Main Engine Cut Off - T+6: Orbital ATK’s Next-Gen Vehicle, Falcon 9 Proving Its Reusability, and ULA’s Tough Future

Episode Date: June 1, 2016

Orbital ATK shared some more details about their next-generation launch vehicle, SpaceX is working out their certification process for reflown stages, and how these events affect the industry and other competitors in the near future. Details of Orbital ATK’s proposed heavy launcher revealed – Spaceflight Now SpaceX to brief underwriters on the road to Falcon 9 reusability - SpaceNews.com First Stage: The Air Force looks at reusability | SpaceNews Magazine SpaceX on Twitter: “Yesterday, our next rocket moved into the launch site at Cape Canaveral, FL” Email feedback to [e-mail] Follow @WeHaveMECO Support Main Engine Cut Off on Patreon

A few weeks back I talked about Orbital ATK in negotiations with NASA to use part of the VAB to support a future next-generation launch vehicle. a future next-generation launch vehicle. This past week, we got a couple more details about what that launch vehicle would be, and it looks like it would be a three-stage rocket, the first two of which would be solid rocket motors built by Orbital ATK themselves, and the third stage would use an upper engine supplied by Blue Origin. It would actually be the BE-3U, which is the upper-stage version of the rocket engine currently powering Blue Origin's New Shepard rocket. According to Orbital ATK, this rocket would be available by 2020, but they said they would only

go ahead with the development of the rocket if they got some Air Force funding to support it. As of right now, Orbital ATK does have some initial funding from the Air Force to work on lighter weight casings for the solid rocket motors that they are supplying NASA with currently for use on the SLS. Those are currently made of steel casings, but they're looking to switch to a composite case, which would be a significant mass reduction, which would help the launch vehicles be a bit more efficient and lift a little bit more mass to orbit. So Orbital ATK is looking for some more funding to do these improvements, which would be helpful to their own launch vehicle, but also to the SLS and maybe the next generation version of the booster for that rocket.

The goal is to have this new launch vehicle certified for Department of Defense missions, so they would be able to launch those military satellites and compete with Falcon 9, Atlas 5, Delta 4 for the launch contracts there, though Atlas 5 and Delta IV are in the process of being phased out, so by the time this comes online it could be competing with the Falcon 9, the Atlas V will probably still be around, and maybe even the Vulcan will be entering service by that point. The spokesperson from Orbital ATK didn't want to talk about what the cost of that rocket would be, but there was a direct quote that I found very interesting. John Steinmeier, the

Director of Strategy and Business Development for Orbital ATK said, the dollar value that we are requesting from the Air Force to go forward would be substantially less than others have stated is required for their RD-180 replacement activities. Now there's only one person that is working towards replacing an RD-180 and that is ULA with their Atlas V rocket. So this is a quote that is pointed directly at the process to switch over from the Atlas V to something affordable that is made with an American-built engine. So Orbital ATK is really not pulling any punches, saying that it would be a lot cheaper to go ahead and build this rocket that they're proposing

than it would be to put all the money necessary into replacing the Atlas V with the Vulcan. Now the interesting thing again is how Blue Origin plays into all this. Blue Origin would be supplying the upper stage engine for this Orbital ATK proposed rocket, and they are slated to supply the first stage engine for ULA's new Vulcan rocket. So just from currently flying launch providers, Blue Origin has a lot of business ahead of them. They're kind of piggybacking on top of these established companies to fund some of their own development, both of a first stage engine that would be capable to lift a launch vehicle off of the ground, but also for an upper stage engine, which they've already been flying. They've already flown the BE-3 three times at this point, with a fourth coming up soon. And partnerships like this would help

fund the conversion of that from an engine that is built for launch from the ground to something that would be more optimized for an upper stage use. So again, we see Blue Origin playing a very interesting game where they're using partnerships to help build the engines they need for their own launch vehicle. Because with what they've got in store, you really can't see them not building a launch vehicle of their own. They're going to have a first stage engine in the BE-4. They've already got an engine that would be useful for an upper stage in the BE-3. So you put those two things together and tack on their reusability work that

they've been doing, and you've got a pretty compelling launch vehicle on paper right there. So Blue Origin is definitely playing its cards right in, you know, setting themselves up for success with these different partnerships, and Orbital ATK, for that matter, is doing pretty well in their own right. Orbital ATK is really playing their cards right here as well, because the Air Force and the military as a whole love solid rocket motors. Solid rocket motors are needed for the rockets and missiles that are in the military's arsenal, so it's very beneficial for them to keep the leading producer of those in the country in business. So with Orbital ATK saying that we could build a rocket that you could use for Department of Defense launches

