The Strategic Forces subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) will markup its section of the FY2015 National Defense Authorization Act on Wednesday, April 30. A draft of the subcommittee's portion of the bill provides $220 million to DOD to begin development of a U.S.-built liquid rocket engine to replace the Russian RD-180 engines used for the Atlas V rocket.
QuoteThe Strategic Forces subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) will markup its section of the FY2015 National Defense Authorization Act on Wednesday, April 30. A draft of the subcommittee's portion of the bill provides $220 million to DOD to begin development of a U.S.-built liquid rocket engine to replace the Russian RD-180 engines used for the Atlas V rocket.http://www.spacepolicyonline.com/news/hasc-subcommittee-proposes-220-million-for-u-s-alternative-to-russias-rd-180-engines
Section 16xx—Liquid Rocket Engine Development Program This section would express the sense of Congress that the Secretary of Defense should develop a next-generation liquid rocket engine that is made in the United States, meets the requirements of the national security space community, is developed by not later than 2019, is developed using full and open competition, and is available for purchase by all space launch providers of the United States. This section would also direct the Secretary of Defense to develop a nextgeneration liquid rocket engine that enables the effective, efficient, and expedient transition from the use of non-allied space launch engines to a domestic alternative for the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle program. Of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act, $220.0 million would be available for the Secretary of Defense to develop a next-generation liquid rocket engine. The Secretary would be required to coordinate with the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, to the extent practicable, to ensure that the rocket engine developed meets objectives that are common to both the national security space community and the civil space program of the United States. The Secretary, in coordination with the Administrator, would be directed to deliver a report with a plan to carry out the development of the rocket engine, including an analysis of the benefits of using public-private partnerships, the estimated development costs, and identification of the requirements of the program to develop such rocket engine.
Would this US liquid engine requirement not be fulfilled by fully certifying the Falcon 9/Heavy as an EELV?
Would this US liquid engine requirement not be fulfilled by fully certifying the Falcon 9/Heavy as an EELV?I could also imagine SpaceX designing an engine, and selling it to ULA for 5x its production cost, and yet below any price ULA could deliver one for... just for spite and profit (might fund that Mars mission lol)
that's not a bad article http://www.spacenews.com/article/military-space/40404draft-house-bill-recommends-220-million-next-year-for-rd-180-alternative
Quote from: VulcanCafe on 04/30/2014 07:59 pmWould this US liquid engine requirement not be fulfilled by fully certifying the Falcon 9/Heavy as an EELV?I could also imagine SpaceX designing an engine, and selling it to ULA for 5x its production cost, and yet below any price ULA could deliver one for... just for spite and profit (might fund that Mars mission lol) They're going to have enough on their plates building enough Merlins for Falcon missions.
Quote from: VulcanCafe on 04/30/2014 07:59 pmWould this US liquid engine requirement not be fulfilled by fully certifying the Falcon 9/Heavy as an EELV?If it were a requirement for launch capability, yes. But the article indicates it's intended to replace a specific engine, RD-180. Presumably that means the specs will be required to match those of RD-180 closely, so no existing SpaceX engine would do, and it wouldn't help Falcon 9 or Falcon Heavy at all.SpaceX could bid on it if they wanted, which might bring some benefits to SpaceX as a company, but the much bigger benefit is to ULA, which would otherwise have to either retire Atlas V or pay $1 billion out of its own pocket to start up U.S. production of an RD-180 replacement, in the event that Russian engines become unavailable.
ULA has 2.5 years worth of RD-180s. I highly doubt it would be possible (for Rocketdyne-Aerojet or SpaceX or anybody else) to develop a comparable engine to operational capability within that timeframe. If the stockpile of RD-180s dries up, then ULA is going to have to ramp up Delta IV instead. They may even have to dip into their $1B mission assurance stipend to cover the higher cost. Boo hoo.
Quote from: butters on 05/02/2014 03:56 pmULA has 2.5 years worth of RD-180s. I highly doubt it would be possible (for Rocketdyne-Aerojet or SpaceX or anybody else) to develop a comparable engine to operational capability within that timeframe. If the stockpile of RD-180s dries up, then ULA is going to have to ramp up Delta IV instead. They may even have to dip into their $1B mission assurance stipend to cover the higher cost. Boo hoo.The plan calls for development of a U.S. engine available in 2019. The current RD-180 contract pays for deliveries through 2018. In short, the plan is not designed to quickly stop RD-180 use, or to replace it two years from now. The plan is to replace it several years down the road, after Energomash has fulfilled its contract deliveries. - Ed Kyle
Quote from: edkyle99 on 05/02/2014 05:04 pmQuote from: butters on 05/02/2014 03:56 pmULA has 2.5 years worth of RD-180s. I highly doubt it would be possible (for Rocketdyne-Aerojet or SpaceX or anybody else) to develop a comparable engine to operational capability within that timeframe. If the stockpile of RD-180s dries up, then ULA is going to have to ramp up Delta IV instead. They may even have to dip into their $1B mission assurance stipend to cover the higher cost. Boo hoo.The plan calls for development of a U.S. engine available in 2019. The current RD-180 contract pays for deliveries through 2018. In short, the plan is not designed to quickly stop RD-180 use, or to replace it two years from now. The plan is to replace it several years down the road, after Energomash has fulfilled its contract deliveries. - Ed KyleSo your saying the SpaceX injunction isn't factored into this yet?
Quote from: Prober on 05/02/2014 05:59 pmQuote from: edkyle99 on 05/02/2014 05:04 pmQuote from: butters on 05/02/2014 03:56 pmULA has 2.5 years worth of RD-180s. I highly doubt it would be possible (for Rocketdyne-Aerojet or SpaceX or anybody else) to develop a comparable engine to operational capability within that timeframe. If the stockpile of RD-180s dries up, then ULA is going to have to ramp up Delta IV instead. They may even have to dip into their $1B mission assurance stipend to cover the higher cost. Boo hoo.The plan calls for development of a U.S. engine available in 2019. The current RD-180 contract pays for deliveries through 2018. In short, the plan is not designed to quickly stop RD-180 use, or to replace it two years from now. The plan is to replace it several years down the road, after Energomash has fulfilled its contract deliveries. - Ed KyleSo your saying the SpaceX injunction isn't factored into this yet?Keep in mind that SpaceX did not request the injunction. - Ed Kyle
Sorry Ed, SpaceX put the "Russian Engine" before the court and asked for relief. The SpaceX injunction correct.