Move Over, SLS! Orion EM-1 On TWO Delta IV Heavy (ft. Marcus House)

I teamed up with Marcus House and we're using Kerbal Space Program to determine which rocket could replace SLS for Orion Exploraion Mission 1 (EM-1): Delta IV Heavy from ULA or Falcon Heavy from SpaceX.
I decided to go the harder route and built a Delta IV Heavy in KSP with the help of the Realism Overhaul mod suite.
Subscribe to Marcus! / @marcushouse
Watch his Falcon Heavy video: • SpaceX Falcon Heavy la...
🠴Mod list for this video🠶
AdvancedJetEngine
B9-PWings-Fork
CameraTools
CommunityResourcePack
CommunityTechTree
DockingPortAlignmentIndicator
EnvironmentalVisualEnhancements
FASA
FerramAerospaceResearch
FirespitterCore
HangarExtender
HyperEdit
KAS
KerbalEngineerRedux
KerbalJointReinforcement
Kopernicus
KSCSwitcher
KSP-AVC
KSPWheel
KVVContinued
MechJeb2
ModularFlightIntegrator
ModuleManager
ProceduralFairings
ProceduralFairings-ForEverything
ProceduralParts
RasterPropMonitor-Core
RCSBuildAid
RealChute
RealEngines
RealFuels
RealHeat
RealismOverhaul
RealPlume
RealScaleBoosters
RealSolarSystem
ReentryParticleEffect
RSSDateTimeFormatter
RSSTextures4096
RSSVE
SCANsat
SmokeScreen
SolverEngines
SpaceXLaunchVehicles
SpaceXLegs
SSTU
TACLS
TextureReplacer
Trajectories
TransferWindowPlanner
TweakScale
VesselMoverContinued
🠴Delta IV User's Guide🠶
www.ulalaunch.com/docs/defaul...
🠴Join me to stay in the loop for more KSP stuff and general madness, Kerbal, space or otherwise!🠶
▶ Twitter - / the_shadowzone
▶ Instagram - / the_shadowzone
▶ Facebook - / the-shadowzone-3045600...
▶ Patreon - / shadowzone
🠴Interested in the vehicles I make in Kerbal Space Program? Check out my KerbalX🠶
▶ kerbalx.com/The_ShadowZone/
▶ steamcommunity.com/id/the_sha...
🠴Music🠶
"Ambient Madness" (c) The ShadowZone
Get my Music here:
▶ Spotify:
open.spotify.com/artist/0F8ZM...
▶ Apple Music:
itunes.apple.com/ca/artist/sh...
▶ Google Play:
play.google.com/store/music/a...
▶ Deezer:
www.deezer.com/de/artist/5298...
▶ Tidal:
tidal.com/browse/artist/10500010
"District Four", "Firesong", "Black Vortex" and "The Descent" all (c) Kevin MacLeod ( incompetech.com/music )
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0
creativecommons.org/licenses/b...
🠴HELLO everybody and welcome to the ShadowZone🠶
Here you can find weird and funny videos about Kerbal Space Program and other video games. In general, if you like space, space ships, space stations or any space related video game, this channel is the right place to be!
I try to deliver you fascinating creations, tutorial and how-to videos about KSP and other video game content.
I also compose my own music from time to time.
Stay a while and join the shadowzone community by subscribing to my channel or following me on those social thingies up there.

[@ShadowZone]

Which launcher will get EM-1 off the ground? I put a poll into the video, please vote! Although, it's totally clear the Delta IV Heavy will stomp out Marcus's measly Falcon Heavy mission, right? 😜

[@MarcusHouse]

1 x rocket > 2 x rocket... I think we can all agree that a Falcon Heavy is going to be the obvious choice to launch Exploration Mission 1. 😘 Vote #1 Falcon Heavy!

[@coreywestwell]

Marcus House but FH still isn’t human rated so they would need two regardless, unless they plan to human rate it which would be easier then the Delta IV heavy

[@maxmai7972]

I think the Falcony Heavy is more capable than the Delta IV heavy just because it has MOAR POWER

[@ShadowZone]

@@coreywestwell human rating doesn't matter for EM-1 since it will be unmanned anyway.

