This is not a NASA Website. You might learn something. It's YOUR space agency. Get involved. Take it back. Make it work - for YOU.
Commercialization

Orbital and SpaceX Make Progress

By Keith Cowing
NASA Watch
October 1, 2012
Filed under , , , ,

American Resupply Missions to the Space Station Progressing
“Orbital Sciences Corporation Monday rolled the first stage of its Antares rocket to the launch pad of the nation’s newest spaceport – the Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport at Wallops Island, Va. – while in Florida, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) moves ahead with preparations for an Oct. 7 launch to the International Space Station for NASA’s first Commercial Resupply Services (CRS) mission. These developments mark progress in returning space station resupply missions to American soil.”

NASA Watch founder, Explorers Club Fellow, ex-NASA, Away Teams, Journalist, Space & Astrobiology, Lapsed climber.

25 responses to “Orbital and SpaceX Make Progress”

  1. PostitiveOutlook says:
    0
    0

    The Orbital vehicle is not really an “all American” product like the SpaceX Dragon.  Its first stage engines and tanks are Russian-made, American-refitted.  Still, its at least finished off in the US.  Does anyone see any symbolism in the name Antares (the rival of Ares?). 

    • mattmcc80 says:
      0
      0

      Yeah, it’s been amusing watching the proponents behind some of these new launch platforms try to make nationalistic “All-American” arguments, while actually depending substantially on foreign components.

      Antares is no more an American launch platform than Atlas V, also built around Russian motors.  Similarly, the flag-emblazoned, much-ballyhooed “Liberty” rocket from ATK depended entirely on a non-existent variant of the Ariane V.  Not exactly a rocket to drape stars & stripes around, despite all its marketing material to the contrary.

      Ultimately, though, I don’t care what country a rocket motor design comes from, I’m more interested in where it was built.  There are only so many good, effective designs in the world and not all of them are American.  That’s fine.  Aerojet is selling Russian-built motors to Orbital, but they do also hold a license to build their own using the same design.  If they do that, that’s “American” enough for me because the jobs are domestic.  If we were talking about cars, tariffs would be involved, which is why Toyotas sold in the US are built in Kentucky, not Nagoya.

      • James says:
        0
        0

         Altas is much more American than Antares.  Only the booster engines are foreign vs engines and tanks.

        • mattmcc80 says:
          0
          0

          Atlas V’s first stage core engine is the Russian RD-180.  As I understand it, Rocketdyne does hold a license to build the engines in the US, but it doesn’t sound like that’s actually happened yet.  Part of the reason may be that Aerojet is in the process of acquiring Rocketdyne.

    • Jeff Havens says:
      0
      0

      I was reading a bit about the engines, and what you said does pose a question — what engines are on the pad.  Is AeroJet making new engines based on the NK-33’s yet (They have the license to do so), or are the installed engines two of the refurb’ed NK-33’s?

      • no one of consequence says:
        0
        0

        Doesn’t matter. Issue is more about if Antares is a one shot deal for a handful of COTS flights only.

        Midway through COTS, as the budgetary, costing, performance, and need “air” clears … then you’ll see some revision of LV to fit market need. The market is radically changing at the moment, and we still don’t see the endpoint.

        Note that Falcon 9 is being revised now that they have significant flight history – clearly to make it more competitive. If Antares were to succeed, likely the niche it would sell into would require a smaller, tighter budgetary footprint, so a liquid second stage and lower cost first stage (likely engine(s)) would be likely changes for optimizing a Delta II footprint. Ironically, Liberty as an all solid might compete here as well.

        Oh, and the tanks/structural are from the Ukraine as outsource, and the cargo container is Italy, and the panels Danish.

        • Mark_Flagler says:
          0
          0

          SpaceX is, indeed, upgrading their LV; this appears to be an ongoing product improvement program. 
          The higher-thrust Merlin 1-D is now in production and should be used on a Vandenberg launch of a Canadian payload in Q1 of 2013. 
          The 1-D will increase payload somewhat. Isp is slightly improved at 310 sec, expansion ratio is higher at 16, and the thrust-to-weight ratio of tested engines exceeds 150.The 1-D has already gotten (a few feet) off the ground with Grasshopper where its throttleability (to ~70%) should be useful soon.
          Interestingly, the 1-D should cost less than the 1-C which might translate to slightly lower launch costs.BTW, the Russians are a little sensitive about SpaceX and are circulating rumors that it will soon be absorbed by a major aerospace firm. 
          I find that funny, actually, and not at all likely.

          • no one of consequence says:
            0
            0

            The Russian genY’s snark all the time about not being able to do a “SpaceXski” in Russia.

            This causes managers to go wild eyed. Its a mild form of organizational torture / entertainment. P.O.’s management too.

      • hikingmike says:
        0
        0

        They must be refurbished (with other mods) since I haven’t heard of them building any themselves and there are a lot of stored NK-33s to use.

    • no one of consequence says:
      0
      0

      There’s something even more funny about it.

      The Russians are pissed off at both Orbital and SpaceX, for different reasons.

      Orbital, because they’ll be the first to fly on Russian engines that the Russians couldn’t get around to use on own LV since they were designed but never used for its N-1 lunar HLV.

      SpaceX, because they did an all-up new LV and SC (actually worse in that its really a manned capsule in their eyes) from scratch, in less time than the master of the universe Russian designers, the most experienced in the world, on a fraction of the budget they have for same.

      For SpaceX to even exist and do what they have already done, is a major affront to their pride.

      COTs put to lie a lot of what all “arsenal systems” across the globe have claimed.

