-
#580
by
edkyle99
on 29 Apr, 2013 13:47
-
Interesting, so they're going with a fixed nozzle extension? I wonder how all of it is going to fit into the interstage adapter, or is there enough space for the entire nozzle?
Edit:
You don't happen to know the base diameter of each section do you?
RL10C will fly on Atlas V/Centaur, which has enough interstage length. I'm not sure if it will fly on Delta IV.
Here's the information that I have on hand.
The A-Cone fixed section is 22.1 in. (570 mm) long. The combined B/C-Cone translating section is 77.2 in. ( 2082 mm) long. The three cones increase the expansion ratio from 77:1 at the regenerative primary nozzle to 285:1. The primary renerative nozzle is 44 in. (1113 mm) in diameter. At the connection point between the A and B Cones (connection between fixed and translating nozzles) the diameter is 57 in. (1445 mm). At the exit plane the maximum diameter is 84 in. (2136 mm).
Snecma Moteurs of Le Haillan, France built the nozzle extensions.
Here's an image with some more dimensions.
- Ed Kyle
-
#581
by
Jim
on 29 Apr, 2013 15:11
-
The nozzle extension used on the RL10B-2 engine on the DCSS, is it a two-piece extension or just one? From various photos I have found of it in the stowed config, it looks like it's a two-piece design rather than a single-piece design.
The deployable extension is connected in one piece, but it consists of two parts (called the "B-cone" and "C-cone"). A third nozzle extension (called the "A-cone") is fixed to the main nozzle.
- Ed Kyle
Thanks Ed, I thought it might have been something like that as a two-piece deployment mechanism would have introduced as additional failure modes.
RL-10C, created from rebuilt excess RL-10B-2 engines, will, as I understand it, dispense with the B and C-cone extensions, eliminating the entire extension sequence.
- Ed Kyle
That is only for Atlas. Delta will still use the extensions.
-
#582
by
Jim
on 29 Apr, 2013 15:13
-
The nozzle extension used on the RL10B-2 engine on the DCSS, is it a two-piece extension or just one? From various photos I have found of it in the stowed config, it looks like it's a two-piece design rather than a single-piece design.
The deployable extension is connected in one piece, but it consists of two parts (called the "B-cone" and "C-cone"). A third nozzle extension (called the "A-cone") is fixed to the main nozzle.
- Ed Kyle
Thanks Ed, I thought it might have been something like that as a two-piece deployment mechanism would have introduced as additional failure modes.
RL-10C, created from rebuilt excess RL-10B-2 engines, will, as I understand it, dispense with the B and C-cone extensions, eliminating the entire extension sequence.
- Ed Kyle
Interesting, so they're going with a fixed nozzle extension? I wonder how all of it is going to fit into the interstage adapter, or is there enough space for the entire nozzle?
Atlas already uses a fixed nozzle extension.
-
#583
by
DaveS
on 29 Apr, 2013 19:52
-
Does anyone have a photo of the RL-10B-2 with the thermal shield installed? Does it cover the entire exterior pipes/boxes or just part of them?
-
#584
by
Targeteer
on 07 Jul, 2013 04:16
-
Details of the RL10 plans from the new Delta IV users guide (page 244)...
8.2.1 RL10C-2 2nd Stage Engine Upgrade
To improve commonality between the Atlas and Delta launch vehicles, ULA and Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne (PWR) are currently developing the RL10C-1 engine for the Centaur upper stage of the Atlas launch vehicle. This engine uses similar chamber and nozzle configuration as the RL10B-2 engine currently used on Delta. Use of this common engine allows for future upgrades to the RL10B-2 engine, to be called the RL10C-2 (Figure 8-2).
The RL10C-2 engine will incorporate all improvements from the RL10C-1, including an upgraded redundant ignition system to improve reliability, changes to the engine plumbing to improve starting operations, a propellant valve design update, and a number of improvements previously qualified under the Assured Access to Space program including a revised gear train and seal improvements.
The RL10C-2 development will be managed through
the RL10 Sustainment and Modernization Program.
This program is intended to incorporate improved manufacturing methods for turbomachinery, propellant valves, and injector hardware, revised large plumbing to reduce weight, and more robust solenoid valves. Additionally, the RL10C-2 is intended to be qualified to operate with active Mixture Ratio control, a capability available on Atlas/Centaur missions dating back to 1965. This feature, enabled on Delta IV by the addition of Common Avionics (Section 8.3.2), could result in a performance improvement of up to 200 lb for certain Delta missions. The RL10C-2 will continue to use the 3-segment extendible nozzle currently used on the RL10B-2. The C-2 will look virtually the same as an RL10B-2, with slight changes to the Ignition and Engine Instrumentation Boxes and realignment of some of the large plumbing.
Changes incorporated as part of the Sustainment and Modernization effort will be qualified for both the RL10C-1 for Atlas and the RL10C-2 for Delta at the same time, using the same common core engine. The end result will be an engine that can be built and acceptance tested using a common bill of material and test program, and then configured as necessary with bolt-on hardware to support either Atlas V or Delta IV vehicles.
-
#585
by
Prober
on 15 Jul, 2013 12:41
-
Anyone have a general idea of what the weight of the LH2 tankage of the Delta IV is?
-
#586
by
RocketmanUS
on 14 May, 2014 16:42
-
Could DIV be made to use the Atlas V solid boosters?
If so how many per core could be used.?
With maximum amount of Atlas V solid boosters on a DIV core what LEO payload mass could this get?
Note for questions:
This is all for tech and not political.
OK if it needs a new pad for this idea.
-
#587
by
baldusi
on 14 May, 2014 21:49
-
My guess is that you could.. while doing Delta V. Those SRB are not thrust vectored, like the GEM-60. I don't know if the RS-68A has enough control authority to handle the Atlas V's SRB. Then they have more thrust, so you'd probably need reinforcements in the tanks. And let's remember that the big work was actually having a common core. Thus, if you reinforce the structure for bigger SRB, you add weight and take out performance of the Medium.
I'm pretty sure that they could also try to make a composite H2 tank out of Boeing's 5.5m demonstrator (would have to adapt the tooling to 5.2m, of course). And that will increase performance a lot. But then you are so far from a Delta IV that's probably simply too expensive. ULA has always talked about an Atlas V Phase II.
-
#588
by
sdsds
on 15 May, 2014 05:23
-
Anyone have a general idea of what the weight of the LH2 tankage of the Delta IV is?
Rough guess?
((stage burnout mass) - (mass of engines)) * (29 / (12 + 29))
((27 t) - (7 t)) * 0.71 = 14.2 t
The LOX tankage would be (20 - 14.2 = 5.8 t.
You probably wonder where 29 and 12 come from. STS ET.
http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/technology/sts-newsref/et.htmlThe ratio isn't going to be exactly correct, since RS-68 and RS-25 have different O/F ratios. But hey, you asked for a general idea...! Maybe the data is available from Boeing somewhere?
-
#589
by
ZachS09
on 23 Jan, 2015 20:25
-
How come ULA does not have as many Delta IV launches planned as they have of Atlas V? Delta has only three for 2015 and in that same year, Atlas has nine including MUOS 3 seventy-two hours ago. I understand that the workhorse Delta II has only one this year because it is on the verge of retirement.
-
#590
by
the_other_Doug
on 24 Jan, 2015 02:59
-
ULA is, AIUI, planning on retiring the Delta IV as well, because it is far more expensive to produce, prepare and launch than the Atlas V, and gives little in extra performance. Even the D-IVH can't outperform a fully loaded-out Atlas V 500 series to the extent needed to maintain it as a viable commercial launch vehicle.
At least, that's the rationale I've heard.
-
#591
by
Jim
on 24 Jan, 2015 03:26
-
How come ULA does not have as many Delta IV launches planned as they have of Atlas V? Delta has only three for 2015 and in that same year, Atlas has nine including MUOS 3 seventy-two hours ago. I understand that the workhorse Delta II has only one this year because it is on the verge of retirement.
A. it is more expensive
b. it has a lower launch rate capability
-
#592
by
edkyle99
on 24 Jan, 2015 04:17
-
Even the D-IVH can't outperform a fully loaded-out Atlas V 500 series to the extent needed to maintain it as a viable commercial launch vehicle.
Delta 4 Heavy can lift about 1.7 times as much to GTO as Atlas 5-551. 11.4 versus 6.7 tonnes to GEO-1,500 m/s - more than any other rocket in the world. That seems substantial to me.
- Ed Kyle
-
#593
by
ZachS09
on 24 Jan, 2015 14:19
-
Holy smokes! I didn't know the Delta IV was near retirement!
-
#594
by
edkyle99
on 24 Jan, 2015 14:38
-
Holy smokes! I didn't know the Delta IV was near retirement!
It probably has another decade or more of life. ULA plans to develop a new first stage powered by BE-4 engines that will replace the existing Atlas 5 first stage for EELV Medium work, but the company cannot use this new rocket to replace Delta 4 Heavy until it also develops a new upper stage to replace Centaur. No substantial work is underway on the new upper stage to my knowledge, which means Heavy is going to be needed for years.
- Ed Kyle
-
#595
by
AS_501
on 24 Jan, 2015 15:22
-
Sorry for the confusion, didn't someone at ULA or Boeing recently say that Delta IV production would be stepped up to protect against Atlas V engine availability issues? Is that still that case? Thanks.
-
#596
by
Skyrocket
on 24 Jan, 2015 16:17
-
Holy smokes! I didn't know the Delta IV was near retirement!
...
No substantial work is underway on the new upper stage to my knowledge, which means Heavy is going to be needed for years.
- Ed Kyle
For which payloads? NROL-37 is the only one baselined for DIVH, and there are rumours, that it has been cancelled.
-
#597
by
edkyle99
on 24 Jan, 2015 17:16
-
Holy smokes! I didn't know the Delta IV was near retirement!
...
No substantial work is underway on the new upper stage to my knowledge, which means Heavy is going to be needed for years.
- Ed Kyle
For which payloads? NROL-37 is the only one baselined for DIVH, and there are rumours, that it has been cancelled.
The block buy was said to include four Delta 4 Heavies. That's for 2017 to maybe 2019-20.
- Ed Kyle
-
#598
by
Star One
on 27 Jan, 2015 06:33
-
If it's chosen when would the Delta IVH for the Solar Probe Plus mission be ordered?
-
#599
by
TetraOmni
on 25 May, 2015 12:48
-
Hi, i have some questions about the Delta 4:
Why is it being retired instead of being evolved into a less costly rocket? Basically ULA has this great vehicle and are going to just throw it away! F9 had to evolve to meat the commercial market, why not D4?
Gotta be cheaper than developing Vulcan from scratch^.^
