-
#60
by
nacnud
on 26 Feb, 2022 15:17
-
-
#61
by
Jim
on 26 Feb, 2022 15:18
-
Jim,
I know about the white room and that most launchers have access panels in the sides of the fairings. But Cygnus payload module can only be accessed from bulkhead that is pointing up when in the launch configuration. If you are saying there's a hatch in the fairing that allows access at the "pointy end", I'll take your word for it. I was not aware of this.
There won't be anymore metallic fairings. They can put it in the side above bulkhead before the nosecone.
-
#62
by
baldusi
on 26 Feb, 2022 19:42
-
Jim,
I know about the white room and that most launchers have access panels in the sides of the fairings. But Cygnus payload module can only be accessed from bulkhead that is pointing up when in the launch configuration. If you are saying there's a hatch in the fairing that allows access at the "pointy end", I'll take your word for it. I was not aware of this.
There won't be anymore metallic fairings. They can put it in the side above bulkhead before the nosecone.
They need to be able to put a rig, basically a crane, that can carry and lower the late-load cargo. I ignore the size of the access panel, but it would have to be at least 4/6ft high and have such a rig certified. I would suspect some other clients have much more stringent requirements, but I have to ask.
-
#63
by
Jim
on 26 Feb, 2022 19:49
-
Jim,
I know about the white room and that most launchers have access panels in the sides of the fairings. But Cygnus payload module can only be accessed from bulkhead that is pointing up when in the launch configuration. If you are saying there's a hatch in the fairing that allows access at the "pointy end", I'll take your word for it. I was not aware of this.
There won't be anymore metallic fairings. They can put it in the side above bulkhead before the nosecone.
They need to be able to put a rig, basically a crane, that can carry and lower the late-load cargo. I ignore the size of the access panel, but it would have to be at least 4/6ft high and have such a rig certified. I would suspect some other clients have much more stringent requirements, but I have to ask.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=10600.msg217651#msg217651
-
#64
by
baldusi
on 26 Feb, 2022 19:56
-
Jim,
I know about the white room and that most launchers have access panels in the sides of the fairings. But Cygnus payload module can only be accessed from bulkhead that is pointing up when in the launch configuration. If you are saying there's a hatch in the fairing that allows access at the "pointy end", I'll take your word for it. I was not aware of this.
There won't be anymore metallic fairings. They can put it in the side above bulkhead before the nosecone.
They need to be able to put a rig, basically a crane, that can carry and lower the late-load cargo. I ignore the size of the access panel, but it would have to be at least 4/6ft high and have such a rig certified. I would suspect some other clients have much more stringent requirements, but I have to ask.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=10600.msg217651#msg217651
Yep, like that. But that was Shuttle. I was wondering about composite Atlas V/Vulcan fairing. Actually, I think only Vulcan would be an option.
-
#65
by
Jim
on 26 Feb, 2022 20:23
-
Jim,
I know about the white room and that most launchers have access panels in the sides of the fairings. But Cygnus payload module can only be accessed from bulkhead that is pointing up when in the launch configuration. If you are saying there's a hatch in the fairing that allows access at the "pointy end", I'll take your word for it. I was not aware of this.
There won't be anymore metallic fairings. They can put it in the side above bulkhead before the nosecone.
They need to be able to put a rig, basically a crane, that can carry and lower the late-load cargo. I ignore the size of the access panel, but it would have to be at least 4/6ft high and have such a rig certified. I would suspect some other clients have much more stringent requirements, but I have to ask.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=10600.msg217651#msg217651
Yep, like that. But that was Shuttle. I was wondering about composite Atlas V/Vulcan fairing. Actually, I think only Vulcan would be an option.
Door on the left would be fine.
-
#66
by
zubenelgenubi
on 28 Feb, 2022 22:13
-
Moderator:
I edited the title to remove reference to "CRS-3."
-
#67
by
yg1968
on 01 Mar, 2022 03:55
-
For CRS2, NG had offered Cygnus on an Atlas as an option. I imagine that this CRS2 option can be replaced with Vulcan-Centaur.
-
#68
by
deadman1204
on 09 Mar, 2022 15:06
-
For CRS2, NG had offered Cygnus on an Atlas as an option. I imagine that this CRS2 option can be replaced with Vulcan-Centaur.
