-
#400
by
ugordan
on 16 Dec, 2014 23:27
-
Sounds like Orbital called in their settlement with ULA for RD181. ULA gets one to two launch options next year. Begs the question if there is anything really different vs RD180vsRD181
Different engines. The small, last digit difference is misleading.
-
#401
by
Kryten
on 16 Dec, 2014 23:34
-
Begs the question if there is anything really different vs RD180vsRD181 if Orbital gets to piggy pack off the 30 orders ULA just closed. Either way win - win for everybody. Good Job Orbital & ULA
Note the article specifies RD-181 being used 'in shipsets of two'. This strongly suggests it's a a redesignated RD-193, rather than a lightly modified RD-180.
-
#402
by
rayleighscatter
on 17 Dec, 2014 00:09
-
I wonder if they also optioned the possibility of producing licensed copies in the US.
-
#403
by
Will
on 17 Dec, 2014 00:17
-
Begs the question if there is anything really different vs RD180vsRD181 if Orbital gets to piggy pack off the 30 orders ULA just closed. Either way win - win for everybody. Good Job Orbital & ULA
Note the article specifies RD-181 being used 'in shipsets of two'. This strongly suggests it's a a redesignated RD-193, rather than a lightly modified RD-180.
http://www.russianspaceweb.com/rd193.html
-
#404
by
TrevorMonty
on 17 Dec, 2014 01:53
-
Now all Antares needs is a hydrogen upper stage to compete in commercial GEO market.
-
#405
by
Prober
on 17 Dec, 2014 11:01
-
-
#406
by
Jim
on 17 Dec, 2014 11:46
-
There is no contractual relationship between ULA and OSC in regard to the RD-181
-
#407
by
ChrisWilson68
on 17 Dec, 2014 12:03
-
Sorry but no "official" news release from Orbital.
What are you talking about? The message you replied to (and messed up the quotes in your reply, by the way), quoted the official Twitter feed of Orbital.
It's 2014. Companies communicate over Twitter these days. It's no less official if it's on the company's Twitter feed than if it's on PRNewsWire.
-
#408
by
LouScheffer
on 17 Dec, 2014 15:01
-
The cost of these engines, at least the first few, seems high. From
http://rt.com/news/215063-antares-russian-rocket-engines/Russian Space Agency (Roscosmos) officials meanwhile confirmed the deal to Russian Izvestia Daily, saying that 20 rocket engines have so far been inked on paper, for a sum close to $1 billion.
“There is now a firm contract for 20 engines, the realization of which we have already begun, as the first two engines will have to be delivered in June next year. Plus there are two options in the contract, each for 20 pieces,” Izvestia cites the source as saying. The sum of the contract allegedly includes a number of services including, flight training, engine installation and testing.
So this sounds like $1 billion for the first 20 engines, or $50M each, or $100M for each Antares rocket. The options for additional engines would need to be *much* cheaper for this to make sense. This of course will depend on how much of the first contract is non-recurring, which is not specified.
The recent currency crisis should be raise the engine profit dramatically, since they almost surely get paid in dollars, but buy their raw materials and labor in rubles.
-
#409
by
baldusi
on 17 Dec, 2014 15:34
-
Or may be 1B is the value if the two further options are exercised, which would make each engine about 17B, or 34M in propulsion, which seems a much more reasonable price. The RD-180 was renegotiated to something like 25M, I seem to recall. And this will use the same production line as the RD-191, and they might get the RD-193 on the Soyuz-2.1v, so they should be able to get excellent economies of scale at NPO Energomash. At least until Angara's propulsion actually gets moved to Pyosk.
-
#410
by
abaddon
on 17 Dec, 2014 17:22
-
Orbital really needs to win a CRS2 contract, doesn't it? I can't imagine them making enough hay in the commercial arena (not to say they can't win some contracts), and this will exclude them from consideration for USAF/DOD contracts.
That said, I think they have an excellent chance of winning a CRS2 contract, and given the constraints they are facing, this seems like the only reasonable move they can make if they want to stay in the medium+ launcher business.
-
#411
by
Prober
on 17 Dec, 2014 18:33
-
Sorry but no "official" news release from Orbital.
What are you talking about? The message you replied to (and messed up the quotes in your reply, by the way), quoted the official Twitter feed of Orbital.
It's 2014. Companies communicate over Twitter these days. It's no less official if it's on the company's Twitter feed than if it's on PRNewsWire.
Don't forget Orbital is a Publicly traded company. Must follow the rules.
http://www.orbital.com/NewsInfo/They do have social on that page, but if you notice its not being used for major company announcements.
-
#412
by
LouScheffer
on 17 Dec, 2014 19:16
-
Or may be 1B is the value if the two further options are exercised, which would make each engine about 17B, or 34M in propulsion, which seems a much more reasonable price. The RD-180 was renegotiated to something like 25M, I seem to recall. And this will use the same production line as the RD-191, and they might get the RD-193 on the Soyuz-2.1v, so they should be able to get excellent economies of scale at NPO Energomash. At least until Angara's propulsion actually gets moved to Pyosk.
This seems to be the right interpretation. From
http://spacenews.com/orbital-sciences-orders-rd-181-engines-for-antares-rocket/ Beneski said the $1 billion contract value being quoted in Moscow is incorrect.
