-
#20
by
spacenut
on 05 Mar, 2022 13:02
-
ISS is getting new solar arrays.
Maybe not now. With everything that is happening, if Russia decides to disconnect or deactivate their part of ISS. Seems to me it would be easier to go ahead and retire it.
-
#21
by
edzieba
on 05 Mar, 2022 17:51
-
ISS is getting new solar arrays.
Maybe not now.
Two iROSA arrays have already been installed, two more will be going up this April, and the last pair this September.
-
#22
by
Athelstane
on 06 Mar, 2022 18:26
-
ISS is getting new solar arrays.
Maybe not now. With everything that is happening, if Russia decides to disconnect or deactivate their part of ISS. Seems to me it would be easier to go ahead and retire it.
The Russians aside, there are a lot of stakeholders in ISS, and they all seem to want to keep it in operation for as long as possible.
So, I think we have to work from that premise, whether we agree with the decision or not.
-
#23
by
deadman1204
on 08 Mar, 2022 19:38
-
Neutron is several years out. Cygnus needs and answer in a few months.
-
#24
by
Robotbeat
on 09 Mar, 2022 00:20
-
Neutron is several years out. Cygnus needs and answer in a few months.
The answer (beyond the existing Antares stock if there are any) is Falcon 9. Atlas V as the emergency contingency of that (but would require some deal with Boeing?). …if Cygnus is the lynchpin of some emergency measure.
-
#25
by
DanClemmensen
on 09 Mar, 2022 00:39
-
Neutron is several years out. Cygnus needs and answer in a few months.
The answer (beyond the existing Antares stock if there are any) is Falcon 9. Atlas V as the emergency contingency of that (but would require some deal with Boeing?). …if Cygnus is the lynchpin of some emergency measure.
We have been discussing two types of Cygnus mission: normal Cygnus CRS-2 resupply missions, and "emergency" reboost missions. Because Antares is manufactured in eastern Ukraine, NG can only count on the two Antares LV that have already been delivered.
Cygnus has been flying CRS missions about twice a year since 2014. the next two missions are NG-18 in August 2022 and NG-19 in April 2023. these missions will expend the remaining two Antares LVs. NG will need another launcher by August 2023, or NASA will be forced to use Cargo Dragon missions instead.
If NASA needs additional Cygnus missions for reboost on an emergency basis and if supply missions cannot also act as reboost missions, NASA could choose to use Cargo Dragon to replace the two Cygnus supply missions. We know a Cygnus supply mission can provide reboost, but I do not know if this dual-use mission cuts into the reboost capability. If more than two Cygnus reboosts are needed, a replacement LV will be needed, possibly sooner than August 2023 and certainly not later.
-
#26
by
deadman1204
on 09 Mar, 2022 14:09
-
If NASA needs additional Cygnus missions for reboost on an emergency basis and if supply missions cannot also act as reboost missions, NASA could choose to use Cargo Dragon to replace the two Cygnus supply missions. We know a Cygnus supply mission can provide reboost, but I do not know if this dual-use mission cuts into the reboost capability. If more than two Cygnus reboosts are needed, a replacement LV will be needed, possibly sooner than August 2023 and certainly not later.
I'm pretty I've read that the amount of boost a Cygnus can provide the ISS is significantly less than what a Progress can provide. Does anyone have numbers for this?
-
#27
by
Jim
on 09 Mar, 2022 14:14
-
If NASA needs additional Cygnus missions for reboost on an emergency basis and if supply missions cannot also act as reboost missions,
Why make this assumption and what are you basing it on? No need to take the discussion further without resolving this and involve any others.
-
#28
by
JEF_300
on 09 Mar, 2022 19:06
-
I mean, if it's an emergency mission, I think they'll just use the Falcon 9. Even if for whatever reason SpaceX or Northrop Grumman were especially against working together, it's not like they're going to be so against it that they'd allow the Station to be endangered.
-
#29
by
FunBobby
on 09 Mar, 2022 20:18
-
Not considering the immediate concerns with ISS.....Cygnus on Neutron might be a good combination for Orbital Reef if it gets built or the standalone Axiom Station. If I were Axiom, I hope I have a plan B for my station where it begins life as a free-flyer not dependent on ISS, just in case ISS is at the bottom of the Pacific before my first module launches. Upmass should be slightly improved for Cygnus to a station at a lower latitude than 56 degrees. I suppose it would no longer make sense to use Baikanor to determine orbital inclination. I can't remember right now if Rocket Lab gave orbital parameters for it's baseline 8MT to LEO figure.
-
#30
by
edzieba
on 09 Mar, 2022 22:35
-
I mean, if it's an emergency mission, I think they'll just use the Falcon 9. Even if for whatever reason SpaceX or Northrop Grumman were especially against working together, it's not like they're going to be so against it that they'd allow the Station to be endangered.
In an 'emergency', they'd use Atlas as Cygnus is already qualified to fly on it (and has done so) and Atlas is already qualified to launch it (and has done so). The chances of Amazon refusing to give up (with a nice compensation) one of their earmarked cores for an actual 'emergency' is slim to none.
-
#31
by
russianhalo117
on 09 Mar, 2022 22:46
-
I mean, if it's an emergency mission, I think they'll just use the Falcon 9. Even if for whatever reason SpaceX or Northrop Grumman were especially against working together, it's not like they're going to be so against it that they'd allow the Station to be endangered.
In an 'emergency', they'd use Atlas as Cygnus is already qualified to fly on it (and has done so) and Atlas is already qualified to launch it (and has done so). The chances of Amazon refusing to give up (with a nice compensation) one of their earmarked cores for an actual 'emergency' is slim to none.
If it was declared as needed for national security then maybe but right now through the end of the current Cygnus Contract it is not needed. Such a decision is nothing any of us would be privy to. Investors of all involved parties would be informed via a presentation and/or teleconference.
-
#32
by
lrk
on 10 Mar, 2022 14:55
-
I mean, if it's an emergency mission, I think they'll just use the Falcon 9. Even if for whatever reason SpaceX or Northrop Grumman were especially against working together, it's not like they're going to be so against it that they'd allow the Station to be endangered.
SpaceX and NG have no problems with collaborating. E.g. the Gateway (for which the HALO module is built by NG) is launching on Falcon Heavy.
-
#33
by
Robotbeat
on 10 Mar, 2022 15:15
-
That’s NASA’s decision, not NG’s.
-
#34
by
JEF_300
on 10 Mar, 2022 20:37
-
I mean, if it's an emergency mission, I think they'll just use the Falcon 9. Even if for whatever reason SpaceX or Northrop Grumman were especially against working together, it's not like they're going to be so against it that they'd allow the Station to be endangered.
In an 'emergency', they'd use Atlas as Cygnus is already qualified to fly on it (and has done so) and Atlas is already qualified to launch it (and has done so). The chances of Amazon refusing to give up (with a nice compensation) one of their earmarked cores for an actual 'emergency' is slim to none.
I think what would probably actually happen is they would use the last two Antares for any 'emergency' flights, since that is what would be fastest. Dragon flights could be shuffled forwards to cover a gap while either an adaptor is made for Cygnus to fly on another rocket, or access to Atlas V's is negotiated.
-
#35
by
oldAtlas_Eguy
on 03 May, 2022 02:05
-
RocketLab posted just recently its upgraded LEO payload capability of 13t in the reuse configuration. An increase of 5t from its previous of 8t for reuse configuration.
This puts Neutron as a definite can do the Cygnus mission without difficulty as well as likely being very close to direct cost competitor to the F9.