Liberty Launch Vehicle - ATK and Astrium Combine Shuttle Solid Rocket Booster and Ariane 5

Loading...

Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon
Upgrade to the latest Flash Player for improved playback performance. Upgrade now or more info.
16,246
Loading...
Alert icon
Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon

Uploaded by on Mar 15, 2011

ATK and Astrium (an EADS Company) are working together in response to NASA's Commercial Crew Development-2 (CCDev-2) procurement. The team is offering NASA launch services with the Liberty rocket. This new launch vehicle combines two of the world's most reliable propulsion systems, with a collective heritage of nearly 150 successful flights.




ATK would supply the human-rated first stage, which it developed under NASA's Space Exploration Program. The five-segment solid rocket first stage is derived from the Space Shuttle's four-segment solid rocket boosters (SRBs) which are built by ATK and have flown 107 successful missions since 1988 (encompassing 214 SRBs).

Astrium, the developer and manufacturer of the Ariane 5 launcher, working with Snecma (Safran Group), Europe's leading propulsion company, is providing Liberty's second stage based on the liquid-fueled cryogenic core of the Ariane 5 vehicle powered by the Vulcain2 engine. The Ariane 5 Launcher, operated by Arianespace, has flown more than 40 consecutive successful missions over nearly eight years and has launched more commercial satellites than any other launch vehicle in the world during that time. The Ariane 5 enjoys the lowest launch insurance rates in the industry due to an unrivaled safety record in the commercial launch services market.

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

License:

Standard YouTube License

Link to this comment:

Share to:

Top Comments

  • strange...it looks A LOT like the ares 1.

  • Safest, most reliable available? Maybe at Lockheed martin. What would make it safe is to NOT use solid rocket fuel. Thus, you don't need a heavy list rocket for an attempt at an escape system to get fare enough away from an SRB failure. Also, if you clustered engines allowing individual engines to shut down would add more safety. Also, changing the design to it did not have to balance itself like a javelin would also help. Right now Falcon9 is "by far" the safest thing out there.

see all

All Comments (27)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • With both segments of this booster already operational, lead time should be VERY low to get this configuration flying!!

  • @marmaladekamikaze Its called "Falcon Heavy" (no 9 in the name) and its simply 3 Falcon 9's put together. SaturnV could only afford to lose the middle of its 5 main engines or it would be a catastrophic failure. If Shuttle lost an SRB it would get ripped a part. If Shuttle lost one main engine it would be an abort scenario and it would have to land in Europe because Shuttle barely had enough thrust to get itself and its cargo to LEO when all is working.

  • @ti994apc

    Have you even seen the design for the Falcon 9 heavy? The Shuttle main engines SSME and the F-1 engines of the Apollo era could, contrary to what you claim, deal with an engine cutout/failure and still reach LEO.

    For someone who points the finger about comparing apples and watermelons, you sure do it a lot yourself. Furthermore you are claiming the Falcon 9 is superior to flight tested vehicles Shuttle & Saturn, we'll see how reliable the Falcon 9 is when it flies 135 times

  • @marmaladekamikaze Your comparing apples to watermelon and could not be more wrong. Soyuz has 6 engines and "40" nozzles w/well over 2000 flights. N1 was a giant and had 30 main engines. Failure was complex plumbing, and lack of funding for full-up testing. N1 could not turn off engines if there was an issue. Falcon9 can turn off any of its engines mid flight. Shuttle and Apollo flights would have been a failure if one engine was lost. Falcon9 can turn off up to 2 and still reach LEO.

  • @ThatAdelaideGuy

    The APCP propellant in solid rocket motors is not classified as an explosive. Tripoli won a famous court battle about this.

  • @ti994apc

    Falcon 9 will be the safest thing out there until it succumbs to the same complexity faults that plagued the USSR's failed N-1 rocket. Lots of engines = higher chance of failure.

  • great idea!!!

Loading...

Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more