-
Antares on Sea Launch (Armchair Engineering)
by
arachnitect
on 31 Dec, 2012 21:35
-
Idle Speculation (why should SpaceX threads have all the fun?):
Antares first stage is in same family as Zenit-3SL; dimensions are same or smaller.
Antares is integrated horizontally and erected at pad as required by Sea Launch operations.
Antares is advertised as a "Delta II" class vehicle but doesn't have a polar orbit capability (required for many or most potential Antares payloads). There are difficulties associated with all west coast launch site options; Vandenberg is crowded, Kodiak has logistical and environmental constraints, and Kwajalein is worse than Kodiak. Sea Launch would offer all inclinations and a minor performance boost for low inclination orbits (or GSO if Orbital wants to develop that capability for Antares). Sea Launch would probably appreciate spreading their fixed costs over more launches.
I'm just curious how much effort would be required to adapt Odyssey and Sea Launch Commander. New launch mount and strongback would be needed, probably a HIF at Long Beach as well.
There's a million reasons this wouldn't work; what are the technical showstoppers?
-
#1
by
Prober
on 03 Jan, 2013 18:19
-
Idle Speculation (why should SpaceX threads have all the fun?):
Antares first stage is in same family as Zenit-3SL; dimensions are same or smaller.
Antares is integrated horizontally and erected at pad as required by Sea Launch operations.
Antares is advertised as a "Delta II" class vehicle but doesn't have a polar orbit capability (required for many or most potential Antares payloads). There are difficulties associated with all west coast launch site options; Vandenberg is crowded, Kodiak has logistical and environmental constraints, and Kwajalein is worse than Kodiak. Sea Launch would offer all inclinations and a minor performance boost for low inclination orbits (or GSO if Orbital wants to develop that capability for Antares). Sea Launch would probably appreciate spreading their fixed costs over more launches.
I'm just curious how much effort would be required to adapt Odyssey and Sea Launch Commander. New launch mount and strongback would be needed, probably a HIF at Long Beach as well.
There's a million reasons this wouldn't work; what are the technical showstoppers?
I got a better one to have "fun" with.....talks fail and Russia is forced to move all its launches to "Russia".
Ukraine or Orbital or both teamed up talk about using the Zenit launch pads of Land launch. Only difference is using Aerojet engines.
How is that for a fun idea?
-
#2
by
Jim
on 03 Jan, 2013 18:32
-
1. Antares is integrated horizontally and erected at pad as required by Sea Launch operations.
2. Antares is advertised as a "Delta II" class vehicle but doesn't have a polar orbit capability (required for many or most potential Antares payloads).
3. There are difficulties associated with all west coast launch site options; Vandenberg is crowded,
4. Sea Launch would probably appreciate spreading their fixed costs over more launches.
1. The solid motor second stage may cause issues
2. Sun synchronous orbits are obtainable from WFF>
3. Not really. There are places for a pad.
4. There isn't really available slots for other launches. Also, doubt the pad and LCC could be dual compatible.
-
#3
by
Jim
on 03 Jan, 2013 18:34
-
1. I got a better one to have "fun" with.....talks fail and Russia is forced to move all its launches to "Russia".
Ukraine or Orbital or both teamed up talk about using the Zenit launch pads of Land launch.
3. Only difference is using Aerojet engines.
1. There is nothing that would force the move
2. No benefit to Orbital or Ukraine.
3. There are more differences
-
#4
by
Prober
on 04 Jan, 2013 03:36
-
1. I got a better one to have "fun" with.....talks fail and Russia is forced to move all its launches to "Russia".
Ukraine or Orbital or both teamed up talk about using the Zenit launch pads of Land launch.
3. Only difference is using Aerojet engines.
1. There is nothing that would force the move
2. No benefit to Orbital or Ukraine.
3. There are more differences
Kazakhstan mulls ending Russia's cosmodrome lease
http://news.yahoo.com/kazakhstan-mulls-ending-russias-cosmodrome-lease-075818121.html
-
#5
by
Jim
on 04 Jan, 2013 13:14
-
1. I got a better one to have "fun" with.....talks fail and Russia is forced to move all its launches to "Russia".
Ukraine or Orbital or both teamed up talk about using the Zenit launch pads of Land launch.
3. Only difference is using Aerojet engines.
1. There is nothing that would force the move
2. No benefit to Orbital or Ukraine.
3. There are more differences
Kazakhstan mulls ending Russia's cosmodrome lease
And how does that change what I said.
That doesn't affect Sealaunch
The Land launch pads won't be available to them
-
#6
by
Prober
on 04 Jan, 2013 14:27
-
1. I got a better one to have "fun" with.....talks fail and Russia is forced to move all its launches to "Russia".
Ukraine or Orbital or both teamed up talk about using the Zenit launch pads of Land launch.
3. Only difference is using Aerojet engines.
1. There is nothing that would force the move
2. No benefit to Orbital or Ukraine.
3. There are more differences
Kazakhstan mulls ending Russia's cosmodrome lease
And how does that change what I said.
That doesn't affect Sealaunch
The Land launch pads won't be available to them
That is up to the Kazakhstan gov to say. Note I didn't say SeaLaunch, I said Landlaunch.
SeaLaunch will prob go with a pure Russian rocket in the future. Sure that might be a fight Russia vs Ukraine. This IMHO, is only a few years off.
-
#7
by
Jim
on 04 Jan, 2013 15:06
-
That is up to the Kazakhstan gov to say. Note I didn't say SeaLaunch, I said Landlaunch.
SeaLaunch will prob go with a pure Russian rocket in the future. Sure that might be a fight Russia vs Ukraine. This IMHO, is only a few years off.
