-
#60
by
Lobo
on 05 Mar, 2015 23:26
-
Atlas V basically used the Atlas II upper stage and made use of some existing Titan facilities.
Are the MSS's at LC-41 and SLC-3 modified Titan MSS's? Or were the Titan one's removed and new Atlas ones built?
-
#61
by
Lobo
on 05 Mar, 2015 23:30
-
The savings are in getting rid of the separate production lines for the single-stick 4-meter upper stage and the GEM-60 solid boosters. With only a handfull of Delta IV-Heavy launches planned thru 2022 (let's assume your scenario of NGL certification) for national security purposes, ULA can scale down substantially on the production facility (particularly staff). A clever stockpile of RS-68 will also allow for early closure of that production line.
Are there -any- D4H launches planned through 2022? I couldn't find any manifested publically. Do you have a source for manifested future D4H launches?
-
#62
by
Lobo
on 05 Mar, 2015 23:33
-
From the article that started this thread.
Bruno has said the BE-4 could debut on the NGLS by 2019 but that the vehicle would not be certified to carry national security payloads until 2022 or 2023.
But they can start going after commercial payloads as soon as it's flying. I gather the "New ULA" will be going after SpaceX's commercial business just as SpaceX is going after ULA's government business.
-
#63
by
DaveS
on 05 Mar, 2015 23:40
-
Atlas V basically used the Atlas II upper stage and made use of some existing Titan facilities.
Are the MSS's at LC-41 and SLC-3 modified Titan MSS's? Or were the Titan one's removed and new Atlas ones built?
There's no MSS at SLC-41. SLC-41 is a clean pad. And SLC-3W is a former Atlas II pad, not Titan. The two Titan pads at VAFB was SLC-4W/E.
-
#64
by
Lobo
on 06 Mar, 2015 00:32
-
Atlas V basically used the Atlas II upper stage and made use of some existing Titan facilities.
Are the MSS's at LC-41 and SLC-3 modified Titan MSS's? Or were the Titan one's removed and new Atlas ones built?
There's no MSS at SLC-41. SLC-41 is a clean pad. And SLC-3W is a former Atlas II pad, not Titan. The two Titan pads at VAFB was SLC-4W/E.
That's right... I already know that about LC-41. I brain farted there for a minute wondering about how much Titan Legacy was used there. Yea, there's a VIF, not a MSS at LC-41.
Thanks for the clarification on the SLC-3.
-
#65
by
TrevorMonty
on 06 Mar, 2015 00:34
-
From the article that started this thread.
Bruno has said the BE-4 could debut on the NGLS by 2019 but that the vehicle would not be certified to carry national security payloads until 2022 or 2023.
But they can start going after commercial payloads as soon as it's flying. I gather the "New ULA" will be going after SpaceX's commercial business just as SpaceX is going after ULA's government business.
They may need to heavily discount first few flights, to attract customers. ULA have a great record but this will be an unproven LV.
-
#66
by
mkent
on 06 Mar, 2015 00:45
-
Are there -any- D4H launches planned through 2022? I couldn't find any manifested publically. Do you have a source for manifested future D4H launches?
There are four Heavies in the block buy.
-
#67
by
Lobo
on 06 Mar, 2015 16:18
-
From the article that started this thread.
Bruno has said the BE-4 could debut on the NGLS by 2019 but that the vehicle would not be certified to carry national security payloads until 2022 or 2023.
But they can start going after commercial payloads as soon as it's flying. I gather the "New ULA" will be going after SpaceX's commercial business just as SpaceX is going after ULA's government business.
They may need to heavily discount first few flights, to attract customers. ULA have a great record but this will be an unproven LV.
SpaceX got a lot of customers early on by offering good pricing. I'm sure ULA can do that same thing. And although it's a new LV, ULA themselves have a very good track record of reliable launches so I think that will help them too, whereas SpaceX was completely unproven.
-
#68
by
Lobo
on 06 Mar, 2015 16:37
-
Are there -any- D4H launches planned through 2022? I couldn't find any manifested publically. Do you have a source for manifested future D4H launches?
There are four Heavies in the block buy.
