Author Topic: Orbital ATK OmegA (NGL) Rocket UPDATES/DISCUSSION - Thread 2  (Read 37225 times)

Offline Space Ghost 1962

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2783
  • Whatcha gonna do when the Ghost zaps you?
  • Liked: 2911
  • Likes Given: 2249
Omega is the last letter in the greek alphabet. Often this implies the last in a series. "I am the alpha and the omega, the beginning and the end".

Why do the upper stage nozzles appear to be underexpanded? Solids are poor on iSP, they need all the help they can get. And even RL-10's can support drop down nozzles.

The graphic suggests monolithic stages, but the first stage is too large for rail transport, so it must be segmented. Which requires assembly as part of the flow and readiness time, as well as a time limit on pad and in the VAB.

Where are the fairing dimensions? Are they similar the RUAG's? Are they RUAG?

Online Prettz

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 277
  • Atlanta, GA
  • Liked: 111
  • Likes Given: 17
Does "RL10C" imply these engines will not be the modernized RL10 variant AJR is working on?

Offline TrevorMonty

Does "RL10C" imply these engines will not be the modernized RL10 variant AJR is working on?
There is good shot of RL10C at 0:25 in video. Looks like a few 3D printed parts.
Expect price of RL10C be low $Ms. AJR have spent lot of money modernising it reducing build cost. Between Omega, Vulcan and odd SLS, AJR stand to sell 20-30 engines a year as all these LVs use 2-4 per US.

At 7800kg direct to GEO the heavy is a powerful LV, if its US can last a few days it would be capable of delivering significant payloads eg fully loaded Cygnus direct to lunar orbits. Given latest announcements about SLS 1A and 1B trades, NASA may need commercial HLVs like this to deliver LOP-G modules.
« Last Edit: 04/17/2018 05:28 am by TrevorMonty »

Offline GWH

AJR calls the variant for Omega the RL10C-5-1, and that it has a 3D printed injector assembly. It's a derivative of the RL10-C1 but no specs are given.
http://www.rocket.com/article/rl10-selected-omega%E2%84%A2-rocket


Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5180
  • Liked: 3073
  • Likes Given: 1547
Omega is the last letter in the greek alphabet. Often this implies the last in a series. "I am the alpha and the omega, the beginning and the end".

Why do the upper stage nozzles appear to be underexpanded? Solids are poor on iSP, they need all the help they can get. And even RL-10's can support drop down nozzles.

The graphic suggests monolithic stages, but the first stage is too large for rail transport, so it must be segmented. Which requires assembly as part of the flow and readiness time, as well as a time limit on pad and in the VAB.

Where are the fairing dimensions? Are they similar the RUAG's? Are they RUAG?

ATK is making the fairing themselves.

Offline Kabloona

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4339
  • Velocitas Eradico
  • Fortress of Solitude
  • Liked: 2578
  • Likes Given: 531

The graphic suggests monolithic stages, but the first stage is too large for rail transport, so it must be segmented. Which requires assembly as part of the flow and readiness time, as well as a time limit on pad and in the VAB.


According to this earlier SFN report, Stage 1 is indeed segmented. The graphic is poor, but it does seem to show vague joint lines at intervals equal to the length of Stage 2, which is one segment long.

https://spaceflightnow.com/2016/05/27/details-of-orbital-atks-proposed-heavy-launcher-revealed/

(Obviously written before OATK opted for RL-10 vs. BE-3U, but the details of the solids seem current).

Ed Kyle has put some estimated numbers on the SRM segments here, for reference:

http://www.spacelaunchreport.com/ngl.html
« Last Edit: 04/17/2018 02:19 pm by Kabloona »

Offline rcoppola

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2074
  • USA
  • Liked: 1414
  • Likes Given: 624
What needs would this rocket fulfill in world where you'll have F9, FH, Vulcan & New Glenn? I mean sure, if they want to build, test and then offer this up for a competitive price then that's fine. But I see no reason the AF should spend precious resources on this effort besides certifying it, if it comes to that.
« Last Edit: 04/17/2018 02:29 pm by rcoppola »
Sail the oceans of space and set foot upon new lands!
http://www.stormsurgemedia.com

Offline Kabloona

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4339
  • Velocitas Eradico
  • Fortress of Solitude
  • Liked: 2578
  • Likes Given: 531
What needs would this rocket fulfill in world where you'll have F9, FH, Vulcan & New Glenn?

The Air Force's desire to keep the solid propellant industry busy.

Offline rcoppola

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2074
  • USA
  • Liked: 1414
  • Likes Given: 624
What needs would this rocket fulfill in world where you'll have F9, FH, Vulcan & New Glenn?

The Air Force's desire to keep the solid propellant industry busy.
I would think there are better, more efficient ways to do that than propping up an unnecessary, unneeded launcher and associated expenses, some of which would have nothing to do with solid propellants.
« Last Edit: 04/17/2018 02:33 pm by rcoppola »
Sail the oceans of space and set foot upon new lands!
http://www.stormsurgemedia.com

Offline Kabloona

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4339
  • Velocitas Eradico
  • Fortress of Solitude
  • Liked: 2578
  • Likes Given: 531
What needs would this rocket fulfill in world where you'll have F9, FH, Vulcan & New Glenn?

The Air Force's desire to keep the solid propellant industry busy.
I would think there are better, more efficient ways to do that than propping up an unnecessary, unneeded launcher and associated expenses, some of which would have nothing to do with solid propellants.

That discussion has already been had, over here:

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=42663.msg1810534#msg1810534

But don't fret, OmegA won't survive if its business case doesn't close. OATK does actually have a board to answer to, unlike SpaceX and Blue.

