Почему на поверхность спускались двое, а не один?

Aerojet takes the NK-43, vacuum optimized, huge bell housing, runs in on Hydrolox, and applies their TAN know-how to it. Now, they have a SSTO type of engine, ideal for higher-thrust/low-atmosphere to higher-isp/lower-thrust in vacuum

 

США купят у России ракетные двигатели сорокалетней давности

 

..В то же время исполнительный директор Самарского научно-технического комплекса (СНТК) имени Кузнецова Николай Никитин отметил, что по оценкам американской компании, в 2016-2020 годах ей потребуется 71 двигатель НК-33. В настоящее время на складах СНТК хранится лишь около 40 двигателей. По оценкам Никитина, на возобновление производства НК-33 потребуется 4 миллиарда рублей.

 

Также издание отмечает, что в середине 90-х годов компания Aerojet купила у СНТК около 40 двигателей НК-33, заплатив за каждый по миллиону долларов. По словам Николая Никитина, при новых поставках стоимость двигателя будет существенно увеличена.

 

As pointed out, Aerojet has a license to the NK-33/43, and also had a lead in technologies such as TAN. Also SpaceX manufactures a Kerolox engine. IIRC, Rocketdyne also has a license on the RD-180 as well. So, this implies to me that should push come to shove, we do have the pieces in place to do the work, and the information necessary even if not the hands-on know how.
Aerojet and Rocketdyne may have licenses to build NK-33/43 and RD-180, respectively, and even prototype manufacturing demonstrations, but does that imply they understand how to design such an engine from scratch, rapidly and inexpensively? I have no doubt that Rocketdyne, and possibly SpaceX and Aerojet could create an RD-170-class engine of their own, given a major government contract, but would it be a massive, decade-long, many $billions SSME-like development effort, or more of an RS-68-like project?
-Alex
Aerojet have basically redesigned the NK33 at this point. the AJ-26 has more thrust, longer burn, and can run on either Hydrolox or Kerolox, so I understand.

And why would you need to design an engine from scratch, when you have a perfectly good design already? Let me post a scenario.
Aerojet takes the NK-43, vacuum optimized, huge bell housing, runs in on Hydrolox, and applies their TAN know-how to it. Now, they have a SSTO type of engine, ideal for higher-thrust/low-atmosphere to higher-isp/lower-thrust in vacuum.

 

Karev1> Все, нервы маэстро не выдержали

5.Не занимайся примитивной грубостью и флеймом. Едкие насмешливые подколки в сто раз обиднее. К тому же модератор не найдёт предлога заткнуть тебе рот, как бы ему этого ни хотелось.

 

Karev1> Цитаты уже давно под носом Следующий виток отмазок: "Я пишу ответы в порядке прочтения". Угу

двигателей НК33, тех ,шо есть, хватит на более чем пять лет полетов T-II, несмотря на почтенный возраст, двигуны в хорошем состоянии..(пропущено), а ежели кто-то хочет начать производить эти двигуны в Америке, то пусть помнит он, что на родине эти двигуны вполне возможно, производились, пьяным в умат товарисчем, причем чуть ли не наполовину(!) без документации, держа многие элементы дизайна(разработке) в уме.

 

Theme: Taurus II and availability of the NK33

Reply #75 on: 08/20/2008 07:21 PM »

Perhaps someone would know the Taurus II AJ26 situation, but I don't believe it's been fully certified. But it's been thru development testing that's for sure... Due to it's maturity I'd expect a 2 or 3 engine certification. These engines will be tested extensively, beyond their rated life to show margin, and then torn down for a detailed inspection. These engines will never be flown, but the rest would be available for flight... Assuming they pass the acceptance testing and various pre-delivery inspections.

Re: Taurus II and availability of the NK33
« Reply #76 on: 08/22/2008 02:40 AM »
Folks,
I can tell you first hand that there is zero issue with a lack of NK-33 engines. None.

Re: Taurus II and availability of the NK33
« Reply #77 on: 08/22/2008 06:59 AM »
How long have those things been sitting around? Stress corrosion cracking is a laika.
Logged
Stop putting NASA first in your mind. The ends should be first in your mind. Commercial space, Mars, international cooperation in space, asteroids, space-enabled science: those are ends. Achieve the most ends for a given budget is the goal.

Re: Taurus II and availability of the NK33
« Reply #78 on: 08/22/2008 05:48 PM »
Quote from: Danderman on 08/22/2008 02:40 AM

I can tell you first hand that there is zero issue with a lack of NK-33 engines. None.
Fair enough, but let's assume the supply is not infinite, just for the sake of argument.
So what do we got? Enough for 2-3 launches for 10 years? Five years of 4-6 launches? Inquiring minds want to know.
Antonioe said in another thread that they'll go back to Aerojet and talk when they have orders for 50% of the available engines. I'm just curious as to how many orders that is, but I expect that I will not get a hard answer. I suspect there are probably good reasons why I won't get that answer.

Re: Taurus II and availability of the NK33
« Reply #79 on: 08/22/2008 06:11 PM »
I recall 46 engines (most NK33 but 7 NK43) at Aerojet. There are more in Samara, Russia but getting at those may now be more of an issue.

This means, using US stock, about 20 or so T-II flights. Aerojet can put the engine back into production for a reasonable price but I also recall the issue was lead time (something like 5 years). If my memory is correct, they need to start pretty much now or within the next two years, assuming T-II is a success.


Re: Taurus II and availability of the NK33
« Reply #80 on: 08/22/2008 08:30 PM »
Having spent a large portion of my Aerojet career on NK-33's (before bailing out for greener pastures earlier this year), I can tell you:

It's AJ-26-62 for the Taurus II.
There's enough engines for 5+ years of T-II flights.
The engines are well preserved and in really good shape regardless of how old they are.
SCC is not an issue (response to Antares' post)
NK-33's could be built here in the US if somebody actually had the 'nads to commit to this and would open up their checkbook. Remember, these were built using manual machining equipment and the components were designed with that (probably drunk, unmotivated machinist comrade) in mind. There are a bunch of clever things inside. It would be fun to make all those pieces in a modern machine shop with the latest CNC equipment.
I was bummed about the Wallops decision - I wanted Vandenberg so I could see it (assuming no fog, of course). Ah well...
Do Svedaneye!

 

WASHINGTON — Aerojet is in talks with Russian propulsion firms to restart production of the Soviet-era NK-33 rocket engine that the Sacramento, Calif.-based propulsion company is modernizing for use on Orbital Sciences’ Taurus 2 medium-lift rocket.
Slated to make its launch debut in 2010 from NASA’s Wallops Flight Facility on Virginia’s eastern shore, the Taurus 2 will be powered by two modified NK-33 engines. The liquid oxygen and kerosene engines originally designed for Russia’s abandoned Moon program were acquired by Aerojet in the 1990s and more recently redesignated AJ26-62 for use on Taurus 2.

Today, Aerojet has 37 NK-33 engines in the United States, and owns the rights to additional surplus inventory in Russia. Van Kleeck says at this time there are ample NK-33s in the United States and Russia to support Orbital’s planned CRS contract commitment.

“From a U.S. perspective, there are enough engines for CRS to go 10 to 12 years,” she said, adding that a more optimistic view of forecasted U.S. demand would call for starting a new production line within the next three to five years.

This fall, Aerojet is planning a long-duration, high-power test firing of the NK-33 in Samara, Russia. Scheduled for late September or early October, the test could raise confidence in the engine.

 

В Самаре возобновлен выпуск двигателей НК-33

Производство жидкостных двигателей НК-33, разработанных для лунной ракеты Н-1, на самарском "Моторостроителе" решено возобновить.

Правда, двигатели будут устанавливать на ракету «Таурус-2», которая должна прийти на замену американским «Шаттлам». Ожидается, что американская ракета-носитель, оснащённая самарскими двигателями НК-33, отправится в космос уже в следующем году. На сегодняшний день речь идёт о 5 запусках. Соответственно, предприятию предстоит передать иностранным партнёрам 10 моторов. На этот счёт уже есть твердые договоренности.

"Аналога отечественным силовым установкам, производство которых свернули ещё в 1974 нет", - с гордостью говорят двигателестроители. Во время только что завершившихся так называемых огневых испытаний на Земле номинальные режимы, под которые моторы разрабатывались, были превышены более чем в 2 раза. Работоспособность агрегатов устроила представителей компаний "Эйр Джет" и "Орбитал", которые и являются заказчиками.

Сейчас идёт работа над совместным инвестиционным проектом с американской стороной. Возможно, в дальнейшем самарские предприятия получат от заокеанских партнёров другие заказы на свою продукцию, сообщает ГТРК Самара.

 

Fair enough, but let's assume the supply is not infinite, just for the sake of argument.
So what do we got? Enough for 2-3 launches for 10 years? Five years of 4-6 launches?