[@simonrmerton]

Corey Westwell : EM-1 is unmanned, so no HSF rating will be necessary.

[@matth4926]

* clouds casually spazzing out in the background *

[@dustin8889]

It's the Kraken! :p

[@JonathanAdami]

hahaha

[@senioravocado1864]

Lol

[@ThePrimalEarth]

Omg this colab is amazing!

[@Papershields001]

There’s something really significant that both of you guys have missed. Ariane 5 is LH2/LOX, on a completely currently independent infrastructure with a separate pad, ESA is building the service module. Last but not least Ariane has a 4.57 meter fairing and the kickstage to take em1 to the moon is 4 meter. The easiest way to do this mission is to launch delta 4 heavy from ksc and the booster from Guyana simultaneously. No muss, no fuss.

[@AmusedWalrus]

This double premier colab is awesome, never seen this done before. Sorry Marcus and Shadow, SLS > Falcon Heavy & Delta IV Heavy.

[@MarcusHouse]

I also want to see SLS launch at some point (shhh.. don't tell anyone). 😜

[@dwldjon]

you mean sls and starship> ;)

[@brendanhenderson6999]

@@dwldjon I hope they get the Starship into space so they can call the SLS the "Starship's Lazy Sister"

[@travelsofmunch1476]

Not if they never get SLS off the ground

[@bwjclego]

@@MarcusHouse Well, I'd put my money on a *late* 2020 or more likely 2021 SLS launch for EM-1. Congress won't give up on SLS easy, and Boeing is getting a nice kick in the butt by NASA with several methods of schedule acceleration being applied. So it's not all doom and gloom for SLS!

[@kaihang4685]

Love how KSP and its modding community have provided a space for the average spaceflight fan and youtubers to settle debates in a relatively realistic simulation instead of resorting to slinging insults on the internet. Of course the premiere hasn't ended yet so the insults haven't been slung yet..

[@kaihang4685]

The stream ended. I'm really impressed with this rocket debate over KSP idea! I think since no insults were used, it's the official new way of settling rocket debates - over a game of modded KSP.

[@ShadowZone]

@@MarcusHouse Hahaha, you just couldn't resist :D

[@Theodwin1]

@@ShadowZone Even though I think it's more likely that Orion would fly on the Delta IV Heavy, I made a short KSP video and went with the Falcon Heavy!

[@MrZayLock]

I love this colaboration, what a beautifull vídeo:')

[@jacoblyman9441]

So if both rockets are capable of doing the mission. The real question comes down to engineering. Adding docking to the cryogenic stage, while possible is one more hurdle needed to be crossed before it can fly on two Delta IV's. Likewise, since the cryogenic stage was designed originally for a Delta or SLS type rocket, I am sure there would also be another engineering challenge in adapting the SLS launch stack for a Falcon Heavy due to size differences. So its possible for either rocket to take the mission, but both have some challenges ahead... Unfortunately knowing how NASA and government works the mission will probably just get de-funded before anything ever launches. :(

moar boosters

[@joshk8462]

Although you raised some good points I think it’s quite clear that the falcon heavy was better. Not only was the mission more simple with it but you must remember that an expendable falcon heavy is about $150 wile 2 delta 4 heavys is about 800!

[@OblivifrekTV]

even if they use two Falcon Heavys they would still be cheaper than one delta

[@Archgeek0]

It's kinda amazing that tragically saccing no less than 28 Merlin engines is so much cheaper than saccing 6 RS-68-As and 2 RL-10-B-2s.

[@jaycweingardt11]

Loved the collab, this was a really cool topic. Thanks!

[@ronsmith4927]

You guys left off the most important factor, Orion and the ESM require Vertical integration. Delta IV already does this for payloads, but SpaceX does NOT. That is a pretty big deal. (though now SLS is back on for EM-1)

[@marianandnorbert]

3 things: 1 - you both touched down on the ocean, but wasn’t the orion spacecraft supposed to land on land with airbags? to prevent corrosion from seawater? or was that the CST-100 starliner? 2 - notice how if you watched both video they trap you in an endless circle telling you to continue by watching the other video, I thought that was funny. 3 - marcus slipping in the “falcon heavy” at the end of the video made me laugh so hard lmao oh and 4 - great job both of you, these were great videos, you should totally do more collaborations like this!

