On Dec 16, 9:32*am, "Jeff Findley"
wrote:
"M" wrote in message

...
On Dec 15, 1:33 pm, "Jeff Findley"
wrote:



"M" wrote in message

....

Where can I go for a web page that has a direct comparison of the
Aries 1 payload capability versus the Delta iV Heavy and the Altas V?

It's hard to compare the two since they have completely different
missions.
That said, I think NASA's ESAS report looked at them. But people have
been
complaining that this report lacks some of the detils which are
contained in
(missing) appendices:

http://www.nasa.gov/directorates/esm...AS_report.html

I think you want:

Part 6: Launch Vehicles and Earth Departure Stages (6.5 Mb PDF)

Thanks, that is perfect. Just what I was looking for.

Please be aware that this is the "bait" Ares I of the "bait and switch"
which Griffin pulled on all of us. *For Ares I, ESAS assumed a four segment
SRB topped with an air started SSME powered upper stage. *This has been
replaced with a five segment SRB topped with a much less efficient J-2X
powered upper stage. *Performance of Ares I has suffered as its development
has progressed.

Also, I would not trust all of the EELV information in there. *It's dated,
at the least.

Jeff
--
"Many things that were acceptable in 1958 are no longer acceptable today.
My own standards have changed too." *-- Freeman Dyson

What piqued my interest in that document was the reliability ratings
for manned spaceflight. I have no idea how they figured tehat the Ares
designs were safer than the Delta or Atlas.