Skip to content

Synergism with an Air force and NASA Methane gell RS-25

June 17, 2015

Air Force contracts for 16 RS-25 expendable engines and transfers( loans?) them to NASA, NASA “owes” the Air force for these engines.These are flown on the first 3 to 4 SLS flights.The air force is owed engines that have higher molar mass engines ( hydrocarbon)

NASA agrees to transfer(loans?) the 17 SSME’s to the Air Force

The Air Force agrees to fund the R&D for recovering the SSME engines after each flight, these engines are worth recovering!

The Air Force Runs SSME on EELV with a 5% to 10% Methane gel( does it  need modification?)

http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/Fuels-And-Space-Propellants/GELLED.htm

Production engines for both agency’s are incrementally evolved to a higher methane gel mix

NASA owes the Air Force so NASA needs a Methane gell CBC for the SLS so the Air Force agrees to look for a sweet spot between CBC and EELV commonality also NASA must replace the Air Forces SSME’s as they were out.This means the Air Force EELV must be human rated!

The SSME is already human rated

The Air Force and NASA will cost engineer the cost savings of SSME/EELV to see how many  flights a recovered SSME would produce over years, assume SpaceX and ULA have won a percentage of flights.Cost engineering should done by NASA, The Air Force and an independent third party. SSME’s are reusable and with 16 flight sets the Air Force with recovery could see at 10 flights per engine X 2 engines per launch vehicle(3 for a heavy)yields a result of 160 flights divided by 2 equals 80 flights.Refurbishment costs of each Air force SSME would have to be researched by cost engineers.We are talking about opportunity costs here versus delayed expenses (SSME refurbishment VS AF not having to pay for a new engine R&D)

If this SSME/RS-25 CBC as a EELV is to large even for the biggest NRO payloads then the Air Force agrees to the idea of co-manifesting NASA or commercial payloads  ( each CBC would have two to three engines) The two engine SSME EELV would make for the better launcher with some Methane gel Molar mass.Two engines make for a better recovery option.

NASA and the ESA agree to explore the joint development of the winged engine recovery option as long as the air force requirement is meet on this being sold to everyone.This would be built in the united states and Europe.(a US Adeline)

Advertisements

From → Uncategorized

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: