-
#20
by
kevin-rf
on 20 Sep, 2014 19:21
-
Dr. Sowers, thank you for taking the time. Hope things are progressing well.
One question, the current engine compartment (boat tail?) is a smaller diameter than the current Atlas V tanks (but I think the same diameter as the prior Atlas III tanks), will the new vehicle (Does it have an official name?) use a similar design and be able to use the exist mobile launch platform and VIF without modification (even if larger, say 5m tanks are used)?
Again, thank you
-
#21
by
edkyle99
on 20 Sep, 2014 19:22
-
Is ULA's intention to create a common booster core that would serve, or replace, both Atlas and Delta?
- Ed Kyle
-
#22
by
BrightLight
on 20 Sep, 2014 19:29
-
Will the composite tankage presently being tested for SLS by Boeing and NASA be used on a rocket based upon the ULA/Blue Origin engines?
-
#23
by
TrevorMonty
on 20 Sep, 2014 19:43
-
Blue Origin are planning their own RLV based on BE4. Will they fly it from ULA launch facilities?
PS congratulations on ULA's new exciting future.
-
#24
by
cosmiste
on 20 Sep, 2014 19:46
-
How throtteable will be the BE-4 on the new Atlas X ?
-
#25
by
tobi453
on 20 Sep, 2014 19:54
-
Will the next generation ULA launch vehicle also get a new upper stage or a RL-10 replacement?
-
#26
by
2552
on 20 Sep, 2014 20:12
-
Is a 3-core Heavy version of the BE-4 vehicle being studied?
-
#27
by
DaveS
on 20 Sep, 2014 22:27
-
How are you planning to handle this new vehicle re: ground systems with the minimum amount of disruption to the existing Atlas V pads at VAFB and CCAFS? I'm thinking in terms of schedule impacts.
-
#28
by
Falcon H
on 20 Sep, 2014 23:17
-
Will the new launch vehicle be reusable, or designed with reusability in mind?
Thank you!
-
#29
by
HIP2BSQRE
on 20 Sep, 2014 23:22
-
The USAF recently issued a RFI looking for a replacement engine for the RD-180. The RFI calls for "a replacement engine with similar performance characteristics to currently used engines, alternative configurations that would provide similar performance (such as a multiple engine configuration) to existing EELV-class systems, and use of alternative launch vehicles for EELV-class systems." What do you see as the potential impact of this RFI and possibly RFP for ULA and your recent announcement with Blue Origin? The AF may be looking at a national engine/rocket competition that includes Blue Origin but also SpaceX and wants the new engine to be available commercial to any of the US rocket builders.
-
#30
by
dglow
on 20 Sep, 2014 23:42
-
The BE-4 is being described as a LOX+LNG engine – not methane. Is this distinction important to ULA and Blue Origin and, if so, how?
And thank you for your time and attention.
-
#31
by
Galactic Penguin SST
on 20 Sep, 2014 23:57
-
With rocket stage re-usability being the "hot thing" of rocketry recently, are there any plans and studies inside ULA to make this new LV reusable? If so, are there any plans that ULA would co-operate with Blue Origin to develop that capability?
-
#32
by
georgesowers
on 21 Sep, 2014 00:11
-
Wow! Thanks for all the great questions. But before I dive in, a few general comments.
It was a great week for ULA. In fact, the 24 hours starting with the NASA commercial crew announcement and finishing with a reception we held with Blue at the National Geographic Museum in DC was probably the best day ever.
Starting with Boeing being announced as one of the commercial crew winners, this was very emotional for me. Despite being deeply disappointed for Sierra Nevada and all my friends up there, we are now FINALLY going to get to fly human on Atlas again!! It has been a 15 year odyssey for me. At LM, I led the Atlas efforts on OSP which was baselined on EELV. Then there were the dark days when talking about humans on Atlas was heresy. Almost fired on several occasions... Then helping get the commercial crew program started and nurturing it through the interminable steps of CCdev1, CCdev2, CCiCap and now CCtCap. Whew! Rocket science is the easy part...
Then we had the successful launch of CLIO. Launching at the
last second of the window is even harder than launching at the first second of the window.
Then the great day we had with the Blue announcement. It feels fantastic to be back in the vehicle development game again. I've attached some eye candy. We had this as a full scale banner for a backdrop of the dais at the reception.
I have been very impressed with the speculation about our vehicle plans on the other thread. Some of it is pretty close to the mark.
