不能生产rd180发动机导致美国回收火箭项目成本太高

来源:百度文库 编辑:超级军网 时间:2024/04/27 13:54:16
美国研究委员会要求美国空军暂停资助洛克希德马丁公司的回收运载火箭发动机的研究项目,认为该项目的成本估计有问题。导致回收项目可能高成本的原因是美国至今不能生产从俄国引进的高压补燃煤油发动机rd180(目前美国运载火箭使用的主力发动机)。美国一直计划生产着发动机,但是一直没有落实。

http://www.spacenews.com/militar ... e-booster-plan.html
Report Questions Cost Savings of U.S. Air Force Reusable Booster Plan

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By Warren Ferster
   ShareThis

Lockheed Martin's Reusable Booster System Flight Demonstrator Program.

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Air Force should hold off on major investments in a reusable launch vehicle concept until the economics are better understood but should continue and even expand smaller-scale efforts to reduce the technical risk of developing such a system, the National Research Council says in a new report.

Among other things, the Air Force Research Laboratory should build and fly more than one subscale prototype reusable booster system (RBS) under an existing program known as Pathfinder, the report said. “In addition, competition amongst RBS concepts should be maintained as long as possible to obtain the best system for the next generation of space launch,” the report said.

Lockheed Martin Space Systems of Denver, Boeing Phantom Works of Huntington Beach, Calif., and Andrews Space of Seattle are designing RBS prototypes under contracts awarded in December by the Air Force Research Laboratory, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio. The indefinite-quantity, indefinite-delivery contracts have a total potential value of $250 million combined through 2019, with the initial task orders valued at about $2 million apiece, according to announcements by the Air Force and the companies.

As envisioned, the RBS features a reusable first stage powered by a liquid-kerosene-fueled engine and an expendable second stage fueled by liquid hydrogen. The vehicle would take off vertically and the first stage would, after releasing the second stage, return to the launch site and land horizontally.  

The Air Force has notional plans for a fleet of eight such vehicles at Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif., and Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Fla., according to the report, “Reusable Booster System: Review and Assessment.” These plans were devised in response to a June 2011 Air Force Space Command vision document outlining strategies for maintaining U.S. dominance of space and cyberspace, the report said.

According to the Aerospace Corp., the Los Angeles-based not-for-profit company that performs engineering and other analyses in support of U.S. military space programs, developing and operating an eight-vehicle RBS fleet would provide significant long-term cost savings over the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) program, which today launches the vast majority of U.S. military and intelligence satellites. But the National Research Council, tasked with conducting an independent analysis of the concept, said the business case for pursuing a large-scale RBS program is unclear.

The council’s expert panel questioned the RBS cost estimates, citing numerous uncertainties associated with reusable launch systems. While the estimates were based on industry-standard methodologies, they rely on historical data that do not draw on experience operating reusable launch systems, the report said.

The cost projections also assume the RBS’s first stage would utilize a U.S. variant of Russian hydrocarbon — or kerosene-fueled — engine technology, “but the cost risks associated with development of an operable engine are difficult to capture,” the report said. The first stage of the Atlas 5 rocket, one of two workhorses of the U.S. EELV fleet, is powered by the Russian-built RD-180 main engine, for which a U.S.-based production line was planned but never implemented.

Moreover, the report said, it is not clear what infrastructure would be needed to operate and maintain a fleet of RBSs, and therefore the costs associated with that requirement are uncertain.

The report also noted that the savings attributed to the RBS are based on current EELV program costs and do not account for the possibility of lower-priced competitors entering the market.

Denver-based United Launch Alliance, a Boeing-Lockheed Martin joint venture, has a virtual monopoly in the U.S. military market as prime contractor on the EELV program, whose costs have soared well beyond expectations for a variety of reasons. But Space Exploration Technologies Corp. of Hawthorne, Calif., is angling for that business with what it says will be lower-cost vehicles, and has several successful launches under its belt. Another company, Stratolaunch Systems of Huntsville, Ala., is developing a system that would launch rockets from an aircraft that incorporates components from a Boeing 747 jetliner.

“Given the significant number of commercial entities pursuing novel approaches to achieve launch capabilities, the future of space lift may look very different from those employed today,” the report said.

The report said reusable vehicles nonetheless hold promise for bringing down launch costs and that the Air Force, independent of whether it pursues the RBS program, should continue developing key technologies including oxygen-rich staged-combustion hydrocarbon engines; operations of vehicles that return to the launch site; vehicle-health monitoring systems; and adaptive guidance and control.

The return-to-launch-site, or rocketback, maneuver is a focus of the Pathfinder program. “The use of a rocketback maneuver for [return-to-launch-site] operations of an RBS has not yet been demonstrated, so this approach to reusability carries significant risk,” the report said. “Given these risks and the resulting parameter space for innovative solutions, the Pathfinder program should be executed in a manner wherein several vehicle designs are developed and flown.”

