Talk:EELV Secondary Payload Adapter

History

There is some interesting perspective on history of the development of the ESPA ring, including projected advantages to "taxpayers" and the "space community" in this USAF news publication from 2006: Taxpayers, space community benefit from innovative “ESPA” ring adapter, Air Force Space Command, 2006-06-19. Cheers. N2e (talk) 13:31, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

that link doesn't work for me now. Seems to have moved to Taxpayers, space community benefit from innovative “ESPA” ring adapter June 2006 - Rod57 (talk) 11:05, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Article should be renamed to "ESPA ring"

The article currently says in the intro lead sentence: "The EELV Secondary Payload Adapter (ESPA) is a payload adapter ring for launching secondary payloads on EELV-type orbital launch vehicles." and the article name is "EELV Secondary Payload Adapter"

This specific EELV part of that was the original application the payload ring design was originally made for, and how the first ones flew. It was also the name when it was, as originally designed, merely a big metal ring mechanism for holding secondary payloads. But that time is past. It is no longer used merely on EELV (expendable) launch vehicles, and no longer merely for carrying secondary payloads, although it is still often used for secondary payloads, among its other uses. On LCROSS mission, it was merely the mechanical bus for the fairly complex satellite on a multicomponent mission. For the Spaceflight Industries SHERPA missions, it is just the big honking sat bus for a lot of payloads, and one cannot always, or even usually, determine which is the primary payload.

Further, like the acronym SCUBA, the thing has over time surpassed the expansion of its acronym, and is now generally just called "ESPA ring" which is already a valid redirect to this page.

I can't just WP:MOVE the article myself, 'cause the redir already exists. So, let's see what others think on the matter.

PROPOSE: Rename this article to "ESPA ring" from "EELV Secondary Payload Adapter"

SUPPORT — as nom, I support the proposal, per the rationale above. N2e (talk) 01:35, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Should define ESPA vs ESPA Grande

Article does not clearly say they are different - but they are, eg. [1] ... Now used, but there must be earlier more detailed refs. - Rod57 (talk) 19:10, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can we add the diameter and height of the rings as well, and typical masses (of the rings). ?

ESPA Overview MOOG mentions a 4-point-mount satellite interface on EAGLE. - Rod57 (talk) 10:58, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Taxpayers, space community benefit from innovative “ESPA” ring adapter June 2006 says "Roughly five feet in diameter and two feet tall, the ESPA is a half-inch thick aluminum ring ..." and shows it fitting under the conical payload adapter (that may be a mistake, all photos seem to show it on top of the EELV cone adapter). - Rod57 (talk) 11:08, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Technical details could also describe the top and bottom interface rings

Technical details could also describe the top and bottom interface rings (roughly 60 inches diameter?). Presumably they are very similar to each other and to the Standard Payload Interface bus proposed as part of EELV around 1994 ? - Rod57 (talk) 14:10, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]