[@jamiesmith3396]

Phoenix Plays Games Orion will land in the ocean you are thinking of starliner.

[@Cultleader1984]

Yeah you must be thinking of the Boeing starliner

[@ShadowZone]

1 - yes, that's Starliner 2 - an infinite KSP mission, is there anything better? 3 & 4 - thanks :)

[@Patchuchan]

Originally Orion was to land using air bags but they got rid of it and went with splash downs I think due to payload limits on Ares I . Exposure to seawater makes refurbishment more difficult but not impossible as EFT-1 is being reused for the abort test and Cargo Dragons have been reused. Turn around ends up being more work as the RCS plumbing and electrical connections outside need to be cleaned of salt and checked.

[@jimabbey9544]

IDIOT!

[@TrikeSquadron]

Sorry Shadowzone... I gotta side with Markus and the Falcon Heavy. BUt fun to watch both videos.

[@agsystems8220]

Falcon heavy is not intended to be crew rated, so a rendezvous would be required for that mission too. That could be handled by a dragon though, and spare capacity could give a couple of tourists a ride. Getting them to manhandle a few hundred kilos of supplies onto the orion could really make them feel an important part, and undeniably astronauts as well as tourists. If I were Elon, I would go myself! A dragon is capable of hanging around for a few days just fine, so could be launched first. As other people have said, your profile isn't human rated either, and I think the upper stage for crewed flight is intended to have 2 engines for a lower profile. I'm not sure what inclination orion is intending to launch at, but I would imagine they would also be intending to avoid the worst of the Van Allen belts again, which might add another complication (no multiburns at perigee, and high inclinations only). The compromise that I quite like is a recovered heavy for the orion uncrewed. A delta for the ICPS, because it can handle hydrogen already, and a dragon to crew the thing before sending it off. All tested tech used to purpose. If you are worried about hydrogen storage you can send up the orion and dragon first, to get settled and test all orion systems in LEO. The transfer stage can go up a few days later, possibly with the crew in the dragon at a safe distance. Get back in the orion, wave goodbye to the dragon, and off you go! If there is an issue, you can drop the dragon, and maybe send up what you need in another dragon without having to drop the orion or wasting a transfer stage. The ICPS really should be redesigned though, to just be a disposable tank attachment for the upper stage of the delta. A fuel valve has got to be easier and lighter than a full stage. At a push you could just take an extra tank with you, and not ditch it at all. Currently it seems stupid, using two of exactly the same rocket in stages. Storing hydrogen and oxygen in space is actually considerably easier than storing it on earth. Layers of foil separated by vaccum are extremely effective lightweight insulation. The problem is that maintaining a vacuum on earth is difficult. Air that gets in will freeze out, while hydrogen and helium are good conductors of heat. You don't just throw together hydrogen handling in the atmosphere. I do think the cost of designing a full docking system for the ICPS would be well worth doing. It would turn it from a mission specific part into a plug and play booster for orbital assembly. Imagine how capable a craft with 3 of them lined up could be. Using a couple of recovered block 5 falcon 9s instead of the expensive delta boosters could massively cheapen the whole thing too, but might be a cooperation too far. Then again, using an upgraded ICPS to get itself most of the way to orbit instead of the upper stage of a falcon heavy would be better still, as the lofting trajectory that the hydrogen engines need is quite recovery friendly.

[@jmstudios457]

I love SLS. And even if SLS is a bit late to the party, I would my rather see it go up in a delta iv. Delta IV gang

[@Jerrybudss]

You two should do more collabs. This was an awesome video and I really like how it was done

[@justjane69]

“His falcon heavy toy” The falcon heavy is over 2 times as powerful as the delta IV

[@Pandicle]

I've not finished the video yet sorry, but aren't we talking 800M$ vs 150$ ? but max Q..

[@seen203]

You don't think the modified FH can handle the max Q? Is this confirmed or just hypothesis?