I'm doubtful about this. The first several vulcans are already spoken for. ULA desperately needs them for nssl contracts and other stuff. I doubt there is gonna be any extra to sell for a few years.
-
#69
by
DanClemmensen
on 09 Mar, 2022 15:18
-
For CRS2, NG had offered Cygnus on an Atlas as an option. I imagine that this CRS2 option can be replaced with Vulcan-Centaur.
I'm doubtful about this. The first several vulcans are already spoken for. ULA desperately needs them for nssl contracts and other stuff. I doubt there is gonna be any extra to sell for a few years.
ULA is a rocket launch provider. Atlas V is retireing after the remaining 24 are used and Delta IV is retiring after the last three are used. Vulcan is all they have to sell after those 27 already-sold rockets are launched. They have a factory that can build 30 Vulcans a year starting as soon as they can get the engines. Many of the existing Atlases (and Deltas?) are already allocated for NSSL. As soon as the first three Vulcan flights are completed, Vulcan will be certified and they will surely want to begin commercial launches including Cygnus.
The only problem: NG will need its first non-Antares rocket no later than about August 2023 to maintain its CRS-2 cadence.
-
#70
by
Jim
on 09 Mar, 2022 16:39
-
Certification is not required for commercial launches
-
#71
by
DanClemmensen
on 09 Mar, 2022 16:45
-
Certification is not required for commercial launches
Formal certification is not needed, but surely it affects the insurance prices? I was just assuming without any evidence that the same first three flights that are already booked for Vulcan-Centaur would precede any additional Vulcan-Centaur flights including any Cygnus flights.
-
#72
by
Jim
on 09 Mar, 2022 16:54
-
Certification is not required for commercial launches
Formal certification is not needed, but surely it affects the insurance prices? I was just assuming without any evidence that the same first three flights that are already booked for Vulcan-Centaur would precede any additional Vulcan-Centaur flights including any Cygnus flights.
That is between ULA and its customers and none of us are privy to it.
-
#73
by
baldusi
on 10 Mar, 2022 13:08
-
Certification is not required for commercial launches
Formal certification is not needed, but surely it affects the insurance prices? I was just assuming without any evidence that the same first three flights that are already booked for Vulcan-Centaur would precede any additional Vulcan-Centaur flights including any Cygnus flights.
That is between ULA and its customers and none of us are privy to it.
How long would be contracting and integration work for Vulcan/Falcon 9? I'm wondering if NG would be able to offer Vulcan with F9 as an option if their initial Vulcan is delayed or suffers an anomaly.
-
#74
by
russianhalo117
on 10 Mar, 2022 14:16
-
For CRS2, NG had offered Cygnus on an Atlas as an option. I imagine that this CRS2 option can be replaced with Vulcan-Centaur.
I'm doubtful about this. The first several vulcans are already spoken for. ULA desperately needs them for nssl contracts and other stuff. I doubt there is gonna be any extra to sell for a few years.
ULA is a rocket launch provider. Atlas V is retireing after the remaining 24 are used and Delta IV is retiring after the last three are used. Vulcan is all they have to sell after those 27 already-sold rockets are launched. They have a factory that can build 30 Vulcans a year starting as soon as they can get the engines. Many of the existing Atlases (and Deltas?) are already allocated for NSSL. As soon as the first three Vulcan flights are completed, Vulcan will be certified and they will surely want to begin commercial launches including Cygnus.
The only problem: NG will need its first non-Antares rocket no later than about August 2023 to maintain its CRS-2 cadence.
The engines do not prevent them from manufacturing everything for each Vulcan minus the engines. They are already building out their year 1 manifest at this time plus some.
-
#75
by
DanClemmensen
on 10 Mar, 2022 14:52
-
For CRS2, NG had offered Cygnus on an Atlas as an option. I imagine that this CRS2 option can be replaced with Vulcan-Centaur.
I'm doubtful about this. The first several vulcans are already spoken for. ULA desperately needs them for nssl contracts and other stuff. I doubt there is gonna be any extra to sell for a few years.
ULA is a rocket launch provider. Atlas V is retireing after the remaining 24 are used and Delta IV is retiring after the last three are used. Vulcan is all they have to sell after those 27 already-sold rockets are launched. They have a factory that can build 30 Vulcans a year starting as soon as they can get the engines. Many of the existing Atlases (and Deltas?) are already allocated for NSSL. As soon as the first three Vulcan flights are completed, Vulcan will be certified and they will surely want to begin commercial launches including Cygnus.