美国研究委员会要求美国空军暂停资助洛克希德马丁公司的回收运载火箭发动机的研究项目,认为该项目的成本估计有问题。导致回收项目可能高成本的原因是美国至今不能生产从俄国引进的高压补燃煤油发动机rd180(目前美国运载火箭使用的主力发动机)。美国一直计划生产着发动机,但是一直没有落实。

http://www.spacenews.com/militar ... e-booster-plan.html
Report Questions Cost Savings of U.S. Air Force Reusable Booster Plan

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By Warren Ferster
   ShareThis

Lockheed Martin's Reusable Booster System Flight Demonstrator Program.

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Air Force should hold off on major investments in a reusable launch vehicle concept until the economics are better understood but should continue and even expand smaller-scale efforts to reduce the technical risk of developing such a system, the National Research Council says in a new report.

Among other things, the Air Force Research Laboratory should build and fly more than one subscale prototype reusable booster system (RBS) under an existing program known as Pathfinder, the report said. “In addition, competition amongst RBS concepts should be maintained as long as possible to obtain the best system for the next generation of space launch,” the report said.

Lockheed Martin Space Systems of Denver, Boeing Phantom Works of Huntington Beach, Calif., and Andrews Space of Seattle are designing RBS prototypes under contracts awarded in December by the Air Force Research Laboratory, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio. The indefinite-quantity, indefinite-delivery contracts have a total potential value of $250 million combined through 2019, with the initial task orders valued at about $2 million apiece, according to announcements by the Air Force and the companies.

As envisioned, the RBS features a reusable first stage powered by a liquid-kerosene-fueled engine and an expendable second stage fueled by liquid hydrogen. The vehicle would take off vertically and the first stage would, after releasing the second stage, return to the launch site and land horizontally.  

The Air Force has notional plans for a fleet of eight such vehicles at Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif., and Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Fla., according to the report, “Reusable Booster System: Review and Assessment.” These plans were devised in response to a June 2011 Air Force Space Command vision document outlining strategies for maintaining U.S. dominance of space and cyberspace, the report said.

According to the Aerospace Corp., the Los Angeles-based not-for-profit company that performs engineering and other analyses in support of U.S. military space programs, developing and operating an eight-vehicle RBS fleet would provide significant long-term cost savings over the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) program, which today launches the vast majority of U.S. military and intelligence satellites. But the National Research Council, tasked with conducting an independent analysis of the concept, said the business case for pursuing a large-scale RBS program is unclear.

The council’s expert panel questioned the RBS cost estimates, citing numerous uncertainties associated with reusable launch systems. While the estimates were based on industry-standard methodologies, they rely on historical data that do not draw on experience operating reusable launch systems, the report said.

The cost projections also assume the RBS’s first stage would utilize a U.S. variant of Russian hydrocarbon — or kerosene-fueled — engine technology, “but the cost risks associated with development of an operable engine are difficult to capture,” the report said. The first stage of the Atlas 5 rocket, one of two workhorses of the U.S. EELV fleet, is powered by the Russian-built RD-180 main engine, for which a U.S.-based production line was planned but never implemented.

Moreover, the report said, it is not clear what infrastructure would be needed to operate and maintain a fleet of RBSs, and therefore the costs associated with that requirement are uncertain.

The report also noted that the savings attributed to the RBS are based on current EELV program costs and do not account for the possibility of lower-priced competitors entering the market.

Denver-based United Launch Alliance, a Boeing-Lockheed Martin joint venture, has a virtual monopoly in the U.S. military market as prime contractor on the EELV program, whose costs have soared well beyond expectations for a variety of reasons. But Space Exploration Technologies Corp. of Hawthorne, Calif., is angling for that business with what it says will be lower-cost vehicles, and has several successful launches under its belt. Another company, Stratolaunch Systems of Huntsville, Ala., is developing a system that would launch rockets from an aircraft that incorporates components from a Boeing 747 jetliner.

“Given the significant number of commercial entities pursuing novel approaches to achieve launch capabilities, the future of space lift may look very different from those employed today,” the report said.

The report said reusable vehicles nonetheless hold promise for bringing down launch costs and that the Air Force, independent of whether it pursues the RBS program, should continue developing key technologies including oxygen-rich staged-combustion hydrocarbon engines; operations of vehicles that return to the launch site; vehicle-health monitoring systems; and adaptive guidance and control.

The return-to-launch-site, or rocketback, maneuver is a focus of the Pathfinder program. “The use of a rocketback maneuver for [return-to-launch-site] operations of an RBS has not yet been demonstrated, so this approach to reusability carries significant risk,” the report said. “Given these risks and the resulting parameter space for innovative solutions, the Pathfinder program should be executed in a manner wherein several vehicle designs are developed and flown.”

