Updates Orion (MPCV) Updates and Discussion

[Orbinaut Pete]

NASASpaceFlight: "Orion becomes a liability as Lockheed Martin pull 600 engineers off the contract".

 

[Orbinaut Pete]

Houston Chronicle: "JSC's future relies on moon program compromise".

 

[Star Voyager]

NASA now starting Constellation shutdown:

http://flametrench.flatoday.net/2010/06/nasa-moves-to-kill-moon-program-despite.html

 

[Orbinaut Pete]

SpaceRef: "Orion Budget is Cut 20% with 600 Jobs Eliminated and Progress Slowed".

 

[Orbinaut Pete]

Lockheed Martin to get $163M from NASA to keep Orion work going.

 

[Orbinaut Pete]

SpaceRef: "Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle Passes Key NASA Milestone".

Orion? Is that thing still around?

 

[Iberville]

I have been playing and reading a lot about space stuff for the last 2 months since I discovered Orbiter and I wonder something about the Space Shuttle... If the Russians still have roughly the same ship for 40 years and if NASA wanted to go back to capsule like ships, why did the USS built the Space Shuttle in the first place? I mean, it's costly, dangerous, complicated, no wonder why all the future plans for space exploration are capsule like ships.

 

[Orbinaut Pete]

I have been playing and reading a lot about space stuff for the last 2 months since I discovered Orbiter and I wonder something about the Space Shuttle... If the Russians still have roughly the same ship for 40 years and if NASA wanted to go back to capsule like ships, why did the USS built the Space Shuttle in the first place? I mean, it's costly, dangerous, complicated, no wonder why all the future plans for space exploration are capsule like ships.

Remember that when the Shuttle was designed, NASA's goal was to essentially create a "space airliner", capable or routinely, cheaply, & safely putting large payloads and/or crews into LEO. However, it didn't exactly work out like that - the turnaround in between each Shuttle flight takes a long time and is very costly, and the fact that this extremely complicated system needs to be made extremely safe, means that the Shuttle can never compete with conventional EELVs as a quick, cheap launch system.
However, as an astronaut one said: "When you need the capability of human beings in space, the Shuttle is the only thing like it in the world - ever".

 

[N_Molson]

Also, the Soyuz is lot lighter and cheaper than the Apollo program. And, even more, the rocket used to launch it was also the cheapest and more reliable in the Soviet inventory.

An Apollo/Saturn launch was extremely expensive, even with the "lite" LEO variations of the Saturn. And still, the Apollo spacecraft carried 3 astronauts, like it's russian counterpart. The Apollo-Soyuz missions were a demonstration of that.

NASA had no valid reasons to sustain the Apollo program once they decided that the Moon was a boring place. The Soviets had then several successes with Almaz/Salyut stations, and, especially in the Cold War context, it was impossible to let them alone build a military complex in orbit (Almaz stations were designed for military missions). The Shuttle was the answer to that. In fact, it worked so well that the Soviet exhausted themselves with the Buran/Energia program !

Then the things calmed down, the Soviet built Mir and Mir was a convenient destination for the Space Shuttle. Then the SSSR collapsed, Mir was underfunded, and the Shuttle was used to bring vital supplies (and crew) to the station. Then a partnership with the new Russian Federation was signed, the Russian accepted to deorbit Mir, put Zarya & Zveda into orbit, and the ISS was born ! The Shuttle had now a perfectly-sized mission : bringing plugin modules to build the ISS.

Then the Columbia disaster proved that the Shuttle had it's flaws. After that, NASA lost the track of it's space program. Bush's administration supported the Orion, and forgot that Shuttle would have to be replaced. After all, it would be the next administration's work to deal with the problem !

Here we are.

 

[Alexw95]

im lost is the constellation program done for good or is there still hope

 

[N_Molson]

From what I have understood, the Orion capsule could be used for manned LEO operation, with a smaller Service Module. It will always be possible to use it with a bigger SM (or an advanced engine like VASMIR or so).

