登月火箭第二轮大战结束,土星5败给n1

来源:百度文库 编辑:超级军网 时间:2024/04/29 04:39:24

半个月前刚刚说登月火箭第二轮大战开始,土星5再次对决n1 ,
http://lt.cjdby.net/thread-1477845-1-1.html

最新的消息让人失望,第二轮大战要结束了,只不过这次和传说中的第一次结局相反,现在nasa居然要放弃当年的土星5的燃气循环煤油/液氧发动机f1,加入原来只有美国空军资助aerojet公司的n1火箭中的nk-33高压补燃煤油液氧发动机,原来计划中的当年的土星5的燃气循环煤油/液氧发动机f1则再次被老主人Rocketdyne的工作,将要被aerojey得到。美俄f1-nk33大战,变成了俄俄rd180-nk33大战---山寨版。

http://www.spacenews.com/civil/1 ... g-cost-sharing.html
NASA, Air Force Haggling Over Cost Sharing on Engine Project

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

By Brian Berger and Dan Leone
   ShareThis

The first stage of the United Launch Alliance Atlas 5 rocket, powered by RD-180 engines, is readied for launch at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Fla.


HUNTSVILLE, Ala., and WASHINGTON — Negotiations on a proposal in which NASA and the U.S. Air Force would jointly fund an Aerojet-led propulsion project that could pave the way for a U.S. alternative to the Russian-built RD-180 rocket engine are bogged down over cost sharing issues, according to government and industry officials.

The impasse centers on how much funding the Air Force would provide for tests Aerojet has proposed as part of a program aimed at upgrading NASA’s heavy-lift Space Launch System (SLS) crew and cargo rocket. Aerojet is one of four companies NASA selected in July to work on liquid- and solid-fueled booster concepts meant to improve SLS’s lift capacity and affordability.

When it debuts in 2017, SLS will rely on a pair of five-segment solid-rocket boosters and a cluster of four RS-25 engines — both remnants of the retired space shuttle program — to haul 70 metric tons to orbit. NASA plans to eventually add advanced boosters and a new upper stage to increase SLS’s hauling capacity to 130 metric tons.

Having set aside $200 million for a 30-month SLS Advanced Booster Engineering Demonstration and Risk Reduction effort, NASA announced Oct. 1 that it had signed contracts with Utah-based ATK Launch Systems; Huntsville, Ala.-based Dynetics; and Los Angeles-based Northrop Grumman Corp. The combined value of the awards is $137.3 million.

Conspicuously absent from the mix was Sacramento, Calif.-based Aerojet, one of the three main U.S. rocket propulsion providers.

“We’re in negotiations,” Julie Van Kleeck, Aerojet’s vice president of space and launch systems, said Oct. 16 during the American Astronautical Society’s Werner von Braun Memorial Symposium in Huntsville. “There have been additional partners brought into this, so we have a few weeks in front of us to complete that.”

NASA spokeswoman Jennifer Stanfield confirmed Oct. 26 that Aerojet’s Advanced Booster award was still in negotiations.

One aerospace executive, whose company is not involved with the SLS Advanced Booster studies, said Oct. 25 that the potential collaboration would leverage Aerojet’s work on the Air Force’s Hydrocarbon Boost Engine Technology program. In 2006, Aerojet won a nine-year, $110 million contract for that program, which is being managed by the Air Force Research Laboratory.

“What I know from discussions with the Air Force and NASA is that they are looking to combine the NASA effort with what the Air Force had been doing on the hydrocarbon boost initiative,” this executive said. Hydrocarbon typically refers to kerosene rocket fuel.

Another industry official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said negotiations between Aerojet, NASA and the Air Force were hung up over how much funding each would bring to the table.

Aerojet canceled an Oct. 25 interview with Van Kleeck and referred questions about the engine project to company spokesman Glenn Mahone, who did not respond by press time.

During the Huntsville symposium, Van Kleeck would talk about Aerojet’s Advanced Booster proposal only in general terms.

“Without getting into too much detail, the focus is on a large liquid rocket engine — kerosene, closed-cycle,” Van Kleeck said Oct. 16. “Our offering is to look at those areas that might be perceived as high risk particularly in the area of combustion stability.”

During a separate presentation at the symposium the next day, Dale Thomas, associate director of NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, talked about the agency’s interest in collaborating with the Air Force on a large,  

kerosene-fueled engine that could both power an advanced SLS booster and replace the RD-180 on the United Launch Alliance Atlas 5. The Atlas 5 is one of two main rockets used to launch U.S. national security payloads.

“We know the Department of Defense is interested, being a little apprehensive about using a foreign-sourced engine on a strategic capability for our nation,” Thomas said. “So there may be an intersecting interest there. We have some technology work going on the [kerosene] engines for advanced booster. We are currently in talks with the Air Force about how we can intersect with [a kerosene] test bed, hydrocarbon test bed, that they have underway.”

