"Derek Lyons" wrote in message
...
John Doe wrote:
Which would be the QUICKEST to get man back in space on US-built hardware
?

If your goal is to simply get back into space, then capsule on an
expendable is the way to go.

Build new shuttles based on existing plans, reusing some of the spare
parts
and infrastructure already there (such as tile manufacturing, software
etc)
(and including all improvement that had been made since originally
built). ?

If your goal is to reconstitute some from of actual space capability
there are two way to go:

A: capsule based (as above), plus a Progress style cargo vehicle.
Downside: The ISS CBM hatches are not currently fitted for
autodocking.

You'd have to resort to berthing, which was originally considered for the
space station as an alternative to docking. This was in pre-Russia years,
so using APAS wasn't yet being considered. Essentially you station keep
your cargo module close to ISS (cold gas thrusters would be good for this)
and then use the SSRMS to grapple the cargo module. Once this is done, it's
just like attaching an MPLM to a CBM.

From what i can tell, this is how the Japanese HTV will attach to ISS.
There are some pictures of this this page:

http://spaceboy.nasda.go.jp/lib/rock.../htv_01_e.html

Here are links to four pictures of the grapple/berthing process:

http://spaceboy.nasda.go.jp/lib/rock.../g/htv_006.jpg
http://spaceboy.nasda.go.jp/lib/rock.../g/htv_009.jpg
http://spaceboy.nasda.go.jp/lib/rock.../g/htv_016.jpg
http://spaceboy.nasda.go.jp/lib/rock.../g/htv_017.jpg

B: Boeing has offered a shuttle replacement for (IIRC) something like
a billion so far as they are only held to being moldline and interface
compatible.

While this is true, I'd be a bit leery of that number. Considering how the
costs of several shuttle upgrades have escalated over the years (e.g.
electric actuators to replace the APU's and hydraulics), I'd expect $1
billion to be a low estimate.

Jeff
--
Remove icky phrase from email address to get a valid address.
Jeff