 

[Ghostrider]

Also, the Soyuz is lot lighter and cheaper than the Apollo program. And, even more, the rocket used to launch it was also the cheapest and more reliable in the Soviet inventory.

An Apollo/Saturn launch was extremely expensive, even with the "lite" LEO variations of the Saturn. And still, the Apollo spacecraft carried 3 astronauts, like it's russian counterpart. The Apollo-Soyuz missions were a demonstration of that.

However, Apollo packed more punch in the delta-V department than Soyuz, and that was evident with ASTP. Moreover, Apollo was designed to go to the Moon and not to be an orbital taxi (Soyuz was designed to do that as well, but it was reworked).

The problem with NASA was that it could only build and fly ONE manned spacecraft. Gemini had a lot of potential to become as flexible and cheap as Soyuz, maybe even more, but the program had to be stopped because there was no way to go forward with both programs.

 

[N_Molson]

I'm not making the comparison between Apollo & Soyuz (which was lighter because it has a lot less Dv). Just that Apollo was over-scaled for LEO operations, while Soyuz proven to be very cost-effective.

The problem with NASA was that it could only build and fly ONE manned spacecraft. Gemini had a lot of potential to become as flexible and cheap as Soyuz, maybe even more, but the program had to be stopped because there was no way to go forward with both programs.

There is actually more living space inside the (spherical) Soyuz than in the (conic) Apollo. Gemini was like a sportcar : it could carry only 2 astronauts, and they were unable to move from their seats, except for EVA of course. It was an excellent and reliable spacecraft that contributed a lot to put the USA ahead in the Moon race, but it was not designed for long duration orbital missions.

That being said, I agree that the Soyuz doesn't look pretty, but that's not the point.

 

[Orbinaut Pete]

[Photos] NASA: "Orion Spacecraft Takes Shape".

NASA: "NASA Tests Launch Abort System At Supersonic Speeds".

 

[Orbinaut Pete]

The Planetary Society Blog: "NASA's Orion Test Capsule enters Test Phase".

 

[Orbinaut Pete]

Aerojet's Successful Main Engine Injector Tests Provide Milestone for NASA's Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle - Testing confirms combustion stability and provides initial performance data.

SACRAMENTO, Calif., Aug. 5, 2010 – Aerojet, a GenCorp (NYSE: GY) company, under contract to Lockheed Martin (NYSE: LMT), has successfully completed more than 20 injector tests for the 7500-pound thrust Orion main engine (OME) for NASA's Orion crew exploration vehicle. The tests are a combination of checkout, development, and qualification that will anchor models and satisfy combustion stability qualification requirements. The OME is a pressure-fed, regeneratively cooled, storable bi-propellant engine that is a technically advanced, increased performance version of Aerojet’s flight-proven 6000-pound thrust space shuttle Orbital Maneuvering System Engine (OMS-E).

"Successful completion of this test series represents a major milestone in the OME development program and clears the way for further testing with the regeneratively cooled flight design chamber in 2011," said Sam Wiley, Aerojet's Orion technical director.

The injector has performed exceptionally well to date, verifying the engine's combustion stability and additionally providing chamber wall heat flux and injector performance data to anchor mathematical models. All testing is being performed in heavy-weight combustion chambers specifically designed for these tasks. This early demonstration of the engine's combustion stability at expected Orion operating conditions is being conducted to retire risk to the Orion vehicle.

The OME injector combines the reliability and combustion stability of the OMS-E injector with current Aerojet best practices in design and manufacturing to reduce process variability affecting injector performance and cost for the Orion program. The OME injector is a diffusion-bonded platelet device with the same injector element type, face pattern layout, and element quantity as the OMS-E, but with improvements in the injector body design and platelets to provide more uniform flow to the injector elements.

The current Aerojet platelet manufacturing capability results in significantly less dimensional variability than was possible for the OMS-E, enabling improved uniformity of propellants injected into the combustion chamber. The improvements in injection uniformity are also expected to result in improved nominal and minimum vacuum specific impulse for the OME.

