Air Force awards SpaceX contract worth as much as $122 61M to develop its Raptor engine as part of RD-180 replacement program.
Air Force awards Orbital/ATK contract worth as much as $180M to develop three rocket prototypes as part of RD-180 replacement program.
Air Force announcement says Orbital-ATK's next-generation rocket could use Blue Origin BE-3 for its upper stage engine.
* Correction: Total potential government investment: $61M. Total potential SpaceX investment: $122M.
This other transaction agreement requires shared cost investment with SpaceX for the development of a prototype of the Raptor engine for the upper stage of the Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launch vehicles.
Wow, that's news! Raptor to be used for a new upper stage for the Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy. There was talk of that a long time ago, but I don't think we've heard of this in a while. And from a government contract, which makes it real.
Raptor prototype is the wording. A small version of the Raptor, in the 800kN range, could add some serious performance to F9 and FH. I wouldn't discount 6 tonnes to GTO for F9 and 60 tonnes to LEO for FH.It would only seem logical to do a small version first, to learn the propellant lessons on a small scale, before committing to the big version.I suspect that the government investment made it worthwhile to SpaceX and it can reasonably be funded under the EELV program.
Because it makes the Falcon family capable of delivering the payloads that currently require the Atlas V.
The ratios are interesting... If you read the initial and total awards.- Orbital ATK is putting up 2/3 of what the government is (or, put another way, the government is putting up 150% of what Orbital ATK is)- SpaceX is putting up 2x of what the government is (or, put another way, the government is putting up 50% of what Orbital ATK is)That should raise some eyebrows in various places.
Quote from: QuantumG on 01/14/2016 05:15 amBecause it makes the Falcon family capable of delivering the payloads that currently require the Atlas V.I would rather think they would also be interested in delivering the payloads for people such as the NRO that currently require the Delta IVH.
These two sentences doesn't go together: " This agreement implements Section 1604 of the Fiscal Year 2015 National Defense Authorization Act, which requires the development of a next-generation rocket propulsion system that will transition away from the use of the Russian-supplied RD-180 engine to a domestic alternative for National Security Space launches.""This other transaction agreement requires shared cost investment with SpaceX for the development of a prototype of the Raptor engine for the upper stage of the Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launch vehicles. "How does an upper stage engine replace rd-180 ?
Quote from: QuantumG on 01/14/2016 05:15 amBecause it makes the Falcon family capable of delivering the payloads that currently require the Atlas V.Indeed. There is more than one way to get rid of RD-180:- Get rid of the engine itself and replace it with an all-US alternative (Aerojet is working on that)- Get rid of the launcher (Atlas V) and replace it with an all-US alternative (multiple companies working on that)SpaceX was just awarded some money to go for the latter alternative. Basically, USAF just handed SpaceX money for an effort to make ULA's star vehicle go away. That will raise some eyebrows in Centennial, Colorado.
Well, we know that Orbital ATK is also getting money for the GEM-63XL (for Vulcan, I assume), and the extendable nozzle for the BE-3U (ACES, may be?). Those two should be related to ULA. And I would assume that both Aerojet Rocketdyne and Blue Origin are negotiating some similar investments.
Quote from: Star One on 01/14/2016 02:41 pmYou Cannot separate the two things that easily as you seem to think you can. Do you think that when this award was made that it was just with an eye to Atlas V without considering Delta IV as well. EELV is two systems closely linked together even as far as shortly having a common avionics package. Their replacement by Vulcan will encompass both launchers not just one. They are intrinsically linked.That's not true. It's easy to discuss just one or the other when the topic is relevant to one or the other. This particular topic is relevant to Atlas V but not Delta IV because it's about replacing Russian engines.Quote from: Star One on 01/14/2016 02:41 pmAnd I will thank you to stop acting as some kind of gatekeeper over what you think can or cannot be posted where.So in your ideal world people should never point out to you when you're misunderstanding what a topic is about? You'd rather not hear when you've made a mistake?Sorry, but this is a discussion board and people are free to point out your mistakes here. I think it's unfortunate that you're not receptive to that.