      • DTARS says:
        0
        0

        “It doesn’t take a rocket scientist”

        Of course I put that in quotes lolololol

        DTARS

      • hikingmike says:
        0
        0

        Yeah the NK-33 seems pretty badass. Any chance they (Aerojet?) can buy the whole enchilada eventually and do everything in the US once the existing stockpile is exhausted? Maybe not if they are seen as valuable to continue using whatever license/business model they do now.

        • hikingmike says:
          0
          0

           Also anybody think it a little different to have a solid as the 2nd stage? That thing could go like a bat out of hell with less weight, less gravity, and less atmosphere. Maybe it’s a lower thrust solid or something though.

          • no one of consequence says:
            0
            0

            Orbital knows solids. They were too chicken shit to do a liquid US at increased risk.

          • rockofritters says:
            0
            0

             they got the development of stage 2 free because it’s a slight derivative of work ATK was doing on PGS. Orbital loves plug and play and they’ll have to be dragged kicking and screaming from it…

        • no one of consequence says:
          0
          0

          Yes. But more likely to do a derivative follow-on with certain American technology adds – if they have the guts to follow through.

  2. Saturn1300 says:
    0
    0

    Interesting that Dragon again,will only carry 1000lbs,12,000lb. cap.What a waste.The first ISS flight of Cygnus will only carry 1000lbs.4000lb.cap.More waste.What is the cost per lb?An agreement so neither can brag?Dragon will carry a practice external load to be removed by the arm.Some progress any way.These small loads may be because NASA loaded up ISS with enough supplies a year ago to go thru ’12 in case Dragon did not deliver.Insurance can be expensive. Cygnus missions cost more than 2X Dragon.NASA had to have a backup.The best they could do unless as I have said,if they built the launcher and spacecraft at the NASA centers.Sorry Steve I could not resist.

    • Michael Reynolds says:
      0
      0

      Not that I have seen the cargo manifest. But maybe it is a restriction on volume more than on weight. Not all cargo is going to be dense. Keep in mind this is only an assumption.

    • John Gardi says:
      0
      0

       S13:

      Dragon cargo capacity is split between capsule and trunk (unpresurized). The Dragon capsule’s up cargo is the same as it’s down cargo; 6000lbs. It makes sense when you think about abort scenarios and what the parachutes can take and such. But still, this cargo, at a thousand pounds, is pretty light. One sixth maximum capacity.

      There is also a secondary payload, an OrbComm mini communications satellite that will remain with the second stage for a ride to it’s orbit of 750 miles after Dragon separates. It weighs about 300lbs.

      I think it’s smart of NASA to send nonessential durables on this first contract flight. Don’t forget, they have that whole new module (one of the MPLMs) to fill up. So, high volume, light mass stuff is a good ‘get ahead’ cargo without actually calling it another test flight ;). Also, it’s a test of SpaceX’s idea of a multi-role mission, proving to NASA that they can keep control of the second stage and make it do some decent work by delivering the OrbComm sat to it’s orbit. Practice for later geosynchronous deliveries too.

      tinker 

  3. Saturn1300 says:
    0
    0

     Some briefings on Sat.,maybe if we look hard enough we might find a cargo manifest.I see that SpaceX is losing the first 2 Iridium flights,I think it is.They are going to Dieneper.I wonder if SpaceX traded those flights to Russia for information on how Soyuz comes down on the ground with little damage,but F9 comes down in the water and is destroyed.
     NASA more than meets their quota for small business every year.This cold be called corporate Welfare.That is what it is called when government hires someone for something they can do themselves.Like building launchers and spacecraft.Strange that Antares has the same capacity as Titan 2.Maybe NASA wanted to help out Orbital and that is why those 47 Titan 2 were destroyed in 2006,right before Antares was thought up.Would it have saved a lot or was the conversion too costly.NASA had already converted some.

    • Mader Levap says:
      0
      0

      Err… what? It is just me or I see particularly loopy conspiracy theories?

      • Saturn1300 says:
        0
        0

        Probably are loopy.If anybody knows why they were destroyed or has a better theory,lets here it.The SpaceX theory was half joking.We are not suppose to post conspiracy theories however.I am really unhappy with those 47 Titan 2s being destroyed.I do not remember me or anyone else complaining in 2006.I guess we were richer then and throwing away billions like that was no worry.If Pres. Bush said it was OK,then no one can be charged with destroying government property.
        Correction.There were 38.5 Titan2 destroyed in 2008.They were pulled from Silos in !983.So maybe they were not in good shape.

    • Tom Young says:
      0
      0

      Conspiracy theories not needed.  SpaceX didn’t trade anything to Russia.  Iridium simply exercised its Dniepr launch options.

      Iridium is now down to five on-orbit spares for six orbital planes, and the satellites have been dying at the rate of about one per year.  It doesn’t take a genius to see that they’d better start getting satellites up *SOON* if they don’t want to lose coverage.

      When they signed the contract in 2010, SpaceX was still claiming to be a satellite launch company.  Now, they’ve turned into an ISS resupply company.  In the past two years, they could’ve launched Falcon 9 a dozen times with commercial payloads, but instead they built the Dragon and launched Falcon 9 only three times.

      Iridium’s insurers would rather SpaceX not practice on Iridium — better to let them build their launch record on the back of ISS resupply missions.

      Thus, they have a dilemma.  They have to get new satellites up *soon*, but they also can’t use SpaceX until they’ve built more of a  track record.  They’d previously bought 6 Dniepr launch options as an emergency backup.  This is an emergency.  Time to exercise those options.

  4. Todd_Martin says:
    0
    0

    If Orbital is unable to provide cargo services to ISS in 2013, would SpaceX be eligible to take on that work?