Recommended Posts

To compete for US Air Force EELV launches.

 

Sounds like their ATK Liberty Commercial Crew launcher concept, which was a second bite at the apple after the Constellation Program Ares I launcher for Orion was cancelled.

 

http://fortune.com/2016/05/25/spacex-rocket-orbital/

 

 

Quote

This SpaceX Competitor Just Unveiled a New Rocket

 

It could be a new player in the battle for military and commercial missions to space.

 

Orbital ATK on Tuesday unveiled plans for a new rocket to compete against United Launch Alliance and Elon Musk’s Space Exploration Technologies for missions to launch U.S. military and commercial satellites.

 

Orbital’s Next Generation Launcher is based on the solid-rocket strap-on boosters that flew on NASA’s space shuttles, Orbital Business Development Director John Steinmeyer said at the 2016 Space Congress conference in Cape Canaveral.

 

The company plans to buy the rocket’s second stage from Jeff Bezos’ space company, Blue Origin.

 

Currently, United Launch Alliance—a partnership of Lockheed Martin  LMT 0.61%  and Boeing  BA -0.06% — and Musk’s SpaceX  SPACEX 0.00%  are the only companies certified to launch U.S. military and national security satellites.

 

“We’re working cooperatively with the Air Force to make sure there’s room for three players,” Steinmeyer said in an interview with Reuters.

Orbital would launch the rocket from one of the space shuttle’s old launchpads at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida.

 

If the Air Force maintained requirements for a West Coast launch site as well, Orbital could refurbish a pad at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California, Steinmeyer said.

 

Orbital in January won an Air Force contract worth up to $180 million to develop rocket propulsion technologies. Steinmeyer declined to say how much Orbital was investing in the project.
>

 

 

Liberty.png

 

Edited by DocM

Stephen Clark of Space News tweeted a slide of the layout, but it was shot at an angle which messed up the perspective. Fortunately, we can mitigate that :)

 

Straightened slide below.  I'm assuming the CASTOR solids are their 96 inch units, and their length is also in inches. Conversions added.

 

My translation. If anyone can get more out of it, go for it.

 

1-6 GEM 63XL solids (Atlas V is ditching its AJR solids for these)

Core diameters:  2.438 meter (96 inch)

 

S1 (2 seg): CASTOR 600 (600 in/15.24m)

S1 (4 seg Heavy): CASTOR 1200 (1200 in/30.48m)

S2: CASTOR 300 (300 in/7.62m)

 

S3 specs

Diameter: 5.25 meter
Engine: BE-3U-EN (extendable nozzle)
Propellants:  LOX/LH2 
Thrust: 120 klbf (534 kN)
Features: deep throttle, restartable

 

Payload fairing: 5.25x15 meters

 

Adjusted slide

f51648c88712ebaf1771bcea10605d0a.jpg

 

  • Like 1
  • 9 months later...

I don't see this flying, it's Ares I with a different upper stage and will need boosters to get heavy payloads up. The acoustics will be murder, which was the death knell of Constellation. Without really heavy dampeners astronauts riding Ares I  would have been turned into tomato soup, and those made it impossible to lift Orion to a decent orbit..

  • Like 1
  • 9 months later...

Mostly paywalled, it makes you wonder what they didn't like about the Blue Origin BE-3U. 

 

Good luck in getting AJR to bring the price down on the RL-10, and I would imagine getting USAF or congressional approval for a foreign upper stage engine on defense payloads isn't going to be a walk in the park  either.

 

http://aviationweek.com/awinspace/orbital-atk-pick-upper-stage-engine-ngl

 

OrbitalATK is considering the Aerojet-Rocketdyne RL10 or Ariane Group Vinci rocket engine for its Next Generation Launcher upper stage after rejecting Blue Origin's BE-3U. Decision expected in Q1 2018.....

Uuuughh ... the RL-10 is seriously underpowered for anything beyond satellite tasks (it could barely deal with Cygnus, and had almost zero margins left for that) unless and until it gets clustered, and there's no way that the USAF will use another foreign engine for DoD payloads again.

 

Possible use for the Interim Upper Stage for SLS, maybe? I'd sure love for it to see some action beyond the one or two flights, and it'd be trivial to adapt it for ATK's new rocket. New software and adapters, maybe a bulkhead and the panels. Otherwise it wouldn't take a heck of a lot to adapt it, really. 20% redesign/repurpose isn't a lot really. Oh, and four RL-10's are gonna have some throwing capability. :yes: 

I think the idea for Centaur V (5.4m core instead of the usual 3 meter) and ACES is to use up to four RL-10's.

 

One thing that could drop the cost is that AJ-R recently tested a 3D printed thrust chambe4,

 

http://www.rocket.com/article/aerojet-rocketdyne-achieves-3-d-printing-milestone-successful-testing-full-scale-rl10-copper

 

20170403_AM.jpg

  • Like 1

There's a lot of 3D printing going on. NASA has been working on 3D printed nozzles, and just about everyone in aerospace is trying to see what can be printed and what can't.  SpaceX prints turbopumps, valves, SuperDraco thrusters and much of Raptor.

 

So far it looks like 3D printing cuts the part count by at least 90%, with a similar reduction in waste. What's not to like?

  • Like 1
  • 2 months later...

DoD is re-doing EELV as EELV 2, and AIUI new participants need to bid on all launch types and payload classes - a direct response to ULA refusing to bid on the GPS-3 launch SpaceX then won by default. This after SpaceX won the previous round by a LOT.

 

NGL can meet the GTO 18,000 lb launch requirement, but I haven't seen anything  to meet the 14,500 lb GEO 2 requirement, which a direct injection to GEO launch.

 

 

eelv_rfp_reference_orbits.jpg

  • Like 1
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Calling GTA 6 overhyped crap doesn’t make you edgy, it just makes you sound like someone who hasn’t enjoyed anything since the PS2 era.
    • I’m not arguing whether Rockstar likes money. Obviously, they do, they’re a business. I’m saying this isn’t new. They’ve always launched console first. This is just how Rockstar operates.
    • I'm not sure how old the school is, but they've been doing this since GTA 3. Back in those days we'd be lucky for game companies to release on the PC at all. And with the current state of Sony (or Microsoft) their gaming wing won't be getting a penny from me.
    • We now know when and how the Universe may truly end by Sayan Sen Image by Marek Pavlík via Pexels| Not representative A study by physicist Henry Tye of Cornell University suggests that the universe may not expand forever. Instead, it could eventually stop expanding, begin contracting and end in a "Big Crunch" roughly 20 billion years from now. The research, published in the Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, was conducted by Tye, Horace White Professor of Physics Emeritus at Cornell University. Using recent observations from major dark-energy surveys, Tye and his collaborators developed a cosmological model that predicts the universe could have a total lifespan of about 33 billion years. Since the universe is currently estimated to be 13.8 billion years old, the model places it near the midpoint of its existence. According to Cornell University's summary of the research, the study centers on the cosmological constant, a term introduced by Albert Einstein in his theory of general relativity. In modern cosmology, the cosmological constant is commonly used to describe the simplest form of dark energy, the unknown phenomenon believed to be driving the accelerating expansion of the universe. "For the last 20 years, people believed that the cosmological constant is positive, and the universe will expand forever," Tye said in a Cornell University news release. "The new data seem to indicate that the cosmological constant is negative, and that the universe will end in a big crunch." The study draws on data from the Dark Energy Survey (DES) and the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI), two major projects designed to investigate the nature of dark energy. According to Tye, recent observations suggest that dark energy may not behave exactly like a simple cosmological constant. To account for those observations, Tye and his collaborators proposed a model involving an extremely light hypothetical particle that evolves over time. In their calculations, this produces a negative cosmological constant and leads to a future collapse of the universe. The model predicts that cosmic expansion would continue for approximately another 11 billion years before reaching a maximum size, after which the universe would begin contracting and eventually collapse. Scientists have long debated how the universe might end. As explained in an article published in The Conversation by Stephen DiKerby of Michigan State University, several possibilities have been proposed. If dark energy remains constant and positive, the universe could continue expanding indefinitely, gradually becoming colder, darker and more diffuse in a scenario often called the "heat death" of the universe. Other theoretical possibilities include a Big Rip, in which cosmic expansion accelerates so dramatically that galaxies, stars and even atoms are torn apart, or a Big Crunch, in which expansion reverses and the universe collapses back into an extremely dense state. DiKerby notes that the Big Crunch idea itself is not new. What distinguishes Tye's work is that it attempts to use current observational data to estimate when such a collapse might occur and how it could unfold. Much of the universe's long-term evolution remains uncertain. According to current astrophysical understanding, stars will continue to form and die for billions of years. The Sun, for example, is about halfway through its expected lifespan. Galaxies are also expected to continue merging; the Milky Way and Andromeda galaxies are projected to collide several billion years from now. At the same time, the nature of dark energy remains one of the biggest unanswered questions in cosmology. While observations indicate that the universe's expansion is accelerating, scientists still do not know what is causing that acceleration. Future observations may therefore alter current predictions about the cosmos's ultimate fate. Tye emphasized that additional evidence will be needed before firm conclusions can be drawn. DESI continues to collect data, while upcoming observations from missions and observatories including Euclid, SPHEREx and the Vera C. Rubin Observatory are expected to provide more precise measurements of dark energy. "People have said before that if the cosmological constant is negative, then the universe will collapse eventually. That's not new," Tye said. "However, here the model tells you when the universe collapses and how it collapses." For now, the study presents one possible future for the cosmos rather than a settled prediction. Whether the universe ultimately ends in a Big Crunch, expands forever, or follows another path entirely remains an open question that future observations will help answer. Source: Cornell University, The Conversation This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • If you look around on Amazon, some of these are available for $9
  • Recent Achievements

    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      With What earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      570
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      175
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      73
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      68
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!