-
#40
by
Prober
on 01 May, 2013 16:58
-
In my opinion, planned cessation of production of RD0110 in Russia - a good reason for license purchase.
good thinking Dmitry.
-
#41
by
russianhalo117
on 01 May, 2013 17:02
-
In my opinion, planned cessation of production of RD0110 in Russia - a good reason for license purchase.
good thinking Dmitry.
I agree, but would Russia allow and agree to license purchase of RD-0110 engine and would their be issues raised regarding ITAR.
-
#42
by
Dmitry_V_home
on 01 May, 2013 17:07
-
I agree, but would Russia allow and agree to license purchase of RD-0110 engine and would their be issues raised regarding ITAR.
Well, Russia already sold NK-33 and RD-180 engines in the USA. Why to it also not to sell RD0110, having money from its license production?
-
#43
by
Dmitry_V_home
on 03 May, 2013 19:21
-
-
#44
by
baldusi
on 03 May, 2013 21:01
-
You really should get L2. There's some amazing info directly from senior officials from OSC regarding the Stratolauncher and how it could help the Antares.
-
#45
by
zaitcev
on 11 May, 2013 02:47
-
You really should get L2. There's some amazing info directly from senior officials from OSC regarding the Stratolauncher and how it could help the Antares.
Oh shiny God in the Sky please no solid boosters
-
#46
by
floss
on 29 Jun, 2013 15:54
-
How about adding a third nk 33 on the first stage and a reusable upper stage with an inflatable heat shield.What shut down Kistler was lack of money not technical problems.
-
#47
by
Dmitry_V_home
on 01 Jul, 2013 17:09
-
How about adding a third nk 33 on the first stage and a reusable upper stage with an inflatable heat shield.What shut down Kistler was lack of money not technical problems.
In my opinion, such change in a design of the rocket won't pay off because of high expenses and low rate of starts.
Let's ask about it doctor Antonio Elias
-
#48
by
floss
on 02 Jul, 2013 12:18
-
I am not talking about a fast modification a slow evolution one step at a time . I honestly thing orbital have scored an ace with that rocket .See how slow it rose off the pad nice smooth launch with low G,s .
-
#49
by
Jim
on 02 Jul, 2013 12:28
-
I am not talking about a fast modification a slow evolution one step at a time . I honestly thing orbital have scored an ace with that rocket .See how slow it rose off the pad nice smooth launch with low G,s .
I am sure the max G's were over 5
-
#50
by
floss
on 02 Jul, 2013 12:48
-
Well within human tolerances .No shaky solids this launcher should find plenty of work .All that is needed is to replace the Caster with a liquid stage to man rate it .
As I said they have scored an ace
-
#51
by
asmi
on 05 Jul, 2013 17:40
-
Well within human tolerances .No shaky solids this launcher should find plenty of work .All that is needed is to replace the Caster with a liquid stage to man rate it .
As I said they have scored an ace
If my memory serves me, Russian man-rating requirement is that G-load shall not exceed 4Gs during nominal ascent. I'm sure NASA's requirements are even more restrictive (or maybe not since they seem to be perfectly fine with flying astronauts onboard rocket certified to Russian man-rating standards).
-
#52
by
asmi
on 05 Jul, 2013 17:42
-
I am sure the max G's were over 5
I remember I've asked this question here, and got response that it was around 5Gs near end of first stage flight.
-
#53
by
Kabloona
on 07 Jul, 2013 20:48
-
-
#54
by
Kabloona
on 08 Jul, 2013 17:19
-
How about adding a third nk 33 on the first stage and a reusable upper stage with an inflatable heat shield.What shut down Kistler was lack of money not technical problems.
In my opinion, such change in a design of the rocket won't pay off because of high expenses and low rate of starts.
Let's ask about it doctor Antonio Elias
Dmitry is correct; Antonio has said that Antares was designed to be profitable at a low launch rate. Making it more expensive (and reducing payload) at a low launch rate won't help.
