ATK/EADS: Liberty Launch Vehicle Update Thread

[simonbp]

So, in proving that the re-designed Vulcain 2 would not suffer the original failure (buckling under flight loads), it coincidentaly proved itself to be capable of air-start.

Heh, that's pretty cool, actually.

WRT load paths, it's not too much of an issue, as the Ariane's boosters attach at the bottom anyway, so it's mostly transparent to the upper stage.

[Jim]

So, in proving that the re-designed Vulcain 2 would not suffer the original failure (buckling under flight loads), it coincidentaly proved itself to be capable of air-start.

Heh, that's pretty cool, actually.

WRT load paths, it's not too much of an issue, as the Ariane's boosters attach at the bottom anyway, so it's mostly transparent to the upper stage.

It was nozzle loads

[baldusi]

WRT load paths, it's not too much of an issue, as the Ariane's boosters attach at the bottom anyway, so it's mostly transparent to the upper stage.

Are you sure? I've always read that they attach to the interstage between the core and second stage.

[Chris Bergin]

We'll be covering this in an article tomorrow when they release the information on the development.

bumping article as reminder

Will be hosted on a new thread (cross linked into here).

There will also be a L2 thread for non released source information and contnet.

[AnalogMan]

Use this thread for the article and presser:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=28840.0

[woods170]

WRT load paths, it's not too much of an issue, as the Ariane's boosters attach at the bottom anyway, so it's mostly transparent to the upper stage.

Are you sure? I've always read that they attach to the interstage between the core and second stage.

Simonbp had it wrong. Thrust of the EAP (SRB's) is transferred to the Ariane 5 core stage (EPC) thru the forward skirt of the EAC. Ariane 5 lifts primarily from the top, during the SRB-phase. It becomes a dedicated bottom-lifter after the EAP's are dropped, but by that time the EPC still retains roughly 75% of it's lift-off weight.
It means that the structure of the EPC is optimized to handle loads from both the top (pull) and the bottom (push). In that sense it is actually better suited for Liberty then I previously figured. The EPC stage will require only moderate reinforcement to handle the all-push loads of Liberty.

[mrmandias]

The price they are quoting is very promising.

[sdsds]

I assert that for a launch vehicle designed to support human spaceflight, thrust oscillation is never a problem. Because for that one in a million time when the launch vehicle experiences TO, the crew will safely abort off the launcher.

Oh. Right. For that logic to work the abort must always be safe.

[Bob Shaw]

"Those of you who think ATK is the spawn of satin..."

...well, I agree! That's one seXXXy rocket!

[Jason1701]

The price they are quoting is very promising.

What is the quote?

[Downix]

The price they are quoting is very promising.

What is the quote?

Last price I'd heard was $160 million per, but that is without crew capsule.  Using their current presentation and some math-fu, I get a crewed launch at around $280 million.

[arkaska]

The price they are quoting is very promising.

What is the quote?

Last price I'd heard was $160 million per, but that is without crew capsule.  Using their current presentation and some math-fu, I get a crewed launch at around $280 million.

What I have heard is less then $60 million / seat (price for Soyuz seat). Since Liberty can take 7 people that is a total price of less then $420 million which I think is realistic.

[Downix]

The price they are quoting is very promising.

What is the quote?

Last price I'd heard was $160 million per, but that is without crew capsule.  Using their current presentation and some math-fu, I get a crewed launch at around $280 million.

What I have heard is less then $60 million / seat (price for Soyuz seat). Since Liberty can take 7 people that is a total price of less then $420 million which I think is realistic.

$160 + $280 = $440, so we're both in the same ballpark.  And yes, I'd count is as quite realistic.

[arkaska]

The interesting discussion is NASAs interest in 7 seats since ISS can only hold 4 USOS crew members. If NASA only require 4 seats Liberty (the same is true for the other contenders) it might end up being more then $60million/ seat

[QuantumG]

The interesting discussion is NASAs interest in 7 seats since ISS can only hold 4 USOS crew members. If NASA only require 4 seats Liberty (the same is true for the other contenders) it might end up being more then $60million/ seat

Also, in response to one of the questions they indicated they need 4 flights per year with that many seats to beat the Soyuz price.. it seems SpaceX set that low bar.

[Go4TLI]

The interesting discussion is NASAs interest in 7 seats since ISS can only hold 4 USOS crew members. If NASA only require 4 seats Liberty (the same is true for the other contenders) it might end up being more then $60million/ seat

It's not a coincidence that all potential contenders are designing for up to 7 seats. 

[jongoff]

The interesting discussion is NASAs interest in 7 seats since ISS can only hold 4 USOS crew members. If NASA only require 4 seats Liberty (the same is true for the other contenders) it might end up being more then $60million/ seat

Also, in response to one of the questions they indicated they need 4 flights per year with that many seats to beat the Soyuz price.. it seems SpaceX set that low bar.

At least when Gwynne talked at Space Access, I thought she made it clear that they were saying they could beat the old $20M/seat price if they sold four full flights per year. Not the $60M/seat current price ATK is shooting for. Both numbers should be taken with a grain of salt of course.

~Jon

[QuantumG]

At least when Gwynne talked at Space Access, I thought she made it clear that they were saying they could beat the old $20M/seat price if they sold four full flights per year. Not the $60M/seat current price ATK is shooting for. Both numbers should be taken with a grain of salt of course.

Yeah, but when talking to Congress Elon said only "beat the Russian price" with 4x7. When you consider that the question posed to everyone in attendance was 2x4, only ULA answered the question.

Maybe during CCiCap we'll actually find out what it is NASA wants to buy, but I doubt it

[edkyle99]

Liberty is strong on performance - it lifts many more tonnes than any of its announced competitors -  but that may be its Achilles heel.  More performance means a bigger rocket, which requires more money.  In the end, Liberty is too powerful for the ISS taxi mission.

I wonder why ATK didn't go with a smaller rocket, powered by fewer motor segments. 

 - Ed Kyle

[docmordrid]

Because they want to compete for missions that would otherwise go to Delta IV?