“If all the options under the contract were exercised, the total value would be significantly less than $1 billion,” Beneski added in an email to SpaceNews. “I can’t be more precise than that.”
If we assume $100M is significant, then the cost would be about $900M/60 = $15M/engine. Not cheap, but not crazy. However, surely the first batch of 20 will be more expensive per engine.
Another way to look at this is to compare to possible USA development. This was usually estimated at about $1B. For the same cost here, you get development + engines for 30 missions. By that comparison it seems a real bargain.
-
#413
by
edkyle99
on 17 Dec, 2014 19:19
-
Or may be 1B is the value if the two further options are exercised, which would make each engine about 17B, or 34M in propulsion, which seems a much more reasonable price. The RD-180 was renegotiated to something like 25M, I seem to recall. And this will use the same production line as the RD-191, and they might get the RD-193 on the Soyuz-2.1v, so they should be able to get excellent economies of scale at NPO Energomash. At least until Angara's propulsion actually gets moved to Pyosk.
The contract includes more than just engine delivery. Energomash crews, it appears, will be at Wallops installing, testing, and supporting the engines.
This can't pay off, obviously, unless Orbital wins a lot more work for Antares.
A killer for Aerojet-Rocketdyne. Some of those funds were originally headed for California. Now they're Russia-bound. I shed no tears, however, because it is the U.S. company's own fault.
- Ed Kyle
-
#414
by
woods170
on 17 Dec, 2014 20:26
-
A killer for Aerojet-Rocketdyne. Some of those funds were originally headed for California. Now they're Russia-bound. I shed no tears, however, because it is the U.S. company's own fault.
- Ed Kyle
That's a fact. Aerojet and/or Rocketdyne should have gotten off their respective *sses years ago and should have started developing engine(s) to compete with the stuff from Russia. The fact that they didn't is now taking significant bites out of their business.
-
#415
by
TrevorMonty
on 17 Dec, 2014 20:43
-
A killer for Aerojet-Rocketdyne. Some of those funds were originally headed for California. Now they're Russia-bound. I shed no tears, however, because it is the U.S. company's own fault.
- Ed Kyle
That's a fact. Aerojet and/or Rocketdyne should have gotten off their respective *sses years ago and should have started developing engine(s) to compete with the stuff from Russia. The fact that they didn't is now taking significant bites out of their business.
If they don't come up with a low cost RL10 replacement, ULA/XCOR will and they can kiss goodbye to that business.
-
#416
by
baldusi
on 17 Dec, 2014 21:01
-
A killer for Aerojet-Rocketdyne. Some of those funds were originally headed for California. Now they're Russia-bound. I shed no tears, however, because it is the U.S. company's own fault.
- Ed Kyle
That's a fact. Aerojet and/or Rocketdyne should have gotten off their respective *sses years ago and should have started developing engine(s) to compete with the stuff from Russia. The fact that they didn't is now taking significant bites out of their business.
If they don't come up with a low cost RL10 replacement, ULA/XCOR will and they can kiss goodbye to that business.
The J-2X contract is finished. Blue Origin have just eaten their RS-68 and RD-180 breakfast. SpaceX is eating it indirectly. NPO Energomash have just eliminated the middle man. ATK appears to have eaten their SLS booster contracts. What do they have left? RS-25, which will go on for a long time (apparently, if SpaceX doesn't actually delivers their BFR). And the RL10, which have at least Blue Origin and XCOR, with SNC/Orbitec as hungry wolves close by. The Stratolauncher concept might well end up as full OrbitalATK. And let's remember that they didn't helped Antares in the least bit. And again, the RL10 contract will suffer from SpaceX competition.
I'm saddened because those companies carry the torch of the Apollo program. But the way they went into comfortable public-money supported easy life, is really shameful.
-
#417
by
arachnitect
on 17 Dec, 2014 21:19
-
Orbital finally confirmed RD-181 the same day the TESS launch contract was announced.
Did OSC bid Antares for TESS?
-
#418
by
Remes
on 17 Dec, 2014 22:45
-
That's a fact. Aerojet and/or Rocketdyne should have gotten off their respective *sses years ago and should have started developing engine(s) to compete with the stuff from Russia.
How was that supposed to work? Before the political crisis everyone was perfectly happy, but you think that back then Aerojet or Rocketdyne should have designed a highly complex rocket engine for ULA or Orbital, just in case something would go wrong and someone would need an engine? I think no one can expect to develop an engine like an RD180 or RD181 on own money just in case it is needed.
-
#419
by
Lars-J
on 17 Dec, 2014 23:59
-
That's a fact. Aerojet and/or Rocketdyne should have gotten off their respective *sses years ago and should have started developing engine(s) to compete with the stuff from Russia.
How was that supposed to work? Before the political crisis everyone was perfectly happy, but you think that back then Aerojet or Rocketdyne should have designed a highly complex rocket engine for ULA or Orbital, just in case something would go wrong and someone would need an engine? I think no one can expect to develop an engine like an RD180 or RD181 on own money just in case it is needed.
By that argument SpaceX wouln't even have started. But they did. And developed their own engine. NOTHING stopped Aerojet or Rocketdyne from doing the same.
In real life (not government subsidized lala land), commercial companies self fund research and development ALL the time.