In a brief interview with Space News after his presentation, Thomas declined to say whether he was talking specifically about Aerojet’s proposal.

Todd May, SLS program manager at Marshall, said some of the liquid-propulsion concepts NASA selected under the Advanced Booster program have “intriguing potential for solutions that not only benefit NASA but may benefit others like, say, the Air Force.

“As a matter of fact,” May added during an Oct. 16 interview at the symposium, “there are Air Force people here today meeting with my advanced development manager who has under his purview the Advanced Booster contracts”

The Air Force’s Hydrocarbon Boost Engine Technology program is aimed at producing a staged-combustion cycle kerosene-fueled demonstration engine capable of producing 250,000 pounds of thrust at sea level. The engine, intended for ground testing only, would be an incremental step toward a larger engine that eventually could displace the RD-180.

Unlike the gas-generator engines that have become the hallmark of the U.S. liquid rocket-propulsion industry, oxygen-rich staged-combustion engines were a specialty of the Soviet space program. For years, the U.S. government has sought a domestic alternative to the RD-180, but none has materialized.

Negotiations between NASA, the Air Force and Aerojet are proceeding against a backdrop of declining government budgets and a consolidating U.S. propulsion industry. In July, Aerojet announced it would acquire its main competitor in the liquid-rocket business, Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne of Canoga Park, Calif., for $550 million. Assuming federal regulators approve the deal, the sale would close in early 2013.

Since before NASA unveiled its basic SLS design last September, Aerojet has sought a greater role on the project. In 2011, NASA sole-sourced a great deal of SLS work to Houston-based Boeing Space Exploration, ATK and Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne, all of which had major development roles in the Ares family of rockets under the Constellation lunar exploration program that was canceled in 2010. The SLS design was derived in large part from the Ares 5 heavy-lift concept.

Besides the work it had already won for SLS, Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne is a subcontractor to Dynetics for its two Advanced Booster awards, one of which focuses on reviving the kerosene-fueled F-1 engine that powered NASA’s Apollo-era Saturn 5 rocket. Aerojet would get that business after the companies merge.

The Air Force Research Lab’s Public Affairs Office did not respond to a request for comment.

半个月前刚刚说登月火箭第二轮大战开始,土星5再次对决n1 ,
http://lt.cjdby.net/thread-1477845-1-1.html

最新的消息让人失望,第二轮大战要结束了,只不过这次和传说中的第一次结局相反,现在nasa居然要放弃当年的土星5的燃气循环煤油/液氧发动机f1,加入原来只有美国空军资助aerojet公司的n1火箭中的nk-33高压补燃煤油液氧发动机,原来计划中的当年的土星5的燃气循环煤油/液氧发动机f1则再次被老主人Rocketdyne的工作,将要被aerojey得到。美俄f1-nk33大战,变成了俄俄rd180-nk33大战---山寨版。

http://www.spacenews.com/civil/1 ... g-cost-sharing.html
NASA, Air Force Haggling Over Cost Sharing on Engine Project

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

By Brian Berger and Dan Leone
   ShareThis

The first stage of the United Launch Alliance Atlas 5 rocket, powered by RD-180 engines, is readied for launch at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Fla.


HUNTSVILLE, Ala., and WASHINGTON — Negotiations on a proposal in which NASA and the U.S. Air Force would jointly fund an Aerojet-led propulsion project that could pave the way for a U.S. alternative to the Russian-built RD-180 rocket engine are bogged down over cost sharing issues, according to government and industry officials.

The impasse centers on how much funding the Air Force would provide for tests Aerojet has proposed as part of a program aimed at upgrading NASA’s heavy-lift Space Launch System (SLS) crew and cargo rocket. Aerojet is one of four companies NASA selected in July to work on liquid- and solid-fueled booster concepts meant to improve SLS’s lift capacity and affordability.

When it debuts in 2017, SLS will rely on a pair of five-segment solid-rocket boosters and a cluster of four RS-25 engines — both remnants of the retired space shuttle program — to haul 70 metric tons to orbit. NASA plans to eventually add advanced boosters and a new upper stage to increase SLS’s hauling capacity to 130 metric tons.

Having set aside $200 million for a 30-month SLS Advanced Booster Engineering Demonstration and Risk Reduction effort, NASA announced Oct. 1 that it had signed contracts with Utah-based ATK Launch Systems; Huntsville, Ala.-based Dynetics; and Los Angeles-based Northrop Grumman Corp. The combined value of the awards is $137.3 million.

Conspicuously absent from the mix was Sacramento, Calif.-based Aerojet, one of the three main U.S. rocket propulsion providers.

“We’re in negotiations,” Julie Van Kleeck, Aerojet’s vice president of space and launch systems, said Oct. 16 during the American Astronautical Society’s Werner von Braun Memorial Symposium in Huntsville. “There have been additional partners brought into this, so we have a few weeks in front of us to complete that.”

