Redmond, WA, United States
Redmond, WA, United States

Time filter

Source Type

ATTLEBORO, MA, December 02, 2016-- Frank Crossley has been included in Marquis Who's Who. As in all Marquis Who's Who biographical volumes, individuals profiled are selected on the basis of current reference value. Factors such as position, noteworthy accomplishments, visibility, and prominence in a field are all taken into account during the selection process.After more than four decades of professional experiences in the field of metallurgical engineering, Dr. Crossley retired in 1991. Prior to entering the field professionally, however, he obtained a Bachelor of Science in chemical engineering with a minor in art and a Master of Science in metallurgical engineering from the Illinois Institute of Technology. Subsequently, he obtained a Ph.D. at age 25 in metallurgical engineering, where he was the first person of any race to obtain that degree at the Institute, and most likely the youngest recipient in the country to have ever earned it. Few African-Americans were visible in his field in the 1950s, but he excelled.During World War II, Crossley was enrolled in a little-publicized government experiment (to minimize a possible backlash), through the V-12 Navy College Training Program, to prepare blacks for service as officers. He was the only black among an entering class of 1,500, and served as a Navy ensign in the Philippines at the close of the war.Dr. Crossley started in the field of engineering in 1948, as an instructor for his alma mater. For the next two years, from 1950 until 1952, he became a professor and head of the department for foundry engineering at the Tennessee Agricultural and Industrial State University. The next nearly decade and a half saw him working as a senior scientist for the Illinois Institute of Technology's Research Institute, at which point he transferred to Lockheed Missiles & Space Company, where he worked as a senior member of the research laboratory for eight years. A pioneer in the field of titanium metallurgy, Dr. Crossley worked for the next five years as their manager of department producibility and standards and manager of the department of missile body mechanical engineering. Before departing Lockheed, he worked as a consultant engineer in the missile systems division for seven years.Prior to his retirement, Dr. Crossley worked with the Aerojet Propulsion Research Institute division of GenCorp in the roles of director of research propulsion materials, research director of materials applications and technical principal. A fellow of the American Society for Metals International (ASMI) and a member of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics and, since 1947 of The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society (TMS), he has achieved much. Dr. Crossley has received seven patents, five of which were in titanium base alloys [surprisingly first used in orthodontia] that greatly improved the aircraft and aerospace industry. In 2016, TMS held its "DMMM2" Conference at Northwestern University in Dr. Crossley's honor. Additionally, he has won numerous awards, including the R.B. Young Technology Innovation Award from GenCorp Aerojet in 1990 and has been featured in publications such as Who's Who in Science and Engineering and Who's Who in the World. Even though Dr. Crossley has contributed to 60 metallurgical journals and chapters in books such as We Could Not Fail: The First African Americans in the Space Program, he would say his proudest moment was the creation of Transage titanium alloys and grain refiner for titanium alloy castings, for which he received the Titanium Award.Other proud moments: Dr. Crossley believed in encouraging the dreams of others and, in retirement, served as a successful and popular volunteer math and science tutor to both advanced and at-risk students until age 87. As a young engineer, he also encouraged three African-American neighbors to pursue PhDs in STEM areas.About Marquis Who's Who :Since 1899, when A. N. Marquis printed the First Edition of Who's Who in America , Marquis Who's Who has chronicled the lives of the most accomplished individuals and innovators from every significant field of endeavor, including politics, business, medicine, law, education, art, religion and entertainment. Today, Who's Who in America remains an essential biographical source for thousands of researchers, journalists, librarians and executive search firms around the world. Marquis now publishes many Who's Who titles, including Who's Who in America , Who's Who in the World , Who's Who in American Law , Who's Who in Medicine and Healthcare , Who's Who in Science and Engineering , and Who's Who in Asia . Marquis publications may be visited at the official Marquis Who's Who website at www.marquiswhoswho.com


