tater

ULA launch and discussion thread

Recommended Posts

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ULA has been talking about this with nanoracks, and it's pretty interesting:

TLDR: the docking ports are between the 2 tanks, and the interstage between them contains robotic cutters, than can then open the 2 tanks to the central area, accessible via docking. Clever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Nightfury said:

I see the ISS. When should this happen ?

It's notional, though they are talking to NASA about using a centaur that is lying around that didn't pass inspection to fly as a ground-based testbed.

The image and video show an upper stage that doesn't really exist, so I'm a little unsure what the are getting at. Seems like the docking port/robot area could be under the payload adapter, instead. Centaur has a common bulkhead.

 

 

Edited by tater

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tater said:

... Though they are talking to NASA about using a centaur that is lying around that didn't pass inspection to fly as a ground-based testbed.

Interesting... How do they plan to launch it up there ? Pressurize with air then vent it off ?

Edited by YNM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tater said:

It's notional, though they are talking to NASA about using a centaur that is lying around that didn't pass inspection to fly as a ground-based testbed.

The image and video show an upper stage that doesn't really exist, so I'm a little unsure what the are getting at. Seems like the docking port/robot area could be under the payload adapter, instead. Centaur has a common bulkhead.

 

Lol, this is what you want a living quarter made out of the inside of a rocket that didn't pass inspection. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't there an issue in the skylab era where they found that people couldn't work very well in wet labs? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ment18 said:

Wasn't there an issue in the skylab era where they found that people couldn't work very well in wet labs? 

I don't recall there being one... just that with a Saturn V not being reserved for a Moon mission (Apollos 18, 19, and 20 were cancelled), it was the preferred option to launch a dry workshop with one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ment18 said:

Wasn't there an issue in the skylab era where they found that people couldn't work very well in wet labs? 

I think it depends on what the "wet" used to be. Hydrogen and oxygen tanks would probably be fine. I certainly wouldn't want to live or work in a tank that had held kerosene, however. The smell would be terrible. There would probably also be unavoidably high levels of HAPs (hazardous airborne particles).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, mikegarrison said:

I think it depends on what the "wet" used to be. Hydrogen and oxygen tanks would probably be fine. I certainly wouldn't want to live or work in a tank that had held kerosene, however. The smell would be terrible. There would probably also be unavoidably high levels of HAPs (hazardous airborne particles).

Well certainly not diesel, low fuming kerosene would be tolerable. But just to clean it you would need some kind of volatile chemical and that in and of itself is a problem. If you were going to weld in space you would at least have to have it clean enough to flux the metal. Its very difficult, short of sanding or flaming to clean oil off metal. 

There are other solutions, such as using prefit brackets that can snuggly fit and snap together in an unwelded manner. Once these are attached false interior walls can be placed and welded. Here's the problem, there must be some sort of welding work done to create a dock port or hatch. That means recycling means a mandatory work in space. . . . . . or the tanks itself is built with a docking port installed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, tater said:

The image and video show an upper stage that doesn't really exist, so I'm a little unsure what the are getting at.

It sort of looks like the ACES.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't all the Centaurs have a common bulkhead?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tater said:

Don't all the Centaurs have a common bulkhead?

405px-Centaur_rocket_stage.jpg225px-Centaur_upper_stage_of_Atlas_V_roc

This can be contrasted with DIVUS (probably more efficient but for large PLs, very little thrust) [Note NASA little rear bumber 'decorations']

1280px-Second_stage_of_a_Delta_IV_Medium

And EUS

LUS1.jpg&f=1

The interesting thing about these two is the spheroid tanks and the Russian-like lattice between the hydrogen and oxygen tanks. Also not that compared to the RL10B-2 that the RL10-C[3?] on the EUS have very little engine detail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DCSS/ICPS/EUS has higher dry mass than centaur as a % of total mass, as I recall. Dunno, but those could work. Still, different than the images show for this concept.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, tater said:

DCSS/ICPS/EUS has higher dry mass than centaur as a % of total mass, as I recall. Dunno, but those could work. Still, different than the images show for this concept.

Hmm, I wonder then why they would not expand the Centuar to accomidate new functions.  Yep you are correct.

EUS 129,000 kg of propellant. (dont know of any stats for  dry weight)
DCSS 26,000 kg of propellant (3490 kg of gross weight) for DIV-5metter - 11.83%
Centaur 20,830 kg of Propellant (~2250 kg of gross weight) - 9.7%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ACES is common bulkhead as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, tater said:

ACES is common bulkhead as well.

I think the EUS is supposed to share a common bulkhead with SIV upper stage.

There is a major difference in the overall design.

" The forward bulkhead of the LOX tank formed the aft bulkhead of the LH2 tank. This saved up to 20% of structural weight." this differs from the latticed structure of the EUS. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/4/2018 at 10:58 PM, tater said:

 

So does anyone have the foggiest what AFSPC-11 actually is?

Without more info, I'm going to make it a spysat with hella dV, listening in on geostats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, sevenperforce said:

So does anyone have the foggiest what AFSPC-11 actually is?

Without more info, I'm going to make it a spysat with hella dV, listening in on geostats.

Quote

A United Launch Alliance Atlas 5 rocket, designated AV-079, will launch the AFSPC 11 mission for the U.S. Air Force. The mission will launch the Air Force’s Continuous Broadcast Augmenting SATCOM (CBAS) payload and the EAGLE satellite hosting multiple military experiments. The rocket will fly in the 551 vehicle configuration with a five-meter fairing, five solid rocket boosters and a single-engine Centaur upper stage. Delayed from Dec. 7 and March. Moved forward from April 18. Delayed from April 12. [April 12]

https://spaceflightnow.com/launch-schedule/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, tater said:

snip-snap

http://space.skyrocket.de is also mentioning the presence of a third craft aboard, "MYCROFT" which is based on a ESPASat bus from Orbital ATK and which should be deployed from EAGLE.

 

A pretty discrete payload, here are the specifications published by Orbital about the platform:

Orbit: GEO

Design Life: Three years, single string

Dry Mass (no P/Ls): 70 kg

Dimensions (no P/Ls): 22.3” x 22.3” x 27.4”  (56.6 x 56.6 x 69.5 cm)

Fuel Capacity: 22.7 kg,

Hydrazine Payload Mass: 30 kg

Total Power: 265 W

Payload Power (OAP/Peak): 30/60 W

Battery: 24 A hr Li Ion

Downlink/Uplink Rate: 256 kbps/2 kbps via AFSCN + Type 1 encryption

Data Storage: 12 GB

Attitude Knowledge: < 70 µrad, 1σ

Slew Rate: 1.5 deg/sec

Position Control: 6 DoF Control using wheels and thrusters

Position Knowledge: < 10 m

Avionics: IAU, BRE440 Processor, Virtex 5 FPGA

 

If anyone is interested, more info about the bus are available here: https://www.orbitalatk.com/space-systems/spacecraft-buses/docs/ESPASat_factsheet.pdf

Edited by XB-70A
Aurhtaugraf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, XB-70A said:

http://space.skyrocket.de is also mentioning the presence of a third craft aboard, "MYCROFT" which is based on a ESPASat bus from Orbital ATK and which should be deployed from EAGLE.

 

A pretty discrete payload, here are the specifications published by Orbital about the platform:

I hope it's a discrete payload. Continuous payloads would be...odd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.