-
#1540
by
zaitcev
on 24 May, 2012 17:37
-
Wow!
Wow indeed. But do Orbital people know that Energomash is preparing an engine for them? The original URL with full picture including RD-175 for SLS:
http://www.buran.ru/htm/news.htmI consider it likely to be wishful thinking, but it may add options for Orbital once AJ-26 are expended.
-
#1541
by
ugordan
on 24 May, 2012 17:46
-
Interesting numbering choice for the engine, given how RD-180 and 181 are nowhere near RD-170 and 171 in similarity.
-
#1542
by
Lurker Steve
on 24 May, 2012 18:12
-
Wow!
Wow indeed. But do Orbital people know that Energomash is preparing an engine for them? The original URL with full picture including RD-175 for SLS:
http://www.buran.ru/htm/news.htm
I consider it likely to be wishful thinking, but it may add options for Orbital once AJ-26 are expended.
Once the converted NK-33's are gone, I would assume Orbital would switch over to the domestic AJ-26 that Aerojet is building with Teledyne. Of course, if a new Energomash engine was significantly cheaper than the domestic AJ-26, it's possible. I assume that there are enough left-over NK-33s for Aerojet to convert, where that decision doesn't need to happen for several years.
-
#1543
by
zaitcev
on 24 May, 2012 18:53
-
I assume that there are enough left-over NK-33s for Aerojet to convert, where that decision doesn't need to happen for several years.
There aren't any over the 36 or 38 that Aerojet already have. Soyuz has dibs on the remainder.
-
#1544
by
baldusi
on 24 May, 2012 19:29
-
I assume that there are enough left-over NK-33s for Aerojet to convert, where that decision doesn't need to happen for several years.
There aren't any over the 36 or 38 that Aerojet already have. Soyuz has dibs on the remainder.
That's 18 to 19 Antares launches. CRS means just 8. And they stated they can do three launches per year just after the third year. So, it would be a problem by 2020. I guess a new equivalent engine would be available by then.
-
#1545
by
strangequark
on 24 May, 2012 20:13
-
Maybe the Google translation makes it a little more blunt, but the keynote speech on that page is a pretty scathing critique of the Russian space industry.
-
#1546
by
jnc
on 24 May, 2012 20:31
-
the Tau... Antares
Hmm, it's been 6 months since the name change, and that's not the
first time that you've
done that stutter-step... Do I hear an axe being ground? :-)
Perhaps someone disagreed with a marketing person (
first up against the wall!) when they originally named it 'Taurus II' (emphasizing continuity - but only to people who know little of technology)? :-)
Noel
-
#1547
by
Danderman
on 24 May, 2012 22:37
-
Interesting numbering choice for the engine, given how RD-180 and 181 are nowhere near RD-170 and 171 in similarity.
Actually, the RD-180 is basically a 2 chamber version of the 4 chamber RD-171. Presumably, the RD-181 engine that Energia would like to use on Antares is some variant of the RD-180, a little large and expensive for Antares. Probably 2 RD-191 engines would be a direct replacement for NK-33.
-
#1548
by
zaitcev
on 25 May, 2012 02:16
-
Presumably, the RD-181 engine that Energia would like to use on Antares is some variant of the RD-180, a little large and expensive for Antares. Probably 2 RD-191 engines would be a direct replacement for NK-33.
Two things about RD-181 CAD model jump at me.
#1 - a large purple device that is attached to the turbopump assembly (the purple color is just a key to identify it, of course - it may be made from any material). RD-191 has no such, although RD-193 does! It may be a starter. Or it may have something with the way pressurization works on Zen... er... Antares 1st stage.
#2 - the TVC that's attached in a different way, to the fuel manifold on the nozzle instead to the "throat" of the bell as on other engines of the family. It's possible that they did away with one of the key features of RD-171: the sylphone or a flexible segment between the chamber and the bell.
Since there's no scale, it's hard to tell how big the engine actually is. If it uses the 1/4 of RD-175, which is a radical thrust upgrade, then ONE RD-181 may replace TWO AJ-26 on Antares.
Edit: typoed 181 and 191; also see a reply below that 181-as-1/4-175 is not big enough.
-
#1549
by
hkultala
on 25 May, 2012 07:03
-
Since there's no scale, it's hard to tell how big the engine actually is. If it uses the 1/4 of RD-175, which is a radical thrust upgrade, then ONE RD-191 may replace TWO AJ-26 on Antares.
AFAIK RD-175 was to be have about 1000t thrust,
so quarter of RD-175 means about 250t thrust.
This would mean the thrust-weight ratio of 1.04 on liftoff assuming Antares is 240t.
So it would be possible to get off the ground but the gravity losses would be terrible.
-
#1550
by
Antares
on 25 May, 2012 20:32
-
Well, to be fair to Orbital, I gather the delays at Wallops are NASA's fault rather than theirs. So you have to compare on a level playing field.
Most of the fault lies with the state-level agencies and their prime contractor. One might put Orbital at the second tier of responsibility for not managing suppliers better, and NASA at the third tier for the same reason. No one was helped by the economic downturn which limited Virginia's plan to sell bonds to help finance the build. But, none of the major players are blameless.
-
#1551
by
jnc
on 28 May, 2012 23:28
-
-
#1552
by
kanathan
on 02 Jun, 2012 19:22
-
#1 - a large purple device that is attached to the turbopump assembly (the purple color is just a key to identify it, of course - it may be made from any material). RD-181 has no such, although RD-193 does! It may be a starter. Or it may have something with the way pressurization works on Zen... er... Antares 1st stage.
That purple device looks like the preburner. The picture is too fuzzy to make out too many details, but comparing it to the AIAA RD-180 presentation could help.
-
#1553
by
Danderman
on 03 Jun, 2012 13:34
-
-
#1554
by
Prober
on 03 Jun, 2012 14:54
-
-
#1555
by
baldusi
on 04 Jun, 2012 13:34
-
Which presentation is that?
-
#1556
by
Chris Bergin
on 05 Jun, 2012 01:59
-
-
#1557
by
HIP2BSQRE
on 10 Jun, 2012 19:08
-
Hotfire scheduled for June 26th.
GREAT NEWS...
-
#1558
by
mr. mark
on 10 Jun, 2012 19:17
-
Correction Hotfire June 25th looking forward to this test and getting the Antares launch vehicle underway.
-
#1559
by
Space Pete
on 10 Jun, 2012 19:22
-
Great news! Hopefully they can get C1 moved into October.
