In article ,
says...

On 2018-02-01 06:05, Jeff Findley wrote:

Conclusion: The space shuttle orbiter suffers a far greater mass
penalty from increased orbital inclination than a traditional two or two
and a half stage to orbit launch vehicle (e.g. Atlas, Delta, Delta
Heavy, and etc).

For any given delta-V, a vehicle+cargo has a total mass limit.

When you increase delta-V, total mass of vehicle needs to decrease. And
when cargo represents smaller proportion of total mass (aka: heavy
Shuttle), it takes a greater mass hit in percentage since vehicle mass
is fixed.


But if the heavy truck still ends up with more uplift capacity than the
lighter rocketsm the loss of capacity to 51 is still moot and the
smaller rockets would still require more launches.

Obviously, with Falcon Heavy, this changes the equation should the space
station be build today.

Atlas V is going to launch Boeing's commercial crew capsule to ISS.
It's no lightweight. You might want to look at Delta IV Heavy's payload
capacity to ISS orbit. It's currently the biggest operational US launch
vehicle (until Falcon Heavy flies).

The shuttle was used because that's what NASA had to work with and
because all Freedom hardware was designed to be launched by it. ISS
hardware was derived from Freedom hardware, so sticking with the shuttle
was the "easiest" way forward. Doesn't mean it was the best way
forward. After all, shuttle launches cost $1.45 billion each (total
program costs over the life of the program divided by the number of
flights).

Jeff
--
All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone.
These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends,
employer, or any organization that I am a member of.