The OME will provide thrust for events requiring large velocity changes such as Earth orbital insertion, translunar/trans Earth injection, Earth de-orbit, and emergency thrust for high-altitude abort scenarios. Orion's engine complement also includes 16 25-pound thrust engines and eight 100-pound-thrust bipropellant engines for the Orion service module. Additionally, Aerojet supplies 12 160-pound-thrust monopropellant thrusters for the Orion crew module. Aerojet is providing all of the engines for the Orion spacecraft which is comprised of a crew module for crew and cargo transport, and a service module for propulsion, electrical power and fluids storage. Risk reduction testing of critical subsystems has been ongoing throughout Orion's development phase to maximize mission success and crew safety.

Lockheed Martin is the prime contractor to NASA for the Orion spacecraft, which is being developed as the nation's next generation spacecraft for future human exploration throughout our solar system. Aerojet is part of the nationwide Orion industry team led by Lockheed Martin, which includes five major subcontractors and an expansive network of minor subcontractors and small businesses working at 88 facilities in 28 states across the country.

Aerojet is a world-recognized aerospace and defense leader principally serving the missile and space propulsion, defense and armaments markets. GenCorp is a leading technology-based manufacturer of aerospace and defense products and systems with a real estate segment that includes activities related to the entitlement, sale, and leasing of the company's excess real estate assets. Additional information about Aerojet and GenCorp can be obtained by visiting the companies' Web sites at www.Aerojet.com and www.GenCorp.com.

Accompanying image is here.

 

[N_Molson]

NASA needs mostly money. They have excellent engineers that can realize technological wonders. But this can't be cheap, and this is what they try to hide. But it's impossible. The only mean to make quick advances is to give NASA the means to work properly.

Don't forget that Apollo 11 was the result of 10 years of a nation-wide "war-effort". And the economy of the US in the 60's... That was the American Dream Gold Age !

So I'm convinced that things won't move quickly without a serious budget. The space program has to be an effort from the nation. It can't be otherwise, money won't drop from the sky...

 

[Orbinaut Pete]

SpaceRef: "Ping-Pong Balls to Float Crew Capsule Simulator".

SpaceRef: "NASA's Pioneer Orion Capsule Starts Its Test Phase".

 

[Orbinaut Pete]

Lockheed Martin: "Orion Performs Under Pressure".

The Lockheed Martin Orion team performed well under pressure as the first Orion spacecraft successfully passed a structural proof pressure test at the NASA/Michoud Assembly Facility in New Orleans, La., on Aug. 30, 2010, paving the way for future tests prior to space flight. This Orion spacecraft will be used for ground and flight test operations to correlate test data with analytical models to validate Orion’s flight design engineering.

Built to spaceflight specifications, the vehicle completed an important series of leak and proof pressure tests that confirmed Orion's structural design can withstand long-duration missions. The test incrementally pressurized the spacecraft with breathing air up to 15.55 pounds per square inch – or 1.05 atmospheres -- which is the equivalent pressure a scuba diver's gauge would read at a 35-foot depth.

The successful tests demonstrated a leak-free structure fabricated using self-reacting friction stir welding techniques, a technology that produces stronger and higher quality joints when compared with conventional welding. The pressurization test demonstrated weld strength capability, and advanced aluminum-lithium alloy structural performance at maximum flight operating pressures, making this structure survivable in the harshest environments of space. Test engineers monitored and collected data from 600 channels of instrumentation to support margin assessments and confirm design accuracy.

Successful test completion allows the hardware to advance to subsystem assembly and integration. Following additional testing in 2010, the assembled crew module will be mated to the launch abort system to undergo ground tests in flight-like environments in 2011.

All testing was accomplished at the NASA Michoud Assembly Facility, leveraging advanced technology and a diverse workforce experienced in all of NASA's human spaceflight programs. Recent engineering graduates supporting the Lockheed Martin team gained hands-on experience by designing elements of the successfully tested Orion spacecraft.

 

[Orbinaut Pete]

Aviation Week: "Orion Testing Continues At Michoud".