-
#380
by
arachnitect
on 11 Dec, 2014 05:42
-
Hi guys, how about New LV adopts BE-4 too, sharing engines with ULA and BO, to further reduce to cost?
One BE-4 offers a lower thrust than 2 NK-33, but has higher Isp, so seems to offer a similar delivery capacity with current Antares with verniers(to be developed too).
Goldilocks problem: 1x BE-4 is too little thrust, 2x BE-4 is too much. Either way means big first stage changes.
OSC needs a new engine yesterday. BE-4 won't be ready in time.
What matters is not only thrust, but also Isp, a LV with lower thrust and lower liftoff weight can also deliver the same payload, just as the case of Atlas V and Delta IV(of course, it is a extreme case).
Also, perhaps verniers are needed(not neccesary if rcs is available).
And still more, the verniers can be developed into second stage engine, which means even higher delivery capacity.
Maybe someday they could have a vehicle built around a single BE-4. Possibly using SRMs to keep it in the same payload range (Delta II redux?). But it would be years away at this point, and wouldn't really be "Antares" anymore.
-
#381
by
kevin-rf
on 11 Dec, 2014 12:25
-
But SpaceX has no reason to keep OSC alive. The best outcome for SpaceX is for OSC to go bankrupt ASAP.
No, the best outcome is they are well positioned to get the majority/all of the launches for the small GEO birds Orbital builds. Orbital goes away, those launches go away.
-
#382
by
notsorandom
on 11 Dec, 2014 13:04
-
But SpaceX has no reason to keep OSC alive. The best outcome for SpaceX is for OSC to go bankrupt ASAP.
No, the best outcome is they are well positioned to get the majority/all of the launches for the small GEO birds Orbital builds. Orbital goes away, those launches go away.
Indeed, look at SpaceX's previous satellite launches. Most of them have been built by OSC. Besides I bet that SpaceX doesn't really view Antares as serious competition.
-
#383
by
Jim
on 11 Dec, 2014 13:12
-
Spacex ensures OSC make a profit for gap filler launches, while Atlas V costs more than Antares and OSC will hardly make a profit.
You don't know that
-
#384
by
Prober
on 11 Dec, 2014 13:51
-
-
#385
by
guckyfan
on 11 Dec, 2014 14:24
-
I understand they expect higher performance from the upgraded launch vehicle. Where does that come from? Higher ISP? More thrust and a bigger upper stage? Or am I wrong? That's ssuming the first stage tank is the same, or will it be stretched?
-
#386
by
nimbostratus
on 11 Dec, 2014 14:30
-
Spacex ensures OSC make a profit for gap filler launches, while Atlas V costs more than Antares and OSC will hardly make a profit.
You don't know that
What? The insides?
-
#387
by
nimbostratus
on 11 Dec, 2014 14:35
-
I understand they expect higher performance from the upgraded launch vehicle. Where does that come from? Higher ISP? More thrust and a bigger upper stage? Or am I wrong? That's ssuming the first stage tank is the same, or will it be stretched?
Higher thrust allows for heavier second stage(if the 1st stage structure permts) and thus heavier payload.
And what have I missed for the new engine? What is the new engine? RD193? I get no news upgrade.
-
#388
by
aga
on 11 Dec, 2014 14:45
-
I understand they expect higher performance from the upgraded launch vehicle. Where does that come from? Higher ISP? More thrust and a bigger upper stage? Or am I wrong? That's ssuming the first stage tank is the same, or will it be stretched?
iirc - both better isp and higher thrust... if with talk about rd-193
SL Isp is 309 vs 297 s (rd-193 vs nk-33)... the SL thrust should be slightly higher as well (cca 1,9 MN vs 1,6 MN)...
-
#389
by
baldusi
on 11 Dec, 2014 16:43
-
I understand they expect higher performance from the upgraded launch vehicle. Where does that come from? Higher ISP? More thrust and a bigger upper stage? Or am I wrong? That's ssuming the first stage tank is the same, or will it be stretched?
iirc - both better isp and higher thrust... if with talk about rd-193
SL Isp is 309 vs 297 s (rd-193 vs nk-33)... the SL thrust should be slightly higher as well (cca 1,9 MN vs 1,6 MN)...