Same company. And no, Sealaunch is not going to a pure Russian rocket. The whole concept is built around the Zenit.
-
#8
by
strangequark
on 04 Jan, 2013 16:45
-
That is up to the Kazakhstan gov to say. Note I didn't say SeaLaunch, I said Landlaunch.
SeaLaunch will prob go with a pure Russian rocket in the future. Sure that might be a fight Russia vs Ukraine. This IMHO, is only a few years off.
The Ukrainians are more open to selling their tech, and generally easier to work with. Russia has been getting more conservative about exporting their technology, and more nationalistic, in recent years. As documented in the Antares thread, this would be the reason using the RD-0124 on Antares fell through. Russia is no longer the cash-starved post-Soviet rump state of the mid-90s that joined with US firms on ILS and RD-180.
To stay on topic, Orbital has an existing presence at Vandenburg, Kodiak, and Kwaj. There's not much benefit to trying to tackle SeaLaunch versus a new pad at one of those three sites.
-
#9
by
Robotbeat
on 04 Jan, 2013 18:35
-
If Kazakhstan ended the Cosmodrome lease, Russia may just invade them. Seriously, they may.
More likely, they'll exert geopolitical influence (and their sizable intelligence capability) to keep the lease going.
-
#10
by
Lars_J
on 04 Jan, 2013 19:06
-
If Kazakhstan ended the Cosmodrome lease, Russia may just invade them. Seriously, they may.
More likely, they'll exert geopolitical influence (and their sizable intelligence capability) to keep the lease going.
Or maybe they would finally get their butts in gear and finish Vostochny Cosmodrome. (which they have started constructing, finally)
-
#11
by
krytek
on 05 Jan, 2013 22:44
-
If Kazakhstan ended the Cosmodrome lease, Russia may just invade them. Seriously, they may.
More likely, they'll exert geopolitical influence (and their sizable intelligence capability) to keep the lease going.
Kazakhstan isn't Georgia. Look it up on a map, bad idea.
As above, there are other places to build a cosmodrome.
-
#12
by
Robotbeat
on 06 Jan, 2013 00:34
-
If Kazakhstan ended the Cosmodrome lease, Russia may just invade them. Seriously, they may.
More likely, they'll exert geopolitical influence (and their sizable intelligence capability) to keep the lease going.
Kazakhstan isn't Georgia. Look it up on a map, bad idea.
As above, there are other places to build a cosmodrome.
Touche, I had somehow got it in my mind that the Cosmodrome was right on the border with Russia. Definitely isn't, and invasion isn't anything like a realistic option at this point in history. But the other methods of influence are still very much in play.
-
#13
by
arachnitect
on 06 Jan, 2013 01:08
-
1. Antares is integrated horizontally and erected at pad as required by Sea Launch operations.
2. Antares is advertised as a "Delta II" class vehicle but doesn't have a polar orbit capability (required for many or most potential Antares payloads).
3. There are difficulties associated with all west coast launch site options; Vandenberg is crowded,
4. Sea Launch would probably appreciate spreading their fixed costs over more launches.
1. The solid motor second stage may cause issues
2. Sun synchronous orbits are obtainable from WFF>
3. Not really. There are places for a pad.
4. There isn't really available slots for other launches. Also, doubt the pad and LCC could be dual compatible.
I didn't know SSO were available from Wallops. If there isn't a big performance penalty, we'd probably never see a west coast Anatares at all.
-
#14
by
zaitcev
on 09 Jan, 2013 00:47
-
And no, Sealaunch is not going to a pure Russian rocket.
You think? Not if Mr. Lopota has anything to say about it. The only little problem that's holding up his plans is the lack of actual rocket factory under his control (his own factory is too small). How do you know he's not repurposing an abandoned warehouse right as we type this?
-
#15
by
Prober
on 09 Jan, 2013 11:57
-
And no, Sealaunch is not going to a pure Russian rocket.
You think? Not if Mr. Lopota has anything to say about it. The only little problem that's holding up his plans is the lack of actual rocket factory under his control (his own factory is too small). How do you know he's not repurposing an abandoned warehouse right as we type this?
Which firm does Mr. Lopota work for? Don't you think Ukraine as a Sea Launch Partner will be upset if all russian rocket is used?
-
#16
by
baldusi
on 09 Jan, 2013 15:04
-
Mr. Lapota is Energia's president. The current owner of Sea Launch. And they have been dreaming of replacing the Zenit with their own Energia-K. Une interesting point is, that for those dimensions I've seen, they were using 4.1m instead of Zenit's 3.9m. Since That's Proton's core size, and Krushinev is moving to the Angara's 2.9m, he might have hopes of buying the used tooling?
In any case, 4.1m is the maximum you can transport by train if you have exclusive use of the tracks (you can't have another train coming the other way).
-
#17
by
Prober
on 10 Jan, 2013 11:55
-
Mr. Lapota is Energia's president. The current owner of Sea Launch. And they have been dreaming of replacing the Zenit with their own Energia-K. Une interesting point is, that for those dimensions I've seen, they were using 4.1m instead of Zenit's 3.9m. Since That's Proton's core size, and Krushinev is moving to the Angara's 2.9m, he might have hopes of buying the used tooling?
In any case, 4.1m is the maximum you can transport by train if you have exclusive use of the tracks (you can't have another train coming the other way).
interesting, kinda thought one version of Angara was planned for SeaLaunch.
-
#18
by
Jim
on 10 Jan, 2013 12:59
-
interesting, kinda thought one version of Angara was planned for SeaLaunch.
Wrong contractor