![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The new Delta IV-H and (possible) Delta V-H ELV's still fall far short of
the performance of the Saturn V moon rocket. At the moment they have about a quarter of the latter's performance. I'm beginning to wonder if it's even feasible (both technically and economically) to even upscale these things to Saturn V performance. Wouldn't it be easier jjust to start from scratch and design another 100 ton LEO booster with a 10 meter fairing? Anyway, if it is at all possible to scale these things to Saturn V performance it will take at least another 3 generations. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Henk Boonsma" wrote in message
news:1103793537.1545802e182bbfe92208c7ee60cca5cc@t eranews... The new Delta IV-H and (possible) Delta V-H ELV's still fall far short of the performance of the Saturn V moon rocket. At the moment they have about a quarter of the latter's performance. I'm beginning to wonder if it's even feasible (both technically and economically) to even upscale these things to Saturn V performance. Wouldn't it be easier jjust to start from scratch and design another 100 ton LEO booster with a 10 meter fairing? Anyway, if it is at all possible to scale these things to Saturn V performance it will take at least another 3 generations. Economical? Not on your Aunt Nelly! Economics means there's a product people are willing to purchase and that means there has to be a market. No market. Fifty tonnes will be fine for the next 15-20 years. -- Alan Erskine We can get people to the Moon in five years, not the fifteen GWB proposes. Give NASA a real challenge |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Henk Boonsma" wrote in
news:1103793537.1545802e182bbfe92208c7ee60cca5cc@t eranews: The new Delta IV-H and (possible) Delta V-H ELV's still fall far short of the performance of the Saturn V moon rocket. At the moment they have about a quarter of the latter's performance. I'm beginning to wonder if it's even feasible (both technically and economically) to even upscale these things to Saturn V performance. Wouldn't it be easier jjust to start from scratch and design another 100 ton LEO booster with a 10 meter fairing? Anyway, if it is at all possible to scale these things to Saturn V performance it will take at least another 3 generations. 3 generations? Not at all. Delta IV (and Atlas V) have a potential advantage in their modularity. A Saturn V class heavy lifter tends to be very expensive and there isn't any call for one at present. We certainly could use more affordable not-quite-Saturn-class lift. Check here for an example of how Boeing thinks they can get much more performance out of the basic building blocks that already exist: http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/.../d4heavy/docs/ delta_growth_options.pdf At some point, clustering the existing CBCs gets unwieldy and hits an upper limit in performance; Boeing proposes a new and larger CBC for a next-generation heavy lifter that achieves and exceeds Saturn V class performance. Lockheed-Martin has very similar proposals for the Atlas V. If you need bigger, just wave sufficient money at the right parties. There's no technologicial limit to heavy lift. High energy might been another thing, however. Going to Mars is almost certainly need nuclear propulsion to get beyond Earth orbit, if it's to be done right and in timely fashion. --Damon |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Damon Hill" wrote in message 1... "Henk Boonsma" wrote in news:1103793537.1545802e182bbfe92208c7ee60cca5cc@t eranews: The new Delta IV-H and (possible) Delta V-H ELV's still fall far short of the performance of the Saturn V moon rocket. At the moment they have about a quarter of the latter's performance. I'm beginning to wonder if it's even feasible (both technically and economically) to even upscale these things to Saturn V performance. Wouldn't it be easier jjust to start from scratch and design another 100 ton LEO booster with a 10 meter fairing? Anyway, if it is at all possible to scale these things to Saturn V performance it will take at least another 3 generations. 3 generations? Not at all. Delta IV (and Atlas V) have a potential advantage in their modularity. A Saturn V class heavy lifter tends to be very expensive and there isn't any call for one at present. We certainly could use more affordable not-quite-Saturn-class lift. I doubt that given the fact NASA has been ordered to prepare manned lunar missions in the next decade. At some point they will have make the same decisions the Apollo program managers had to make: do we use a single large booster or assemble a craft in orbit. They chose the former. I suspect they will make the same choice this time around. Check here for an example of how Boeing thinks they can get much more performance out of the basic building blocks that already exist: http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/.../d4heavy/docs/ delta_growth_options.pdf At some point, clustering the existing CBCs gets unwieldy and hits an upper limit in performance; Boeing proposes a new and larger CBC for a next-generation heavy lifter that achieves and exceeds Saturn V class performance. I'm pretty sure that the next Atlas will not rival or exceed the Saturn V as that would require a 500% boost in payload capacity. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Henk Boonsma wrote:
"Damon Hill" wrote in message 1... At some point, clustering the existing CBCs gets unwieldy and hits an upper limit in performance; Boeing proposes a new and larger CBC for a next-generation heavy lifter that achieves and exceeds Saturn V class performance. I'm pretty sure that the next Atlas will not rival or exceed the Saturn V as that would require a 500% boost in payload capacity. Boeing does not make the Atlas. Damon is describing a descendent of the Delta IV common core booster which is larger than the current version. Clusters of that larger core could conceivably achieve Saturn V performance, especially considering that configurations using not just 3, but 5 or more common cores have been proposed. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article 1103835754.ce2a8c41ae592272bc54a4c7b19b3242@teran ews,
Henk Boonsma wrote: I doubt that given the fact NASA has been ordered to prepare manned lunar missions in the next decade. At some point they will have make the same decisions the Apollo program managers had to make: do we use a single large booster or assemble a craft in orbit. They chose the former. I suspect they will make the same choice this time around. They did it last time because they were in a big hurry to do a minimal landing mission. This time, there is no rush and (officially, at least) a longer-term view of the objectives. The more relaxed schedule and eye on later missions will encourage building infrastructure (e.g., orbital assembly facilities) as appropriate, and the emphasis on long-term lunar surface activity will encourage even the first missions to use heavier spacecraft with larger crews and much longer surface stays. The sensible choice now is orbital assembly. -- "Think outside the box -- the box isn't our friend." | Henry Spencer -- George Herbert | |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 22:02:57 +0100, in a place far, far away, "Henk
Boonsma" made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: Delta IV (and Atlas V) have a potential advantage in their modularity. A Saturn V class heavy lifter tends to be very expensive and there isn't any call for one at present. We certainly could use more affordable not-quite-Saturn-class lift. I doubt that given the fact NASA has been ordered to prepare manned lunar missions in the next decade. At some point they will have make the same decisions the Apollo program managers had to make: do we use a single large booster or assemble a craft in orbit. They chose the former. I suspect they will make the same choice this time around. They did that because they understood little/nothing about orbital rendezvous and assembly, and they were in a race with time. The situation is different today. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Rand Simberg" wrote in message ... On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 22:02:57 +0100, in a place far, far away, "Henk Boonsma" made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: Delta IV (and Atlas V) have a potential advantage in their modularity. A Saturn V class heavy lifter tends to be very expensive and there isn't any call for one at present. We certainly could use more affordable not-quite-Saturn-class lift. I doubt that given the fact NASA has been ordered to prepare manned lunar missions in the next decade. At some point they will have make the same decisions the Apollo program managers had to make: do we use a single large booster or assemble a craft in orbit. They chose the former. I suspect they will make the same choice this time around. They did that because they understood little/nothing about orbital rendezvous and assembly, and they were in a race with time. The situation is different today. With all respect, I think both you and Henry are wrong. But we'll know soon enough ![]() |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Christopher M. Jones" wrote in message ... Henk Boonsma wrote: "Damon Hill" wrote in message 1... At some point, clustering the existing CBCs gets unwieldy and hits an upper limit in performance; Boeing proposes a new and larger CBC for a next-generation heavy lifter that achieves and exceeds Saturn V class performance. I'm pretty sure that the next Atlas will not rival or exceed the Saturn V as that would require a 500% boost in payload capacity. Boeing does not make the Atlas. Damon is describing a descendent of the Delta IV common core booster which is larger than the current version. Clusters of that larger core could conceivably achieve Saturn V performance, especially considering that configurations using not just 3, but 5 or more common cores have been proposed. Still that does not change the fact that the Delta-IV-H has only 1/5th the load capacity of the Saturn V and will therefore need a five-vold increase in capacitity to match the old Saturn V. I simply don't see them doing that in the next generation (if ever). |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Still that does not change the fact that the Delta-IV-H has only 1/5th the
load capacity of the Saturn V and will therefore need a five-vold increase in capacitity to match the old Saturn V. I simply don't see them doing that in the next generation (if ever). So maybe we should build Shuttle Cs if there is no way for the Deltas to do it. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Astronomical Observations - Parts 1 & 2 | Fact Finder | Amateur Astronomy | 5 | August 25th 03 03:52 PM |
Astronomical Observations - Parts 1 & 2 | Fact Finder | CCD Imaging | 3 | August 25th 03 03:52 PM |
Incontrovertible Evidence | Cash | Astronomy Misc | 1 | August 24th 03 07:22 PM |
Incontrovertible Evidence | Cash | Amateur Astronomy | 6 | August 24th 03 07:22 PM |
NASA artist illustrations and cutaways of Saturn vehicles | Rusty Barton | History | 3 | August 24th 03 10:39 AM |