|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
SLS is a booster to no where
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
SLS is a booster to no where
"bob haller" wrote in message
... http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2330/1 nasa miss management at its finest Unfortunately, not much new here. SLS is a dog. It basically takes every wrong lesson from the shuttle program and applied them. I'm not sure one could design a worse launcher if they tried. -- Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/ CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
SLS is a booster to no where
congress forced this down nasas budget, it really was a revamped ARES....
basic PORK, and something we cant afford |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
SLS is a booster to no where
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
SLS is a booster to no where
In article ,
says... "Jeff Findley" wrote in message ... In article , says... http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2330/1 nasa miss management at its finest Actually, this particular monstrosity was mandated by Congress. A surprisingly low cost alternative, as far as super heavy lift is concerned, is described he Phase 2 EELV - An Old Configuration Option with New Relevance to Future Heavy Lift Cargo. http://www.ulalaunch.com/site/docs/p...hase2_2010.pdf It would use the same tooling as used on Delta IV core to produce a stage of the same diameter but kerosene fueled. This would then be double the mass of the Atlas V core, and would use two RD-180 engines instead of the one of the Atlas V. It could also use a single RD-171 engine, at twice the thrust of the RD-180. Then we might estimate the development cost as double that of the Atlas V which was about $2 billion, so about $4 billion for this stage. This would give in the range of 30 to 35 metric tons to LEO. Then to get a 70 metric ton launcher, combine three a la the Delta IV Heavy and the upcoming Falcon Heavy. True. But, it wouldn't be a NASA launch vehicle and wouldn't employ as many ex-shuttle workers as SLS does. The point of SLS is to keep spending money in the districts which once held shuttle jobs. The point isn't to save money, or even to put anything into orbit. This is why it's a "launch vehicle to nowhere". Jeff -- "the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
SLS is a booster to no where
On 7/26/2013 1:31 PM, Jeff Findley wrote:
In article , says... A surprisingly low cost alternative, as far as super heavy lift is concerned, is described he Phase 2 EELV - An Old Configuration Option with New Relevance to Future Heavy Lift Cargo. http://www.ulalaunch.com/site/docs/p...hase2_2010.pdf It would use the same tooling as used on Delta IV core to produce a stage of the same diameter but kerosene fueled. This would then be double the mass of the Atlas V core, and would use two RD-180 engines instead of the one of the Atlas V. It could also use a single RD-171 engine, at twice the thrust of the RD-180. Then we might estimate the development cost as double that of the Atlas V which was about $2 billion, so about $4 billion for this stage. This would give in the range of 30 to 35 metric tons to LEO. Then to get a 70 metric ton launcher, combine three a la the Delta IV Heavy and the upcoming Falcon Heavy. True. But, it wouldn't be a NASA launch vehicle and wouldn't employ as many ex-shuttle workers as SLS does. The point of SLS is to keep spending money in the districts which once held shuttle jobs. The point isn't to save money, or even to put anything into orbit. This is why it's a "launch vehicle to nowhere". Jeff I think the key here is the time line. The paper Robert mentions looks like it was written after the Augustine Commission but before the SLS mandate was shoved down NASA's throat by the Congress. ULA was offering an EELV alternative before the SLS mandate. Today, the ex-shuttle contractors are all marching off lockstep towards that sunrise on the SLS horizon! (or is that a sunset on the SLS cliff?)... Dave (cross-posts elided) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
SA-214, the Last Cluster Booster | Pat Flannery | History | 0 | January 2nd 06 12:36 AM |
SA-214, the Last Cluster Booster | Pat Flannery | History | 0 | January 2nd 06 12:24 AM |
SA-214, the Last Cluster Booster | Heinrich Zinndorf-Linker (zili@home) | History | 0 | January 1st 06 10:17 PM |
SA-214, the Last Cluster Booster | [email protected] | History | 0 | January 1st 06 06:06 PM |
Booster for CEV? | Matt Wiser | History | 8 | August 11th 05 04:03 PM |