Congress Moves to Stop Use of Russian RD-180 Engines

[andrew123]

It appears that the idiot oligarch in charge of Roscosmos and their sales agencies tweeted one too many threats. Congress finally realized that depending on the Russians to provide military SLV engines is a rather bad idea.

http://www.janes.com/article/46643/congress-moves-to-stop-use-of-russian-built-rocket-engine-by-2019

But like any political move, they forgot to plan for the replacement.

Edited December 5, 2014 by andrew123

[K^2]

I seem to recall Duma working on a law that would limit export of RD-180 anyhow. This is a good move. It will force military to invest into a replacement before Russia refuses to supply these engines.

[Streetwind]

A stupid move, in my personal opinion. The USA are shooting themselves in the foot by:

a.) subverting their own values of open, free global trade in favor of political ideologies - the very thing the USA always shouts that other countries shouldn't be allowed to do;

b.) denying their space industry the use of one of the world's best rocket engines, without any replacement in sight;

c.) throwing away the most reliable launch vehicle the US has ever had (Atlas V), together with the most efficient Earth departure stage in the entire world today (Centaur);

d.) crippling their single national security launch provider to the point where it basically cannot perform its function anymore - and if they certify a new one, they're once again left with a competition-free monopoly instead of a healthy market;

e.) exacerbating the tensions with Russia instead of working to lessen them, thereby promoting international conflict.

And in return, what is the advantage the USA are gaining from this? There is none. They are gaining absolutely nothing.

I think that the congressmen driving this resolution once again demonstrate that they're in it for nothing but lining their own pockets, have no idea what they're doing and hold none of the values that the citizens they supposedly represent associate with their country. It shouldn't surprise anyone that the USA's international reputation has been on a constant decline for over a decade now, and this move will certainly not reverse that trend.

[Aningaaq]

I do not want to backseat moderate but I hope this thread would stick with the science and leave politics out of it. These are the science labs and this thread will probably be closed if it continues like this (don't shoot the messenger. I love talking politics).

2.2 Forbidden content

Messages which contain, discuss or link to the following are explicitly forbidden:

Discussions of a political, ideological or religious nature;Source

With that said...

Is it possible that private companies like SpaceX could develop an alternative engine? If this is such a problem, then shouldn't a large contract be given to Boeing or SpaceX to develop such a thing? Or does such a reliable engine only come from decades of use and modification? Is it improbable that we could be without this engine?

[Kryten]

The bill actually allows such use if there's no option to get launch services 'at a fair and reasonable price' otherwise. Given that, it's effectively symbolic.

EDIT:

Is it possible that private companies like SpaceX could develop an alternative engine? If this is such a problem, then shouldn't a large contract be given to Boeing or SpaceX to develop such a thing? Or does such a reliable engine only come from decades of use and modification? Is it improbable that we could be without this engine?

ULA are already working on a replacement engine called BE-4 with Jeff Bezos' Blue Origin. If push comes to shove before that Delta IV is available, if rather pricy.

Edited December 5, 2014 by Kryten

[sal_vager]

It's hard to keep politics out of discussions like this, I understand that guys, but try to talk about the technology rather than the people who don't know any better, thanks

[Tiberion]

ULA was way ahead of this decision anyway since they had already announced the Be-4 engine would be used for a new booster (Atlas VI or whatever they decide to call it). This MIGHT accelerate the timeline on that new rocket and engine. Probably not. It just means that new sales of Atlas V launches are probably done. It seems pretty unlikely they'll try to activate the exception - the ban is set for 2019, Conveniently ULA also says their new rocket will fly "no earlier than" 2019. So the bill is indeed pretty much just a political action without much actual affect.

If the new rocket should happen to arrive late... well ULA will gladly move contracted launches over the Delta IV family... for a small additional cost of course; one they will gladly pass along to tax payers.

The interesting case here is the CST-100 - it flies on the Atlas V. Even if ULA has the engine stock to fly their NASA contract, they're going to want to be able to launch the thing in the future; that means man-rating something else besides the Atlas-V; that means either the Delta or the new rocket (which extends its timeline and program cost.

It's definitely going to be an interesting few years, I think.

[Kryten]

The interesting case here is the CST-100 - it flies on the Atlas V. Even if ULA has the engine stock to fly their NASA contract, they're going to want to be able to launch the thing in the future; that means man-rating something else besides the Atlas-V; that means either the Delta or the new rocket (which extends its timeline and program cost.

As long as they keep the same kind of design philosophy as they used with Atlas V, costs for man-rating should be minimal. There were already so many sensors and redundant components in A-V that man-rating for CCDEV took less than $7 million.

[Tiberion]

Well that was the cost of the technology that needed to be added. There's also been changes to its launch platform.

For the next rocket, those things should come with the original spec of the rocket, though they still represent additional costs a cargo rocket wouldn't incur. The main 'cost' is going to be additional unmanned flights of CST-100+AtlasNext to achieve that manrating (after its already been flying on A-V. Has 2 be 2 launches according to CCDev if I recall, and I don't think unmanned cargo launches of the new rocket will count of that, it'll need to be CST flights.

Its not going to derail anything, it just adds an.. interesting facet to the situation. Just imagine if the Dream Chaser (also launched on a A-V) had also been selected.