Well, the Antares propulsion module, has a T/W of 77. If the RD-193 has more thrust, it would improve the T/W of the overall stack, without needing new upper stage. Just by the reduction of gravity losses you get better performance.
-
#390
by
Antares
on 14 Dec, 2014 00:40
-
It is my understanding that both enigines are being sent to USA for final Evaluation testing and flight engines will also be fired at Stennis for hotfire testing. Not sure if AJ-26 stands will be used for this.
Interesting. Why wouldn't they just test them at Energomash? I would think it would be more risk to train American operators and add in an extra shipping step.
-
#391
by
Robotbeat
on 15 Dec, 2014 12:14
-
Because American quality control is /ostensibly/ better.
-
#392
by
edkyle99
on 15 Dec, 2014 15:19
-
Because American quality control is /ostensibly/ better.
Because American quality control is /ostensibly/ better.
American quality control tested and delivered the faulty AJ-26 engine.
Perhaps some type of systems integration test is needed, which might explain Stennis.
- Ed Kyle
-
#393
by
Prober
on 16 Dec, 2014 01:14
-
Because American quality control is /ostensibly/ better.
Because American quality control is /ostensibly/ better.
American quality control tested and delivered the faulty AJ-26 engine.
Perhaps some type of systems integration test is needed, which might explain Stennis.
- Ed Kyle
would also add we don't have an "official" news release from Orbital on the selected engine. Hold on friends, we could have a surprise.
-
#394
by
abaddon
on 16 Dec, 2014 13:53
-
I'm wondering if the real loser in the "no Russian engines" bill is going to be Orbital. It seems ULA will be largely unaffected since they have a large stockpile/orders for the RD-180 and are already planning to transition to the BO engine.
Orbital, on the other hand, has talked about bidding for USAF/DOD payloads in the future, but they would not be able to do so if they in fact have chosen the RD-193. Maybe they will content themselves with CRS payloads and any commercial contracts they can win... or maybe they are going in a different direction. But there aren't really many non-Russian options out there that would work very well for them, so my guess is they will in fact choose the RD-193 and quietly let any talk about USAF/DOD certification die out.
-
#395
by
woods170
on 16 Dec, 2014 13:58
-
Because American quality control is /ostensibly/ better.
Because American quality control is /ostensibly/ better.
American quality control tested and delivered the faulty AJ-26 engine.
Perhaps some type of systems integration test is needed, which might explain Stennis.
- Ed Kyle
would also add we don't have an "official" news release from Orbital on the selected engine. Hold on friends, we could have a surprise.
Just about any available candidate has passed speculation here multiple times. What ever engine finally appears from behind the curtain, it won't be a surprise. At least not to the regulars here.
And might I add you really should stop using the 'lips sealed' smiley. You don't actually know more than anyone else here (despite that crystal ball of yours), so stop suggesting otherwise.
-
#396
by
Prober
on 16 Dec, 2014 16:08
-
I'm wondering if the real loser in the "no Russian engines" bill is going to be Orbital. It seems ULA will be largely unaffected since they have a large stockpile/orders for the RD-180 and are already planning to transition to the BO engine.
Orbital, on the other hand, has talked about bidding for USAF/DOD payloads in the future, but they would not be able to do so if they in fact have chosen the RD-193. Maybe they will content themselves with CRS payloads and any commercial contracts they can win... or maybe they are going in a different direction. But there aren't really many non-Russian options out there that would work very well for them, so my guess is they will in fact choose the RD-193 and quietly let any talk about USAF/DOD certification die out.
had the same thoughts.....
-
#397
by
puhnitor
on 16 Dec, 2014 21:49
-
-
#398
by
Ronsmytheiii
on 16 Dec, 2014 22:44
-
-
#399
by
Tomness
on 16 Dec, 2014 23:24
-