News Article | November 4, 2015
Site: news.yahoo.com

An unmanned Antares rocket is seen exploding seconds after lift off from a commercial launch pad in this still image from NASA video at Wallops Island, Virginia October 28, 2014. REUTERS/NASA TV/Handout via Reuters More CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla (Reuters) - - Independent NASA accident investigators said the U.S. space agency should “perform a greater level of due diligence for major system components” in rockets that deliver cargo to the International Space Station following a 2014 explosion. The recommendation came in the investigators' report on the explosion of Orbital ATK's Antares rocket that destroyed a load of cargo for the space station. It may spur calls for more oversight of NASA's use of commercial contracts to deliver cargo - and soon crew members - to the space station. NASA shared development costs for those programs with its commercial partners, while earlier rockets were fully government-funded. Separate accident investigations are underway to determine the cause of a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket failure on June 28, 2015, which claimed another load of station cargo. NASA hired both Orbital and privately held Space Exploration Technologies, or SpaceX, to fly cargo to the station after the space shuttles were retired. The U.S. space agency is working on a similar program with SpaceX and Boeing to fly crew. Orbital, in a report obtained by Reuters from the Federal Aviation Administration on Tuesday, said the Oct. 28, 2014 Antares explosion was most likely caused by an engine manufacturing defect, while NASA said it could also have been caused by a design issue or debris in the engine. Both investigations said a fire and explosion in the rocket engine’s liquid oxygen turbopump caused the booster to fail about 14 seconds after liftoff from Wallops Island, Virginia. Orbital said the cause of the failure was most likely a manufacturing defect in a turbopump in one of the rocket’s two AJ-26 engines, a Soviet-era motor refurbished and resold by Aerojet Rocketdyne Holdings Inc. Aerojet in September paid Orbital $50 million to settle the dispute. Orbital plans to replace the AJ-26 engines with a new Russian-made engine manufactured by Russia's NPO Energomash. First flight of the refurbished Antares is expected in 2016. The use of Russian engines is controversial – they have been banned from use in rockets carrying military payloads – but analyst Marco Caceres, with Teal Group, says NASA has no choice if they want competition. “We know the Russians build excellent engines, but we don’t know how the quality control is,” he said. “To a certain extent, it’s a moot point because NASA doesn’t have a lot of choices.” The NASA investigators said a manufacturing defect was possible in the Antares case, noting that a defect also was found in a separate AJ-26 engine that exploded during testing in May 2014. But they said it was not clear the defect alone could have caused the explosion. The NASA probe found two other potential causes of the failure: an engine design that made the turbopump “vulnerable to oxygen fires and failures,” and silica and titanium debris found in the engine. The probe said any one of the three potential causes, or a combination of them, could have triggered the explosion. Investigators also said Orbital and Aerojet did not have full insight into the design and operational record of the engines, which were manufactured 40 years ago for a Soviet moon program.