没觉着MD生产的会比毛子便宜。就不算建厂的费用,也不行。
matrix_shu 发表于 2012-10-17 14:55
没觉着MD生产的会比毛子便宜。就不算建厂的费用,也不行。
你觉得美国不能自产,俄国人还会傻到廉价出售rd180发动机?
MD自己生产RD-180???
唯一结果就是成本翻将近10倍,其他都一样。而且atlas系列火箭相对于delta系列火箭的最主要优势立即丧失殆尽。
MD要自己生产RD-180还不如将从仓库里拖出RS-83,改头换面一下就可以了,怎么也比rd-180强一些。
奇怪吗?以前美帝有些媒体还吆喝海军要引进苏-33代替F-18做舰载机呢,只不过是开开心而已,不必当真!
南极冰 发表于 2012-10-17 15:06
MD自己生产RD-180???
唯一结果就是成本翻将近10倍,其他都一样。而且atlas系列火箭相对于delta系列火箭 ...
你的说法不成立。
美国自己生产比rd180成本高的多的液氢液氧发动机和燃气循环的煤油发动机。
这都是高消耗、低消费比的东西
不搞通原理,成天转这种文章
美特工用波音747飞机机翼制造技术换毛国钛合金制造技术(实际美帝早在1949年就把钛合金用在F-100上了),美陆军准备买AK-47来替换自己的M-16,美海军准备用苏-33替换F-14,毛这种出口转内销的聊以自位消息还是少吹为妙。
奇怪吗?以前美帝有些媒体还吆喝海军要引进苏-33代替F-18做舰载机呢,只不过是开开心而已,不必当真!
区别大了,rd180美国已经引进并大规模使用
谁信啊~
没觉着MD生产的会比毛子便宜。就不算建厂的费用,也不行。
毛子可以好好的拿捏一把
http://www.spacenews.com/launch/ ... -rocket-felled.html
spacenews的最新报道:
美国空军已经停止了这个项目。
中国什么时候也上马可重复使用运载火箭啊。
Bearcat 发表于 2012-10-20 09:08
中国什么时候也上马可重复使用运载火箭啊。
啥叫“也上马”?
中国是到目前为止唯一试验且成功可重复使用运载火箭的国家。
rongzhili.au 发表于 2012-10-20 09:16
啥叫“也上马”?
中国是到目前为止唯一试验且成功可重复使用运载火箭的国家。
哪个火箭??
TommyM 发表于 2012-10-20 10:49
哪个火箭??
中国的报道中没有透露回收的液体火箭型号。
rongzhili.au 发表于 2012-10-20 09:16
啥叫“也上马”?
中国是到目前为止唯一试验且成功可重复使用运载火箭的国家。
那你是没有算航天飞机的SRB吧
俺是小马甲 发表于 2012-10-20 20:35
那你是没有算航天飞机的SRB吧
航天飞机轨道器也同样是。

rolltide 发表于 2012-10-20 21:47
航天飞机轨道器也同样是。
燃料箱丢掉了 结构有损失

俺是小马甲 发表于 2012-10-20 20:35
那你是没有算航天飞机的SRB吧


是的,算航天飞机,美国是唯一实际使用的回收液体火箭的国家。
航天飞机的固体火箭助推器实际上从来没有回收使用过,都是再造的。

俺是小马甲 发表于 2012-10-20 20:35
那你是没有算航天飞机的SRB吧


是的,算航天飞机,美国是唯一实际使用的回收液体火箭的国家。
航天飞机的固体火箭助推器实际上从来没有回收使用过,都是再造的。
rongzhili.au 发表于 2012-10-21 08:00
是的,算航天飞机,美国是唯一实际使用的回收液体火箭的国家。
航天飞机的固体火箭助推器实际上从来没 ...
那你再去查资料吧 SRB当然都是重复使用的
俺是小马甲 发表于 2012-10-21 10:23
那你再去查资料吧 SRB当然都是重复使用的
任何资料说SRB是重复使用的都是垃圾。
rongzhili.au 发表于 2012-10-20 11:15
中国的报道中没有透露回收的液体火箭型号。
求链接
rongzhili.au 发表于 2012-10-21 10:44
任何资料说SRB是重复使用的都是垃圾。
是吗
别的不说 discovery的纪录片有SRB回收重铸燃料的全过程 难道说重新装好的SRB放在那里供人参观?
俺是小马甲 发表于 2012-10-21 10:55
是吗
别的不说 discovery的纪录片有SRB回收重铸燃料的全过程 难道说重新装好的SRB放在那里供人参观?
discovery是大众媒体,不是专业媒体。
yzsz266 发表于 2012-10-21 10:44
求链接
对不起,我不收集保留这些东西。
rongzhili.au 发表于 2012-10-21 11:26
discovery是大众媒体,不是专业媒体。
那你是如何确定SRB没有重复使用过的
对不起,我不收集保留这些东西。
没点干货还满嘴跑火车
俺是小马甲 发表于 2012-10-21 11:31
那你是如何确定SRB没有重复使用过的
抱歉,无可奉告,你可以不信。
根据我的观察楼主不择手段黑美挺毛的手法估计就是两年前那个被我们拍得体无完肤的毛国友人汗斯或者是大油子的马甲的真正幕后主使者,怪不得这么能哈毛。