Interesting. I wonder what payloads they are for?
-
#69
by
edkyle99
on 06 Mar, 2015 18:34
-
Atlas V basically used the Atlas II upper stage and made use of some existing Titan facilities.
Are the MSS's at LC-41 and SLC-3 modified Titan MSS's? Or were the Titan one's removed and new Atlas ones built?
There's no MSS at SLC-41. SLC-41 is a clean pad. And SLC-3W is a former Atlas II pad, not Titan. The two Titan pads at VAFB was SLC-4W/E.
That's right... I already know that about LC-41. I brain farted there for a minute wondering about how much Titan Legacy was used there. Yea, there's a VIF, not a MSS at LC-41.
Thanks for the clarification on the SLC-3.
They did use the existing SLC 41 exhaust duct, rail tracks, and other basic structures, which simplified launch site development. SpaceX gained the same benefits at SLC 40.
- Ed Kyle
-
#70
by
Patchouli
on 07 Mar, 2015 03:12
-
One risk we have not covered with the NGLV is will Blue Origin keep their end of the deal if the present tech bubble bursts early in development?
Amazon and Blue Origin most likely will survive the next tech crash but there may be some tightening of the purse strings on Bezo's part.
Can ULA fund NGLV on their own if necessary?
But then again Jeff Bezos did found BO soon after the first crash and Amazon has a clear profit model so maybe not.
Though on it looking like they're betting the farm on NGLV maybe not as they will be keeping the Delta IV-H so a single stick vehicle could be brought back in service if if needed and I think the tooling for the Delta II and RS-27 still exist.
Plus most of NGLV might be Delta IV and Atlas V derived hardware same tank tooling,same avionics,etc.
I think if it does fly it'll probably be more related to Delta IV then Atlas V.
-
#71
by
Jim
on 07 Mar, 2015 03:25
-
No. It will be closer to Atlas and delta II is gone
-
#72
by
Patchouli
on 07 Mar, 2015 04:17
-
Yea, there was still a "LH2 is the miracle fuel" mentality back then. The real sad thing is there was no domestic RP-1 engine to even go to to offer. The next gen RP-1 engines partially developed for SLI wouldn't come along until the late 90's. But imagine if there's been a TR-107 or RS-84 engine to offer for an EELV? Topped with Centaur or DCSS or something else, would have made a fine all-domestic Atlas V with a bit more performance. And if they had been selected winner of the EELV competition, then it would have been in production by the time ESAS came along, and would have made a very viable engine for a HLV (assuming Shuttle Derived politics could have been over come). As it was there was only Russian built RP-1 engines flying and any RP-1 HLV would have needed a new engine development. That actually wouldn't have been that hard because TR-107 and RS-84 had been partially developed and those programs only recently cancelled with the cancellation of SLI. But it did make it easier to put the thumb on the scale for Shuttle Derived.
Well they had options other then the RD-180 they could have brought the F-1 back in production using modern tooling or used four x RS-27s.
The former would have out performed the RD-180 by a large margin the latter would have been lower performance but Rocketdyne might have been able to sell the RS-27 for a lower price if production was higher.
The RD-180 was cheap simply because of the dollar to ruble exchange rates at the time and the Russians were hungry for any business they could get.
But the TR-107 and RS-84 were the engines they really needed for a next generation launch vehicle at the time.
The TR-107 in particular looks like it could have been a very affordable for an engine in it's thrust class and it's high enough thrust you'd only need one for a MLV.
In retrospect cancelling SLI was big mistake.
-
#73
by
AncientU
on 07 Mar, 2015 13:37
-
So ULA are going into the competition for the next 28 core block buy with a retiring D-IV, no heavy, and a AV with an embargoed Russian engine (and a promise of a certified single-stick NGLV -- flying on an engine made by someone who has never flown to space -- in the early 20s)...
Good luck.
-
#74
by
Patchouli
on 07 Mar, 2015 16:01
-
So ULA are going into the competition for the next 28 core block buy with a retiring D-IV, no heavy, and a AV with an embargoed Russian engine (and a promise of a certified single-stick NGLV -- flying on an engine made by someone who has never flown to space -- in the early 20s)...
