Main Engine Cut Off - T+79: Orbital ATK’s OmegA, NASA’s Bridenstine

Episode Date: April 21, 2018

Orbital ATK unveiled the name and additional technical details of their new launch vehicle, OmegA. Jim Bridenstine was finally confirmed as the new NASA Administrator. This episode of Main Engine Cut Off is brought to you by 29 executive producers—Kris, Pat, Matt, Jorge, Brad, Ryan, Jamison, Nadim, Peter, Donald, Lee, Jasper, Chris, Warren, Bob, Brian, Russell, John, Moritz, Tyler, Joel, Jan, David, and six anonymous—and 157 other supporters on Patreon. OMEGA: Orbital ATK’s New Large-Class Rocket for U.S. Air Force Bridenstine Confirmed as NASA Administrator On Party-Line Vote - SpacePolicyOnline.com Senate votes to confirm Bridenstine as NASA administrator - SpaceNews.com Email your thoughts and comments to [e-mail] Follow @WeHaveMECO Listen to MECO Headlines Join the Off-Nominal Discord Subscribe on Apple Podcasts, Overcast, Pocket Casts, Spotify, Google Play, Stitcher, TuneIn or elsewhere Subscribe to the Main Engine Cut Off Newsletter Buy shirts and Rocket Socks from the Main Engine Cut Off Shop Support Main Engine Cut Off on Patreon

Hello and welcome to Main Engine Cutoff. I am Anthony Colangelo. Got some fun topics to dive into today. First up, Omega, Orbital ATK's next generation launch vehicle, got a name. We found out some more details. We're going to break some of that down. Then I've got a couple of quick thoughts on Jim Bridenstine, who is NASA's new administrator. So I'll save those for the end. Won't be too much anyway, since nothing really has happened yet. So let's dive in to Omega. First up, it is a really cool name, I think.

It's pretty honest that it is the last launch vehicle Orbital ATK will produce. But man, I hate how it's typed out. They did this capital O, capital A thing with the logo, and they are forcing you to type it that way as well. So that looks kind of dumb, but it's a cool name otherwise. And I think it fits with their current lineup of names pretty well. The other big thing we learned about it is that for the upper stage, it is going to be using the RL-10. Specifically, it's going to be using the RL-10C51, which is the model that will incorporate some 3D printing and additive manufacturing to cut down the cost. And it'll be using a pair of those engines.

So much like we just recently talked about how New Glenn is switching to a pair of BE-3Us, this Orbital ATK's Omega rocket, its upper stage will be using a pair of RL-10s. So that's an interesting development in its own right. So I want to just take a step back now that we know some of these details. We've got some payload specs. I want to kind of ruminate on why they are focusing on Omega in this way, what they could do with it in the future, how it will fit into their lineup, and maybe how it fits in to the launch industry as a whole a little bit. So first to start off with some payload specifications. There are two configurations of Omega, an intermediate and a heavy configuration.

The intermediate configuration, I've got a little printout here, a little printed out piece of paper that says the payload capacities on it feel like a little bit like rush limbaugh or some sort of radio producer that's got a stack of papers around um but the intermediate configuration uh they've got the payload range here listed at 4900 to 10 000 kilograms to gto um so that's about the low end of the Atlas V to a little above the Atlas V range, about 2,000 kilograms above what Atlas V can do to GTO. And that's the intermediate configuration. And then in the heavy configuration, it can do 5,200 to 7,800 kilograms directly to geostationary orbit. So that covers the full range of what the Air Force has defined in their EELV reference orbits. And the fairing here is also interesting as well. It's five meter

fairing. So the same width as Falcon 9 or the bigger fairings of Atlas 5 and Delta 4. But they are much longer. So these are 15 meter long fairings for the intermediate configuration, and the heavy configuration can either fly a 15 meter or a 20 meter fairing. For comparison, I've got the other charts here for the other launch vehicles in the U.S. here. The Falcon 9's fairing is only 11 meters long, and the straightaway portion before it starts curving is only 6.7 meters long. The Atlas V obviously has a range of payload fairings. We'll talk just in the 5-meter case. The shortest one is 10 meters long. The medium length is, what's that, 12.7, 12.8 meters,