NASA spokeswoman Jennifer Stanfield confirmed Oct. 26 that Aerojet’s Advanced Booster award was still in negotiations.

One aerospace executive, whose company is not involved with the SLS Advanced Booster studies, said Oct. 25 that the potential collaboration would leverage Aerojet’s work on the Air Force’s Hydrocarbon Boost Engine Technology program. In 2006, Aerojet won a nine-year, $110 million contract for that program, which is being managed by the Air Force Research Laboratory.

“What I know from discussions with the Air Force and NASA is that they are looking to combine the NASA effort with what the Air Force had been doing on the hydrocarbon boost initiative,” this executive said. Hydrocarbon typically refers to kerosene rocket fuel.

Another industry official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said negotiations between Aerojet, NASA and the Air Force were hung up over how much funding each would bring to the table.

Aerojet canceled an Oct. 25 interview with Van Kleeck and referred questions about the engine project to company spokesman Glenn Mahone, who did not respond by press time.

During the Huntsville symposium, Van Kleeck would talk about Aerojet’s Advanced Booster proposal only in general terms.

“Without getting into too much detail, the focus is on a large liquid rocket engine — kerosene, closed-cycle,” Van Kleeck said Oct. 16. “Our offering is to look at those areas that might be perceived as high risk particularly in the area of combustion stability.”

During a separate presentation at the symposium the next day, Dale Thomas, associate director of NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, talked about the agency’s interest in collaborating with the Air Force on a large,  

kerosene-fueled engine that could both power an advanced SLS booster and replace the RD-180 on the United Launch Alliance Atlas 5. The Atlas 5 is one of two main rockets used to launch U.S. national security payloads.

“We know the Department of Defense is interested, being a little apprehensive about using a foreign-sourced engine on a strategic capability for our nation,” Thomas said. “So there may be an intersecting interest there. We have some technology work going on the [kerosene] engines for advanced booster. We are currently in talks with the Air Force about how we can intersect with [a kerosene] test bed, hydrocarbon test bed, that they have underway.”

In a brief interview with Space News after his presentation, Thomas declined to say whether he was talking specifically about Aerojet’s proposal.

Todd May, SLS program manager at Marshall, said some of the liquid-propulsion concepts NASA selected under the Advanced Booster program have “intriguing potential for solutions that not only benefit NASA but may benefit others like, say, the Air Force.

“As a matter of fact,” May added during an Oct. 16 interview at the symposium, “there are Air Force people here today meeting with my advanced development manager who has under his purview the Advanced Booster contracts”

The Air Force’s Hydrocarbon Boost Engine Technology program is aimed at producing a staged-combustion cycle kerosene-fueled demonstration engine capable of producing 250,000 pounds of thrust at sea level. The engine, intended for ground testing only, would be an incremental step toward a larger engine that eventually could displace the RD-180.

Unlike the gas-generator engines that have become the hallmark of the U.S. liquid rocket-propulsion industry, oxygen-rich staged-combustion engines were a specialty of the Soviet space program. For years, the U.S. government has sought a domestic alternative to the RD-180, but none has materialized.

Negotiations between NASA, the Air Force and Aerojet are proceeding against a backdrop of declining government budgets and a consolidating U.S. propulsion industry. In July, Aerojet announced it would acquire its main competitor in the liquid-rocket business, Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne of Canoga Park, Calif., for $550 million. Assuming federal regulators approve the deal, the sale would close in early 2013.

Since before NASA unveiled its basic SLS design last September, Aerojet has sought a greater role on the project. In 2011, NASA sole-sourced a great deal of SLS work to Houston-based Boeing Space Exploration, ATK and Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne, all of which had major development roles in the Ares family of rockets under the Constellation lunar exploration program that was canceled in 2010. The SLS design was derived in large part from the Ares 5 heavy-lift concept.

Besides the work it had already won for SLS, Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne is a subcontractor to Dynetics for its two Advanced Booster awards, one of which focuses on reviving the kerosene-fueled F-1 engine that powered NASA’s Apollo-era Saturn 5 rocket. Aerojet would get that business after the companies merge.

