A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Policy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

World Space Organization



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 4th 10, 08:27 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Jeff Findley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,012
Default World Space Organization


"Brian Thorn" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 23:20:14 -0800, Pat Flannery
wrote:

From what little can be gleaned from the Augustine Commission report,
NASA seems to favor putting the payload and/or Orion on the side of the
ET rather than atop it like in DIRECT, so you basically end up with a
manned Shuttle C.


I know I wasn't the only one around here saying "Just build Shuttle-C
and get on with it" about three years ago, when SSME was dumped and
the Five Segment Accident Waiting To Happen appeared on the scene.
Three years and God alone knows how many billions of dollars later...


And yet there have been many studies done by NASA which show an inline
shuttle derived launch vehicle comes out ahead of the side mounted Shuttle-C
type vehicle. This is particularly true if you assume that shuttle
operations will come to an end, which they most definitely are.

This is why I have a feeling that the side-mounted Shuttle-C style vehicle
was deliberately shown as an "alternative" by NASA to the Augustine
Commission as disinformation. It's easier to point to side-mounted
Shuttle-C style vehicle, note its shortfalls, and then point to NASA's
bloated Ares V to show how they can be solved... They want you to pay no
attention to that "other" inline shuttle derived launch vehicle...

Jeff
--
"Take heart amid the deepening gloom
that your dog is finally getting enough cheese" - Deteriorata - National
Lampoon


  #2  
Old January 6th 10, 12:48 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Brian Thorn[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,266
Default World Space Organization

On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 14:27:34 -0500, "Jeff Findley"
wrote:

And yet there have been many studies done by NASA which show an inline
shuttle derived launch vehicle comes out ahead of the side mounted Shuttle-C
type vehicle.


Not in development costs, and that's the biggest problem we're facing.
Direct is better, but Not Shuttle-C is good enough.

Brian
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
World Space Organization [email protected] Space Shuttle 3 January 20th 10 04:59 PM
World Space Organization Jeff Findley Policy 0 January 4th 10 05:34 PM
World-class radio telescopes face closure - space - 04 November 2006 - New Scientist Space [email protected] UK Astronomy 0 November 13th 06 08:53 AM
Is there a space program veterans organization? Adario History 5 April 23rd 05 10:00 PM
Best Space Organization David Summers Policy 5 February 6th 05 01:44 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:10 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.