that is made of solid rocket motors, that is a lot cheaper than your alternatives, and even replaces the RD-180, which is under a lot of political strife right now and might even be getting banned for use on Department of Defense launches. This is something that could provide the military with a lot of stability in the years ahead by keeping their solid rocket motor production company in business, by giving them an American-built, from the ground up, rocket that is used to put their own payloads into orbit. This is something that, again, has a lot of political sway, and Orbital ATK is doing a really good job at seeing what their benefits are and where their strengths are to get these types of projects greenlit. So just to round out the details of this rocket before going back into the strategy side of things,

without the strap-on motors that they could put on this rocket, it would lift about 12,000 pounds to geostationary transfer orbit, which is where most commercial and military satellites are headed. But they do have the option of putting up to six strap-on motors on the side, which would boost what they could get into orbit. So a very capable launch vehicle that would do a lot of work for the Department of Defense if it was able to be built. And in terms of a launch site, they, as I said, are in negotiations with NASA to use the VAB for assembly of this rocket. And the spokesperson said that they would use Launchpad 39B to launch this rocket. And again, that's where SLS is slated to be launched from. So this is kind of a confirmation

if this project were to go through that SLS would be launching about once a year, which would leave enough time in the Launchpad to support five or six launches of Orbital ATK's next-gen launcher per year, which they kind of need to make their business case work. So Orbital ATK definitely has all the pieces in place for this thing to get greenlit, and they're saying that they're only going to build it if the Air Force will help fund it. And again, they have a lot of interest shared with the Air Force there, and the Air Force has a lot of interest in them sticking around. So I would be very surprised if this project did not get greenlit and go into development, and we'll probably see that launch sometime 2020, maybe 2021, with the inevitable delay here and there. Now getting back to strategy, all I can see is hard

times for ULA coming up. We've got Falcon 9, which is just doing incredible. And we'll talk about that in a bit with them sticking another GTO landing. We've got Blue Origin, who is making these partnerships to develop their own engines, which would eventually build up to another, you know, maybe Falcon 9 competitor with that reusability at hand that Blue Origin seems to be interested in. And then you've got Orbital ATK, who has maybe just as much sway politically as Boeing and Lockheed, which make up ULA. They've got just as much political sway, so they've got the same lobbying firepower as those two old companies, and they always seem to be in the deals of both NASA and the military in terms of launch vehicles. So really, Orbital

ATK is doing great. Blue Origin, while not there yet, seems to be on a good track to be a very reliable launch provider and something that could get a lot of work both from the commercial side as well as from the civil side and the military side as well. And Falcon 9 is doing great, but ULA, they've got a lot of work to do over the next 10 years. They got really stationary over the last 10 years and felt got really stationary over the last 10 years and felt very comfortable in both the Atlas V and Delta IV because those really were the workhorses of the industry. But they kind of fell asleep at the wheel

and they didn't put a lot into cutting their costs. They didn't even really seem to bat an eye at reusability concerns. They kind of say that, well, our future rocket, we could reuse the motors if we put enough work into that, but they haven't even said what that rocket would cost to begin with, and with the Rube Goldberg-esque nature of getting those rocket engines back and then refurbishing them, I just don't see their business case for Vulcan working out and even getting close to the launch cost of Falcon 9, this next-gen launcher from Orbital

ATK, and whatever Blue Origin eventually comes up with. ULA also produces none of their own engines at this point. All of their engines would be sourced from Blue Origin, Aerojet Rocketdyne, and other places like that, but the others all build their own hardware in-house. Falcon 9 builds their Merlin engines, they're working on their Raptor engine, Orbital ATK builds all these solid rocket motors that are used in so many different places and launch vehicles, and Blue Origin is building both their own first stage engine and their upper stage engine. So all of that means that those companies are able to control their own costs. In Orbital ATK's case, they're going to buy an engine from Blue Origin, but that would be a lot cheaper than it would take for them to start working on their own liquid engines, because right now they're really just

focused on those solid rocket motors. The ability to control your own costs of engine production and launch motor production really goes a long way to assuring a low cost to launch, but ULA has to buy all of theirs from elsewhere, and that really doesn't leave a lot of room for them to cut costs by themselves. So in an era dominated by low costs and reliability, ULA doesn't seem to be getting better at cost, though they are still reliable, and everyone else is beating them on cost right now and even, you know, just upping their reliability as we go forward. While ULA seems to be making strides towards the future and working towards a next generation launch vehicle, I'm wondering at what point they're going to have to cut their losses and do a drastic ground-up redesign to get up to

