Zenit's 3.9m. Since That's Proton's core size, and Krushinev is moving to the Angara's 2.9m, he might have hopes of buying the used tooling?In any case, 4.1m is the maximum you can transport by train if you have exclusive use of the tracks (you can't have another train coming the other way).
interesting, kinda thought one version of Angara was planned for SeaLaunch.