Lastly, the great folks at Blue Origin don't like the acronym BO for obvious reasons. They like "Blue" for short.
-
#33
by
rcoppola
on 21 Sep, 2014 00:20
-
See if I can squeeze this in...Will this engine be baselined for Boeing's Commercial Crew Contracts?
-
#34
by
georgesowers
on 21 Sep, 2014 00:22
-
When did ULA become involved with BE-4, and what was the basic reasoning behind becoming involved?
We've been working with Blue for many years. I remember giving Jeff Bezos a tour of the Atlas factory in Denver a year before ULA. We were on their CCdev team from the very beginning. In term of the BE-4, ULA started doing serious propulsion trades over a year ago. The BE-4 was in the mix from the beginning. We turned up the gain substantially as the political situation in Ukraine deteriorated. Blue was one of the companies we put on contract back in June (recall our press release at that time).
Reasoning is straight forward. We were looking at alternatives and the BE-4 was a very-very credible option, despite the fact that nothing was publically known.
-
#35
by
georgesowers
on 21 Sep, 2014 00:25
-
First of all, really happy to see this development! In addition to the engine cooperation between ULA and Blue origin, are there any plans to cooperate on other areas? For example on reusable rocket boosters?[/size]
Our joint investment in the development of the BE-4 is just the start of a long term partnership. We are in discussions about other collaborations including reusability ideas.
-
#36
by
georgesowers
on 21 Sep, 2014 00:45
-
Didn't Atlas V vs Delta IV show that kerolox first stage with expensive engine is cheaper than hydrolox first stage with cheap engine? Why compromise with methalox?
There are several questions on the fuel choice for the BE-4. I'll try to answer all of them here.
I like to think of methane as being about halfway in between hydrogen and RP. It's about half the density of RP but twice that of hydrogen. There are many benefits of methane as a fuel which are outlined in Blue's public fact sheet. Those are all attractive to ULA. Since ULA fields both hydrogen and RP boosters today, accommodating methane is well within our capabilities.
But we didn't make our decision based on fuel. We did a system level comparison of all our options including both technical and business considerations. Both non-recurring and recurring cost were major drivers. The total package won us over.
As to the question of LNG vs methane, it's kind of a distinction without a difference. LNG is a commercially available commodity which is typically >95% methane. The engine is being developed and qualified with LNG. We felt using the term LNG emphasizes the commercial, low cost nature of our mindset as we develop this engine.
-
#37
by
georgesowers
on 21 Sep, 2014 01:12
-
What will be the major milestones for this project, and what is the associated timeline?
Major milestones were in our press release and FAQ: Power pack testing begins this year. Full scale engine development testing in 2016 and first ULA flight in 2019.
The power pack is essentially the entire engine sans combustion chamber. Preburner, boost pump, lox and fuel pumps. Testing to begin within weeks at Blue's west Texas site. The hardware is being finished in Kent as we speak. Beautiful stuff built on the most state of the art tools imaginable. A 3-d printed mock up of the power pack is on the test stand being used to finish facility plumbing and instrumentation. Sweet.
BTW, touring the BE-4 test facility back in February pushed me over the top. 1Mlb+ capable stand, 60ft tall run tanks for Lox and LNG, massive, brand new, state of the art, and 100% private. Pic is on Blue's factsheet. If you look close you can see a pick-up truck for scale.
-
#38
by
georgesowers
on 21 Sep, 2014 01:22
-
Is ULA pursuing multiple complementary strategies, paralleling Delta IV (hydrolox) and Atlas V, with these changes? Specifically how much is a BO derivative following the Atlas V Phase 1/2 direction changes like 5 meter first stage, and how much of existing Atlas V 4 meter is retained?
As my boss Tory Bruno said in Wednesday's press conference, the vehicle announcement will be before the end of the year. My team is working hard to get there.
That being said, the lower density of LNG compared to RP implies more volume for the booster. Do the math, as several have started to do on the other thread.
The beauty of having two fully certified systems in our fleet is that we can be very deliberate about how we introduce new systems and capabilities. Given the criticality of the payloads we launch, deliberation and prudence is a necessity. The rule of wing walking: never let go of what you have until you have a firm grasp on the future.
-
#39
by
baldusi
on 21 Sep, 2014 01:26
-
How does this work integrates with the Common Upper Stage and IVF? Does BE-3 is a possible option for it or you're thinking more of EELV/CUS and then BE-4 boosters/CUS and then a possible BE-4 Boosters / New Upper Stage? A sort of Tick-tock strategy.