The only problem: NG will need its first non-Antares rocket no later than about August 2023 to maintain its CRS-2 cadence.
The engines do not prevent them from manufacturing everything for each Vulcan minus the engines. They are already building out their year 1 manifest at this time plus some.
Sorry, my phrasing was sloppy: ULA needs the engines for integration and delivery, and I have no inside info as to the engineless build status or the integration time after engines are delivered. If ULA is even a little ahead of the engines as you say, then Vulcans are constrained nearly exclusively by BE-4 production rate (after BE-4 production units are qualified by ULA).
The other gating factor is an actual contract between NG and ULA. Based only on public info, The first two Vulcan flights are already booked and there are follow-on flights for Dream Chasers and for USSF, so it's unclear as seen from the outside when the first Cygnus-on-Vulcan could fly. Can it fly by August 2023? If not, can ULA free up an Atlas V?
-
#76
by
oldAtlas_Eguy
on 10 Mar, 2022 17:33
-
From start of a contract awarded to ULA for launch and integration on a Atlas V. ULA launched Cygnus 1 year later. So getting Cygnus onto Vulcan should be able to be done in about the same timeline, especially since ULA has already done integration of Cygnus before but on a Atlas V. The question would be is when available Vulcan Flight hardware would be available?
So yes it is likely that a Vulcan launch of Cygnus could happen as early as Summer of 2023. As long as it gets on contract by this summer 2022 and there are engines to do the flight. But since there are 2 sets of LV hardware already in NG's hands. That gives time to do the swap without a hiccup in any of the planned flights of Cygnus.
-
#77
by
baldusi
on 11 Mar, 2022 19:56
-
From start of a contract awarded to ULA for launch and integration on a Atlas V. ULA launched Cygnus 1 year later. So getting Cygnus onto Vulcan should be able to be done in about the same timeline, especially since ULA has already done integration of Cygnus before but on a Atlas V. The question would be is when available Vulcan Flight hardware would be available?
So yes it is likely that a Vulcan launch of Cygnus could happen as early as Summer of 2023. As long as it gets on contract by this summer 2022 and there are engines to do the flight. But since there are 2 sets of LV hardware already in NG's hands. That gives time to do the swap without a hiccup in any of the planned flights of Cygnus.
But if we expect Vulcan to launch towards Q4 '22, I don't see it doing more than 3 launches in 2023. which means I can hardly see NG getting a slot before Q4 2024. If they need to keep the cadence (which I'm not sure since Dram Chaser would be flying on the second Vulcan and covers most of Cygnus needs), they could get one or two F9 launches to keep the ISS running. Seeing how the situation is affecting ESA and obviously Roscosmos, I think NASA should ask for as much redundancy as possible for the next four years.
-
#78
by
su27k
on 26 Mar, 2022 03:00
-
-
#79
by
deadman1204
on 26 Mar, 2022 13:27
-
From start of a contract awarded to ULA for launch and integration on a Atlas V. ULA launched Cygnus 1 year later. So getting Cygnus onto Vulcan should be able to be done in about the same timeline, especially since ULA has already done integration of Cygnus before but on a Atlas V. The question would be is when available Vulcan Flight hardware would be available?
So yes it is likely that a Vulcan launch of Cygnus could happen as early as Summer of 2023. As long as it gets on contract by this summer 2022 and there are engines to do the flight. But since there are 2 sets of LV hardware already in NG's hands. That gives time to do the swap without a hiccup in any of the planned flights of Cygnus.
But if we expect Vulcan to launch towards Q4 '22, I don't see it doing more than 3 launches in 2023. which means I can hardly see NG getting a slot before Q4 2024. If they need to keep the cadence (which I'm not sure since Dram Chaser would be flying on the second Vulcan and covers most of Cygnus needs), they could get one or two F9 launches to keep the ISS running. Seeing how the situation is affecting ESA and obviously Roscosmos, I think NASA should ask for as much redundancy as possible for the next four years.
We don't actually expect it to launch at the end of this year. ANY rocket company that says "by the end of the year" actually means "some time next year". Like ALL of rocket history pretty much proves that.