On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 22:00:23 GMT, "Dholmes"
wrote:


"Bob Martin" wrote in message
...
I'm interested in seeing what you guys would come up with if you were
writing the requirements for the OSP. Any takers?

I am kind of torn between large and small.

A simple capsule would require over a dozen launches a year giving some
needed volume.

A larger space plane would need only 3 or 4 launches a year but help to
develop heavy lift.

A capsule should be both cheap and quick to develop.

A large space plane while more expensive to develop has better follow on
when a reusable first stage is developed.



Which launch facilities will an OSP use? Is NASA going to use Pads 37
& 40 for an OSP, or will it be assembled in the VAB and ride the
crawler to Pads 39A & B? It's kind of the same dilemma that NASA faced
with the Saturn IB for the Skylab project.

Now where did that Milk Stool go? ;-)

I favor a capsule system. But I don't think any one vehicle type is
the complete solution to orbital access. There is a place for both
planes and capsules. Now if we only had the money for both.

With a capsule system you can start out simple and add complexity as
needed. A capsule is a basic Crew Return Vehicle. Add a Service Module
and you have a Crew Transfer Vehicle. Add an Orbital, Cargo or Boost
Module and you have a Space Station supply and reboost vehicle.

Start out with a parachute or parasail landing system. Later, add a
rotor or roton type landing system if possible or practical. Or as
Henry mentioned a hot air balloon!

A capsule launch escape system has already been designed, tested, used
and proven to work.

You just can't land on a runway or return large objects from orbit
with a capsule.

But, wings are not much use on the way to the moon or Mars. ;-)