[@Pandicle]

@@seen203 We are talking of a very long payload, who know (spacex engineer) how it will react 🤷‍♂️

[@Papershields001]

I’d also like to mention one political note. NASA and the US Air Force are not always known to select the cheapest options on the table. Quite frequently (i.e. the entire history of the Orion/SLS/Aries program) their contract selection has had a lot more to do with how much money gets sent to factories in politically significant congressional districts than it does with flying the mission as efficiently as possible. No matter how conservative Louisiana politicians claim to be, being able to say they brought a few hundred jobs and a multi-billion dollar federal contract into Michoud is a victory they can’t afford to turn down. And the next time that senator votes, you think he’s gonna vote to cut the NASA Budget? No sir. That was the genius of Kennedy and Johnson, they spread NASA around so much that it’s uncancellable.

[@Papershields001]

Pandicle people act shocked that SpaceX has driven down the price so much...that’s silly. All they did was “vertically integrate” build everything at one factory in California rather than run the rocket company as a massive social program. You guys shouldn’t be shocked at seeing price gaps of 800 million to 150 million, this is basic capitalism and economics. And landing rockets is great but it’s got nothing to do with it.

[@OblivifrekTV]

You question Elon?

[@philb5593]

If SLS isn't launching Orion, there will be a FH flying. 2 D4Hs logistically can't launch close enough together, unless they build another pad. Only FH can realistically replace SLS, but even Bridinstine says it won't be available till later missions

[@Tuning3434]

Good job, Scott!

[@jaycweingardt11]

You can burn pro-grade for those transfers and eliminate those cosine losses until about the last 20% when you can switch to aim at the maneuver to correct any error in trajectory This should make your transfers more efficient.

[@TheDarkFalcon]

Needs more AGAIN!

[@bwjclego]

EM-2 will be SLS because neither the D-IVH or the FH are viable within the timeframe. Two D-IVH's would be impossible because you can't launch from Vandenberg and rendezvous with a launch out of the Cape. A D-IVH and FH would be possible from the cape, but you would have to fit ICPS inside FH's fairing, which doesn't fit, and also fuel it at 39A, which you can't do, and also create the docking hardware (and software, since Orion doesn't have docking capability yet). FH wouldn't work, because again fuelling ICPS and other ground systems at 39A, and the time needed to test the stability. So EM-1 will be SLS, and Orion will likely only ever fly on SLS, but still, long term, FH is the best alternative. If NASA wanted to pursue a commercial launcher, the first path would be to see if FH could handle the tall stack, and how to modify ground systems to fuel both ICPS and ESM on the pad at 39A, and since it is a crew vehicle, a second crew arm would need to be installed. A lot of work that only makes sense if SLS gets cancelled. EDIT: The nice thing is in both cases only minor changes are needed to the rockets themselves. Orion is already built to launch on ICPS, which is basically DCSS, so Orion on D-IV is easy peasy. Only modification would be to a D-IV fairing for umbilical pass-through to fuel the ICPS payload. FH would only need an adapter from stage 2 to the D-IV interstage, from which you put a DCSS aka ICPS on top and Orion on top of that, as in the SLS stack. Ground systems of course need more modification (in both cases).

[@grantgoodfellow1008]

Falcon Heavy FTW

[@coreywestwell]

Either way both would need a human rated crew transfer rocket, so they would need three launches, unless either space x or ula plan to human rate their rockets, FH would take far less time to human rate I’m sure.

[@elopeous3285]

Yes. Finally delta iv heavy is getting the spot light

[@Papershields001]

Also the main engines on the Orion service module are shuttle maneuvering thrusters which run on hydrazine, so with an unmanned mission you could easily put the Orion up in orbit for a few weeks and then launch the booster to it.

[@kyleeames8229]

Awesome collab, guys. I think Marcus House’s falcon heavy option is the most feasible. The only other second launch site suitable for launching a delta IV heavy is Vandenberg and that site only works for polar and retrograde launches. It’s more likely that if this mission happens, an unknown third option would be pursued but of the two shown in your videos, my money is on the falcon heavy.

[@kerbonautics5217]

To be perfectly honest I think you're gonna need 3 Delta IV Heavy rockets if you want the standard extra fuel margins which NASA requires for all manned or manned preparation flights, I think they needed something like 5 or 10% excess DeltaV.

[@JonathanAdami]

Really nice to see both, and admittedly I don't know anything but that's a billion dollar launch + added complexity, Falcon Heavy is an easy lean and throw for less than 200M without any docking in mid air... doesn't sound like a choice to me!

[@JustinBeiberOffical]

14:08 Nasa: the orbit looks kinda like a cat Elon musk in his mind : like a cat girl? Elon musk: PEPPARE THE FALCON HEAVY

[@tempe1d]

Great idea for 2 shows. I however think $140million vs $400million x2 would be a huge issue. 1 launch vs 2. Extra fuel/time/weight for a docking in space? Falcon Heavy is simpler and cheaper? Please do more joint vids

[@hichammohsen9239]

Why didnt i watch this before! Please do another collaboration with Marcus.

[@SixDasher]

SSTU parts are used but not in the mod list?

[@aerothecat]

Awesome

[@cmilkau]

Instead of reducing the fuel it might be a better option to complete orbit using the payload icps. The total dV will be a bit higher that way, although not a huge amount. This requires lighting the RL10 on the ICPS twice, but that shouldn't be a problem.

[@odysseusrex5908]

Yeah, I'd love to see EM-1 fly on commercial boosters, but the politicians, who are a big part of the reason SLS is so far behind schedule, seem already to have squelched that idea.

[@maxpower19711]

There aren't even any Delta IV Heavies available in 2020, let alone two.

[@brokensoap1717]

Pretty sure Delta 4 heavy's last flight is scheduled for 2023

[@Tulin258]

Breaking news: Delta IV heavy launches after many delays

[@jacobprice5450]

What mod did you use for the RL-10B2?

[@Pandicle]

14:09 : ok Delta IV lose, but in mission recreation you win! GG for you and the troll ^^

[@JoshKaufmanstuff]

I didn't get where the cat came from in those Orbits? Lol, what was SZ alluding to?

[@Patchuchan]

If they do it with two launches they'd probably have Orion dock nose first since the docking hardware is already there and do the TLI burn eyeballs outs like in the original Ares architecture. This also should save some mass as that extra docking adapter would not be needed. Another idea I wonder could work is using an Atlas V Centaur as the departure stage since it's lower cost?

[@felixsteinhardt8836]

Vandenberg = Polar Orbit, so that whole thing won't work that way, unfortunately.

[@ColdWindPhoenix84]

I think the best option is a dual launch Falcon heavy (recoverable) carrying the Orion capsule and service module, and a Delta IV heavy carrying the ICPS. Not only will it be the cheapest option for both companies, it would also be an amazing show.

[@Tuning3434]

oh, yeah that might be a quite reasonable option. No way I can see Space X launching tow Falcon Heavy's so close to each other. Did somebody already figure out if you could send a 2nd flight from Vandenberg in time to rendezvous?

[@ShadowZone]

Somebody mentioned launching East from Vandenberg is impossible since the boosters would be dropped over US mainland.

[@ColdWindPhoenix84]

The insight probe was launched from Vandenberg and it hugged the coastline, but it was highly inclined.

[@ColdWindPhoenix84]

Also, I may have miss typed, I mean a Falcon heavy and a Delta IV heavy, dual launch from Florida.

[@galadato7425]

Why instead of the orion mpcv connect to the icps using the docking system it has in the bow?

[@kevinjackson6642]

New Glenn won’t be ready so is never considered. But as a thought experiment pretending it would be ready would it be capable of doing this mission in one launch.

[@_mikolaj_]

For people that hoped for Falcon Heavy, well, NASA cancelled this idea. Also Delta IV is cancelled. They plan to make less tests to save 8 months in SLS development. But, after 2025 they want to use one of our smaller rockets

[@MarcusHouse]

Lets hope SLS will make up some ground with some very lost time.

[@rongriffiths3556]

Only problem with the theory is NASA have admitted that the Orion doesn't have a docking capability, which negates a two part launch.

[@jeffm9264]

I thought manned missions were constrained to a different launch trajectory than you used to remain in a safe ballistic trajectory in case of an abort.

[@_mikolaj_]

Now i want to see same thing but on atlas V or antares

[@theretroaviator3171]

What mod did you use for the Prion Capsule

[@jefffradsham2297]

sorry, guys, I dont think that elon will invest any more time or talent into anything falcon, he appears to be totally invested into the bfr system.

[@CatWachristmashat]

in ksp we need the 1-3 command pod but looks more like the apollo 11 command module. more stubby

[@tomasbrod1533]

Why are you burning unaligned with the node? It looks like you are using the gimbal to rotate, while you have rcs. I am not familiar with realism, so can you explain. Thank you!

[@ShadowZone]

You mean for one of the three-part-injection burns? I was low on Hydrazine and was trusting in the Gimbal to orient the vehicle to the maneuver node. In Realism Overhaul you need to first settle the propellant, since it sloshes all over the place in zero G. Therefore you first need to do a little RCS burst so the fuel settles at the bottom and the pumps can correctly suck it. Otherwise you'll end up with vapor in the fuel lines and the engine won't ignite. Since I was low on RCS fuel I wanted to make sure I get the engine going no matter the direction. The RL10-B2 has so little TWR that I was confident the orbit wouldn't change significantly before it would reorient.

[@tomasbrod1533]

@@ShadowZone Thanks. I knew about ullage, but I did not know about your hydrazine shortage.

[@KergarinAerospace]

From which mods are the Delta IV and ICPS made? The look pretty good

[@ShadowZone]

Delta is from Real Scale Boosters, ICPS and Orion are SSTU parts.

[@KergarinAerospace]

@@ShadowZone danke! :)

[@springbonniestudios]

Updating all those mods must be a nightmare lmao

[@telclivo7945]

Not really. With RP-0 and Realism Overhaul, it is not updated to the most recent version of the game. Currently my stable version of the game is running on KSP 1.3.1 and I am able to get the most up to date version of the mods for KSP Version 1.3.1. I never have to update.

[@DroneMee]

Sorry ShadowZone Delta IV Heavy is out. For two reason; 1 there is only 2 launch pads for Delta IV one on the East Coast and one on the West Coast. The East Coast location is capable of launching into the correct orbit however, the West Coast launch would have to be polar and correct its orbit for so long it would run too low on propellant from cryogenic boil off. 2 Orion is not capable of docking without a crew which means it is completely impossible to do the LEO rendezvous. Sorry mate Falcon Heavy wins but just barley because it can only throw Orion on a free return trajectory around the moon. Thus the EM-1 mission would only meet 1 of its many goals.

[@ShadowZone]

I mean if they would be willing to allow ULA to drop the Delta IV boosters somewhere over US soil, they could launch from Vandenberg ;) I know it's less viable than the FH mission. Although if they would have to split the payload, a simultaneous launch of FH and D4H from KSC might be possible. But hey, this was the more Kerbal mission. If you want sensible, go watch Marcus's video :D

[@DroneMee]

@@ShadowZone absolutely! Lol Thanks for the great work.

[@DeviantDeveloper]

Could they send the complete module up on one rocket, then fuel it in orbit instead of assembling 2 parts in orbit?

[@user-mr1um1cg5v]

How are you going to dock the Orion and ESM with ICPS? Tie them up with ropes? They have no docking mechanisms OR an automated docking system. Only one launch pad on either coast for Delta Heavy. Launching from West coast goes to a wrong orbit - polar. So you’ll need tons of fuel to switch from that orbit. Plus cryogenic boil off. Listen to Bridenstine before embarking on some wishy-washy impossible to do missions with two Delta Heavies which are not available any time in the next year anyway.

[@BenjaminGottsch]

What if we built the delta iv super heavy by adding two more boosters to the delta iv.

[@DavidNagy03ER]

Wouldn’t it be easier in terms of time to launch the ICPS on the Falcon and the Orion on the Delta or the other way around

[@ojasdeshmukh693]

Clearly the stress would be to high at max q for the falcon body. The oscillations would tear it apart.... I suggest using ISRO to put one module in LEO where it can safely rendezvous with falcon heavy. ISRO takes like 1.5 mil to make one of their PSLV so the price in a collaboration would be low

[@liquidhype3025]

The entire ICPS resting on the nozzle extension of the RL-10B-2-1 is by far the most unrealistic things I think I've ever seen in RSSRO.

[@Ujwal5555]

Doesn't ICPS have limited ignitions? That would make docking a lot harder, right?

[@sausage4mash]

perhaps we need to rethink and have a filling station in orbit

[@ShadowZone]

Oh totally. If we want to have a sustainable presence in space, that needs to be one of the top priorities, as well as how to generate fuel from asteroids or the Moon

[@JohnMorley1]

I am surprised that they don't have cryopumps. Are you sure that they allow the fuel to boil off? I can see masses of oxygen boils off the electron rocket but I thought that was because it was small and simple.

[@r_rumenov]

Obviously FH is a lot more up to the task, without any Delta-V and payload weight "but"s. They "just" need to get the aerodynamics right.

[@neonknight27]

Launches from VAB go south, and west(for icbm tests), but not east. Wallops Virginia would be better suited, but im not exactly sure if its actually doable.

[@nootnootpenguino8586]

Which mod is the delta heavy in

[@DeviantDeveloper]

Just waiting for Starship makes a load more sense.

[@RobDeVos101]

I say, not 2 rockets but more boosters !

[@andreitrifa2658]

Falcon Heavy? NO Delta IV Heavy? NO New Glenn

[@nelsonglover3963]

I thought the upper stage on the Orion launch had two Centaur engines on the upper stage to avoid such a steep ascent?

[@jean-mariedaubrege4201]

Two deltas (each at 500 BUSD) for launching , one, orion + ESM, and other, ICPS? Wherever, one lone Falcon heavy expendable could do the same for 150BUSD? Don't forget your time, chaps!

[@sddndsiduae4b-688]

37 hours 43 minutes - your hydrogen long gone at that point, just boiled, and you have no enough volume to hold it in boiled state. ( 11:24 )

[@Patchuchan]

ULA did some research on boil off mitigation to keep hydrogen liquid for much longer than that. Supposedly when they implement IVF the Centaur and later ACES stage will have an orbital lifespan in days or even weeks.

[@sddndsiduae4b-688]

@@Patchuchan kzbin.info/www/bejne/eYaTaoZmiLWKaKs from NASA administrator himself.

[@Readyplayer11]

What if they send up a extra fuel tank and refuel the upper stage

[@claudineifds]

Version KSP?

[@yonatankanosh7561]

launching from vedenberg they would be throwing giant rocket parts over the US. But maybe they can come up with an accent trajectory that will have the CCBs fall somewere in the vast nothingness that is most of texas

[@user-yj7ks9mb1e]

>of course FH is way more powerfull than D4 and can carry more payload, but err, let's let Marcus to play with his toy FH and get to a real man's rocket [D4] Lol, it's awersome XD

[@suzeal]

wow

[@goatdocfilms504]

in theory yes 2 delta 4's could launch EM-1 but in reality no they can't. there is only 2 launch pads that can launch a delta 4. 1 on the east coast (Cape Canaveral), 1 on the west coast at (Vandenburg.) Vandenburg can only launch delta 4's in polar orbits so you would have to launch both delta 4's from the east coast. But fuel boil off would kill the mission. ULA cannot launch 2 delta 4's quick enough. plus Orion doesn't have an auto dock system so it wouldn't be able to dock with the ICPS in orbit anyways, Falcon Heavy using 3 block 5 boosters in fully expendable mode can barely lob the orion, european service module, and ICPS stack around the moon. but since the orion stack is larger in diameter than the falcon 9 boosters the shock waves coming off of the orion would hit the side boosters on the falcon heavy and have some serious effects on the side boosters so they would have to do models and wind tunnel testing to address that issue. also spacex does not have the capability to vertically intergrate their rockets. so significant changes would have to be made to the strong back to support the orion stack as the rocket transits from horizontial to vertical. then spacex would also have to plumb in a way to fuel the ICPS and the european service module after the rocket stack is vertical So the plan is to still use the SLS, But it won't be a fully tested and certified rocket. NASA is only going to test what absolutely needs to be tested to fly the rocket safely to try and get the Mission back on Schedule for Dec 2019. then they can fully test the next SLS rocket.