As of 2 years ago, OATK was saying they would need 5-6 launches of OmegA for the case to close. The following SFN article has some interesting discussion of the financials, ending with OATK's blunt admission that OmegA needs gov't funding help for development and won't survive unless the numbers add up.

https://spaceflightnow.com/2016/05/27/details-of-orbital-atks-proposed-heavy-launcher-revealed/
« Last Edit: 04/17/2018 02:50 pm by Kabloona »

Offline TrevorMonty


The graphic suggests monolithic stages, but the first stage is too large for rail transport, so it must be segmented. Which requires assembly as part of the flow and readiness time, as well as a time limit on pad and in the VAB.


According to this earlier SFN report, Stage 1 is indeed segmented. The graphic is poor, but it does seem to show vague joint lines at intervals equal to the length of Stage 2, which is one segment long.

https://spaceflightnow.com/2016/05/27/details-of-orbital-atks-proposed-heavy-launcher-revealed/

(Obviously written before OATK opted for RL-10 vs. BE-3U, but the details of the solids seem current).

Ed Kyle has put some estimated numbers on the SRM segments here, for reference:

http://www.spacelaunchreport.com/ngl.html
The single-segment Castor 300 motor would serve as the second stage of all variants.  A two-segment Castor 600 motor would power the intermediate NGL 500-series first stage.  A four-segment Castor 1200 motor would serve as the first stage of the heavy-class NGL 500XL variant. 


Offline The_Ronin

  • Master of Servers, Big and Small
  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 211
  • *nix engineer & space geek
  • Nashville, TN
  • Liked: 94
  • Likes Given: 149
The heavy class looks like a vibration nightmare.  Wonder how they will solve that...

Offline rayleighscatter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1045
  • Maryland
  • Liked: 487
  • Likes Given: 230

Offline Kabloona

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4339
  • Velocitas Eradico
  • Fortress of Solitude
  • Liked: 2578
  • Likes Given: 531
The heavy class looks like a vibration nightmare.  Wonder how they will solve that...

Orbital does have some experience with the dynamics of large solids, ie Stage 0 (Castor 120) on Taurus. Because that stage was so big compared to the Pegasus stages on top, they had to implement active control of the first bending moment into the Taurus GNC software.

But yes, the Castor 1200 stack is going to be a much bigger beast to tame.

Offline Thorny

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 704
  • San Angelo, Texas
  • Liked: 140
  • Likes Given: 168
Very interesting! Not a bad name :)

Yes it is. Omega just lends itself to jokes about coming in last.

Offline russianhalo117

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4933
  • AR USA / Berlin, DE / Moscow, RF
  • Liked: 1335
  • Likes Given: 598
Quote
To date, we have completed 4 large composite cases and will begin casting propellant in the first inert motor next week #OmegaRocket

https://twitter.com/OrbitalATK/status/986031070398345216
AFAIA: the inert motors will also be used for battleship testing (processing, transport, lifting, stacking tests et cetera.) at KSC's VAB for OmegA and evaluation for SLS Block-II under the guise of the Advanced Booster Competition programme.
« Last Edit: 04/17/2018 11:36 pm by russianhalo117 »

Offline Space Ghost 1962

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2783
  • Whatcha gonna do when the Ghost zaps you?
  • Liked: 2911
  • Likes Given: 2249
There is another point for the use of the name "Omega". If you were going to compartmentalize certain specific parts of NSS that might never be economically bid by any commercial, the "last" option might be to have a minimum footprint means of supplying that need.

Such a means would likely be a vehicle like NGL (or, for the Europeans, an uprated Vega-C). Such a vehicle might also be a way of handling funding/development/continued flight of solids based vehicles. It would subsidize both needs at the same time.

The difficulty with that approach would be in the cost escalation as well as the tendency to under- or over-commit missions based solely on keeping alive a narrow need that might imply single-sourcing. This might be difficult for the AF procurement processes.

Offline GreenShrike

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 183
  • Liked: 192
  • Likes Given: 543
Very interesting! Not a bad name :)

Yes it is. Omega just lends itself to jokes about coming in last.

I like how they not-so-subtly emphasized the Orbital 'O' and ATK 'A' in the name OmegA. I wonder how much it influenced the name selection?

Gonna be an upward slog getting people actually using the mixed case for Omega, though.* :-)

Edit -- Heh, especially when even the Omega factsheet PDF on OATK's site doesn't bother.
« Last Edit: 04/18/2018 04:16 pm by GreenShrike »
TriOptimum Corporation            Science
                                      Military /_\ Consumer

Offline Kabloona

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4339
  • Velocitas Eradico
  • Fortress of Solitude
  • Liked: 2578
  • Likes Given: 531
There is another point for the use of the name "Omega". If you were going to compartmentalize certain specific parts of NSS that might never be economically bid by any commercial, the "last" option might be to have a minimum footprint means of supplying that need.

Not sure what you mean by "minimum footprint." Would you please elaborate?

Offline Rik ISS-fan

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 966
  • the Netherlands
  • Liked: 246
  • Likes Given: 141
Let's start with a link to the OmegA page on OATK website.
I think there could be a lot of similarity between the 5-segment SRB and the Castor 1200. I also think some members of the Orion 50, Castor 30/120, GEM40-63 stages could be smaler versions of the Castor 300, 600 and 1200. AFAIK solids scale very easily.
I think GreenShrike nailed the reasoning behind the OmegA name. OA mega; the largest possible launcher from Orbital ATK. 

Tags: updates