News Article | February 20, 2017
Site: marketersmedia.com

This report studies Nano Satellite in Global market, especially in North America, Europe, China, Japan, Southeast Asia and India, focuses on top manufacturers in global market, with capacity, production, price, revenue and market share for each manufacturer, covering Lockheed Martin Northrop Grumman Planet Labs Surrey Satellite Technologies Spire Global Dauria Aerospace Tyvak CubeSat NANOSATELLITE COMPANIES AEC-Able Engineering AeroAstro Aeroflex Aerojet Airbus Defence and Space Aitech Alenia Spazio APCO Technologies Ardé ATK Austrian Aerospace Boeing Space Systems CAEN Aerospace Raytheon PCI Market Segment by Regions, this report splits Global into several key Regions, with production, consumption, revenue, market share and growth rate of Nano Satellite in these regions, from 2011 to 2021 (forecast), like North America Europe China Japan Southeast Asia India Split by product type, with production, revenue, price, market share and growth rate of each type, can be divided into Communications Satellite Positioning Satellite Others Split by application, this report focuses on consumption, market share and growth rate of Nano Satellite in each application, can be divided into Government Military Others Global Nano Satellite Market Research Report 2017 1 Nano Satellite Market Overview 1.1 Product Overview and Scope of Nano Satellite 1.2 Nano Satellite Segment by Type 1.2.1 Global Production Market Share of Nano Satellite by Type in 2015 1.2.2 Communications Satellite 1.2.3 Positioning Satellite 1.2.4 Others 1.3 Nano Satellite Segment by Application 1.3.1 Nano Satellite Consumption Market Share by Application in 2015 1.3.2 Government 1.3.3 Military 1.3.4 Others 1.4 Nano Satellite Market by Region 1.4.1 North America Status and Prospect (2012-2022) 1.4.2 Europe Status and Prospect (2012-2022) 1.4.3 China Status and Prospect (2012-2022) 1.4.4 Japan Status and Prospect (2012-2022) 1.4.5 Southeast Asia Status and Prospect (2012-2022) 1.4.6 India Status and Prospect (2012-2022) 1.5 Global Market Size (Value) of Nano Satellite (2012-2022) 2 Global Nano Satellite Market Competition by Manufacturers 2.1 Global Nano Satellite Production and Share by Manufacturers (2015 and 2016) 2.2 Global Nano Satellite Revenue and Share by Manufacturers (2015 and 2016) 2.3 Global Nano Satellite Average Price by Manufacturers (2015 and 2016) 2.4 Manufacturers Nano Satellite Manufacturing Base Distribution, Sales Area and Product Type 2.5 Nano Satellite Market Competitive Situation and Trends 2.5.1 Nano Satellite Market Concentration Rate 2.5.2 Nano Satellite Market Share of Top 3 and Top 5 Manufacturers …………. 7 Global Nano Satellite Manufacturers Profiles/Analysis 7.1 Lockheed Martin 7.1.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Its Competitors 7.1.2 Nano Satellite Product Type, Application and Specification 7.1.2.1 Communications Satellite 7.1.2.2 Positioning Satellite 7.1.3 Lockheed Martin Nano Satellite Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015 and 2016) 7.1.4 Main Business/Business Overview 7.2 Northrop Grumman 7.2.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Its Competitors 7.2.2 Nano Satellite Product Type, Application and Specification 7.2.2.1 Communications Satellite 7.2.2.2 Positioning Satellite 7.2.3 Northrop Grumman Nano Satellite Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015 and 2016) 7.2.4 Main Business/Business Overview 7.3 Planet Labs 7.3.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Its Competitors 7.3.2 Nano Satellite Product Type, Application and Specification 7.3.2.1 Communications Satellite 7.3.2.2 Positioning Satellite 7.3.3 Planet Labs Nano Satellite Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015 and 2016) 7.3.4 Main Business/Business Overview 7.4 Surrey Satellite Technologies 7.4.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Its Competitors 7.4.2 Nano Satellite Product Type, Application and Specification 7.4.2.1 Communications Satellite 7.4.2.2 Positioning Satellite ..…..Continued Any Query?, Ask Here @ https://www.wiseguyreports.com/enquiry/975255-global-nano-satellite-market-research-report-2017 For more information, please visit http://www.wiseguyreports.com


This report studies Nano Satellite in Global market, especially in North America, Europe, China, Japan, Southeast Asia and India, focuses on top manufacturers in global market, with capacity, production, price, revenue and market share for each manufacturer, covering Market Segment by Regions, this report splits Global into several key Regions, with production, consumption, revenue, market share and growth rate of Nano Satellite in these regions, from 2011 to 2021 (forecast), like Split by product type, with production, revenue, price, market share and growth rate of each type, can be divided into Split by application, this report focuses on consumption, market share and growth rate of Nano Satellite in each application, can be divided into Global Nano Satellite Market Research Report 2017 1 Nano Satellite Market Overview 1.1 Product Overview and Scope of Nano Satellite 1.2 Nano Satellite Segment by Type 1.2.1 Global Production Market Share of Nano Satellite by Type in 2015 1.2.2 Communications Satellite 1.2.3 Positioning Satellite 1.2.4 Others 1.3 Nano Satellite Segment by Application 1.3.1 Nano Satellite Consumption Market Share by Application in 2015 1.3.2 Government 1.3.3 Military 1.3.4 Others 1.4 Nano Satellite Market by Region 1.4.1 North America Status and Prospect (2012-2022) 1.4.2 Europe Status and Prospect (2012-2022) 1.4.3 China Status and Prospect (2012-2022) 1.4.4 Japan Status and Prospect (2012-2022) 1.4.5 Southeast Asia Status and Prospect (2012-2022) 1.4.6 India Status and Prospect (2012-2022) 1.5 Global Market Size (Value) of Nano Satellite (2012-2022) 2 Global Nano Satellite Market Competition by Manufacturers 2.1 Global Nano Satellite Production and Share by Manufacturers (2015 and 2016) 2.2 Global Nano Satellite Revenue and Share by Manufacturers (2015 and 2016) 2.3 Global Nano Satellite Average Price by Manufacturers (2015 and 2016) 2.4 Manufacturers Nano Satellite Manufacturing Base Distribution, Sales Area and Product Type 2.5 Nano Satellite Market Competitive Situation and Trends 2.5.1 Nano Satellite Market Concentration Rate 2.5.2 Nano Satellite Market Share of Top 3 and Top 5 Manufacturers 2.5.3 Mergers & Acquisitions, Expansion 3 Global Nano Satellite Production, Revenue (Value) by Region (2012-2017) 3.1 Global Nano Satellite Production by Region (2012-2017) 3.2 Global Nano Satellite Production Market Share by Region (2012-2017) 3.3 Global Nano Satellite Revenue (Value) and Market Share by Region (2012-2017) 3.4 Global Nano Satellite Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017) 3.5 North America Nano Satellite Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017) 3.6 Europe Nano Satellite Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017) 3.7 China Nano Satellite Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017) 3.8 Japan Nano Satellite Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017) 3.9 Southeast Asia Nano Satellite Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017) 3.10 India Nano Satellite Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2012-2017) 5 Global Nano Satellite Production, Revenue (Value), Price Trend by Type 5.1 Global Nano Satellite Production and Market Share by Type (2012-2017) 5.2 Global Nano Satellite Revenue and Market Share by Type (2012-2017) 5.3 Global Nano Satellite Price by Type (2012-2017) 5.4 Global Nano Satellite Production Growth by Type (2012-2017) 6 Global Nano Satellite Market Analysis by Application 6.1 Global Nano Satellite Consumption and Market Share by Application (2012-2017) 6.2 Global Nano Satellite Consumption Growth Rate by Application (2012-2017) 6.3 Market Drivers and Opportunities 6.3.1 Potential Applications 6.3.2 Emerging Markets/Countries 7 Global Nano Satellite Manufacturers Profiles/Analysis 7.1 Lockheed Martin 7.1.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Its Competitors 7.1.2 Nano Satellite Product Type, Application and Specification 7.1.2.1 Communications Satellite 7.1.2.2 Positioning Satellite 7.1.3 Lockheed Martin Nano Satellite Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015 and 2016) 7.1.4 Main Business/Business Overview 7.2 Northrop Grumman 7.2.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Its Competitors 7.2.2 Nano Satellite Product Type, Application and Specification 7.2.2.1 Communications Satellite 7.2.2.2 Positioning Satellite 7.2.3 Northrop Grumman Nano Satellite Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015 and 2016) 7.2.4 Main Business/Business Overview 7.3 Planet Labs 7.3.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Its Competitors 7.3.2 Nano Satellite Product Type, Application and Specification 7.3.2.1 Communications Satellite 7.3.2.2 Positioning Satellite 7.3.3 Planet Labs Nano Satellite Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015 and 2016) 7.3.4 Main Business/Business Overview 7.4 Surrey Satellite Technologies 7.4.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Its Competitors 7.4.2 Nano Satellite Product Type, Application and Specification 7.4.2.1 Communications Satellite 7.4.2.2 Positioning Satellite 7.4.3 Surrey Satellite Technologies Nano Satellite Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015 and 2016) 7.4.4 Main Business/Business Overview 7.5 Spire Global 7.5.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Its Competitors 7.5.2 Nano Satellite Product Type, Application and Specification 7.5.2.1 Communications Satellite 7.5.2.2 Positioning Satellite 7.5.3 Spire Global Nano Satellite Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015 and 2016) 7.5.4 Main Business/Business Overview 7.6 Dauria Aerospace 7.6.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Its Competitors 7.6.2 Nano Satellite Product Type, Application and Specification 7.6.2.1 Communications Satellite 7.6.2.2 Positioning Satellite 7.6.3 Dauria Aerospace Nano Satellite Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015 and 2016) 7.6.4 Main Business/Business Overview 7.7 Tyvak 7.7.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Its Competitors 7.7.2 Nano Satellite Product Type, Application and Specification 7.7.2.1 Communications Satellite 7.7.2.2 Positioning Satellite 7.7.3 Tyvak Nano Satellite Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015 and 2016) 7.7.4 Main Business/Business Overview 7.8 CubeSat 7.8.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Its Competitors 7.8.2 Nano Satellite Product Type, Application and Specification 7.8.2.1 Communications Satellite 7.8.2.2 Positioning Satellite 7.8.3 CubeSat Nano Satellite Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015 and 2016) 7.8.4 Main Business/Business Overview 7.9 NANOSATELLITE COMPANIES 7.9.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Its Competitors 7.9.2 Nano Satellite Product Type, Application and Specification 7.9.2.1 Communications Satellite 7.9.2.2 Positioning Satellite 7.9.3 NANOSATELLITE COMPANIES Nano Satellite Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015 and 2016) 7.9.4 Main Business/Business Overview 7.10 AEC-Able Engineering 7.10.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Its Competitors 7.10.2 Nano Satellite Product Type, Application and Specification 7.10.2.1 Communications Satellite 7.10.2.2 Positioning Satellite 7.10.3 AEC-Able Engineering Nano Satellite Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015 and 2016) 7.10.4 Main Business/Business Overview 7.11 AeroAstro 7.12 Aeroflex 7.13 Aerojet 7.14 Airbus Defence and Space 7.15 Aitech 7.16 Alenia Spazio 7.17 APCO Technologies 7.18 Ardé 7.19 ATK 7.20 Austrian Aerospace 7.21 Boeing Space Systems 7.22 CAEN Aerospace 7.23 Raytheon 7.24 PCI For more information, please visit http://www.wiseguyreports.com