You Cannot separate the two things that easily as you seem to think you can. Do you think that when this award was made that it was just with an eye to Atlas V without considering Delta IV as well. EELV is two systems closely linked together even as far as shortly having a common avionics package. Their replacement by Vulcan will encompass both launchers not just one. They are intrinsically linked.
And I will thank you to stop acting as some kind of gatekeeper over what you think can or cannot be posted where.
Quote from: baldusi on 01/14/2016 02:30 pmWell, we know that Orbital ATK is also getting money for the GEM-63XL (for Vulcan, I assume), and the extendable nozzle for the BE-3U (ACES, may be?). Those two should be related to ULA. And I would assume that both Aerojet Rocketdyne and Blue Origin are negotiating some similar investments.I think I read somewhere that AJR was still in negotiation with USAF about a major contract (it got a minor one in the last phase), but really, I have no idea about Blue. They did go to the EELV hearing and talked about their engines, but it would not be entirely illogical to not seek any money at all..
Quote from: QuantumG on 01/14/2016 05:15 amBecause it makes the Falcon family capable of delivering the payloads that currently require the Atlas V.One can argue* that the falcon family is already (soon to be) capable of delivering the payloads that currently require the Atlas V (through FH) and the new option only lets them be more competitive (through F9).*Not me. I would argue that competitive = capable
Quote from: woods170 on 01/14/2016 06:17 amQuote from: QuantumG on 01/14/2016 05:15 amBecause it makes the Falcon family capable of delivering the payloads that currently require the Atlas V.Indeed. There is more than one way to get rid of RD-180:- Get rid of the engine itself and replace it with an all-US alternative (Aerojet is working on that)- Get rid of the launcher (Atlas V) and replace it with an all-US alternative (multiple companies working on that)SpaceX was just awarded some money to go for the latter alternative. Basically, USAF just handed SpaceX money for an effort to make ULA's star vehicle go away. That will raise some eyebrows in Centennial, Colorado. The thing is that they really need two healthy enough vehicle families for assured access. Just having SpaceX be more competitive doesn't actually fulfill that requirement.~Jon
1) the need for two EELV launch families. Shuttle is no good for national security, nor costs. 2) “The Secretary of Defense … shall fund the annual fixed costs for both launch service providers" until 3) "until certifying to the President that a capability that reliably provides assured access to space can be maintained without two EELV providers.”4) “Human exploration missions will not be part of the EELV requirements. (See Appendix B.)”5) Delta IV will have the capability and production capacity to execute all EELV heavy-lift requirements through 2020.
Core stage of a rocket that can have boosters strapped on.
for the development of a prototype of the Raptor engine [the] locations of performance are NASA Stennis Space Center, Mississippi; Hawthorne, California; and Los Angeles Air Force Base, California.
No funding required for a non-government facility. (or at least no need to list it.)
Quotefor the development of a prototype of the Raptor engine [the] locations of performance are NASA Stennis Space Center, Mississippi; Hawthorne, California; and Los Angeles Air Force Base, California.No mention of McGregor, Texas.
Quote from: Robotbeat on 01/15/2016 02:16 amCore stage of a rocket that can have boosters strapped on.That doesn't explain the word "Segment" in "Common Booster Segment", unless the core is segmented. - Ed Kyle
1 segment of ATK's advanced boosters would be ~177mt of propellant. Supplemented with 0-4 ~46mt boosters. Sounds reasonable for a 670kn hydrolox second stage.
Quote from: Oli on 01/15/2016 03:08 pm1 segment of ATK's advanced boosters would be ~177mt of propellant. Supplemented with 0-4 ~46mt boosters. Sounds reasonable for a 670kn hydrolox second stage.Minimum would be two segments, top and bottom.
Quote from: edkyle99 on 01/15/2016 02:15 pmQuote from: Robotbeat on 01/15/2016 02:16 amCore stage of a rocket that can have boosters strapped on.That doesn't explain the word "Segment" in "Common Booster Segment", unless the core is segmented. - Ed KyleGood point. Pretty sure this is a descendant of SRB tech. Again, Ares I back from the grave...
