ATK push for US space flight independence via Liberty

[Lobo]

But once the Liberty LV is flying, could not NASA buy a launch on it, the same as they are doing with ULA and D4H for Orion's first unmanned test flight.  It wouldn't have to officially have anything to do with the commercial crew contract, would it?

If they onramp it to the NLS II contract

Please elaborate.  NLS II contract?

[Lobo]

Don't rant, FF. It'll only derail the thread.

X2!

There's so much there in that post I could go after, but won't because it will derail the thread futher.  ;-)

[Lobo]

A decision this thread will have zero impact on!

Last call for any important and previously unanswered questions before I request an interview with ATK and Mr Rominger.

I'm not sure if this is already on your question list or not, but here'd be a few questions I'd like to know.

1)  Any plans to recover the 5-seg used for Liberty?

2)  How would Liberty getting a commercial crew contract effect ATK's offer of 10 pairs of 5-seg boosters for SLS?  if at all?  Are there enough casings and nozzles for 10 pairs of SLS SRB's, plus several Liberty boosters?  How's that going to work?

3)  What would/will Liberty do when there are no more 5-seg casings left?

[Lobo]

So, after reading all of this, I suppose the question is, what is ATK’s shot at securing one of the 2.5 commercial crew awards during the downselect we are expecting this summer?

I keep going back and forth on this myself.  I think SNC has a good shot because it is a spaceplane, and I think there’s many that would be involved in the selection process that would favor that.  Would probably garner more media attention when a mini shuttle is landing at the SLF than a capsule landing in the ocean or desert.

However, Boeing seems to have a good design, and making good progress, and has a lot of experience and clout behind them.  So I really don’t see CST-100 NOT getting selected unless some catastrophic design flaw comes to light.

SpaceX is a crowd favorite, and seems to have a mixed bag of support from liberals and conservatives alike (for different reasons).  They have hardware (albeit cargo only) flying now, and I have a hard time seeing them not selected either, barring some catastrophic flaw that surfaces.

But ATK seems to be making a strong push here.  They seem to be on to a pretty good design, if you set aside all of the hate thrown at it by the anti-ATK and anti-CxP crowds.  It has potential for some synergy with Block 1B SLS for at least the first several SLS flight, as well as synergy with Orion via LM.  Seems the most likely to be launching from KSC as well, and it seems NASA wants to have other outfits utilizing KSC.  (which I’d like to see too).  They have lots of experience in the field similar to Boeing.  So I’m having a harder time not seeing them selected either.

I’ve kind of written off Blue Origin, unless I see something that pops out of left field with them.

So, there’s 4 outfits I can’t see NOT being selected, but likely only 2.5 contracts.
At least one outfit gets left out when the music stops in this game of musical chairs.  I think that would be ATK for awhile, but now, they seem to have a valid design, as well as a lot of clout. 

So who gets left out when the music stops?  I get more confused the more I look at it.

As an add on thought to this, I wonder how NASA going the Block 1A route with SLS instead of the Block 1B route would factor in?  Block 1B means SLS would likely be flying with 5-seg boosters for some time.  At least until they were all expended.  It differs the costs and upgrades of the core and advanced boosters down the road to a full Block 2 upgrade.  As I understand, the Block 1A route would only use 5-seg’s for the first couple of flights, then switch to advanced boosters (likely liquid?) by SLS-3 or something.  That means more for Liberty, but little shared costs or synergy with SLS.  I wonder if the Block 1A or Block 1B route decision would factor in to a selection of ATK for Commercial crew?  NASA either sticks with ATK and SRB’s for awhile, or they dump them and not give them a commercial crew contract, and move to liquid boosters ASAP?

Hmmm….

[spectre9]

If solids are to be selected Aerojet deserves the chance to supply them too.

SLS synergy isn't important. Competition is.

ATK should be chosen on merit not cost savings. Cost savings was the excuse they gave with the shuttle and after 30 years everybody was scratching their heads saying these SRBs aren't cheap.

[neilh]

(not a potential interview question, but a question for the forum)

I was looking through the technical report here:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=27265.0
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20110020665_2011021823.pdf

It seems that the project leads and designers for the CCM were primarily from NASA Langley and NASA Goddard, with ATK, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and others acting as manufacturers. In such a case, who owns the rights to the design? Does ATK need to license the design from NASA to use it in their commercial crew project?

[Robotbeat]

Ask about an all-solid Liberty, ala an Athena III or something.

(FWIW, this seems like the least-risky, most domestic, and least-costly approach... Can use all ATK motors for it, no need to get the Europeans involved... More ATK-heritage parts mean possibly higher overall profit...)

[phred]

My question is about the first test launch in 2014 (is it 2014?).  What, exactly, is going to fly?  A dummy upper stage?  Five segments?  Athena 3?  Etc.?

 - Ed Kyle

Is this for real?

http://space.skyrocket.de/doc_lau/liberty-tv.htm

[Robotbeat]

My question is about the first test launch in 2014 (is it 2014?).  What, exactly, is going to fly?  A dummy upper stage?  Five segments?  Athena 3?  Etc.?

