Author Topic: CNES ESA Prometheus / Callisto proposal  (Read 41546 times)

Offline Rik ISS-fan

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 841
  • the Netherlands
  • Liked: 184
  • Likes Given: 74
Re: CNES ESA Prometheus / Callisto proposal
« Reply #100 on: 11/12/2017 12:30 PM »
Did someone already post the link to the ArianeGroup Prometheus page?
Romeo run at <50bar chamber pressure. Prometheus will run at 100bar. Could this increase in pressure coincide with the thrust increase? Or does a larger combustion chamber have to be developed?

 ??? could this be developed into the engine for Callisto?
« Last Edit: 11/12/2017 02:00 PM by Rik ISS-fan »

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6202
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 5661
  • Likes Given: 1621
Re: CNES ESA Prometheus / Callisto proposal
« Reply #101 on: 12/14/2017 01:26 PM »
Quote
ESA, ArianeGroup sign prototype contract for Prometheus low-cost (OK, reusable too) rocket engine
by Peter B. de Selding   Dec 14, 2017

PARIS — The European Space Agency on Dec. 14 contracted with ArianeGroup to design, build and tests two prototypes of the reusable, LOX-methane Prometheus rocket engine, with test-bed firings to occur from 2020

https://www.spaceintelreport.com/esa-arianegroup-sign-prototype-contract-prometheus-low-cost-ok-reusable-rocket-engine/

Online calapine

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 196
  • Linz, Austria
  • Liked: 161
  • Likes Given: 105
Re: CNES ESA Prometheus / Callisto proposal
« Reply #102 on: 12/14/2017 09:39 PM »
Quote
14 December 2017
An ultra-low cost reusable rocket engine, Prometheus, using liquid oxygen–methane propellants, is set to power Europe’s future launchers.

Today, ESA and ArianeGroup signed a contract to develop a full-scale demonstrator to be ground tested in November 2020.

Prometheus demonstrates the systematic application of an extreme design-to-cost approach, new propellant and innovative manufacturing technologies.

It lowers costs to a tenth of those for Ariane 5’s Vulcain 2 engine.
 
Additive layer-by-layer manufacturing of engine parts enables faster production, with fewer parts.

Key characteristics of Prometheus include a computer system enabling realtime adjustment and immediate diagnosis for potential reusability.

Methane propellant is widely available and brings high efficiency, standardisation and operational simplicity, making it a perfect candidate for a reusable booster engine demonstration.

By 2020, technical knowledge of liquid oxygen–methane propulsion gained through the Prometheus project will allow fast and informed decisions to be made on useful applications.

Prometheus provides a nominal 1 MN of variable thrust, is suitable for first- and second-stage applications, and is reignitable. It will propel a range of next-generation launchers, including future evolutions of Ariane 6.
 
The Prometheus contract, worth €75 million, was signed by ESA Director of Space Transportation, Daniel Neuenschwander, and Alain Charmeau, CEO at ArianeGroup, at ESA headquarters in Paris in the presence of ESA Director General Jan Wörner.

The project is part of ESA’s Future Launchers Preparatory Programme.

“Prometheus will power Europe's future launchers, forging a path of continuous improvement in competitiveness,” commented Mr Neuenschwander.

“This contract paves the way for the future of Europe’s space transportation, and the development of European propulsion technology of tomorrow,” added Mr Charmeau.

The project benefits from significant synergies with other launcher demonstration projects within ESA, national agencies and industry.

http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Space_Transportation/Prometheus_to_power_future_launchers

Offline Rik ISS-fan

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 841
  • the Netherlands
  • Liked: 184
  • Likes Given: 74
Re: CNES ESA Prometheus / Callisto proposal
« Reply #103 on: 12/15/2017 08:52 AM »
https://www.ariane.group/en/news/arianegroup-signs-contract-with-esa-for-future-prometheus-engine/
Two test engines will be developed for 75mln.
I expect that three test stands will be used (P8 GG; PF52 GG+TP and P5 full engine) [possibly also P6].