speed with reusability in the way that others are headed. The attitude from the older side of the industry in general, which ULA is really the poster child for, has always been that, well, that type of reusability will never work. You don't want to land the full stage because it's going to sacrifice too much payload capacity, it's going to be too much to refurbish, it's going to be not great to refly again, and it's just not very reliable, and I don't think it's an economical case that we can make to do that, so that'll never work out. But here we are halfway through 2016 and there are four Falcon 9 cores that have been landed after an orbital launch. One from low-earth orbit back on land, three on a barge, and even including two of those from geostationary transfer orbit.

So really almost every landing case for a Falcon 9 have been proven out at this point. Land landings, barge landings, low-Earth orbit landings, geostationary landings. And the next step is to get these things flying again. And this week we learned that SpaceX is going to start talking to insurance underwriters in the next few weeks to talk about the plans to certify and refly rocket stages. They're going to talk through the recovery process, the refurbishment process, what they're going to do to requalify those stages before a launch, and really just give a full, down-to-the-detail briefing to the insurance underwriters who will be overseeing these launches. Now this is really important for a few reasons. This means that after getting four cores back, SpaceX now has a process for recovery and

refurbishment. They at least know what they're going to do with these stages before they refly them. And it seems like their plans are coming together in order to figure out what they need to get these things launching again. And this is really the first step that we've heard about that is on the path to reusing one of these cores. This is really a crucial step before they even want to refly one of these cores for a customer. And it seems like the first reflown core is going to be for a customer. So this is really the critical step right now to see how this process goes and if they can get this process rubber-stamped from the insurance underwriters.

After that, it now sounds like they're gonna refly one of these cores. They're saying by the end of the year at this point. Elon Musk was saying, well, you're going to refly one in May or June. But once they've adjusted for Elon time, it seems like by the end of the year, they will have reflown one of these. Certainly SES, who has flown multiple satellites with SpaceX and has said that they're interested in reflying a core, would be a good target for the first reflown core that would be sometime later this year. Right now, it's scheduled for September. So we could see that in September, October, depending on what delays there are around that launch. On this latest Falcon 9 landing, we did see a little bit of an issue with one of the landing legs.

SpaceX said that it came back in a little hotter than normal, and it crushed a crumple zone on one of the legs, which is what that crumple zone is there for, so that's a good thing that that worked out, and that's something that they would replace before they fly again. But it's good that they're finding these issues now, because that means most of the other big details are worked out. I mean, if they're starting to find these little issues with the legs, that means that all of the other parts of the launch and landing went flawlessly, or at least from what we can tell, went flawlessly. So it's great that they just continue to be shaking down these rockets

and finding out exactly what they need to get worked out for future reusability concerns. But more and more, they're just proving out that this reusability thing is really happening, and it's really here, and it's here right now. In addition to those insurance agents that are working through the details with SpaceX, the Air Force itself has even begun figuring out what their certification process would be for a previously launched rocket stage. So it's not only SpaceX looking into what it would be

to get the approval to relaunch a rocket, the Air Force itself is trying to figure out what their process would be to be able to use one of these things on a Department of Defense launch. So everybody but ULA at this point is looking ahead to full-stage reusability. So I don't mean to sit here and be doom and gloom about the most reliable launch provider, but they really, really have a lot of work to do and they've got a lot to figure out internally if they don't want to get left behind in another five years. In other SpaceX

news, on that same day that they launched TICOM 8 up to GTO and landed the first stage of their Falcon 9, they moved the next first stage into Cape Canaveral for their upcoming launch. They're slated for a June 16th launch of two satellites up to GTO, so their launch rate is certainly picking up. I mean, we're getting close to that two-week mark, maybe three-week mark at this point, but every time they seem to be launching a Falcon 9, another one's on the truck coming into Cape Canaveral. So we've talked about in the past that SpaceX needs to get their flight rate up, needs to get their reliability up. And over the past month or two, they've just done incredible at doing both of those things while returning four stages at this point to

Cape Canaveral. So that'll be it for me this week. I would love to hear your thoughts about the next five years of these companies and how they're going to play out with all these plans interacting the way they are on Twitter at MECOPodcast, M-E-C-O podcast, or to the email anthony at mainenginecutoff.com. If you're enjoying the show, I would love a rating on the iTunes store, recommendation on Overcast, or whatever other platform you use, or just spread the word to a fellow spaceflight nerd. Thanks, and I'll talk to you soon.