EPThttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RS-68
So partially dependent on Russian engines, but not fully.
NASA and the Private Sector - Page 113
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Keep debates civil. | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RS-68 So partially dependent on Russian engines, but not fully. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
Paywalled, but it essentially says "nah idiot" to that memo on forcing ULA to do things as requested by certain Congresspeople. In a nicer way of course. | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
After Saturday night's successful delivery of a US Air Force communications satellite to orbit, the medium variant of the Delta IV rocket has now launched 26 times. All of the Delta IV medium launches, which primarily have served the US armed forces, have ended in mission success. Other US-based rockets have launched more, but no modern rocket with all-American components, from the engines and solid-rocket motors to the upper stage, can boast of such a record of success as the Delta IV Medium. And yet now the rocket's parent company, United Launch Alliance, desperately wants to retire the booster. Why? The answer is cost; it's about twice as expensive as competitors. “Great rocket,” the chief executive of United Launch Alliance, Tory Bruno, said in 2015 of the Delta IV. “But it’s more expensive than the equivalent Atlas rocket." The only problem with the Atlas V, which has launched about twice as many times as the Delta V, is that it uses Russian RD-180 engines rather than American-made ones. As the US military doesn't want to be entirely reliant on Russian rocket engines to get its sensitive communications and spy satellites into space, lawmakers have been putting pressure on United Launch Alliance (ULA) to keep the Delta IV Medium flying. Even the emergence of SpaceX, and its equally capable and far less expensive Falcon 9 rocket, has done little to quell the ardor of some on Capitol Hill to keep the Delta IV flying, both in its medium and heavy variants. Rocket politics In a late February letter to Lisa Disbrow, the acting secretary of the US Air Force, and James MacStravic, who is performing the duties of the undersecretary of defense for acquisition, two congressmen said the Delta IV Medium and Heavy should continue to fly. US Representatives Mike Rogers (R-Ala.) and Mac Thornberry (R-Texas) required the company to report back on how it could make the Delta IV "a more cost-effective and modern launch system" for the US government. Moreover, the letter said, the company should provide to Congress, "A detailed summary of the mechanics and costs for the Department to use the Defense Production Act to require ULA to continue to produce the Delta family of launch vehicles should it be deemed necessary." This seems like a bit of overkill. In addition to the Atlas V and Falcon 9 vehicles, by as early as 2019 the US Department of Defense may have two or three other medium- and heavy-lift rockets to choose from for delivery of satellites to geostationary orbit: ULA's next-generation Vulcan rocket, SpaceX's Falcon Heavy, and Blue Origin's New Glenn vehicle. (The Department of Defense, to date, hasn't been interested in using NASA's even more muscular Space Launch System, primarily due to its very high cost.) The political subtext here seems pretty clear—some congressmen don't seem to like (or trust) new space companies such as SpaceX or Blue Origin. Parochially, they also seem to like the fact that ULA does a lot of business in Alabama with its Delta IV rocket. In any case, the medium variant of the Delta IV rocket will continue to fly a few more times. There are currently three more flights of the vehicle planned, with the final launch possibly occurring in late 2018 with another Air Force communications satellite, Wideband Global SATCOM, similar to the one that launched Saturday night. Source ULA slowly but surely retiring its more expensive, but all-American, rocket. It's been kept around for pork and insurance reasons (Air Force wants two rockets at a time to be able to fly, didn't have any other choices before). To be replaced by newer Vulcan at some point in the future. As noted in a comment: RD-180 costs $10m, the other engine costs $25m. Besides reliability, the Russian engine is pretty solid on cost as well. Not as cheap as SpaceX of course, but it makes up for it in being more dependable. | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On March 21 2017 02:00 LegalLord wrote: Air Force on previous memo regarding ULA plans. Paywalled, but it essentially says "nah idiot" to that memo on forcing ULA to do things as requested by certain Congresspeople. In a nicer way of course. Follow-up: House Armed Services Committee (HASC) Chairman Mac Thornberry (R-Texas) will not intervene in United Launch Alliance’s (ULA) downselect of a first stage booster for its next-generation rocket, despite declaring in a recent letter that the company should provide… http://www.defensedaily.com/thornberry-walks-back-ula-vulcan-intervention-suggestion/ Long discussion of why the RD-180 gained the relevance it did, and why it needs to go now: https://www.csis.org/analysis/beyond-rd-180 The dependence on the RD-180 actually came from an important period of weakness in the US launch industry. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