Online AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6176
  • Liked: 3966
  • Likes Given: 5459
Re: CNES ESA Prometheus / Callisto proposal
« Reply #104 on: 12/26/2017 12:14 AM »
A 1MN engine is a bit larger (20% or so) than Merlin1D for a bargin price.  Should make a nice 7-9 engine methlox reusable booster and single engine upper stage.   If this progresses, don't think Ariane 6 will be around long.
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline Darkseraph

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 573
  • Liked: 267
  • Likes Given: 116
Re: CNES ESA Prometheus / Callisto proposal
« Reply #105 on: 12/26/2017 02:10 AM »
https://www.eucass.eu/doi/EUCASS2017-537.pdf

From the above document, it appears Prometheus is Europe's answer to the Merlin engine. It uses the same gas generator cycle for lower development costs, belongs to a similar thrust class as Merlin 1D. Significant parts of it will be 3D printed and it's intended to be used as a single engine or in clusters depending on launch vehicle. The biggest differences are the use of a more efficient, reuse friendly fuel Methane and the larger throttle range of Prometheus (30 -110%).

Totally pie in the sky speculating here, but Europe could end up creating a launch vehicle similar to Falcon 9 but even better optimized for reuse. Think of a VTVL booster the width of Ariane 6, lifted by a cluster of 7-9 Prometheus engines and a similar upperstage using a single vaccum optimized version Or for higher performance missions, a derivative of the Hydrolox Vinci-Upper Stage on Ariane 6. The position of Korou should be a relative advantage for a reusable booster on GTO missions and landing stages on an ocean platform should be possible for the most challenging trajectories.

As things stand, it's hard to see a dramatic change from the incumbent program happening soon without external events pressuring European politicians to back expediting Ariane Next. A shock event like Ariane Group suddenly losing a lot of the launch business abruptly might lend some urgency to Callisto/Prometheus.

 
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." R.P.Feynman

Offline hektor

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1342
  • Liked: 61
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: CNES ESA Prometheus / Callisto proposal
« Reply #106 on: 12/26/2017 08:32 AM »
The implied devastating message seems to be : the SpaceX approach was the right one, despite every statement by European big wigs since 2002.
« Last Edit: 12/26/2017 08:33 AM by hektor »

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8196
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 4323
  • Likes Given: 1334
Re: CNES ESA Prometheus / Callisto proposal
« Reply #107 on: 12/26/2017 12:40 PM »
The implied devastating message seems to be : the SpaceX approach was the right one, despite every statement by European big wigs since 2002.
Nothing devastating about that implied message. The big wigs have been wrong numerous times, not just on this one.

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9319
  • UK
  • Liked: 1652
  • Likes Given: 183
Re: CNES ESA Prometheus / Callisto proposal
« Reply #108 on: 12/26/2017 04:36 PM »
The implied devastating message seems to be : the SpaceX approach was the right one, despite every statement by European big wigs since 2002.
Nothing devastating about that implied message. The big wigs have been wrong numerous times, not just on this one.

Especially when you have multiple interested parties each trying to protect their own interests sometimes at the cost of the overall aim.

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4102
  • Liked: 2122
  • Likes Given: 1269
Re: CNES ESA Prometheus / Callisto proposal
« Reply #109 on: 12/26/2017 05:40 PM »
A couple observations on the paper:

1) The authors do a lot of comparing of the masses of the launch vehicles, and little of the costs. I know that costs are a lot harder to pin down, but they are WAY more important here.

2) The LH2 vehicles assume use of internal insulation with an aluminum liner, which as noted is very low TRL.

3) The vehicles are modeled with Al 2219 alloy, not AL-Li alloy which is state-of-art. They also model aluminum isogrid interstages, whereas carbon fiber over Al honeycomb is SOA. The stage mass fractions are not quite as good as F9.

Offline brickmack

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 426
  • USA
  • Liked: 157
  • Likes Given: 10
Re: CNES ESA Prometheus / Callisto proposal
« Reply #110 on: 12/26/2017 08:28 PM »
3) The vehicles are modeled with Al 2219 alloy, not AL-Li alloy which is state-of-art. They also model aluminum isogrid interstages, whereas carbon fiber over Al honeycomb is SOA. The stage mass fractions are not quite as good as F9.

