Upper stage throw mass.This is where cryogenic LH2 stages come into their own.Centaur beats Briz-M easily.The cost is another matter entirely.
Among other issues, the Proton only has a 4.1m fairing, so the maximum internal diameter of a heat shield would be 3.7m. The Atlas V has 5.2m fairing, with an internal diameter of 4.65m. Keeping everything else the same, they have 35% less mass if you keep the heat shield surface to payload mass constant.
I was under the impression (according to Anatoly Zak, at least) that the ExoMars launches would be using the Blok DM-03. Have I missed something?
According tohttp://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=26990.135,there are at least three future launches of the Proton-Blok DM planned out through 2015.IIRC, one of the initial Russian objections was that they themselves no longer used this vehicle for Lunar & Planetary missions.
So it's ESA that want them to use it on these missions rather than the Russian side?
Proton is now the choice for Spektr-UF though with Briz-Mhttp://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=26990.msg891784#msg891784
AFAIK, Proton-M/Briz-M is rated at 5500 kg capability for lunar missions, whereas the old Proton-K/Block-D was used to send 5800 kg Zonds to the Moon; Proton-M should be much more capable for these missions, but I don't know why the official capability is less.
This is bit of a beat up I think. Atlas was supposed to carry both MAX-C and ExoMars, Proton, which can send ~4 tonnes to Mars should be able to handle ExoMars, which has a rover mass of ~300 kg.The statement may apply to the 2016 mission, with an orbiter of ~3 tonnes, a 600 kg test lander, and an unknown Russian lander, together this would be getting near the limit.
In February 2012, following NASA's withrawal,the ESA went back to previous designs for a smaller rover,[3] once calculated to be 207 kg. Instrumentation will consist of the exobiology laboratory suite, known as "Pasteur analytical laboratory" to look for signs of past or present life - or biosignatures.[1][4][5][6] Among other instruments, the rover will also carry a 2 metres (6.6 ft) sub-surface drill to pull up samples for its on-board laboratory.[7]
It is not a real re-design, it is only going back to the drawings before the joint rover time. The rover design is now very similar to the one in 2009. I know this from some TAS-I meetings to accommodate instruments in the ALD.
Quote from: stone on 09/27/2012 03:29 pmIt is not a real re-design, it is only going back to the drawings before the joint rover time. The rover design is now very similar to the one in 2009. I know this from some TAS-I meetings to accommodate instruments in the ALD. Thanks for that. Has there been any particular loss of science through returning to this 2009 design?
Quote from: Star One on 09/29/2012 05:49 pmQuote from: stone on 09/27/2012 03:29 pmIt is not a real re-design, it is only going back to the drawings before the joint rover time. The rover design is now very similar to the one in 2009. I know this from some TAS-I meetings to accommodate instruments in the ALD. Thanks for that. Has there been any particular loss of science through returning to this 2009 design?We lost two instruments and all their science. Rover payload is smaller now.We lost 400 or 500 days of science. The mission is 180 days and not two years.We lost all the instruments on the US side of the ExoMars-MaxC rover. We got in real trouble because there is still instrument participation of Goddard and everything called Exomars should have been canceled.There is still changes within Exomars because the contracts with Russia are still under negotiation.
European Space Agency member states have approved the agreement that would see Russia take significant roles in Red Planet missions in 2016 and 2018.
I bet considering what has happened of late with the Briz-M that ESA are rather glad they are using the Blok DM-03.
Quote from: Star One on 12/09/2012 03:27 pmI bet considering what has happened of late with the Briz-M that ESA are rather glad they are using the Blok DM-03.Block DM is the upper stage that launched Mars-96 and Astra-1K... Europe has not good memories with this one !
Proton-M to be orderedhttp://zakupki.gov.ru/pgz/public/action/orders/info/common_info/show?notificationId=5368033
Quote from: Stan Black on 02/03/2013 06:07 pmProton-M to be orderedhttp://zakupki.gov.ru/pgz/public/action/orders/info/common_info/show?notificationId=5368033Thanks for that link. It's good to see a concrete move like this.
Quote from: Star One on 02/04/2013 05:30 pmQuote from: Stan Black on 02/03/2013 06:07 pmProton-M to be orderedhttp://zakupki.gov.ru/pgz/public/action/orders/info/common_info/show?notificationId=5368033Thanks for that link. It's good to see a concrete move like this.Thought that rocket looked like a bargain; price has been revised from 1 399 625 400,00 Российский рубльto1 509 826 000,00 Российский рубль
I know it's a while down the road yet but what impact will this Proton failure have on ESA & the Protons used on ExoMars, do they already have the right to carry out their own full inspections of the vehicles?
Quote from: Star One on 07/04/2013 07:30 pmI know it's a while down the road yet but what impact will this Proton failure have on ESA & the Protons used on ExoMars, do they already have the right to carry out their own full inspections of the vehicles?No impact. By that time Proton will be flying like nothing had happened.