Launch vehicle, Atlas V |
Launch vehicle, Atlas V |
Jun 3 2006, 01:19 PM
Post
#1
|
|
![]() Member ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 134 Joined: 13-March 05 Member No.: 191 |
NASA has decided to use the Atlas V, with 4 strap-on solid rocket boosters to launch MSL. This is the same rocket that launched MRO (no solids) and New Horizons (5 solids).
Cost: $194.7 million, less than half the price of the Titan IV which would have been needed a few years ago. Rocky Mountain News article NASA press release |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Guest_DonPMitchell_* |
Jun 5 2006, 08:48 AM
Post
#2
|
|
Guests |
Thrusts I gave are vacuum thrusts, just for comparison. Look on Mark Ward's page for more details about an engine.
The big picture is that Russia and America still offer launch vehicles that are competative with each other. The Russian and American space industry are also somewhat in bed with each other now -- Lockheed Martin jointly operates the Proton, Pratt & Whitney works with EnergoMash, etc. Energiya is the only super-heavy class rocket, but it hasn't actually flown very many times. Overall, I'd have to say the Americans have the more modern technology, and their space industry is big enough to be developing multiple rockets from multiple companies. But NASA learns from the Russians too, you can see that in the Delta IV's engine, which has a lot of Russian features. One intersting decision the Russians made was to design their Energiya booster and their shuttle to be independant modules. The Space Shuttle cannot launch without the 99-ton orbiter and its main engines, in addition to its actual payload. If you consider the total mass put into orbit, it is by far the most powerful LV. I'm adding some info on the largest Chinese rocket to my earlier post with all the data. |
|
|
|
Jun 5 2006, 09:00 AM
Post
#3
|
|
![]() Senior Member ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 3534 Joined: 1-October 05 From: Croatia Member No.: 523 |
One intersting decision the Russians made was to design their Energiya booster and their shuttle to be independant modules. The Space Shuttle cannot launch without the 99-ton orbiter and its main engines, in addition to its actual payload. A wise decision in retrospect -- they could use the Energiya stack as an 'ordinary' heavy-lift booster should they ever (heaven forbid!) abandon the shuttle concept. NASA needs to reinvent the wheel with its CaLV launcher because someone once thought putting engines on the shuttle was the best idea. -------------------- |
|
|
|
| Guest_DonPMitchell_* |
Jun 5 2006, 10:27 AM
Post
#4
|
|
Guests |
A wise decision in retrospect -- they could use the Energiya stack as an 'ordinary' heavy-lift booster should they ever (heaven forbid!) abandon the shuttle concept. NASA needs to reinvent the wheel with its CaLV launcher because someone once thought putting engines on the shuttle was the best idea. Yep. And I think the Russians have abandoned their shuttle concept, after one successful unmanned test. Last I heard, the warehouse where the Buran was being stored collapsed and destroyed the craft. Kind of a sad end. [attachment=6071:attachment] [attachment=6072:attachment] I think the so-called Energiya-M is what they call the super-heavy LV without the shuttle. They have a standing offer to launch a spacecraft to Mars with it, if anyone pays them enough. They also tried launching a military space station called Polyus, with the Energiya. [attachment=6073:attachment] |
|
|
|
Jun 5 2006, 11:03 AM
Post
#5
|
|
![]() Member ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 615 Joined: 9-May 05 From: Subotica Member No.: 384 |
I think the so-called Energiya-M is what they call the super-heavy LV without the shuttle. But that was long time ago...Sadly today there is no way they can launch ANY KIND of Energiya rocket because launch-pads are being demolished or converted to launch other types of existing rocket... Energiya was absolutely the coolest looking rocket that I ever saw, but it's story ended long time ago... Such a potential...such a waist... -------------------- The scientist does not study nature because it is useful; he studies it because he delights in it, and he delights in it because it is beautiful.
Jules H. Poincare My "Astrophotos" gallery on flickr... |
|
|
|
Redstone Launch vehicle Jun 3 2006, 01:19 PM
dvandorn This just points out another truth behind the fund... Jun 3 2006, 03:44 PM
Jim from NSF.com QUOTE (Redstone @ Jun 3 2006, 09:19 AM) N... Jun 3 2006, 06:23 PM
BruceMoomaw The Discovery missions are all supposed to use Del... Jun 4 2006, 01:42 AM
RNeuhaus I would like to learn about the what are limit of ... Jun 4 2006, 02:13 AM
Jim from NSF.com The "other items" of the launch service ... Jun 4 2006, 02:55 AM
PhilCo126 A reminder to point out that the Atlas V is not th... Jun 4 2006, 09:34 AM
Bob Shaw QUOTE (PhilCo126 @ Jun 4 2006, 10:34 AM) ... Jun 4 2006, 11:28 AM
ugordan QUOTE (PhilCo126 @ Jun 4 2006, 10:34 AM) ... Jun 4 2006, 05:37 PM
RNeuhaus QUOTE (PhilCo126 @ Jun 4 2006, 04:34 AM) ... Jun 4 2006, 08:48 PM
ugordan QUOTE (RNeuhaus @ Jun 4 2006, 09:48 PM) p... Jun 4 2006, 09:15 PM
DonPMitchell QUOTE (ugordan @ Jun 4 2006, 02:15 PM) Th... Jun 4 2006, 11:46 PM
DonPMitchell Let's look at some numbers. Here are some fig... Jun 4 2006, 06:20 PM
ugordan You're forgetting the engine RD-180 was derive... Jun 4 2006, 06:46 PM
DonPMitchell QUOTE (ugordan @ Jun 4 2006, 11:46 AM) Yo... Jun 4 2006, 07:04 PM
Bob Shaw QUOTE (DonPMitchell @ Jun 4 2006, 08:04 P... Jun 4 2006, 07:12 PM
DonPMitchell QUOTE (Bob Shaw @ Jun 4 2006, 12:12 PM) D... Jun 4 2006, 07:23 PM
Jim from NSF.com QUOTE (Bob Shaw @ Jun 4 2006, 03:12 PM) D... Jun 5 2006, 07:20 AM
djellison In a brief 'still on holiday' pop-head-aro... Jun 5 2006, 07:41 AM
ugordan QUOTE (djellison @ Jun 5 2006, 08:41 AM) ... Jun 5 2006, 08:28 AM
ugordan QUOTE (DonPMitchell @ Jun 5 2006, 11:27 A... Jun 5 2006, 10:47 AM

