Upscaling towards Saturn V performance?

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.

"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

"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

"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.

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.

"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).

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.

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.

"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

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.


So you want to do orbital assembly for the sake of doing orbital assembly? We
still are in a race against time. I expect to die sometime in the 2050s. It
seems possible to build such a spaceship in low orbit as to take longer than
that.

Tom