The Air Force Research Lab’s Public Affairs Office did not respond to a request for comment.
哈哈哈哈哈,恭喜恭喜啊
nk33是个好发动机
反正MD可以买到毛子的180,何必用N1的发动机呢?直接山寨个“能源号”不久可以了?
大小企鹅 发表于 2012-10-28 03:55
反正MD可以买到毛子的180,何必用N1的发动机呢?直接山寨个“能源号”不久可以了?
没有国家会把运载火箭这种关乎国家命运的武器/工具寄托在进口上,美国的计划一直就是要山寨rd180,但是20年下来这个计划没有落实,美国人的窘迫和着急可想而知,加入nk33多少可以增强企业之间的竞争。
rongzhili.au 发表于 2012-10-28 07:50
没有国家会把运载火箭这种关乎国家命运的武器/工具寄托在进口上,美国的计划一直就是要山寨rd180,但是20 ...
nk33也要从毛子哪里进口的,而且nk33比rd170系列落后10年左右,既然可以买到为什么不买效率更高的呢?
大小企鹅 发表于 2012-10-28 11:43
nk33也要从毛子哪里进口的,而且nk33比rd170系列落后10年左右,既然可以买到为什么不买效率更高的呢?
一直在说美国要山寨这两种前苏联发动机,不是像现在的只是进口。

自己山寨,不是光靠先进性的,还要看可行性,这篇新闻本身就是说美国nasa觉得能山寨出nk-33,也比效率低很多的f1强多了。
所以现在是nk-33和rd180之争。
何以见得啊 嘿嘿
rongzhili.au 发表于 2012-10-28 11:59
一直在说美国要山寨这两种前苏联发动机,不是像现在的只是进口。

自己山寨,不是光靠先进性的,还要看 ...
能山寨出NK33的话离RD170也不远了,毕竟都是富氧燃烧室的发动机。
话说为毛MD可以买到RD170/180,毛子却不卖我们难道我们的山寨能力比MD都强?(我想是的)
毛子和md航天合作的广度大,毛子既然卖一定有其他回报
大小企鹅 发表于 2012-10-28 12:11
能山寨出NK33的话离RD170也不远了,毕竟都是富氧燃烧室的发动机。
话说为毛MD可以买到RD170/180,毛子却 ...
毛熊砸锅卖铁的时候兔子家里也揭不开锅,只有白头鹰富的流油,毛熊会怎么开价可想而知。
中国航天那些年不容易。
acoustics 发表于 2012-10-29 01:02
毛熊砸锅卖铁的时候兔子家里也揭不开锅,只有白头鹰富的流油,毛熊会怎么开价可想而知。
中国航天那些年 ...
不对吧,当年我们哪怕砸锅卖铁也要去毛熊家淘宝的,毕竟可以给我们省下巨量的钱,还有更关键的时间。
RD120和R8不就是那个时代淘回来的?
都是NB的火箭
acoustics 发表于 2012-10-29 01:02
毛熊砸锅卖铁的时候兔子家里也揭不开锅,只有白头鹰富的流油,毛熊会怎么开价可想而知。
中国航天那些年 ...
中苏国界东段协定
鬼眼老三 发表于 2012-10-30 01:28
中苏国界东段协定
兄弟的意思是:以领土换技术??
如果是真的,劳资宁可不要技术。技术可以自己发展,领土走了就再也回不来了。当然,除非发动战争。
普罗米修撕 发表于 2012-10-30 10:51
兄弟的意思是:以领土换技术??
如果是真的,劳资宁可不要技术。技术可以自己发展,领土走了就再也回不 ...
“中苏国界东段协定” 91年5月签的, “中国载人航天工程” 92年启动。

90年前后苏共倒台, 苏联分裂。 免子一不借机收回国土, 二不派员去“帮”当地人搞民族自决, 还要把脸贴上人家屁股, 自动承认对方霸占了中国土地的所有权。 若是连点技术也没有换回来, 那不是傻到家了?

鬼眼老三 发表于 2012-10-30 12:11
“中苏国界东段协定” 91年5月签的, “中国载人航天工程” 92年启动。

90年前后苏共倒台, 苏联分裂 ...


毛子是分裂了,可核武库还在哪里,而且兔子方面当年自己内部也是个烂摊子,麻烦得很。

你以为兔子真是傻的?你以为兔子真的不想收回国土?

没办法啊。。。。
鬼眼老三 发表于 2012-10-30 12:11
“中苏国界东段协定” 91年5月签的, “中国载人航天工程” 92年启动。

90年前后苏共倒台, 苏联分裂 ...


毛子是分裂了,可核武库还在哪里,而且兔子方面当年自己内部也是个烂摊子,麻烦得很。

你以为兔子真是傻的?你以为兔子真的不想收回国土?

没办法啊。。。。
鬼眼老三 发表于 2012-10-30 12:11
“中苏国界东段协定” 91年5月签的, “中国载人航天工程” 92年启动。

90年前后苏共倒台, 苏联分裂 ...
管他干什么?又不是你的,70年产权期限。
pphu 发表于 2012-10-30 12:45
毛子是分裂了,可核武库还在哪里,而且兔子方面当年自己内部也是个烂摊子,麻烦得很。

你以为兔子真 ...
如果当时没那个事件会要好很多。想一想当时东方阵营为何差不多都在那几年同时暴发呢。周时的西方也有不少运动如:嬉皮士(虽不可同日而语)