Today's Antares launch just failed

"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

Right, because the N-1 was such a successful launcher.

Considering that this design had never flown to space successfully before
Orbital did so on their first Antares flight, I don't think one can make
that case.

I've come to learn that one NK-33 was used successfully on the first
stage of the Soyuz "light" test flight a few years ago. But, Russia has
a plan to replace it with a more modern design derived from the RD-171,
which itself has its roots all the way back to the NK-33 and the NK-15
(the engine used on the failed N-1 test flights).

Soyuz 2-1v launches on Maiden Flight after long Road to the Launch
Pad, December 28, 2013
http://www.spaceflight101.com/soyuz-...st-launch.html

But Soyuz 2-1v flew later in 2013 than the Antares test flight, so
Orbital Sciences was indeed the first to use the NK-33 on a launch
vehicle successfully.

Antares Rocket Aces First Test Flight, APR 21, 2013
http://news.discovery.com/space/priv...ntares-rocket-
aces-first-test-flight-130421.htm

I'd not kept up with the Soyuz "light" launcher because it always seemed
it would never happen. The Russians seemed quite satisfied flying the
more familiar Soyuz first stage that dates all the way back to the
original Sputnik satellite launch.

Still, Soyuz "light" has only been test flown once so far. Rumor has it
that Orbital will switch to the same "modern" engine to be used on the
Soyuz "light" for its Antares first stage. In my mind, that's the right
way to go. The thought that they'd use large solids for a first stage
does not sit well with me.



The Russians use refurbished ICBM's as launch vehicals for light loads.
They made the choice a couple years ago to develop the Soyuz 2-1v launcher
to take over the light load duties when the stockpile of recycled ICBM
launchers is used up. The Soyuz 2-1v is not intended to haul manned
capsuals or ISS payloads, it is just to replace the ICBM launchers when they
are all expended.

It is arguable that Russia has done a pretty good job of making use of
recycled equipment. NASA/USAF did the same thing with Titan II launchers a
couple decades ago including using one to launch Clementine to the moon.
Russia reserved between 100-150 NK-33 engines that were in storage for the
Soyuz 2-1v program when they decided to use it. That might change now, but
there is no particular reason to expect it too. Accidents happen, most of
them do not get 500 hours of cell phone video posted to YouTube.

In article , says...

"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
...

Still, Soyuz "light" has only been test flown once so far. Rumor has it
that Orbital will switch to the same "modern" engine to be used on the
Soyuz "light" for its Antares first stage. In my mind, that's the right
way to go. The thought that they'd use large solids for a first stage
does not sit well with me.

The Russians use refurbished ICBM's as launch vehicals for light loads.
They made the choice a couple years ago to develop the Soyuz 2-1v launcher
to take over the light load duties when the stockpile of recycled ICBM
launchers is used up. The Soyuz 2-1v is not intended to haul manned
capsuals or ISS payloads, it is just to replace the ICBM launchers when they
are all expended.

Yes, both the US and Russia have made use of "surplus" hardware in the
past. But these NK-33 engines are quite old and in the big scheme of
things are an early, bleeding edge technology, sort of design (i.e. the
single shaft, oxygen rich preburner powered, turbo-pump was long
considered an "unworkable" design by western aerospace engineers).

Recent reports indicate that one of the NK-33 engines on the first stage
of Antares had its turbo-pump fail shortly after lift-off. This is not
good press for these quite old, surplus, engines. It is rumored that
the NK-33 on Antares is to be replaced by a newly manufactured RD-193
engine, but in the meantime the remaining cargo resupply flights for
Cygnus (under the existing contract) will be flown on another launch
vehicle (presumably not made by Orbital).

The plan for Soyuz light was to switch to the RD-193 after the surplus
NK-33 engines ran out. Using the old engines first would have saved
time and money. But, considering the recent NK-33 failures in the US
(both on the test stand and now on the recent Antares launch), I would
not be surprised if the Russians speed up their plans to produce the RD-
193 and replace the NK-33 on Soyuz light sooner rather than later.

Jeff
--
"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would
magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper
than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in
and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer