-
ATK ULA Proposal
by
edkyle99
on 23 Sep, 2014 16:08
-
-
#1
by
Lars-J
on 23 Sep, 2014 16:17
-
I'm curious about the specifics, but it does feel like a "square peg in a round hole" kind of solution.
-
#2
by
butters
on 23 Sep, 2014 16:21
-
Does ULA get to make the selection (e.g. their preference for BE-4) or will it be dictated to them by the Air Force?
-
#3
by
Lars-J
on 23 Sep, 2014 16:29
-
It sounds like ULA has already made their decision.
That does of course make this an interesting scenario if ULA on their own made a decision before Congress awarding funds for an "RD-180 replacement program" - such a multi-billion $ award would presumably have to be competed. I guess they don't need the congressional funds?
-
#4
by
Zed_Noir
on 23 Sep, 2014 16:56
-
Guessing the ATK SRM proposal will be something around the size of the advance booster for the SLS. Or am I mistaken?
It sounds like ULA has already made their decision.
Looks that way. Project development completion pressure IMO. Have to keep pace with the Hawthorne folks.
That does of course make this an interesting scenario if ULA on their own made a decision before Congress awarding funds for an "RD-180 replacement program" - such a multi-billion $ award would presumably have to be competed. I guess they don't need the congressional funds?
Blue & ULA (aka Blue United
) have the Bezos piggy bank.
-
#5
by
ChrisWilson68
on 23 Sep, 2014 16:58
-
It sounds like ULA has already made their decision.
That does of course make this an interesting scenario if ULA on their own made a decision before Congress awarding funds for an "RD-180 replacement program" - such a multi-billion $ award would presumably have to be competed. I guess they don't need the congressional funds?
Perhaps the whole reason ULA made an announcement now about partnering with Blue Origin is to try to head off that competition and/or political pressure to accept ATK or some other solution. I can imagine ULA might be alarmed to have Congress dictating the process to decide who gets to design their future launch vehicles. They might well be eager to seize control of their own destiny.
-
#6
by
Rocket Science
on 23 Sep, 2014 17:03
-
Sounds a bit like Liberty 2.0...
-
#7
by
M129K
on 23 Sep, 2014 19:24
-
I'm getting flashbacks to the Ariane 6 trade studies from this...
But if selected (really big if) how would this affect CST-100?
-
#8
by
edkyle99
on 23 Sep, 2014 19:34
-
I'm curious about the specifics, but it does feel like a "square peg in a round hole" kind of solution.
It is easy to conjure up an Atlas 401 replacement. I can imagine two composite case solid stages topped by Centaur that could weigh maybe 15%
less than Atlas 401. (That would be a sweet little rocket.) The problem is getting to a cost effective solution for the full range from Atlas 411 to 551.
- Ed Kyle
-
#9
by
R7
on 23 Sep, 2014 19:36
-
Uh oh, is spirit of the Stick restless again. Do the right thing, call an exorcist.
-
#10
by
M129K
on 23 Sep, 2014 19:36
-
Solid core plus solid strap ons isn't unheard of and is definitely doable. I actually got this pic from your site, Ed.
-
#11
by
edkyle99
on 23 Sep, 2014 19:50
-
Solid core plus solid strap ons isn't unheard of and is definitely doable.
Here's an example of the challenge. To go from a 401 to a 551 in GTO capability while keeping the second solid stage and the Centaur third stage identical means roughly tripling the propellant burned during the first stage of flight. That's hard to do with smaller strap-on solids.
- Ed Kyle
-
#12
by
Jim
on 23 Sep, 2014 19:56
-
But if selected (really big if) how would this affect CST-100?
CST-100 is flying on an Atlas V.
-
#13
by
RocketmanUS
on 23 Sep, 2014 20:00
-
No in flight throttle control with all solid 1st stage.
BE-4 looks to have far more flexibility for the future over all solid. Including an all liquid ( no solid strap on ) 1st stage.
But if selected (really big if) how would this affect CST-100?
CST-100 is flying on an Atlas V.
Is that the test flight? What about after when Atlas V's 1st stage is replaced? Then CST-100 would be launched on that new 1st stage?
What do you think is over all better BE-4 or ATK all solid?
-
#14
by
TrevorMonty
on 23 Sep, 2014 20:05
-
The mostly likely LV for this engine will be the Antares, if they can get government funding to develop it all the better for ATK.
This would leave the Aerojet AR1 engine without a LV.
-
#15
by
R7
on 23 Sep, 2014 20:05
-
No in flight throttle control with all solid 1st stage.
It could use grain geometry to produce preset throttling curve like SRBs did (=thrust dropped during maxQ then increased again).
-
#16
by
PahTo
on 23 Sep, 2014 20:14
-
Is that the test flight? What about after when Atlas V's 1st stage is replaced? Then CST-100 would be launched on that new 1st stage?
If you do independent checking of dates for expected/planned/hoped first flight of the new Blue-ULA LV, and then read Dr Sowers' responses to various questions, you'll know that the entire current Crew contract (2-6 flights) should be covered by the Atlas V (not sure if you have L2, but much is public knowledge/threads). Note the Atlas V 1st stage won't be replaced, it'll be an entirely new LV (though likely with existing upper stage for some time after the new core flies). One step at a time...
-
#17
by
RocketmanUS
on 23 Sep, 2014 20:18
-
No in flight throttle control with all solid 1st stage.
It could use grain geometry to produce preset throttling curve like SRBs did (=thrust dropped during maxQ then increased again).
In flight, not predetermined. Each solid would have to be made per flight mission then?
Is that the test flight? What about after when Atlas V's 1st stage is replaced? Then CST-100 would be launched on that new 1st stage?
If you do independent checking of dates for expected/planned/hoped first flight of the new Blue-ULA LV, and then read Dr Sowers' responses to various questions, you'll know that the entire current Crew contract (2-6 flights) should be covered by the Atlas V (not sure if you have L2, but much is public knowledge/threads). Note the Atlas V 1st stage won't be replaced, it'll be an entirely new LV (though likely with existing upper stage for some time after the new core flies). One step at a time...
If they have the RD-180's for the crew flights ( and they just might get them ). But after that the new vehicle would be in place to take over CST-100 launches. What would you prefer BE-4 or ATK solid for crewed CST-100 flights?
-
#18
by
clongton
on 23 Sep, 2014 20:23
-
But if selected (really big if) how would this affect CST-100?
CST-100 is flying on an Atlas V.
Can't fly CST-100 on it unless all the vibration dampening mechanisms are included in the Atlas re-design that were worked out for Ares-I.
-
#19
by
PahTo
on 23 Sep, 2014 20:24
-
If they have the RD-180's for the crew flights ( and they just might get them ). But after that the new vehicle would be in place to take over CST-100 launches. What would you prefer BE-4 or ATK solid for crewed CST-100 flights?
By that time, the whole game may have changed, but all things being equal, I'd much prefer the BE-4 powered stage.
Note I am not a politician, nor am I involved directly with any of the companies involved; though I am an armchair spaceflight enthusiast.
) have the Bezos piggy bank.