Length is, what's that, 12.7, 12.8 meters. And the longest one is over 16 meters, almost 17 meters long. So a much longer fairing than Falcon 9 and in its maximum configuration even longer than an Atlas V fairing. so they do put themselves into the market to launch the larger in terms of shape and size you know dimension payloads like a b330 or a dream chaser is something that i don't think can fit within a falcon 9 fairing as it is now so they do open themselves up to that side of the market as well as you know the bigger spy satellites that go up that that need a lot of room as telescopes things like that so the fairing size is pretty substantial the payload capacity range is is right on it's in that eelv kind of range and can do direct to geo so it's pretty crazy obviously not as high as you know a new glen or something like that but that's you know given the size of it it makes sense um so as a

launch vehicle stats wise it makes sense um it's a solid boosted vehicle so it's going to be a rough ride up there uh that's interesting in its own right um it's a solid with other solids so there's just solids on yo dog i heard you like solids is kind of their strategy here with this vehicle. Price-wise, the statements from Overlay2K is that they can be competitive in the EELV market as well as the commercial market. I assume that means somewhere in the hundreds of millions of dollars range, you know, Atlas 5-ish, maybe the upper end of the Atlas 5. I don't really understand the RL-10 decision. The last stat I've heard on the RL-10 is that a single version of it, this is not the 3D printed version, this is the old, you know, manual labor version of the RL-10. The last stat I've heard of it, and it's not reliable, it was just kind of rumored, was that each one of those engines

is $25 to $30 million a piece. I don't know how much a 3D printed injector assembly will cut the cost of an RL-10, but I can't imagine it's cutting the cost all that much. I can't imagine that it even approaches what Blue Origin is able to produce, being a leaner, meaner company that has built their own engines for a while and is ironing out the production of BE-3, I can't imagine two RL-10s, even 3D printed ones, are approaching the cost of a single BE-3U. So I really have trouble understanding why Orbital ATK moved away from Blue Origin's B3U to go with the Aerojet Rocketdyne RL-10. That does bring in some price considerations as well. It's an expensive engine.

We don't have a reliable quote on what a current RL-10 single engine costs, but buying two of those for every flight really adds up pretty quickly. flight really adds up pretty quickly. So price-wise, I'm not exactly sure, you know, on a, you know, a completely flat competition, how it compares to Falcon 9 Atlas V and New Glenn. But I do think that if you're looking at Omega as just another launch vehicle, as purely a launch services vehicle, a program that Orbital ATK has no other interest in, I really do think you'll be sorely mistaken, and I really think you're missing the point on Omega itself. I think there's a lot going on here within Orbital ATK, a lot of programs that are coming together in an interesting way, in which Omega is a vital part of that. And I think the way that

they're going to generate business for Omega is really interesting and could make some of their other projects work even better. So let's dissect what I'm talking about here. First thing you have to realize is that Orbital ATK does a lot. They are not just a launch services company in the way that ULA is or in the way that Blue Origin is. Obviously, Blue Origin has other things that they're getting into as well. But Blue Origin and SpaceX are launch services companies. Arian Space is a launch services company. Orbital ATK does a lot of things.

