ATK must see the handwriting on the wall and knows that NASA prefers replacing the SRB’s for SLS with liquid boosters in the long term. That being said, the only way for them to stay in the game with solids is to build their own LV.
Quote from: zerm on 06/21/2012 09:16 pmQuote from: jongoff on 06/21/2012 09:01 pmQuote from: zerm on 06/21/2012 10:43 amThe part that caught my ear was that ATK will absolutely press ahead, on their own funds, to operational status even if they are not picked by NASA for CCDEV. He sounded very clear on that point. I get the impression that this vehicle IS coming no matter what. The only snag is that it will take a bit longer (I think he said a couple of years) without NASA funding. These guys are going to bank-roll it themselves, build their own LUT, test it and start flying. Critics may scoff at ATK and say that this is all just boasting, or PR to try and woo NASA, but these ATK people are not playing a game here. They are leveraging STS hardware, they have invested a lot of cash, partnered with overseas folks and they fully intend to make this happen.My only question is if you would take an identical claim from Elon or Boeing, or SNC with the same level of faith. It's really easy to claim you're going to do something on your own dime even if you don't get funding. I've seen enough companies (NewSpace and OldSpace) and space agencies make big claims and then back down on them later. Call me a skeptic who'd love to be proven wrong, but claims are cheap, hardware isn't.~JonYes I would take such a claim with exactly equal weight. Interestingly enough, so would I. It would just involve a pretty large grain of salt.~Jon
Quote from: jongoff on 06/21/2012 09:01 pmQuote from: zerm on 06/21/2012 10:43 amThe part that caught my ear was that ATK will absolutely press ahead, on their own funds, to operational status even if they are not picked by NASA for CCDEV. He sounded very clear on that point. I get the impression that this vehicle IS coming no matter what. The only snag is that it will take a bit longer (I think he said a couple of years) without NASA funding. These guys are going to bank-roll it themselves, build their own LUT, test it and start flying. Critics may scoff at ATK and say that this is all just boasting, or PR to try and woo NASA, but these ATK people are not playing a game here. They are leveraging STS hardware, they have invested a lot of cash, partnered with overseas folks and they fully intend to make this happen.My only question is if you would take an identical claim from Elon or Boeing, or SNC with the same level of faith. It's really easy to claim you're going to do something on your own dime even if you don't get funding. I've seen enough companies (NewSpace and OldSpace) and space agencies make big claims and then back down on them later. Call me a skeptic who'd love to be proven wrong, but claims are cheap, hardware isn't.~JonYes I would take such a claim with exactly equal weight.
Quote from: zerm on 06/21/2012 10:43 amThe part that caught my ear was that ATK will absolutely press ahead, on their own funds, to operational status even if they are not picked by NASA for CCDEV. He sounded very clear on that point. I get the impression that this vehicle IS coming no matter what. The only snag is that it will take a bit longer (I think he said a couple of years) without NASA funding. These guys are going to bank-roll it themselves, build their own LUT, test it and start flying. Critics may scoff at ATK and say that this is all just boasting, or PR to try and woo NASA, but these ATK people are not playing a game here. They are leveraging STS hardware, they have invested a lot of cash, partnered with overseas folks and they fully intend to make this happen.My only question is if you would take an identical claim from Elon or Boeing, or SNC with the same level of faith. It's really easy to claim you're going to do something on your own dime even if you don't get funding. I've seen enough companies (NewSpace and OldSpace) and space agencies make big claims and then back down on them later. Call me a skeptic who'd love to be proven wrong, but claims are cheap, hardware isn't.~Jon
The part that caught my ear was that ATK will absolutely press ahead, on their own funds, to operational status even if they are not picked by NASA for CCDEV. He sounded very clear on that point. I get the impression that this vehicle IS coming no matter what. The only snag is that it will take a bit longer (I think he said a couple of years) without NASA funding. These guys are going to bank-roll it themselves, build their own LUT, test it and start flying. Critics may scoff at ATK and say that this is all just boasting, or PR to try and woo NASA, but these ATK people are not playing a game here. They are leveraging STS hardware, they have invested a lot of cash, partnered with overseas folks and they fully intend to make this happen.
Not at all. The contradiction, if any, comes from Charles Bolden, himself. I sat in a briefing with him as he explained that there is very little technological advancement left available from chemical propulsion from the ground to LEO (possibly a few extra 1 or 2 % improvement) yet at the same time he was willing to spend billions with a B (I believe he said 8b) to “see” if liquid boosters should replace solids. It may be a safety issue more than a thrust or cost issue but there is a definite leaning toward liquid.
And I do agree with you that there seems to be an adoration toward liquid until the bill comes (billions) and I think ATK is using Liberty as Plan B if they lose the solids on SLS block 1a, 1b or 2.
Over in the SLS threads, there is discussion that there exists enough parts for 10 sets of 5 segment boosters. Are these leftover shuttle SRB segments ? Is the Liberty program using the same set of casings as the SLS program ? Is it possible that Liberty would reduce the number of possible SLS block 1 or 1B flights ? Now that would ( or should) generate some negative feedback from NASA and Congress.
I will say that ATK is at the Cape and has been working on getting ready for their (currently planned) 2014 launch, but we shall see if they actually do get a launch off in 2014, and if it's something like Liberty as they presented it or if it's closer to an Athena III-sort of vehicle.
Big advancement is available for the SLS solids, because they use late 1970s steel-casing PBAN technology. Solid rocket state of the art is much advanced from those days, with composite cases, higher pressures, and higher specific impulse. Advanced composite boosters would add tens of tonnes LEO payload to SLS. They would also give Liberty a big jump in performance.
