(dave schneider) wrote:

(Derek Lyons) wrote:
LooseChanj wrote:

Actually, Derek, many of those who have been shuttle supporters for a
long time have been slowly picking up on what the capsule people have
been saying: winged designs are hard, so lets put off doing another
winged design for a while, pick an easy design and see if we can get
the flight rate up. Have the research centers continue to work on TPS
designs, let DOD do a scram jet, and then revisit winged vessels when
we have better materials and/or design.

Putting it off won't make it easier, especially considering that the
real problems have nothing to do with TPS designs or scram jets.

Seperately, many of us who have been reusable space craft supporters
for a long time have been slowly picking up on what the expendable
people have been saying: reusable designs require high flight rates
to avoid being expensive (and worse, expensive up front), so lets
concentrate on making reliable expendables that can get the flight
rate up on a pay-as-you go basis, and then use those reliable
components in steps to getting back to reusable craft.

The problem is; expendables with any significant capability won't be
cheap either. All you are saying is Apollo was cool, the Shuttle
sucks, so let's avoid re-useables.

The key to lowering expenses is reducing the standing army, which
applies regardless of winged or not, expendable or not. The next key
is lowering capital expenses, which is difficult to do with
expendables unless you have a fairly high flight rate resulting in
mass production.

Ultimately, achieving CATS isn't about engineering, it isn't about
cheap spacecraft. It's about managing capital, it's about designing
systems and processes, it's about a metric buttload of things that
have nothing to do with bending metal or pumping fuel. CATS
supporters ignore this at their peril.

The shuttle is sexy, major impressive, and has done things that Apollo
designers would give right arms for. But it requires heroic efforts
to be usable. Apollo required heroic efforts. But the route to CATS
requires something where heroic is too much. The fabled "airliner
flight-line turnaround" is part of the discussion, and EELVs are a
step closer; DC-X was a step closer; Falcon-V and Spaceship One are
steps closer. Maybe Kliper is a step closer.

Maybe, maybe not. A lot of things can happen between prototypes and
viewgraphs and an operational spaceline.

200-series orbiters are possible. But they would be only an
incremental improvement in design, and Big Bucks items as much as Buck
Rogers. Capsules designs on make significant advances over Apollo for
better bang for the Big Bucks.

And in the end, you wrap up with the same statement you started.
Apollo was cool, therefore capsules are cool, the Shuttle sucks,
therefore winged vehicles suck.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.