O'Brien T.F.,Aerojet
17th AIAA International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference 2011 | Year: 2011

A computational study of the viscous performance of a blunt leading-edged, streamlinetraced Busemann inlet with no truncation was performed. A sugar scoop style of Busemann inlet with geometric contraction ratio 7 and leading edge radius of 0.03" was sized for a nominal inviscid mass capture of 10 lbm/s at Mach 7, 0° angle of attack, and a dynamic pressure of 1000 psf. Solutions were obtained at angles of attack ranging from -5° to 10°, in increments of 5°. All angles of attack were calculated at Mach numbers ranging from 5 to 8, in increments of 1. Additional lower Mach number solutions were obtained for each angle of attack to determine operability limits for minimum running Mach number. Conservationaveraged performance results for total pressure ratio and Mach number were compiled at both the cowl lip and inlet throat planes and compared with area- and mass-averaged results. Lift, drag, and pitching moment coefficients were integrated to both the cowl lip and inlet throat planes. Performance trends were presented, showing that the inlet performance correlated well with a drag coefficient referenced to the freestream streamtube area captured by the inlet. Comparisons between the data and existing correlations for maximum contraction ratio showed good agreement when using inlet cowl plane Mach number and internal contraction ratio. © 2011 by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc. All rights reserved.


Mikellides I.G.,Jet Propulsion Laboratory | Katz I.,Jet Propulsion Laboratory | Hofer R.R.,Jet Propulsion Laboratory | Goebel D.M.,Jet Propulsion Laboratory | And 2 more authors.
Physics of Plasmas | Year: 2011

In a qualification life test of a Hall thruster it was found that the erosion of the acceleration channel practically stopped after ∼5600 h. Numerical simulations using a two-dimensional axisymmetric plasma solver with a magnetic field-aligned mesh reveal that when the channel receded from its early-in-life to its steady-state configuration the following changes occurred near the wall: (1) reduction of the electric field parallel to the wall that prohibited ions from acquiring significant impact kinetic energy before entering the sheath, (2) reduction of the potential fall in the sheath that further diminished the total energy ions gained before striking the material, and (3) reduction of the ion number density that decreased the flux of ions to the wall. All these changes, found to have been induced by the magnetic field, constituted collectively an effective shielding of the walls from any significant ion bombardment. Thus, we term this process in Hall thrusters "magnetic shielding." © 2011 American Institute of Physics.


