I didn't realize our atlas rockets are using russian motors.  What have we done to ourselves?

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/03/05/tempers-flare-as-elon-musk-ula-battle-for-big-space-bucks/?intcmp=latestnews

We don't really manufacture anything in this country anymore

What have we done?  IIRC We found great motors on the cheap sitting forgotten in Kazakhstan and are making use using them.

"Outsourcing makes business sense."

The mantra of post-1990's USA.

Also the Orbital Antares uses re-manufactured Russian NK-33 engines called the AJ-26.

Thankfully the Delta IV and Falcon 9 are 100% made in the USA.*

In the case of the Atlas Vs RD-180 Aerojet-Rocketdyne has the full technical data package and an inventory of on hand engines that would last longer then the two to three years it would take to bring a domestically produced RD-180 online. In the early 2000s the then Rocketdyne demonstrated American made burners and turbo-pumps so most of the leg work for domestic production is already done.

Frankly, if we stop buying all aerospace products from the Russians over Ukraine, including Soyuz seats, I think we'd be better off in the long run. Besides, unless ULA completely restructures they're not going to be cost competitive with SpaceX and they're going to go under once their DOD monopoly goes away.

*Edited to add, if memory serves the fairings for the Delta IV are made in Sweeden, so 99% made in the USA 1% made by close allies

It does. Sorry unions. Jk. Get some.

Maybe when a third world country does just as good of a job and ships the product to the other side of the planet the problem is you (us manufacturing) not everybody else....
EPA and the like deserve blame too fwiw.

It should be "outsourcing makes business sense in the right setting with proper oversight and feedback," but that's too complicated.

Couple that with unbridled corporate obsessions over Toyota Production System (TPS!)/just-in-time production/lean process, and we get national & international businesses that grind to a halt if someone trips over an extension cord in Dubuqe, Iowa. It's job security for six sigma black belts, who will organize a life-saving kaizen*.



*with continental breakfast of pink donuts, jellyoid-center pastries, grapes, strawberries, pineapple, OJ, coffee, and apple juice. Lunch not provided.

Can't we re-purpose some ICBM?  I'm serious?  Do we not produce replacement or spares?

Make fun of it all you want, Japan would be a third world country if it wasn't for Deming and Juran.

We built the F1, which is still #1 in its game

it'll be hard to beat, let alone find a project worthy of doing with said power, in our lifetime

if anything, to top the F1, it'll be new technology/science, IMHO

Yep, we fly decommissioned Minuteman and Peacekeepers as the Minotaur series of launch vehicles. The conversion work is done by Orbital Sciences.

The F-1 is an impressive engine, but their is nothing magical about it. Honestly if I had to point to one engine as a technical triumph it would the SSME/RS-25, nearly outputting the theoretical maximum ISP for a cryogenic rocket, reusable, shockingly reliable. The SSME is almost a miracle.

1960's technology and rather fickle.  Advances in solid/liquid booster technology have reduced the need for stupid-large primary stage motors.

but WWTTTMTD?

what would tim the toolman taylor do?  

go big or go home!  

Yeah, I know. The principles are sound. The execution sometimes gets lost in translation to American middle management.  

"America's in a state of renewal. We've gotta have the strength to tie a few factories to a tree and bash them with a shovel." -Ray Zalinski in Tommy Boy. (Should I put w,stte in there?)

That's what I'm talking about.  I'm glad we can still "get there" if we really needed to without calling a taxi from Mother Russia.

LOL, the Tommy Boy reference just made my day.

You are right, there are many managerial sins justified by using quality systems in the wrong context or dogmatic adherence to them. Having lived through Sikorsky trying to apply their manufacturing quality program to a design and engineering office I know how ridiculus things can get first hand. Outlined stapler parking slots, labeling my snack drawer...</shudder>

It's a reliable and powerful motor and actually a pretty good and efficient design.  I don't see a problem - if a design is good, why not use it?  A US company was supposedly reverse-engineering it, so if they stopped making them for us we could just make them ourselves.

They're not Russian if they aren't clearly marked.  

The NK-33 motors are technically superior to US engines in that they have a better P-W ratio, and are far more efficient.  This efficiency comes from the fact that the NK-33 drives the turbopumps with an oxygen rich powerhead whose output is then channeled into the main combustion chamber where it contributes to the overall engine output.  US engines just dump this powerhead exhaust overboard since, being oxygen poor in our designs, it cannot contribute to main chamber combustion.

They worked a long long time developing the metallurgy for their powerhead which is why our engineers were flabbergasted when they actually saw one of these engines fire successfully - our guys didn't think it was possible.

I don't remember the exact percentage but I believe their engines are about 15% more efficient than our best.

Those Russians scientists and engineers aren't dumb people - they just have to deal with a central committee that decides to end projects just as they begin to bear fruit.  These engines were originally destined to send their cosmonauts to the moon and when the moon project was cancelled so was the engine program.  In fact, all of the already built engines were supposed to be destroyed so their secrets would not be revealed to the west.

I do agree with the other poster that the SSME is an engineering tour de force.  Easily OUR best engine ever.  Sad to see them scheduled to be used one last time on disposable rockets.

SpaceX builds their motors here IIRC.

It's not that simple of a trade-off. Staged combustion lets you eek a bit more ISP out of a kero-lox engine, but at the cost of dramatically increased cost and complexity. For a booster stage sea-level ISP isn't that critical, which is why the trend has been towards various gas-generator cycle designs. If ISP is that critical you're better off going all cryogenic and being done with it. The designs of the NK-33 and RD-180 are a result of coming from an era where performance was demanded with no regards to costs, in the case of the NK-33 it was the Soviet lunar program and in the case of the RD-180 it was the bizarre crash program that was Energia/Buran. (The RD-180 is a two combustion chamber variant of the RD-170 which was used on the Energia)

Wow, some really great info.  You don't get that on m4carbine.