[Lockheed]


Recommended Posts

Would it surprise anyone if ULA jumps into the competition as well, then eventually the major parties to this competition "pony up" and form (essentially) a "Super ULA"-type company to pool all their expertise and people-power into their common efforts?

 

It wouldn't shock me if that's what ends up happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's the point? Is this Lockheed's answer to reusability?

In addition to cargo being transfered, you would also have to transfer propellant.

Hasn't Japan, Europe, and Antares demonstrated that it is just better/easier/efficient to build a new cargo ship each time?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Orbital refueling is a good idea if you reuse the spacecraft and can return cargo, but this is one-way and more complex than what CRS-2 needs.

Methinks Lockheed is trying to get NASA's CRS-2 program to pay for a whole fuel depot and tug architecture that couldn't get funding previously.

An enhanced, larger, Cygnus would be cheaper and simpler, even if it's disposable. Already in the mix and part of Orbital's CRS-2 proposal, with an added plus of being usable as a crew habitat for both Orion and the Commercial Crew spacecraft. There's also a good chance Cygnus could get an inflatable heat shield for cargo returns.

Cygnus-Congigurations.jpg

nasa-gonflabil-spatiu.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.