News Article | January 6, 2016
Site: news.yahoo.com

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Aerojet Rocketdyne Holdings Inc on Tuesday said it has won a $6 million contract from the U.S. Air Force to define the standards that will be used to qualify components made using 3-D printing for use in liquid-fueled rocket engine applications. The award is part of a larger drive by the U.S. military to end its reliance on Russian-built RD-180 rocket engines now used on the Atlas 5 rocket built by United Launch Alliance, a joint venture of Lockheed Martin Corp and Boeing Co. The Air Force plans to award additional, larger contracts for U.S.-developed propulsion systems later this year. Aerojet said it would draw upon its extensive experience with 3-D printing, or additive manufacturing, to draw up the standards that would be used to qualify 3-D printed rocket engine components for flight. Aerojet is developing its AR1 engine as an alternative to the RD-180 engine. New rocket engine designs like the AR1 are increasingly using 3-D printing technology because it reduces the amount of time and money required for the engines. The use of additive manufacturing technology reduces the cost to produce components, shortens build times and provides flexibility to engineers to design components that were once impossible to build using traditional manufacturing techniques. The contract calls for Aerojet to define the rigorous engineering and inspection processes to be followed when producing and testing 3-D printed components to ensure they meet the stringent requirements of aerospace systems. In 2014, Aerojet successfully tested an engine made entirely with additive manufacturing that had a thrust of 5,000 pounds. A year later, it used additive manufacturing to replicate the injector of the gas generator used on the Apollo-era F-1 rocket engine to demonstrate that a proven design can be built at a competitive cost without sacrificing performance.


News Article | September 13, 2015
Site: www.techtimes.com

Boeing and Lockheed's United Launch Alliance, or ULA, is set to amplify its commitment to the Blue Origin rocket engines, with Blue Origin and ULA agreeing to the work on expanding the capability of BE-4 rocket engines. Blue Origin was founded by Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, and the move comes as ULA considers a buyout of Aerojet Rocketdyne Holdings, according to sources close to the matter. Last year, Blue Origin and ULA said they would develop a rocket engine fueled by liquefied natural gas (LNG) with liquid oxygen as the oxidizer to replace the RD-180 engines made in Russia, which are currently used on the Atlas 5 booster. The BE-4 engines would be used in the ULA's new Vulcan rocket, which will exceed the capability of the Atlas V. The replacement is needed because the ULA is no longer permitted to import Russian engines, with a congressional ban being put in place due to Russia's involvement in Ukraine. Aerojet is reportedly working on another engine on its own, but it is suggested that the development of this engine is at least 16 months behind the development of the BE-4. Bezos is expected to unveil plans for a new rocket manufacturing plant and launch pad at Florida's Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, which is located near the NASA Kennedy Space Center, on Sept. 15. Blue Origin will use the BE-4 engines in rockets of its own, and will also sell them to ULA and other customers. If the engine deal works out as well as the two companies hope, ULA could have a rocket that is fully made in the U.S. by 2019, a title that only SpaceX currently holds.


News Article | December 3, 2015
Site: news.yahoo.com

An Atlas 5 ULA (United Launch Alliance) rocket carrying a satellite for the Defense Meteorological Satellite Program is launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California April 3, 2014. REUTERS/Gene Blevins More CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. (Reuters) - Rain and cloudy skies delayed Orbital ATK's planned resumption on Thursday of cargo runs to the International Space Station, a year after the company's Antares rocket exploded during launch. An Orbital Cygnus spacecraft, perched atop an Atlas 5 rocket from United Launch Alliance - a Lockheed Martin Corp and Boeing Co joint venture - had been slated for liftoff at 5:55 p.m. EST (2255 GMT). But poor weather at the seaside Florida launch site forced ULA to postpone the launch. The next opportunity is at 5:33 p.m. (2233 GMT) on Friday. The Cygnus, an upgraded cargo ship, is due to carry more than 7,700 pounds (3,500 kg) of food, clothing, supplies and science experiments to the space station, including a prototype satellite astronauts will put together like a Lego kit. Also aboard are two Microsoft HoloLens headsets, which will provide station crew – and onlookers in ground control centers – with digitally enhanced images of whatever the astronauts are looking at. Dulles, Virginia-based Orbital had completed two flights under its original $1.9 billion NASA contract, delivering about 8,400 pounds (3,800 kg) pounds of a promised 22 tons of supplies, when Antares faltered on Oct. 28, 2014. Investigators blamed the botched launch on a defective turbopump in one of Antares’ two main engines, a Soviet-era motor refurbished and sold by Aerojet Rocketdyne Holdings . Exactly what went wrong remains a matter of debate, but Aerojet paid Orbital $50 million to settle the dispute and the companies ended their collaboration. Orbital accelerated plans to outfit Antares with new engines and purchased two Atlas rocket rides to fly Cygnus capsules to the station. Orbital expects to start using its own Antares rocket again in May 2016. Orbital is competing against privately owned Space Exploration Technologies, or SpaceX, and Sierra Nevada Corp for follow-on station cargo delivery contracts, now due to be awarded in January. Resupplying the station has been a challenge for NASA, following not only Orbital’s accident, but the loss of a Russian Progress ship in April and a SpaceX Dragon capsule in June.


