IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Closed TopicStart new topic
Potential Delta II replacement
Jim from NSF.com
post Feb 20 2008, 06:09 PM
Post #1


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 321
Joined: 6-April 06
From: Cape Canaveral
Member No.: 734



http://www.orbital.com/AdvancedSpace/COTS/

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ElkGroveDan
post Feb 20 2008, 08:52 PM
Post #2


Senior Member
****

Group: Admin
Posts: 4660
Joined: 15-March 05
From: Sloughhouse, CA
Member No.: 197



Don't forget Space X's Falcon 9 Heavy.


--------------------
If Occam had heard my theory, things would be very different now.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mps
post Feb 20 2008, 09:30 PM
Post #3


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 118
Joined: 18-November 07
Member No.: 3964



Don't forget ATK's 'Athena III'
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=5337
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
djellison
post Feb 20 2008, 09:34 PM
Post #4


Administrator
****

Group: Chairman
Posts: 13852
Joined: 8-February 04
Member No.: 1



Or go halves on an Ariane V smile.gif

Doug
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jim from NSF.com
post Feb 20 2008, 10:49 PM
Post #5


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 321
Joined: 6-April 06
From: Cape Canaveral
Member No.: 734



QUOTE (mps @ Feb 20 2008, 04:30 PM) *


Since they didn't get COTS, doubtful it will to be
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jim from NSF.com
post Feb 20 2008, 10:51 PM
Post #6


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 321
Joined: 6-April 06
From: Cape Canaveral
Member No.: 734



QUOTE (djellison @ Feb 20 2008, 04:34 PM) *
Or go halves on an Ariane V smile.gif

Doug


Actually that is more than a Delta II and not useful to NASA


QUOTE (ElkGroveDan @ Feb 20 2008, 03:52 PM) *
Don't forget Space X's Falcon 9 Heavy.


That is an EELV class vehicle, in performance and cost
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ElkGroveDan
post Feb 20 2008, 10:58 PM
Post #7


Senior Member
****

Group: Admin
Posts: 4660
Joined: 15-March 05
From: Sloughhouse, CA
Member No.: 197



Yes. It is.


--------------------
If Occam had heard my theory, things would be very different now.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jim from NSF.com
post Feb 20 2008, 11:13 PM
Post #8


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 321
Joined: 6-April 06
From: Cape Canaveral
Member No.: 734




And therefore, not a Delta II replacement
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
djellison
post Feb 20 2008, 11:13 PM
Post #9


Administrator
****

Group: Chairman
Posts: 13852
Joined: 8-February 04
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (Jim from NSF.com @ Feb 20 2008, 10:49 PM) *
Since they didn't get COTS, doubtful it will to be


What does a 'potential Delta II replacement' have to do with COTS?

Yes - the Taurus II is part of the next COTS contract - but that's got nothing to do with it being a potential Delta II replacement.

Customers looking for Delta II like capacity could look to a lot of places, many suggested here, some not, for a replacement. Just because the as yet unflown Taurus II has a COTS contract, that doesn't render it any worse or better means of getting a Delta II sized payload into orbit. If you had opened the thread with 'US governmental customers looking for a replacement for Delta II that isn't a Falcon 9' - maybe you would be on to something.

Doug
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ElkGroveDan
post Feb 20 2008, 11:16 PM
Post #10


Senior Member
****

Group: Admin
Posts: 4660
Joined: 15-March 05
From: Sloughhouse, CA
Member No.: 197



Of course it is.


--------------------
If Occam had heard my theory, things would be very different now.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jim from NSF.com
post Feb 20 2008, 11:21 PM
Post #11


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 321
Joined: 6-April 06
From: Cape Canaveral
Member No.: 734



QUOTE (djellison @ Feb 20 2008, 06:13 PM) *
What does a 'potential Delta II replacement' have to do with COTS?

Yes - the Taurus II is part of the next COTS contract - but that's got nothing to do with it being a potential Delta II replacement.

Customers looking for Delta II like capacity could look to a lot of places, many suggested here, some not, for a replacement. Just because the as yet unflown Taurus II has a COTS contract, that doesn't render it any worse or better means of getting a Delta II sized payload into orbit.

