View Single Post
  #10  
Old January 26th 04, 05:00 PM
ed kyle
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default High-flight rate Medium vs. New Heavy lift launchers

Joe Strout wrote in message ...
In article ,
(ed kyle) wrote:

The problem with this is that Proton has been the driver
of launch cost reduction in recent years. With it out
of the picture, launch prices would rise from current
levels. Since U.S. companies seem incapable of competing
in the commercial launch world market, Arianespace would
then, by default, get to decide how much NASA would have
to pay to launch each lunar mission.


So you don't believe SpaceX will be able to deliver at their quoted
prices ($6M for Falcon I, $12M for Falcon V)?


SpaceX hasn't proposed a heavy lift vehicle, which is
required for this application.

Also, I notice you didn't mention SeaLaunch -- I haven't looked at the
numbers recently, but AIUI they're fairly cheap and can launch into
pretty much any orbit you want.


The current Sea Launch Zenit 3SL can only loft something
like 6.5 tons to LEO due to structural limitations, compared
to 20-25 tons for the other launchers. Sea Launch might be
able to adapt a two-stage Zenit for use in a LEO mission,
but such a vehicle would not use an Energia-built third
stage. Energia, a part-owner of Sea Launch, would have
to agree to such an effort, which would result in the
development of a launcher that does not use any Energia
hardware.

- Ed Kyle