Not really Space related but who knows... SpaceX and Tesla CEO Elon Musk is backing a brain-computer interface venture called Neuralink, according to The Wall Street Journal. The company, which is still in the earliest stages of existence and has no public presence whatsoever, is centered on creating devices that can be implanted in the human brain, with the eventual purpose of helping human beings merge with software and keep pace with advancements in artificial intelligence. These enhancements could improve memory or allow for more direct interfacing with computing devices. Musk has hinted at the existence of Neuralink a few times over the last six months or so. More recently, Musk told a crowd in Dubai, “Over time I think we will probably see a closer merger of biological intelligence and digital intelligence.” He added that “it's mostly about the bandwidth, the speed of the connection between your brain and the digital version of yourself, particularly output." On Twitter, Musk has responded to inquiring fans about his progress on a so-called “neural lace,” which is sci-fi shorthand for a brain-computer interface humans could use to improve themselves. These types of brain-computer interfaces exist today only in science fiction. In the medical realm, electrode arrays and other implants have been used to help ameliorate the effects of Parkinson’s, epilepsy, and other neurodegenerative diseases. However, very few people on the planet have complex implants placed inside their skulls, while the number of patients with very basic stimulating devices number only in the tens of thousands. This is partly because it is incredibly dangerous and invasive to operate on the human brain, and only those who have exhausted every other medical option choose to undergo such surgery as a last resort. This has not stopped a surge in Silicon Valley interest from tech industry futurists who are interested in accelerating the advancement of these types of far-off ideas. Kernel, a startup created by Braintree co-founder Bryan Johnson, is also trying to enhance human cognition. With more than $100 million of Johnson’s own money — the entrepreneur sold Braintree to PayPal for around $800 million in 2013 — Kernel and its growing team of neuroscientists and software engineers are working toward reversing the effects of neurodegenerative diseases and, eventually, making our brains faster and smarter and more wired. Source | ||
zatic
Zurich15328 Posts
| ||
|
ShoCkeyy
7815 Posts
| ||
micronesia
United States24683 Posts
| ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/kZFeSef.jpg) ![[image loading]](https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2897/33550267952_662c3a6f93_o.jpg) Astronaut Bob Behnken emerges from the hatch of a SpaceX Crew Dragon spacecraft in manufacturing at SpaceX's headquarters and factory in Hawthorne, California. | ||
|
zatic
Zurich15328 Posts
On March 29 2017 07:24 micronesia wrote: NASA unveiled the basics of their plan and timeline for a manned trip to Mars. Does anyone know what current radiation dose estimates are? I don't see how they will solve that problem unless they put astronaut health low on their list of priorities. It's even worse. Estimates for a Mars mission go from anything from close to zero to an average of 10 year shortened lifespan due to increases cancer risk. Even if you accept that (and I am sure you'll find enough volunteers), prolonged exposure to cosmic rays might actually fry your brain to an extend that austronauts might become unable to perform their functions during the mission itsself. It could very well be that even the best of the best arrive as blind imbeciles after an 18 month transfer to Mars. It's probably never discussed publicly because there simply isn't a solution, and it might put a hard stop on human space exploration. | ||
|
CuddlyCuteKitten
Sweden2620 Posts
So perhaps it makes trips impossible right now but it shouldnt be a dealbreaker. | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
| ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
8983 Posts
| ||
|
CuddlyCuteKitten
Sweden2620 Posts
In all seriousness a couple of trained rats would probably be the best. Small and you can have them trained to performe tasks in their cages to get food so you can study degradation over time if you can get them to manage it in space (ISS project lol?) or when they get home otherwise. Easier to send 4 rats than one doge so you can get some redundancy. Also can give them different shielding. | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On March 30 2017 02:11 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: Wouldn't a monkey be better? That way you get a close proximity of the effects on humans? Either way. Russia sent doges, the US sent monkeys. Mammals are mammals and our similarities probably matter more than the differences. Just has to be an animal that could be reasonably expected to survive the journey. If you want an animal that would be most likely to survive that trip, I'd put my money on lizards. But they aren't that useful for gauging human survivability. | ||
|
thePunGun
598 Posts
The 6 week study revealed: "Significant long-term brain damage, including cognitive impairments and dementia, a result of brain inflammation and damage to the rodents' neurons." They call it "Space Brain", I hope there'll be a movie and at least two sequels.  | ||
|
ShoCkeyy
7815 Posts
http://space.stackexchange.com/questions/1336/what-thickness-depth-of-water-would-be-required-to-provide-radiation-shielding-i | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On March 30 2017 02:29 thePunGun wrote: Sending a dog or a monkey to mars is too expensive (almost a billion USD) Well someone finally mentioned the elephant in the room. Yes, it's definitely pretty damn expensive. And here we found the biggest reason why the Mars matter is just going to end the way all ambitious space programs that aren't about one-upping the communists end: with a "it's too much money" budget cut. | ||
| ||