Good luck.
If I was a shareholder I would be rather nervous about the move.
Though the Atlas V is a cheaper rocket about around 100million for an Atlas 401 vs 164 million for a Delta IV medium.
I suspect commercial crew has some bearing on the decision as the Delta is not enormously more expensive then Atlas considering it's flight rate is only about half that of the former.
They'd have to start over on the crew rating program if they phased out Atlas V and kept the Delta IV.
I'd be less worried if they were doing a rapid Spacex style development on the BE4 and AR1 engines , if the Delta II rockets were being kept or if the new engine was something much more conservative from a proven aerospace company such as a F-1B.
Though I suspect nothing is concrete at this point as a lot depends on volatile political and economic conditions.
-
#75
by
Hauerg
on 07 Mar, 2015 16:13
-
So ULA are going into the competition for the next 28 core block buy with a retiring D-IV, no heavy, and a AV with an embargoed Russian engine (and a promise of a certified single-stick NGLV -- flying on an engine made by someone who has never flown to space -- in the early 20s)...
Good luck.
If it turns out that their lineup is still that shaky at that time there will be no tender for a block buy.
Methinks.
-
#76
by
gongora
on 07 Mar, 2015 16:36
-
So ULA are going into the competition for the next 28 core block buy with a retiring D-IV, no heavy, and a AV with an embargoed Russian engine (and a promise of a certified single-stick NGLV -- flying on an engine made by someone who has never flown to space -- in the early 20s)...
Good luck.
If I was a shareholder I would be rather nervous about the move.
...
ULA has two shareholders, they're both huge aerospace companies, and none of this would be happening without their consent.
-
#77
by
kch
on 07 Mar, 2015 16:45
-
So ULA are going into the competition for the next 28 core block buy with a retiring D-IV, no heavy, and a AV with an embargoed Russian engine (and a promise of a certified single-stick NGLV -- flying on an engine made by someone who has never flown to space -- in the early 20s)...
Good luck.
"No heavy"? From whence cometh *that*?
I came across this article: http://spacenews.com/ula-targets-2018-for-delta-4-phase-out-seeks-relaxation-of-rd-180-ban/
Some quotes:
United Launch Alliance intends to phase out all but the heavy-lift version of its Delta 4 rocket as early as 2018 as it seeks to sharpen its competitiveness in the face of a challenge by SpaceX.
...
“We’re going to take [out] the redundant, more expensive Delta single-stick-line and fly only Atlas until we have NGLS available and until the government decides they’re done with [Delta 4] Heavy,” Bruno said.
...
“Great rocket,” Bruno said of the Delta 4. “But it’s more expensive than the equivalent Atlas rocket.”
The last of the single-stick, or intermediate-class, Delta 4 launches would take place around 2018-2019, Bruno said.
-
#78
by
AncientU
on 07 Mar, 2015 17:16
-
So ULA are going into the competition for the next 28 core block buy with a retiring D-IV, no heavy, and a AV with an embargoed Russian engine (and a promise of a certified single-stick NGLV -- flying on an engine made by someone who has never flown to space -- in the early 20s)...
Good luck.
"No heavy"? From whence cometh *that*?
Going to two launch pads... impossible if Delta continues.
Keeping the least launched vehicle -- D-IVH -- long term means no reduction in production lines, workforce, etc. Cost of most expensive vehicle -- D-IVH again -- goes up...
ULA won't propose *that*
-
#79
by
arachnitect
on 07 Mar, 2015 18:26
-
So ULA are going into the competition for the next 28 core block buy with a retiring D-IV, no heavy, and a AV with an embargoed Russian engine (and a promise of a certified single-stick NGLV -- flying on an engine made by someone who has never flown to space -- in the early 20s)...
Good luck.
"No heavy"? From whence cometh *that*?
Going to two launch pads... impossible if Delta continues.
Keeping the least launched vehicle -- D-IVH -- long term means no reduction in production lines, workforce, etc. Cost of most expensive vehicle -- D-IVH again -- goes up...
ULA won't propose *that*
They will keep DIV-H online until they have the new upper stage for NGLV