Better a conservative estimate than an overly optimistic one, as long as the assumptions aren't comically biased to weight against a proposal. Arianespace already has experience with Al 2219, but not with Al-Li alloys AFAIK. And further trades may support that even if they already had the experience. NASA reverted to Al 2219 for the SLS core stage, despite it being heavier and them already having experience with Al-2195 on SLWT, because its so much cheaper to work with and the different structural requirements (longer structure with more thrust going through it, and an in-line design) favored it as well. And the long-term survival of composite structures for these sorts of applications (suborbital reentry with little to no shielding, and direct impact of engine exhaust after separation) is still kinda iffy (continued use of F9 will help validate this). More detailed studies and eventually actual vehicle development can trade all that stuff, the fact that it seems viable even in a conservative study is more compelling

Offline Rik ISS-fan

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 841
  • the Netherlands
  • Liked: 184
  • Likes Given: 74
Re: CNES ESA Prometheus / Callisto proposal
« Reply #111 on: 12/29/2017 03:24 PM »
A technical question related to the Prometheus engine:
What happens with the chamber pressure of a rocket engine when the propallent  mass-flow is doubled?
I know Ft=m.*ISP*g0. (Thrust = propellant mass flow * ISP * gravitational asseleation.) (ISP in s not m/s, USA equation.)
So to double thrust, the mass flow has to be doubled. ISP increase (slightly) with higher pressure. But does the chamber pressure double when mass flow is doubled in the same combustion chamber (engine bell)?

It's reported that Prometheus will be a LOxLNG GG engine with  1000kN vacuum thrust. I guess ISP will be about 340s (3335m/s), this equates  to a propallent mass flow of ~300kg/s.

Offline ZachF

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 488
  • NH, USA, Earth
  • Liked: 390
  • Likes Given: 97
Re: CNES ESA Prometheus / Callisto proposal
« Reply #112 on: 12/29/2017 04:20 PM »
A technical question related to the Prometheus engine:
What happens with the chamber pressure of a rocket engine when the propallent  mass-flow is doubled?
I know Ft=m.*ISP*g0. (Thrust = propellant mass flow * ISP * gravitational asseleation.) (ISP in s not m/s, USA equation.)
So to double thrust, the mass flow has to be doubled. ISP increase (slightly) with higher pressure. But does the chamber pressure double when mass flow is doubled in the same combustion chamber (engine bell)?

It's reported that Prometheus will be a LOxLNG GG engine with  1000kN vacuum thrust. I guess ISP will be about 340s (3335m/s), this equates  to a propallent mass flow of ~300kg/s.

Prometheus is roughly the same size and pressure as Merlin 1DFT, and probably has a similar expansion ratio. This should give it a 8-10 sec ISP advantage over similar Merlin models, since that is the advantage Methalox has over kerolox when all other things are equal. So probably 301(sl) to 320(v) seconds for the SL version.Vac version is really going to be dependent upon the expansion ratio, and they could always use Vinci for a US.

A 7-9 Prometheus-engined rocket makes so much sense I can believe that they're bothering with the Ariane 6...

Offline TrevorMonty

Re: CNES ESA Prometheus / Callisto proposal
« Reply #113 on: 12/29/2017 05:14 PM »
A multi engine RLV based on Prometheus wouldn't fly to late 2020s, they need a cheaper and more flexible replacement to A5 now, the Ariane 6 gives them that. Whether they replace A6 with clean sheet RLV or morph A6 into partially RLV time will tell. Either way there is lot of development work needed on Prometheus before a LV can be designed around it.

Online AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6176
  • Liked: 3966
  • Likes Given: 5459
Re: CNES ESA Prometheus / Callisto proposal
« Reply #114 on: 12/30/2017 01:42 PM »
https://www.eucass.eu/doi/EUCASS2017-537.pdf

From the above document, it appears Prometheus is Europe's answer to the Merlin engine. It uses the same gas generator cycle for lower development costs, belongs to a similar thrust class as Merlin 1D. Significant parts of it will be 3D printed and it's intended to be used as a single engine or in clusters depending on launch vehicle. The biggest differences are the use of a more efficient, reuse friendly fuel Methane and the larger throttle range of Prometheus (30 -110%).

Totally pie in the sky speculating here, but Europe could end up creating a launch vehicle similar to Falcon 9 but even better optimized for reuse. Think of a VTVL booster the width of Ariane 6, lifted by a cluster of 7-9 Prometheus engines and a similar upperstage using a single vaccum optimized version Or for higher performance missions, a derivative of the Hydrolox Vinci-Upper Stage on Ariane 6. The position of Korou should be a relative advantage for a reusable booster on GTO missions and landing stages on an ocean platform should be possible for the most challenging trajectories.

