Or Orbital could obtain staged combustion engines RD-120 from Ukraine.Ukraine has serial production of the engine and also had plans for its own launcher using it.The US state Dept. had issued help for Ukraine so no issues there, maybe even some funding help.Its a fine engine even China purchased some and tweeked it for the CZ-5.Only problem might be the need for 4 engines (haven't run the numbers)The mounting hw for 4 has been designed and/or manufactured
Quote from: FinalFrontier on 10/31/2014 07:36 pmBesides the fact that they end up depending on Russian engines, and should relations sour again that would be a problem. Why not just opt to fly with atlas and save themselves the trouble?How much would flying on Atlas cost them? It may not make economic sense to do so.
Besides the fact that they end up depending on Russian engines, and should relations sour again that would be a problem. Why not just opt to fly with atlas and save themselves the trouble?
Quote from: Prober on 10/31/2014 11:30 pmOr Orbital could obtain staged combustion engines RD-120 from Ukraine.Ukraine has serial production of the engine and also had plans for its own launcher using it.The US state Dept. had issued help for Ukraine so no issues there, maybe even some funding help.Its a fine engine even China purchased some and tweeked it for the CZ-5.Only problem might be the need for 4 engines (haven't run the numbers)The mounting hw for 4 has been designed and/or manufacturedUkraine has the RD-120 production line, the first stage version was the RD-120K, which is NPO Energomash. And the thrust of the RD-120K is just 784kN at sea level they would lose 4% of thrust, 1second of isp, have worst T/W, need new control logic and all piping, structure and TVC should weight less than 230kg or they will have a heavier Main Propulsion System.
IMO they'd be better off killing antares and just buying flights on Atlas. But this just seems silly. One Russian design with questionable history fails, so we opt to use another Russian design with questionable history? I don't see this being viable or happening.
Let me clarify that. Yuzmash has a license to build RD-120 as a second stage engine for Zenit. I am not if they are contractually allowed to build the engine for any other purpose.Also, the sea level variant of RD-120, the "K" indeed does not exist in the Ukraine, although the modification to provide for sea level operation has been "marketed" by Yuzhnoye for many years, as part of their efforts to "sell" paper rockets.The technical issues indeed are real - RD-120 is half the thrust of RD-191, and so four would be required. And it is not as advanced an engine as RD-191/193.Orbital would have to significantly upgrade the 2nd stage to use RD-120 on the first stage.
How about this?ESA is ending ATV production, so they are about to run afoul of the IGA in their contributions to ISS resources. So, how about launching Cygnus on Ariane for a bit?
But I doubt very much launching on Atlas makes any financial sense for Orbital in the long run, certainly not for CRS2. The whole point of Antares was that the lower-cost segment of the Delta II market was poorly served by extremely expensive EELV launches.
Quote from: baldusi on 11/01/2014 12:52 amQuote from: Prober on 10/31/2014 11:30 pmOr Orbital could obtain staged combustion engines RD-120 from Ukraine.Ukraine has serial production of the engine and also had plans for its own launcher using it.The US state Dept. had issued help for Ukraine so no issues there, maybe even some funding help.Its a fine engine even China purchased some and tweeked it for the CZ-5.Only problem might be the need for 4 engines (haven't run the numbers)The mounting hw for 4 has been designed and/or manufacturedUkraine has the RD-120 production line, the first stage version was the RD-120K, which is NPO Energomash. And the thrust of the RD-120K is just 784kN at sea level they would lose 4% of thrust, 1second of isp, have worst T/W, need new control logic and all piping, structure and TVC should weight less than 230kg or they will have a heavier Main Propulsion System.Let me clarify that. Yuzmash has a license to build RD-120 as a second stage engine for Zenit. I am not if they are contractually allowed to build the engine for any other purpose.
Posters on NK calculated that the swap would increase payload capability by 800-1000 kg. And replacing existing second stage with liquid one would add another massive increase, almost doubling payload to orbit (they used Antares w/RD-193 + 3rd stage of Soyuz 2.1b instead of existing second for calculations) to 10 mT.No wonder Orbital were attempting to get their hands on RD-0124...
Quote from: Prober on 10/31/2014 05:48 pmQuote from: LOXRP1 on 10/31/2014 03:59 pmSome discussions in the Russian press about Orbital using the NPO Energomash RD-193 for a new Antares engine.http://en.itar-tass.com/non-political/757591not enough launch history. Can't see this as a real fix.It seems to be happening, if the quote of Orbital Sciences Vice-President for Public Relations Barron Beneski is correct. There really is no other choice besides something from Energomash unless Orbital decides to fund its own engine. RD-193 is designed to replace NK-33, while being based on existing RD-170/180 technology and know how. It will also eventually power Soyuz 2-1v. Energomash has been test firing RD-193 since 2012. - Ed Kyle
Quote from: LOXRP1 on 10/31/2014 03:59 pmSome discussions in the Russian press about Orbital using the NPO Energomash RD-193 for a new Antares engine.http://en.itar-tass.com/non-political/757591not enough launch history. Can't see this as a real fix.
Some discussions in the Russian press about Orbital using the NPO Energomash RD-193 for a new Antares engine.http://en.itar-tass.com/non-political/757591
With Ukraine (RD-120K) as an engine partner; ATK/Orbital has surplus manufacturing ability to cast, and produce their own staged combustion engine in the USA. If the company wishes to add very advanced manufacturing to the mix, they know where to find me.ATK/Orbital could even tap into this funding to do the job.http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=34595.0
I apologize for being so far behind the times, but I'd thought until last week that the eventual path forward was the AJ-500. I haven't been able to find much solid information on AJ-500/AJ-1000/AR-1??? this past year, so is that all just paper?
Quote from: FinalFrontier on 10/31/2014 07:36 pmBesides the fact that they end up depending on Russian engines, and should relations sour again that would be a problem. Why not just opt to fly with atlasfalcon 9 and save themselves the trouble?How much would flying on atlasfalcon 9 cost them? It may not make economic sense to do so.
Besides the fact that they end up depending on Russian engines, and should relations sour again that would be a problem. Why not just opt to fly with atlasfalcon 9 and save themselves the trouble?