This report studies sales (consumption) of Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) in Europe market, especially in Germany, UK, France, Russia, Italy, Benelux and Spain, focuses on top players in these countries, with sales, price, revenue and market share for each player in these Countries, covering Market Segment by Countries, this report splits Europe into several key Countries, with sales (consumption), revenue, market share and growth rate of Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) in these countries, from 2011 to 2021 (forecast), like Split by product type, with sales, revenue, price, market share and growth rate of each type, can be divided into Type I Type II Type III Split by application, this report focuses on sales, market share and growth rate of Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) in each application, can be divided into Application 1 Application 2 Application 3 View Full Report With Complete TOC, List Of Figure and Table: http://globalqyresearch.com/europe-terminal-high-altitude-area-defense-thaad-market-report-2016 Europe Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) Market Report 2016 1 Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) Overview 1.1 Product Overview and Scope of Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) 1.2 Classification of Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) 1.2.1 Type I 1.2.2 Type II 1.2.3 Type III 1.3 Application of Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) 1.3.1 Application 1 1.3.2 Application 2 1.3.3 Application 3 1.4 Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) Market by Countries 1.4.1 Germany Status and Prospect (2011-2021) 1.4.2 France Status and Prospect (2011-2021) 1.4.3 UK Status and Prospect (2011-2021) 1.4.4 Russia Status and Prospect (2011-2021) 1.4.5 Italy Status and Prospect (2011-2021) 1.4.6 Spain Status and Prospect (2011-2021) 1.4.7 Benelux Status and Prospect (2011-2021) 1.5 Europe Market Size (Value and Volume) of Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) (2011-2021) 1.5.1 Europe Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) Sales and Growth Rate (2011-2021) 1.5.2 Europe Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) Revenue and Growth Rate (2011-2021) 10 Europe Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) Manufacturers Analysis 10.1 Lockheed Martin Space Systems 10.1.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Competitors 10.1.2 Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) Product Type, Application and Specification 10.1.2.1 Type I 10.1.2.2 Type II 10.1.3 Lockheed Martin Space Systems Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) Sales, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2011-2016) 10.1.4 Main Business/Business Overview 10.2 Caterpillar Defense 10.2.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Competitors 10.2.2 Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) Product Type, Application and Specification 10.2.2.1 Type I 10.2.2.2 Type II 10.2.3 Caterpillar Defense Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) Sales, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2011-2016) 10.2.4 Main Business/Business Overview 10.3 Aerojet 10.3.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Competitors 10.3.2 Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) Product Type, Application and Specification 10.3.2.1 Type I 10.3.2.2 Type II 10.3.3 Aerojet Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) Sales, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2011-2016) 10.3.4 Main Business/Business Overview 10.4 Raytheon 10.4.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Competitors 10.4.2 Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) Product Type, Application and Specification 10.4.2.1 Type I 10.4.2.2 Type II 10.4.3 Raytheon Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) Sales, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2011-2016) 10.4.4 Main Business/Business Overview 10.5 Honeywell 10.5.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Competitors 10.5.2 Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) Product Type, Application and Specification 10.5.2.1 Type I 10.5.2.2 Type II 10.5.3 Honeywell Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) Sales, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2011-2016) 10.5.4 Main Business/Business Overview Global QYResearch is the one spot destination for all your research needs. Global QYResearch holds the repository of quality research reports from numerous publishers across the globe. Our inventory of research reports caters to various industry verticals including Healthcare, Information and Communication Technology (ICT), Technology and Media, Chemicals, Materials, Energy, Heavy Industry, etc. With the complete information about the publishers and the industries they cater to for developing market research reports, we help our clients in making purchase decision by understanding their requirements and suggesting best possible collection matching their needs.

Loading Aerojet collaborators
Loading Aerojet collaborators