 - Ed Kyle

Is this for real?

http://space.skyrocket.de/doc_lau/liberty-tv.htm

That description (of an all-solid Liberty-like LV at the Cape at 2014) is more consistent with the information I have (indirectly from sources who should know) than what was released by ATK. FWIW.

And if you think about it, if they're only starting to do metal coupon tests on the upper stage right now, there is absolutely no way they'd have the full Liberty ready to launch by 2014. Now, an all-solid rocket like on Gunter's Space Page? Much, much more realistic for the 2014 date (and, I've heard they've been very busy at the Cape getting ready for it). Much more likely to be competitive commercially, too, IMHO, than the Euro-Ares-I.

[Downix]

My question is about the first test launch in 2014 (is it 2014?).  What, exactly, is going to fly?  A dummy upper stage?  Five segments?  Athena 3?  Etc.?

 - Ed Kyle

Is this for real?

http://space.skyrocket.de/doc_lau/liberty-tv.htm

That description (of an all-solid Liberty-like LV at the Cape at 2014) is more consistent with the information I have (indirectly from sources who should know) than what was released by ATK. FWIW.

And if you think about it, if they're only starting to do metal coupon tests on the upper stage right now, there is absolutely no way they'd have the full Liberty ready to launch by 2014. Now, an all-solid rocket like on Gunter's Space Page? Much, much more realistic for the 2014 date (and, I've heard they've been very busy at the Cape getting ready for it). Much more likely to be competitive commercially, too, IMHO, than the Euro-Ares-I.

Many of the systems for the upper stage are also being developed for the Antares as well (for the Castor 30XL, which shares systems with the Castor 120 in this). This is an Athena III for all intents and purposes, but it also allows the Liberty to be tested at the same time. A win-win for all involved, and a solution I whole heartedly endorse.

I am more in shock that ATK is doing this, as it is what I'd suggested they persue over a year ago as the ideal path forward for them. Although I did not anticipate the Ariane 5 upper stage for Liberty.

[Lars_J]

My question is about the first test launch in 2014 (is it 2014?).  What, exactly, is going to fly?  A dummy upper stage?  Five segments?  Athena 3?  Etc.?

 - Ed Kyle

Is this for real?

http://space.skyrocket.de/doc_lau/liberty-tv.htm

If so, that seems like significant detour towards Liberty. Not the fastest approach. Primarily due to the 3-segment SRB. (!!!) Why? The 5-segment appears to be close to being ready, so why in the world start with a 3-segment?

[Downix]

My question is about the first test launch in 2014 (is it 2014?).  What, exactly, is going to fly?  A dummy upper stage?  Five segments?  Athena 3?  Etc.?

 - Ed Kyle

Is this for real?

http://space.skyrocket.de/doc_lau/liberty-tv.htm

If so, that seems like significant detour towards Liberty. Not the fastest approach. Primarily due to the 3-segment SRB. (!!!) Why? The 5-segment appears to be close to being ready, so why in the world start with a 3-segment?

Part of the 5-segment redesign included being able to scale the design from 1 segment to 5 segments without significant change. Flying a 3-segment version would validate this work, making the final product more versatile.

[sdsds]

Ed will undoubtedly have some comment on this. It is essentially "old news," as it matches the ATK COTS configuration he describes at http://www.spacelaunchreport.com/atkcots.html. He wrote, "On January 21, 2008, ATK released some details of its proposed COTS launch vehicle to NASASpaceFlight, Florida Today, and several other space media services."

(http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=11539)

[phred]

The one on Gunter's page is a little different.  There are 3 first stage segments (as opposed to 2.5), and 2 Castor 120 upper stages (as opposed to a Castor 120 and a Castor 30).  It also says "it might act as a developmental vehicle for Athena III."

It struck me as odd: 2 identical upper stages.

In any case, I'd like to see this thing fly from 39B in 2014.

[baldusi]

Going all solid would allow the use of Kodiak. Which is interesting because ATK had stated that they expected to compete for DoD's LEO needs with Liberty.

[Lars_J]

Going all solid would allow the use of Kodiak. Which is interesting because ATK had stated that they expected to compete for DoD's LEO needs with Liberty.

I'm having a hard time imagining the infrastructure required to operate the SRB (even if only 3 segments) up at Kodiak.

[baldusi]

But compare that to adding the infrastructure to transport and fuel the EPC. I still believe they should use VAFB. But maybe, if Alaska is willing to fund at least part of the bill, they might go there. That's why I wanted that question specifically answered.

[zerm]

So.. just how far OT is this going to go? This is nonsense.

[Jim]

  Note that the rail-to-ship-to-shore segment transport method was planned for Vandenberg Shuttle too.

Huh?   Solids were all rail to VAFB and ET was by ship.

[Lurker Steve]

As long as we are talking Alaska, What about the issue with segmented solids and cold temps ? Weren't there thermal constraints with Shuttle launches due to the O-rings ? That O-rings design was changed, but they still exist in the 5-seg boosters, right ? Cold temps not an issue anymore ??

I understand global warming, but it still gets cold in Alasks, right ?