They obviously are a big defense contractor. They build a lot of satellites. They're the ones that just built NASA's test satellite that went up. they build a lot of satellites they're the ones that just built nasa's test satellite that went up um they produce a lot of components for other launch vehicles composite structures they build all the uh like the boat tail that goes on the atlas 5 uh the interstages all that kind of stuff um so they do a lot of stuff they also are now expanding into this satellite servicing sector of the market. They have mission extension vehicles, which go up and they latch on to a satellite in geo and they

can take over propulsion for that satellite. They have mission robotic vehicles that they're working on now, which will be a vehicle that can fly around geo with a robotic arm and stick some of these mission extension pods onto another satellite to provide extra propulsion to keep your satellite up there longer. So they are getting into all these new areas of in-space services, as well as being one of the major manufacturers of satellite buses. So when you bring all this together and you start realizing how some of this stuff comes together, I think it could get pretty interesting. Read a little chunk here from a Space News article about Omega. Mike Pinkston, Deputy General Manager of Orbital ATK's Launch Vehicles Division, said Orbital ATK expects Omega to be cost competitive in both the EELV and commercial markets, but said he cannot provide

any priced estimates yet. The company is in search of customers, quote, we have some letters of intent in hand for payloads, unquote, he said. With Orbital ATK being a major satellite manufacturer, the plan is to offer, quote, our own satellites in our own rockets for an attractive price. So that there gives you a little indication of what they're thinking about here. For anyone out there that wants to build a satellite, you got to find somebody to produce a satellite for a couple hundred million dollars. Then you've got to take that satellite, get it insured, and get some launch insurance, and then find a launch provider for,

if you're flying with SpaceX, you know, $60 to $80 million. If you're flying with somebody else, a couple hundred million dollars. So maybe Orbital ATK is going to start pushing some of these bundled deals, Comcast style, where it's cheaper to get the satellite and the launch from one place and be able to offer a more competitive price in that bundle deal. So maybe it's only, you know, maybe it's $100 million less or $50 million less to get your satellite bus and a launch all from Orbital ATK and be able to have a little bit of that,

you know, synergy, if you will, with the two sides of Orbital ATK and be able to have a little bit of that synergy, if you will, with the two sides of Orbital ATK there. Now, when you take that and you factor in mission extension vehicles, mission extension pods, mission robotic vehicles, maybe in that kind of circumstance, they're able to put one of their other vehicles as a secondary payload on their own launch. And all of a sudden, you've got a satellite built by Orbital ATK launching on a launch vehicle built by Orbital ATK with a secondary payload that is operated by Orbital ATK that once on orbit can produce for

them nine digits millions of dollars over a set amount of years for them. You know, all of a sudden, you're providing life extension services for satellites and making hundreds of millions of dollars over the next 5, 10, 15 years in geostationary orbit. And you've done that with a subsidized launch by launching your vehicle for a customer on your own launch vehicle, so you're not paying somebody else's launch vehicle profits, you're able to use that internal launch cost rather than the external launch price. And you're getting your own vehicle up to geostationary orbit that can start providing services to either the vehicle you just launched or another vehicle you've launched previously or any Intel satellite who has been the one signing up at the Orbital ATK for life extension

services. And all of a sudden, this really comes together in a quite interesting way that, you know, when you look at it, Orbital ATK is not a launch services company. They're not getting into this for launch services. Because if you look at that architecture of Omega, that is not a vehicle that is built to be a launch services provider. It's expendable, it's solid boosters, it's kind of like a weird architecture overall for somebody who is focusing on being a lean, mean launch services provider. But if you're looking at it at a way where the other benefit here that I haven't

mentioned is that it keeps Orbital ATK's production line up and running. It scales out what they're doing. Maybe they can get some economies of scale benefits by expanding what they're building. So you've got some production line benefits. You're able to offer this bundle discount between satellite production and launch vehicles. Maybe that alone boosts the interest in your satellite buses. And then you're able to tack on your own vehicle that will be making you money once launched. You've got the full life cycle where you're making money at every step of the way. So I think the simplistic look at Omega and saying like, oh, well, it's a crappy launch vehicle,

if you just look at it as just a launch vehicle, I think that's too simplistic for what Orbital ATK is working on here. I think they're working on this entire ecosystem where they've got production line benefits, assembly of satellite benefits, they've got launch benefits, they've got these bundled discounts, they've got their own vehicles. They've got the full picture there. And I think if that's

