-
#120
by
Jim
on 25 Aug, 2022 19:54
-
The GEM63 and XL are off shelf in that NG has production line for them.
Likely ULA exclusive use.
Omega was going to us GEM63XLT.
That is neither of them nor off the shelf.
-
#121
by
TrevorMonty
on 25 Aug, 2022 21:53
-
The GEM63 and XL are off shelf in that NG has production line for them.
Likely ULA exclusive use.
Omega was going to us GEM63XLT.
That is neither of them nor off the shelf.
Close enough that development and tooling costs aren't that significant.
They could of cause use GEM63 or XL unless ULA paid for development and have sole rights to them.
-
#122
by
Comga
on 30 Aug, 2022 02:25
-
Given how many times FH has flown not worth extra R&D. SRBs are off the shelf.
No, they are not. And they are SRM's. SRB is a Shuttle booster using a Shuttle SRM and it is also what ULA calls the Atlas V SRMs as configured for launch. It is not a generic term.
The GEM63 and XL are off shelf in that NG has production line for them.
(snip)
Sigh
IMO Jim can often be more correct than informative (You too, TM.) but can we give it a rest and take from his posts that the professionals who bolt them on as hardware always refer to them as SRMs (Motors) and from the many alternative sources that SRB (Booster) is a common colloquialism?
-
#123
by
Ronsmytheiii
on 30 Aug, 2022 11:48
-
Still need a new pad and upperstage. Wallops was a big mistake
Might not get to GTO/GEO from Wallops, but with the much bigger mega constellations using higher inclination orbits isnt Wallops positioned well?
The GEO market has pretty much evaporated over the past few years, and while there will be a surge of the C-Band replacement satellites after that going to be slow years, where as mega constellations will have consistent refresh needs.
-
#124
by
Robotbeat
on 30 Aug, 2022 15:58
-
Still need a new pad and upperstage. Wallops was a big mistake
Wallops isn’t a mistake because I can see Wallops launches from my backyard.
-
#125
by
TrevorMonty
on 30 Aug, 2022 18:40
-
Still need a new pad and upperstage. Wallops was a big mistake
Wallops isn’t a mistake because I can see Wallops launches from my backyard.
RL have choosen Wallops twice now to build new launch sites.
-
#126
by
Ronsmytheiii
on 30 Aug, 2022 23:57
-
Still need a new pad and upperstage. Wallops was a big mistake
Wallops isn’t a mistake because I can see Wallops launches from my backyard.
Well to be fair, under the right circumstances and launch inclinations you would be able to see Florida launches from your yard. Just the second stage, not the first
.
-
#127
by
TrevorMonty
on 09 Sep, 2022 02:36
-
Just watch Everyday Astronaut Firefly video from late 2021. Tom said they were partnering with industry leader to speed up development of Beta. Comments at 55:00.
This partnership could be why AE Industrial were happy to put more money into company.
-
#128
by
TrevorMonty
on 01 Oct, 2022 07:47
-
-
#129
by
JEF_300
on 01 Oct, 2022 22:24
-
I imagine this has to be nearly as good a day for the Antares team as it is for Firefly.
-
#130
by
FutureSpaceTourist
on 04 Oct, 2022 17:51
-
twitter.com/northropgrumman/status/1577354693713354752
Congratulations to the @Firefly_Space team on your successful launch! We look forward to collaborating with you to upgrade the first stage of our #Antares rocket and co-develop our future medium launch vehicle. 🚀
https://twitter.com/firefly_space/status/1577355225026809861Thanks Northrop Grumman! The team is excited to be partnering with you.
-
#131
by
Dmitry_V_home
on 21 Oct, 2022 15:27
-
-
#132
by
RyanC
on 26 Oct, 2022 00:27
-
I'd like to point out that if PWR had kept on developing the F-1B engine concept from 2011, they'd have had a really good chance of getting this contract.
-
#133
by
Jer
on 28 Oct, 2022 18:18
-
I'd like to point out that if PWR had kept on developing the F-1B engine concept from 2011, they'd have had a really good chance of getting this contract.
Like what happened with the AR-1, developing an 'orphan' engine is a waste of time and money. The F1-B never had a real chance because the whole point of the SLS was to keep giving the old Shuttle suppliers new contracts.
-
#134
by
FutureSpaceTourist
on 05 Nov, 2022 17:05
-
-
#135
by
FutureSpaceTourist
on 05 Nov, 2022 17:15
-
-
#136
by
edkyle99
on 26 Dec, 2022 23:08
-
On the one hand, this big powerful new first stage is begging for a heavier upper stage or stages. Northrop could do this as a two-step process, flying Antares 330 with Castor 30XL to complete its ISS cargo obligations, then developing a multi-step solid or restart-able liquid upper stage to expand its launch capabilities.
On the other hand, Northrop might only be doing Antares 330 out of necessity, since the CRS profits are likely in the Cygnus payload. Complete the obligation to NASA, then let Firefly go off and finish the more capable all-liquid rocket on its own to fly out of the Cape.
Will be interesting to see what happens.
- Ed Kyle
-
#137
by
Redclaws
on 26 Dec, 2022 23:17
-
On the other hand, Northrop might only be doing Antares 330 out of necessity, since the CRS profits are likely in the Cygnus payload. Complete the obligation to NASA, then let Firefly go off and finish the more capable all-liquid rocket on its own to fly out of the Cape.
Given the degree of competition in the launch market, both current and upcoming (even ignoring things like Starship), this seems by far the most likely - It seems like a lot of companies are willing to burn money trying to get in right now. I can't imagine NG wanting in on that.
-
#138
by
trimeta
on 27 Dec, 2022 02:20
-
On the other hand, Northrop might only be doing Antares 330 out of necessity, since the CRS profits are likely in the Cygnus payload. Complete the obligation to NASA, then let Firefly go off and finish the more capable all-liquid rocket on its own to fly out of the Cape.
Given the degree of competition in the launch market, both current and upcoming (even ignoring things like Starship), this seems by far the most likely - It seems like a lot of companies are willing to burn money trying to get in right now. I can't imagine NG wanting in on that.
Hasn't NG said that they will be working with Firefly to develop the MLV (neé Beta) vehicle? So there's definitely no reason NG would build a separate Antares evolution using the Antares 330 first stage: MLV
is the evolution that NG is working on.
This close
and continued collaboration between the two companies is part of why I have a hard time imagining them still being separate in five years.
-
#139
by
Zed_Noir
on 27 Dec, 2022 03:01
-
<snip>
This close and continued collaboration between the two companies is part of why I have a hard time imagining them still being separate in five years.
Who will be still be around after the next 5 years as a launch provider? Northrop Grumman could let Firefly take over the launch business and concentrated on the more profitable payload side of the business.
.