home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   sci.space.tech      Technical and general issues related to      3,113 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 1,321 of 3,113   
   Dholmes to Cris Fitch   
   Re: High-flight rate Medium vs. New Heav   
   25 Jan 04 22:52:50   
   
   XPost: sci.space.policy   
   From: removedholmes@gte.net   
      
   "Cris Fitch"  wrote in message   
   news:a69765cb.0401241721.254e87bf@posting.google.com...   
   > Not long ago it looked like the Medium lift market was   
   > over-subscribed with Proton, Ariane-5, Sea Launch, Atlas-5   
   > and Delta-IV.  Now with the retirement of Shuttle and a   
   > new plan for manned exploration coming into being, we've   
   > got to ask ourselves:   
      
   Yep the market is about to get a lot bigger.   
      
   One of the things to remember is all the current rockets are designed for a   
   mix of LEO and GTO not LTO or Lunar orbit.   
   Some changes will naturally be made to better suit this new objective.   
      
   >   
   > 1) Launch lots of medium payloads   
   > or   
   > 2) Go Heavy   
   >   
   > I've got to argue in favor of #1, hoping that the economics   
   > of all these medium lift launchers will reduce the overall   
   > cost of these plans.  Standardize the payloads (a la the building   
   > of MIR) and assemble what you need for each mission.  Pay   
   > companies for the results (e.g. fuel delivered to the right   
   > orbit).   
      
   I do not see how you can go with medium launch vehicles unless you count a   
   Delta Heavy as a medium class launch vehicle.   
   The Delta 5,4 can only place less then 5 tons into LTO. With launch capacity   
   like this you would need at least 40 launches and maybe as many as 80   
   launches a year just to  maintain a 4 man base. Too much assembly can cause   
   many of the same problems we see now with ISS.   
      
      
   >   
   > If one feels it necessary to go for heavy lift, can't we at   
   > least think in terms of "Delta-IV Super Heavy", such that   
   > our flight hardware makes use of the engineering and production   
   > already in use (and that will stay around if the politics of   
   > heavy lift fails)?   
      
   This has a lot of potential.   
   Going from just over a 5 meter diameter rocket to an almost six meter   
   diameter rocket even if only for the central rocket would allow for a lot   
   more launch capability in a Delta Heavy.   
   Dual MB-60 second stage could also increase mass to orbit.   
      
   Increasing the thrust of the second stage with either a MB-60 or RL-60 and   
   adding a third stage is IMO a must.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca