In article ,
says...

On 2019-05-25 18:13, Fred J. McCall wrote:

Well, there's that and there's the problem that if you combine
everything in LEO now you need an upper stage with enough grunt to get
the whole works to where it's going all at once. Sending little
pieces is easier.


So they are hoping to have pieces small enough to get to Gaweway with
standard Falcon 9 second stage?

More like Falcon Heavy, Delta IV Heavy (Vulcan), New Glenn, Ariane V,
Proton, H-II (H3), and etc. NASA is not going to limit the size of
components unnecessarily when there are many more options (both existing
and under development), especially when you consider the heavy lifting
that the international partners can provide.

If you need to build a new second stage to get the pieces to Gateway,
why not build 1 hefty one which you fuel from LEO and get everything in
one go?

If you use launch vehicles bigger than a Falcon 9, you just send
everything needed straight to Gateway. No LEO assembly required.

During ISS assembly, people here complained about the 53° inclination
"costing" many more Shuttle flights since cargo capacity was more
limited. If you need to ship separate stage II to Gateway to deliver
each component, don't you end up with same problem of extra mass being
carried and thus reducing payload?

That's what you get when you are "justifying" SLS to keep the Alabama
mafia happy. It's also what you get when you are "accelerating" the
schedule to keep Trump/Pence happy. You do everything you can to
minimize development of anything "new" that's not "needed".

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.