Orion Lite/Atlas V

[JimMcDade]

ULA's Orion Lite/Atlas V commercial configuration might have a chance to do some intermediate ISS work while Ares I development continues. Using Orion Lite could eliminate the gap, and it is more attractive than renting rides from the Russians.

I still don't think the Russian powered Atlas V is politically acceptable as a permanent component of NASA human spaceflight. Too bad that we quit making F-1s.

[spacefan]

ULA's Orion Lite/Atlas V commercial configuration might have a chance to do some intermediate ISS work while Ares I development continues. Using Orion Lite could eliminate the gap, and it is more attractive than renting rides from the Russians.

I still don't think the Russian powered Atlas V is politically acceptable as a permanent component of NASA human spaceflight. Too bad that we quit making F-1s.

Why cant US companies pay for a licence to manufacture the russian engines?

Whats wrong with digging out the old Apollo drawings for any useful components then going to industry and saying build that, lowest tender wins?

I know the above is probebly too naive but it seems that if there is a hard way to build a rocket the constellation program must surely be it.

[Rick]

Why cant US companies pay for a licence to manufacture the russian engines?

Whats wrong with digging out the old Apollo drawings for any useful components then going to industry and saying build that, lowest tender wins?

I know the above is probebly too naive but it seems that if there is a hard way to build a rocket the constellation program must surely be it.

Good question and a good idea.

[Me2]

1. Why cant US companies pay for a licence to manufacture the russian engines?

2. Whats wrong with digging out the old Apollo drawings for any useful components then going to industry and saying build that, lowest tender wins?

1. PWR already has. It is just cheaper to use Russian produced engines

2. Because most of the processes and standards have changed. The drawings would need to be redone.

It is just like trying to build a Model T. Sure it can be done but not for the same price. A lot of items would have to be reverse engineered.

[spacefan]

1. PWR already has. It is just cheaper to use Russian produced engines

2. Because most of the processes and standards have changed. The drawings would need to be redone.

It is just like trying to build a Model T. Sure it can be done but not for the same price. A lot of items would have to be reverse engineered.

Thanks for the reply

1. I thought something like that might be the case. Still its nice to have the capability to make them independently, in case Putin and Medvedev start throwing thier weight around. The US military have no quams about russian built engines i cant see how they would be politicaly unacceptable for HSF.

2. But if there is a lost capability that needs to be reaquired surely its easier to go backto what you know works rather than trying to reinvent the wheel.

[J.McDonald]

As Me2 says, PWR have looked into domestic production of the RD180. There were some mettalurgy issues but they appear to have satisfied themsevles that they could begin producing the engines within such a timescale that the current stock of Russian-built engines would see them through and avoid a gap.

Secondly, I do not believe that it is always easier/cheaper to go back to a previous design. If you could find all the old F1 technicians and all the old tooling, then yeah I guess you could have them churn out the engines no sweat. But neither of these assets exists anymore.
Using a previous design isn't necessarily easier. Get yourself a quote for a wooden sailing ship or a thatched roof and compare it to a current construction method.