DonPMitchell QUOTE (ugordan @ Jun 5 2006, 03:47 AM) Th... Jun 5 2006, 11:36 AM

Bob Shaw Don:
I think Mark Wade is normally excellent, but... Jun 5 2006, 01:03 PM

ugordan QUOTE (Bob Shaw @ Jun 5 2006, 02:03 PM) I... Jun 5 2006, 01:32 PM

Bob Shaw QUOTE (ugordan @ Jun 5 2006, 02:32 PM) Th... Jun 5 2006, 08:45 PM

ugordan QUOTE (Bob Shaw @ Jun 5 2006, 09:45 PM) S... Jun 5 2006, 08:53 PM


Bob Shaw Gordan:
Yup, I see what you mean - I still though... Jun 5 2006, 09:07 PM


ugordan QUOTE (Bob Shaw @ Jun 5 2006, 10:07 PM) t... Jun 5 2006, 09:19 PM


Bob Shaw QUOTE (ugordan @ Jun 5 2006, 10:19 PM) Wh... Jun 5 2006, 09:34 PM


Bob Shaw Looks like I disremembered the landing sequence to... Jun 5 2006, 10:16 PM


ugordan Bob:
In the leftmost image you sent, the drawing ... Jun 6 2006, 01:28 PM


Bob Shaw QUOTE (ugordan @ Jun 6 2006, 02:28 PM) Bo... Jun 6 2006, 02:37 PM


ugordan Yep, look at the other cartoon you sent showing th... Jun 6 2006, 02:44 PM


Bob Shaw Gordan:
So, the question remains: did it actually... Jun 6 2006, 02:53 PM

DonPMitchell QUOTE (Bob Shaw @ Jun 5 2006, 01:45 PM) G... Jun 5 2006, 10:57 PM
PhilCo126 Don was right on the unit ( 10 & 9.8 kilogram-... Jun 5 2006, 04:08 PM
Spirit Hi everybody,
I am new to the forum.
Here is my f... Jun 6 2006, 06:15 PM
Jim from NSF.com QUOTE (Spirit @ Jun 6 2006, 02:15 PM) Hi ... Jun 6 2006, 06:31 PM
DonPMitchell Here is a rather fanciful site dedicated to the En... Jun 6 2006, 07:24 PM![]() ![]() |
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 25th May 2013 - 07:08 AM |
|
RULES AND GUIDELINES Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting. IMAGE COPYRIGHT |
OPINIONS AND MODERATION Opinions expressed on UnmannedSpaceflight.com are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of UnmannedSpaceflight.com or The Planetary Society. The all-volunteer UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderation team is wholly independent of The Planetary Society. The Planetary Society has no influence over decisions made by the UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderators. |
SUPPORT THE FORUM Unmannedspaceflight.com is a project of the Planetary Society and is funded by donations from visitors and members. Help keep this forum up and running by contributing here. |
|