Doug


Why do you think OSC was picked ? It wasn't because the Cygnus was better than the other front ends.
COTS I wasn't about ISS resupply. NASA (the only real future Delta II class customer) picked it because of Taurus II.

None of the "other" ones are viable with the current market and especially without guaranteed order

ATK won't go forward. Falcon 9 Heavy is not in the same class (performance and cost wise), Ariane 5 is too big (even 1/2) and is not available to NASA


I brought this up on this forum because the lost of Delta II would be a determent to science missions and be of concern to forum members
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
djellison
post Feb 20 2008, 11:40 PM
Post #12


Administrator
****

Group: Chairman
Posts: 13852
Joined: 8-February 04
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (Jim from NSF.com @ Feb 20 2008, 11:21 PM) *
None of the "other" ones are viable with the current market


Apart from the Falcon 9, which NASA has also picked.

Again - had you started this thread ' Potential LV's that NASA could use to replace the Delta II ' - then fine. That's not what you said. you said ' Potential Delta II replacement'. NASA is not the only customer the Delta II has had in the last 19 years, nor is it the only customer in the next 12 launches, nor is the Delta II the only vehicle to have been filling that requirement in its lifetime. There are many alternatives for those customers to turn to, some that have been flying for years, some that are yet to fly.

If COTS 1 wasn't about ISS resupply, then someone better tell SpaceX and NASA who have described it thus:

SpaceX
".. demonstrating delivery of cargo to the ISS and safe return of cargo to Earth"

NASA
"to develop and demonstrate the vehicles, systems, and operations needed to support a human facility such as ISS."

I wasn't going to say this publicly but two threads in one day have dissolved to this sort of back and forth. I'm not sure if you're doing it intentionally, but it seems that you are going out of your way to be pedantic, argumentative and infuriating.

Doug
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jim from NSF.com
post Feb 21 2008, 01:51 AM
Post #13


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 321
Joined: 6-April 06
From: Cape Canaveral
Member No.: 734



QUOTE (djellison @ Feb 20 2008, 06:40 PM) *
1. , nor is it the only customer in the next 12 launches, nor is the Delta II the only vehicle to have been filling that requirement in its lifetime. There are many alternatives for those customers to turn to, some that have been flying for years, some that are yet to fly.

2. If COTS 1 wasn't about ISS resupply, then someone better tell SpaceX and NASA who have described it thus:


1. Aside from 4 GPS, which is leaving the Delta II, NASA is the only customer. The two STSS missions are NASA procured. (I am working one of them). There are no alternatives for Delta II's (from qualified providers) at former Delta II's prices. That is the reason Delta II going away because of its cost

2. http://www.nasa.gov/directorates/esmd/ccc/ .
COTS is an effort by NASA to stimulate, and then take advantage of, a robust commercial market for spaceflight services.

As explained on other forums, if COTS I was about ISS resupply, then contractors that used pre existing ELV's and only were developing "front ends" would have won COTS I .

The companies that won were targeted for their LV development.

COTS II is the real resupply contract
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lyford
post Feb 21 2008, 03:18 AM
Post #14


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1264
Joined: 18-December 04
From: San Diego, CA
Member No.: 124



QUOTE (Jim from NSF.com @ Feb 20 2008, 02:49 PM) *
Since they didn't get COTS, doubtful it will to be

Does that mean these folks are dead in the water (or upper atmosphere) as well? I guess that link would be a good example of an ambiguous but optimistic press release....


--------------------
Lyford Rome
"Zis is not nuts, zis is super-nuts!" Mathematician Richard Courant on viewing an Orion test
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Greg Hullender
post Feb 21 2008, 05:25 AM
Post #15


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1010
Joined: 29-November 05
From: Seattle, WA, USA
Member No.: 590



So is the issue that the Falcon 9 is just too big? I didn't see an estimated price for the Taurus. What does a Delta launch cost? Is there any issue besides cost and lift capacity?

--Greg
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Closed TopicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 26th November 2014 - 11:00 PM
RULES AND GUIDELINES
Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting.

IMAGE COPYRIGHT
Images posted on UnmannedSpaceflight.com may be copyrighted. Do not reproduce without permission. Read here for further information on space images and 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.