how their business case closes, this could be a successful project for them. They have said in the past that they only need a handful of launches a year to close the business case of Omega. So maybe that's a couple of launches. Maybe they win some EELV contracts from the Air Force and they've got one or two launches of those. Maybe they've got a couple of satellite launches for their own customers. And maybe they even have a dedicated flight where they launch two or three mission extension vehicles at a time. Having the flexibility of having your own launch vehicle when you're involved in all those markets is really interesting. So if you're able to get enough launch vehicle interest

to close your business case for the launch vehicle alone and then use that to leverage your own advantages like your mission extension vehicles, like your own satellite production lines, that is a really strong portfolio for a company who isn't interested in just being a launch services provider but is interested in just operating a business revolving around space. So when you really start to look at it, that's interesting.

Now, the problem here is that the timeline is really slow. Initial flights of the intermediate configuration are supposed to be in 2021. They will be Air Force certified by 2022. So that's the EELV phase two timeline. And then the heavy configuration flights, which is direct to GEO, would start in 2024. So the next two or three years,

you know, they'll be hitching mission extension vehicles and robotic vehicles on other flights as they have done with a proton flight coming up at the end of this year. But once 2021 rolls around, if they've got this thing up and going, they're going to be launching their own flights to GTO and implementing this whole approach that I'm explaining here. The tough part is if the market shifts considerably away from geo now there will always be geo satellites i think it's a very useful place in space uh obviously there is a certain amount of uh fleet uh you know

re-upping that you got to do you know satellites are going to die you're going to need to extend life services of them you're going to need to replace them so there's always going to be something to do in or in geo for orbital atk but just how much is the gamble they're making because if that market dries up considerably by the end of the 2020s i don't know that they're ever going to be able to implement this full system that i'm kind of foreseeing here but all in all my main point here main takeaway is don't look at omega as just a launch vehicle try to look at it with the full picture of orbital atk in your mind load that all under your head look at it as an entire spectrum of services they're offering and look at how each part plays

into the next because every satellite that they launch on their own launch vehicle is at some point going to need a mission extension vehicle if that company wants to keep using that satellite or sell it off to somebody else. So you're building up your production line of satellites, your production line of launch vehicles, and you're giving your mission extension vehicles some future customers at the same time.

That is a really interesting cradle to grave service that they're offering. So we'll see if my assessment here is right or wrong, or if this project kind of flounders the way that Antares has. We'll see, we'll see. But as an overall architecture, there are some really interesting bits here that I think could make for a very, very interesting project from Orbital ATK. All right, I want to dive into some Bridenstine talk. But before I do that, I want to say a huge thank you to all the supporters of Main Engine Cutoff over at patreon.com slash Miko.

There are 186 of you supporting this show every single week. I could not be more thankful for your support. And this particular episode of Main Engine Cutoff was produced by 29 executive producers. particular episode of Managing Cutoff was produced by 29 executive producers. Chris, Pat, Matt, George, Brad, Ryan, Jameson, Nadim, Peter, Donald, Lee, Jasper, Chris, Warren, Bob, Brian, Russell,

John, Moritz, Tyler, Joel, Jan, David, and six anonymous executive producers. Thank you so much for all your support. You make this show possible, and I am so thankful for everything that you guys have donated to the show over the years don't forget over at patreon.com slash miko a couple of great perks if you want to

help support the show three dollars or more a month you get access to the headlines show that's a special little rss feed you'll get where I read the headlines off every single Friday you get a rundown of the space news and five dollars or or more a month, you get access to the off-nominal Discord, which is a very, very fun place to hang out with fellow space nerds. So check that out if you want to help support out the show. It's an independent show, totally supported by you out there, and I could not be more thankful for all the support.

So thank you, thank you, thank you so much. All right, a couple of thoughts on the Jim Bridenstine situation to close out the podcast here. He's finally confirmed as NASA administrator. It was a party line vote, very contentious, which is not usual for NASA administrators. who is the president and who people are that are being nominated. Overall, I really think Bridenstine is the right fit for NASA where it's at right now because the focus in the last couple of years has been the space industry as a whole and how you leverage what the industry is doing. And I think Bridenstine has had some really cool ideas in the American Space Renaissance Act

that he introduced to Congress, I guess that was two, three years ago at this point. So I think he has the right mind for that job. There's obviously questions about his past on things like climate change and stuff like that. But for what the NASA administrator does as a political figure, I think he's a really good fit. So I'm interested to see how he operates within that office. If you've listened to the show for a while, you know I have some reservations in general about what an administrator does in the previous 10 or 20 years of NASA policy. We'll see if Reidenstein changes any of that because he is a politician. He operates differently than any given space shuttle astronaut that has served as the administrator

in the past 10 or 20 years. So there's some outstanding questions there on how it's all going to operate. The other thing that's really tricky here is that we are heading into an interesting few years where we're approaching the midterm election where everyone is expecting some major swings towards the Democratic Party.

NASA has just had a really good budget year. They got way more money than they asked. All of the things that were proposed to be canceled by the Trump administration were resoundingly rejected by Congress and fully funded and then some. So there's a lot of weird situations where Congress is rejecting what the administration wants in a lot of ways. They're overfunding certain areas for what NASA has requested. And there's going to be a complete congressional swing this November. And then not only that, 2020 is going to be a really interesting presidential election.

2020 is going to be a really interesting presidential election. And you can sure as hell bet that the process for that is going to get started a year or more, a year and a half in advance of the 2020 election. So, you know, it there to be acting upon any of the policy changes that were hoping to be implemented. Maybe a whole lot's not going to change because he's coming in right on the cusp of a time when it's just going to be political turmoil for two years. I'm not sure how much of a focus space is going to be. There's kind of been some quiet time for the administration on the space policy front, but they have had this steady focus. I'm not sure that that's still going to be there when there's going to be all these other situations going on elsewhere in the political world. So not to say that he's totally hamstrung by the environment, but man, it's tough. It's a really tough spot to be in. Now, the good news is that there are some projects coming up for NASA towards the end of the year that an administrator

could have some influence on. There's some of these commercial landers or commercial cargo landers for the moon, both small and medium and large size. All these projects are underway and proposals are due toward the end of the year. Awards are going to be announced and whatnot. So there are these projects coming up for NASA's envisioned architecture around the gateway, the lunar gateway, that he could have some influence on. So, you know, maybe it's not drastic political change that he could drive at NASA, but the trajectory that we've seen NASA on, he can have some influence on how that goes. So if within that framework, he's able to do some

of the things that he was looking to do, then it could be a productive year or two for him. But if the political winds shift drastically in November and the budgeting for the next fiscal year, the one after that, is different than what we're seeing here. And priorities shift. And even quite honestly, as we saw the party line vote, the Democratic Party is not that willing to work with Bridenstine. He may have some headwinds that prevent him from doing what he wanted to do as administrator, as we've heard him express previously. So all that's to say, I'm hopeful for what he could bring to NASA. I'm skeptical of what an administrator can do anyway. And I'm weary of the political turmoil that is about to be injected upon the system in general. But with that, a politically contentious NASA environment right now, starting from the administrator position and moving outward from there. So it'll be a really interesting couple of months, couple of years with the potential for great success or total floundering yet to be seen.

But I'm sure we'll be talking about that more as we see him actually get into office and maybe make a statement or two about intentions and priorities for the coming year. And we'll break it down as we see it from there. But for now, that is it. That's all I've got for this week. Thank you so much for listening. As always, if you can, if you want to reach out about anything in this episode, anthony at mainenginecutoff.com is the email or over on Twitter at wehavemiko. Thank you once again to all of you supporting the show over at Patreon.com slash Miko, and I will talk to you next week.