As things stand, it's hard to see a dramatic change from the incumbent program happening soon without external events pressuring European politicians to back expediting Ariane Next. A shock event like Ariane Group suddenly losing a lot of the launch business abruptly might lend some urgency to Callisto/Prometheus.

Sounds like a huge leap in the right direction.  Go for it!!!!!
The more competition, the merrier.
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6202
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 5661
  • Likes Given: 1621
Re: CNES ESA Prometheus / Callisto proposal
« Reply #115 on: 01/08/2018 12:25 PM »
New article on Callisto:

Quote
France, Germany studying reusability with a subscale flyback booster
by Caleb Henry — January 8, 2018

http://spacenews.com/france-germany-studying-reusability-with-a-subscale-flyback-booster/

Some interesting quotes from Marc Astorg, head of CNES’s Launch Vehicles Directorate, and Hansjörg Dittus, executive board member for space research and technology at DLR. Eg re whether they're copying SpaceX (in part responding but not copyuing) and too many years behind (claim advantages to going after SpaceX).

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9319
  • UK
  • Liked: 1652
  • Likes Given: 183
Re: CNES ESA Prometheus / Callisto proposal
« Reply #116 on: 01/08/2018 04:35 PM »
New article on Callisto:

Quote
France, Germany studying reusability with a subscale flyback booster
by Caleb Henry — January 8, 2018

http://spacenews.com/france-germany-studying-reusability-with-a-subscale-flyback-booster/

Some interesting quotes from Marc Astorg, head of CNES’s Launch Vehicles Directorate, and Hansjörg Dittus, executive board member for space research and technology at DLR. Eg re whether they're copying SpaceX (in part responding but not copyuing) and too many years behind (claim advantages to going after SpaceX).

I don’t know if it shows a level of naivety or realism when they talk about being sceptical if reusability is the best path to take.

Re: CNES ESA Prometheus / Callisto proposal
« Reply #117 on: 01/08/2018 05:01 PM »
To me it's clearly them (or we, as europeans) being in denial. It has always been clear that 'reusability is the right path': tossing 100M$ of hard to manufacture, aerospace grade hardware with each flight is undeniably worse than reusing it. It has always been foolish to deny that IMO.

The rational doubt was in the feasibility of reusing rockets cheaply and reliably. However stop trying after the shuttle, and taking its failure as a definitive answer was an irrational answer to a rational doubt, even if somewhat understandable when factoring in institutional inertia and widespread resignation.

What's really foolish is EU aerospace still trying to hide behind that doubt when SpaceX is successfully demonstrating cheap reuse, and betting they will fail is no longer the safe bet.

You need to try really hard to convince yourself that tossing 100M$ in the ocean every time vs catching them and efficiently reusing them is the right way to go.
« Last Edit: 01/08/2018 05:04 PM by AbuSimbel »
Failure is not only an option, it's the only way to learn.
"Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the custody of fire" - Gustav Mahler

Offline TrevorMonty

Re: CNES ESA Prometheus / Callisto proposal
« Reply #118 on: 01/08/2018 05:31 PM »
Here few clips from article. LV is in 250-500kg range based on graph, given dimensions below about Electron physical. Don't known what engine but 40-100klbs thrust will be needed.

I think they are going about RLV the right way. Its lot cheaper and quicker to build their knowledge with small LV than larger, the reality is they will crash some during recovery. The other big plus is this LV will address a critical market that their current range of LVs don't.



Development of a liquid-hydrogen tank would likely be developed in cooperation between the two countries, Astorg said, with industry supplying the engine — which has not been decided — and the liquid-oxygen tank, he said. Callisto’s current configuration calls for a hydrogen engine, Dittus said.

Astorg said Callisto will need to launch with a different engine because it will be too small for Prometheus, and also because Prometheus will not be ready to fly on Callisto in 2020.

The first vision of Callisto is projected at 13.5 meters high and one meter in diameter, Astorg said. As the project matures, larger versions would fly that could then potentially use Prometheus, he said.


Offline gosnold

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 445
  • Liked: 135
  • Likes Given: 983
Re: CNES ESA Prometheus / Callisto proposal
« Reply #119 on: 01/08/2018 06:55 PM »
Callisto is not a launcher, it is only a first stage. It's a useful demonstrator when you cannot use your production rocket to experiment with boost-back.

Tags: