SSME vs. J2 / RS-68

Any thoughts on the proposed possible engine changes to the proposed
HLV?

URL: http://tinyurl.com/omhpx


NASA Eyes Alternative to Shuttle Main Engine for Heavylift

Brian Berger
Space News Staff Writer
SPACE.comMon Mar 20, 10:00 AM ET

NASA is considering dropping the Space Shuttle Main Engine (SSME) from
its heavy-lift launch vehicle plans and using the
cheaper-to-manufacture RS-68 engine instead.

Daniel Dumbacher, deputy director of the Exploration Launch Office at
NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, Ala., told reporters
following his presentation at the Goddard Memorial Symposium here March
14 that a formal trade study is under way to examine the cost, schedule
and performance merits of the SSME and RS-68. At present those two
engines are NASA's first choice for the main stage engines that would
power the planned heavy-lift cargo launcher NASA intends to build to
boost payloads on their way to the Moon.

Dumbacher said the trade study would be completed this spring. "It's
got to be done in the next month or so because it plays a factor in how
we do our budget planning," he said.

If NASA goes with the RS-68, then the SSME would have no obvious future
beyond the space shuttle program, which is slated to end in 2010.

NASA had previously planned to use a modified version of the SSME to
power the Crew Launch Vehicle's upper stage, but decided earlier this
year instead to go with an updated version of the J-2 engine that
powered the upper stage of the Saturn 5 rocket.

Dumbacher said the J-2 decision figured into NASA's decision to take
another look at the RS-68 for the heavy-lifter's core stage.

"Since NASA made the decision to use the J-2X for the [Crew Launch
Vehicle], we have been looking at options which might allow us to use
RS-68 propulsion for the [cargo launch vehicle] instead of the SSME,"
he said.

Because going with the RS-68 could affect the space shuttle program's
fly-out plans, Dumbacher said the decision would not be the Exploration
Systems Mission Directorate's alone to make. "These kinds of decisions
are agency-level decisions," he said.

The RS-68 is the largest liquid oxygen-liquid hydrogen booster in
existence, capable of producing 650,000 pounds of thrust at sea level.
It was built by Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne for Boeing's Delta 4 rocket.
The SSME also also built by Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne and has been in
service for more than 25 years, powering every space shuttle on its way
to orbit. Each SSME is capable of producing just under 420,000 pounds
of thrust at sea level.

For the better part of a year, NASA's working assumption has been that
the heavy-lift vehicle would be powered by a cluster of five SSMEs.
That was the recommendation of the 2005 Exploration Systems
Architecture study.

While human-rated and highly reliable, the reusable SSMEs are expensive
to manufacture. NASA and its contractors are looking at whether an
expendable version of the SSME could be produced more cheaply, but NASA
officials have privately expressed doubts about just how much cost can
be squeezed out of the roughly $50 million per copy engine.

The RS-68, at roughly $14 million per copy, is cheaper to manufacture,
but it does not have the SSME's track record.

John Mitchell, a spokesman for De Soto, Calif.-based Pratt & Whitney
Rocketdyne declined to comment, saying the company does not release
cost information about its engines.

Sources familiar with the Exploration Systems Architecture Study trade
analysis that recommended the SSME as the best choice for the
heavy-lift rocket, said that while the RS-68 might be cheaper to build,
it also offers less performance and would have to be human-rated before
trusting it to launch Moon- and Mars-bound hardware worth billions of
dollars.

Although the heavy-lifter is expected to enter service around the
middle of the next decade as a dedicated cargo launcher, Dumbacher said
NASA wants to preserve the option of eventually using the heavy-lifter
to launch humans.

The RS-68 engine can produce more total thrust than the SSME, but the
RS-68 has a much lower specific impulse, making it something of a fuel
hog.

While it is certainly possible to use a cluster of RS-68 engines to
power a rocket capable of boosting 125 metric tons of payload, sources
familiar with the trade analysis said the rocket would probably have to
be bigger than an SSME-equipped heavy-lifter because of the extra fuel
it would need to carry to get the job done. One possible solution for
keeping an RS-68-powered rocket from growing too tall, even for the
52-story Vehicle Assembly Building at Kennedy Space Center, would be to
build it wider and add an extra stage. And that, said sources familiar
with the Exploration Systems Architecture Study's trade analysis, could
mean that NASA would not be able to reuse tooling, equipment and
facilities it already has on hand for manufacturing and working with
the space shuttle external tank.

"Some people think it will cost less to use the RS-68 because the
engines are so much cheaper," said a source knowledgeable about the
earlier analysis. But taking into account the "total integrated
picture," the source said, the life-cycle cost of the RS-68 could be
higher.

Dumbacher said NASA is asking all these types of questions in order to
come up with the right answer.

"This is the time to be asking these questions," he said.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: SSME vs. J2 / RS-68
    ... at EELV's and EELV derived vehicles rather than insisting on this "shuttle ... NASA Eyes Alternative to Shuttle Main Engine for Heavylift ... J-2S for the stick's upper stage, in place of an air started SSME. ... and performance merits of the SSME and RS-68. ...
    (sci.space.history)
  • Re: GRIFFINS DRIVE FOR SHUTTLE-DERIVED
    ... >> seems unlikely now that we'll see any RS-68 upgrades. ... >> turbopump upgrades, etc., so NASA isn't going to ... >> abandon SSME easily. ... knows that costs have to be slashed. ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: NASA Eyes Alternative to Shuttle Main Engine for Heavylift
    ... Maybe common sense is not totally dead at NASA. ... That NASA is doing trade studies on SSME versus RS-68 ... This suggests that a RS-68 design is a lot cheaper ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: GRIFFINS DRIVE FOR SHUTTLE-DERIVED
    ... > seems unlikely now that we'll see any RS-68 upgrades. ... Pratt/Rocketdyne already have SSME, which is ... > turbopump upgrades, etc., so NASA isn't going to ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Space Access Update #111 04/05/05
    ... - What We Want From NASA: ... Esther Dyson, of computer journalism fame, with her "Flight ... limited engine catalyst-pack life. ... exhibition rocket flights added in 2006 and the first X-Prize ...
    (sci.space.policy)