[@ratchet12653]

Delta IV can’t actually get ICPS into LEO, it doesn’t have the payload. Also Orion cannot automatically dock, it requires a human pilot.

[@exalosm]

Why two Delta-4 are the same as two Falcon Heavy?

[@fs2728]

Could someone kerbal a "Super Heavy" with an ICPS and Orion atop?. Would be interesting if the booster would be reusable, or if it has to be expendable because it's too fast.

[@isaiahphillip4112]

If it just a super heavy without some form of second stage, then yes it'll be going way to fast to be recovered. If super heavy were to release the payload at the nominal time, then the ICPS would need to provide the remainder of the 6000 or so m/s required to reach orbit. Keep in mind the Superheavy is supposed to fly with a fully fueled Starship on top AND payload with 30 tons more mass than the combined Orion and ICPS. Superheavy could probably get Orion and ICPS a good way to orbit, but it would definitely not be reusable.

[@kosta2190]

LINK for mod plz

[@larrysmith8426]

Why don't you use both the ULA and the Falcon Heavy at the same time to launch both payloads to meet in space?

[@colevanwyk3056]

if falcon heavy can do it by itself why use the extra rocket

[@livovil]

Stock SSTO in realism overhaul Edit: Stock parts

[@Patchuchan]

Simple use the Rapier engine. If you have real fuels and engines you can do single stage vehicles with the RS-25.

[@rokadamlje5365]

Vandenberg can only launch west and north... Probably better launch something like ACES, using all the launch capability of D4H to launch just fuel in a stage that is designed for low boiloff. As it would have to be launched beforehand from the same KSC launch site.

[@RedBlueGamez]

In the description you spelled “Explorian” Instead of Exploration lol

[@AndyOO6]

This is a single slingshot around not a stable orbit around the moon.. which would be what NASA said themselves. wouldn't it?

[@simonrmerton]

They can’t launch a Delta IV Heavy from VAFB because launching over land is a huge no-no. Falcon Heavy FTW, and at a fraction of the cost.

[@ShadowZone]

Ah yes, dumping two giant Delta IV cores over the US mainland might be frowned upon.

[@simonrmerton]

ShadowZone : And that’s the best-case scenario.

[@jbell6642]

simonrmerton ...dumb question...what’s FTW?

[@simonrmerton]

Jody Bell : For The Win. It wasn’t a dumb question.

[@jbell6642]

simonrmerton ....thanks! 🤙🏼

[@spacelite1896]

Game name ?

[@MPHammer]

Kerbal Space Program.

[@spacelite1896]

@@MPHammer ok

[@KOZMOuvBORG]

Wrong suffix, use -lune or -selene

[@YeshuaAgapao]

If SpaceX maintains its negative attitude toward Falcon Heavy, they will not bother to make needed faring modifications to be able to launch EM-1 unless they dump DoD generous amounts of money on them for it. NASA is as wastrel and wasting as DoD, so it could happen. Otherwise EM-1 would end up on a pair of Delta-4s. Most likely it just won't go at all or be delayed 2-3 more years.

[@mocko69]

The FH is waay more practical, bare me

[@plushigaming1822]

Who is here in 2021.

[@jimabbey9544]

I DON'T see Orion to go at ALL. Space x WILL do it before Orion will get off the ground IF EVER!

[@dosmastrify]

Falcon heavy cant do that, even in fully expendable mode 1:15

[@Acklon]

For what reason?

[@Bruceboot]

It would never work on delta 4

[@galadirk7843]

Look at the side effects of using TOO many mods!

[@YeshuaAgapao]

You are better off with Orbiter Space Flight Simulator for real solar system. RSS and RO in kerbal space program are slow.