It is liquid engine technology that hasn't advanced much since Shuttle was born. SSME is still the world's most advanced, most efficient liquid rocket engine. RL-10 still holds the top spot for upper stage engines that are actually flying. 1960s and 70s, those. - Ed Kyle
Quote from: Lurker Steve on 06/22/2012 01:32 amOver in the SLS threads, there is discussion that there exists enough parts for 10 sets of 5 segment boosters. Are these leftover shuttle SRB segments ? Is the Liberty program using the same set of casings as the SLS program ? Is it possible that Liberty would reduce the number of possible SLS block 1 or 1B flights ? Now that would ( or should) generate some negative feedback from NASA and Congress.Here are some flight worthy Aft Skirts on Ransom road (basically a trash depot) at Kennedy Space Center rotting in the sun.
News Release Issued: June 28, 2012 9:00 AM EDTLiberty second stage one step closer to production<snip>A film from the Astrium site in les Mureaux, near Paris (France), shows the work done to complete the stage testing. It shows the machining, forming, computerized automatic welding and inspection of cryogenic tank elements to provide the increased thickness and stiffened profiles necessary for the Liberty second stage. An additional tank panel of increased thickness is welded and tested in a cryogenic environment at the Euro Cryospace facilities (an Astrium and Air Liquide joint-venture). These successful tests demonstrate that Astrium's manufacturing technology has the capability to process panels that are several times thicker than those of Ariane 5. These panels meet the needs for the strengthened cryogenic tanks of Liberty's second stage.
Quote from: jacqmans on 06/28/2012 01:43 pmNews Release Issued: June 28, 2012 9:00 AM EDTLiberty second stage one step closer to production<snip>A film from the Astrium site in les Mureaux, near Paris (France), shows the work done to complete the stage testing. It shows the machining, forming, computerized automatic welding and inspection of cryogenic tank elements to provide the increased thickness and stiffened profiles necessary for the Liberty second stage. An additional tank panel of increased thickness is welded and tested in a cryogenic environment at the Euro Cryospace facilities (an Astrium and Air Liquide joint-venture). These successful tests demonstrate that Astrium's manufacturing technology has the capability to process panels that are several times thicker than those of Ariane 5. These panels meet the needs for the strengthened cryogenic tanks of Liberty's second stage.A few notes:Well, that nicely confirms the suspicion that the Ariane 5 core stage needed some serious reinforcement in order to fly as the Liberty upper stage. "Panels that are several times thicker than those on Ariane 5"? That constitutes a major increase in the stage's dry-mass and lessen it's overall efficiency. Vulcain 2 will be hauling more stage-metal and less payload. That will be the case anyway, because the equipment needed to start-up Vulcain 2 will have to be carried on the Liberty upper stage as well, unless they plan on turning the upper stage into a 'fire in the hole'-stage. In that case the equipment could be located on the first stage. On Ariane 5 that equipment is mostly GSE.
From the video I eye balled it at a 50% thicker panel. To be frank, that's very little increase for the sort of machines they showed. I'm not very impressed with that certification. Not that it's not critical, but seems like much ado about nothing to me.It might mean a lot worse fmp, though.
Quote from: jacqmans on 06/28/2012 01:43 pmNews Release Issued: June 28, 2012 9:00 AM EDTLiberty second stage one step closer to production<snip>A film from the Astrium site in les Mureaux, near Paris (France), shows the work done to complete the stage testing. It shows the machining, forming, computerized automatic welding and inspection of cryogenic tank elements to provide the increased thickness and stiffened profiles necessary for the Liberty second stage. An additional tank panel of increased thickness is welded and tested in a cryogenic environment at the Euro Cryospace facilities (an Astrium and Air Liquide joint-venture). These successful tests demonstrate that Astrium's manufacturing technology has the capability to process panels that are several times thicker than those of Ariane 5. These panels meet the needs for the strengthened cryogenic tanks of Liberty's second stage.A few notes:Well, that nicely confirms the suspicion that the Ariane 5 core stage needed some serious reinforcement in order to fly as the Liberty upper stage. "Panels that are several times thicker than those on Ariane 5"? That constitutes a major increase in the stage's dry-mass and lessen it's overall efficiency. Vulcain 2 will be hauling more stage-metal and less payload. That will be the case anyway, because the equipment needed to start-up Vulcain 2 will have to be carried on the Liberty upper stage as well, unless they plan on turning the upper stage into a 'fire in the hole'-stage. In that case the equipment could be located on the first stage. On Ariane 5 that equipment is mostly GSE.Edit: quick measuring from the video shows the panel to be at least 60% thicker. That will add several metric tons of additional weight when compared to the Ariane-5 core stage
Quote from: baldusi on 06/28/2012 03:54 pmFrom the video I eye balled it at a 50% thicker panel. To be frank, that's very little increase for the sort of machines they showed. I'm not very impressed with that certification. Not that it's not critical, but seems like much ado about nothing to me.It might mean a lot worse fmp, though.1) There are a few people on here who can run the numbers. I suspect it won't be long before we start seeing some (gu)estimates.2) But, like Robotbeat said: this rocket is moving beyond Powerpoint. I don't like this Ares-1-zombie, but hey, new hardware is always interesting to watch.
Well, that nicely confirms the suspicion that the Ariane 5 core stage needed some serious reinforcement in order to fly as the Liberty upper stage.
Quote from: woods170 on 06/28/2012 03:34 pmWell, that nicely confirms the suspicion that the Ariane 5 core stage needed some serious reinforcement in order to fly as the Liberty upper stage. In addition to the CNC comments above, wont astrium be able to shave weight in other areas due to not needing reinforcement for the A5 srbs?
