The first manned CEV flight will be Orion 5 in September 2014.

The first manned CEV flight will be Orion 5 in September 2014.

The above is a quote from the following article:

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=4859

So the "safe, simple, soon" of Ares I won't give us a manned mission until
the third quarter of 2014, which is eight years from now. :-P

Jeff
--
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a
little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor
safety"
- B. Franklin, Bartlett's Familiar Quotations (1919)

Jeff Findley wrote:
The first manned CEV flight will be Orion 5 in September 2014.

The above is a quote from the following article:

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=4859

So the "safe, simple, soon" of Ares I won't give us a manned mission until
the third quarter of 2014, which is eight years from now. :-P

Jeff
--


Here are lead times for previous U.S. manned spacecraft

Space Contract 1st manned
Craft Issued orbital flight Lead time

Mercury Feb 6, 1959 Feb 20, 1962 3 years 2 weeks

Gemini Dec 22, 1961 Mar 23, 1965 3 years - 3 months

Apollo CM Nov 28, 1961 Oct 11, 1968 6 years - 10-1/2 months

Apollo LM Jan 14, 1963 Mar 3, 1969 6 years - 1-1/2 months

Shuttle Jul 26, 1972 Apr 12, 1981 8 years - 8-1/2 months

Sources:

Mercury Chronology, Gemini Chronology, Apollo Chronology, KSC Shuttle
News Reference.

-Rusty

"Jeff Findley" wrote in message


The first manned CEV flight will be Orion 5 in September 2014.

Going one-way should be doable after having spent billions upon
billions, and thankfully body bags are dirt cheap.
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

Of going one-way should become doable after having spent billions upon
billions, and thankfully body bags are dirt cheap. Too bad we still
haven't so much as a prototype of any viable fly-by-rocket lander at our
disposal.

I'm thinking by then banked bone marrow and custom stem cells may even
save their sorry day spent on the naked/anticathode moon.

Supposedly Saturn-V with a nearly 30% inert GLOW accomplished the task
of rather quickly getting nearly 50t into lunar orbit, and within a mere
60:1 ratio. Now that's downright impressive rocket-science, that is if
you still believe in hocus-pocus physics.
-
Brad Guth




--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

Rusty wrote:
Jeff Findley wrote:
The first manned CEV flight will be Orion 5 in September 2014.

The above is a quote from the following article:

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=4859

So the "safe, simple, soon" of Ares I won't give us a manned mission until
the third quarter of 2014, which is eight years from now. :-P

Jeff
--


Here are lead times for previous U.S. manned spacecraft

Space Contract 1st manned
Craft Issued orbital flight Lead time

Mercury Feb 6, 1959 Feb 20, 1962 3 years 2 weeks

Gemini Dec 22, 1961 Mar 23, 1965 3 years - 3 months

Apollo CM Nov 28, 1961 Oct 11, 1968 6 years - 10-1/2 months

Apollo LM Jan 14, 1963 Mar 3, 1969 6 years - 1-1/2 months

Shuttle Jul 26, 1972 Apr 12, 1981 8 years - 8-1/2 months

Sources:

Mercury Chronology, Gemini Chronology, Apollo Chronology, KSC Shuttle
News Reference.

-Rusty


In addition:

Boeing has been making commercial jet airliners for almost 50-years.
The assembly lines have never shutdown (one model may cease being
built, but another is in production - unlike Apollo - the technology
has not been mothballed). It still takes about 4-years to bring a new
line of jet airliners into service.

Lead times for (1st order to 1st commercial flight)

727 1st order 12/5/60 - 1st commercial flight Feb 1964
737-700 1st order 11/17/93 - 1st delivery to airlines 12/17/97
747 1st order 4/13/66 - 1st commercial flight 1/21/70
757 1st order/go ahead 4/79 - 1st commercial flight 1/1/83
767 1st order 7/14/78, 1st commercial flight 9/8/82
777 1st order 10/15/90, 1st commercial flight 6/7/95

So what is a reasonable amount of time to develop and place in service
a new manned spacecraft and booster?


Rusty

Brad Guth wrote:
Of going one-way should become doable after having spent billions upon
billions, and thankfully body bags are dirt cheap. Too bad we still
haven't so much as a prototype of any viable fly-by-rocket lander at our
disposal.

I'm thinking by then banked bone marrow and custom stem cells may even
save their sorry day spent on the naked/anticathode moon.

Supposedly Saturn-V with a nearly 30% inert GLOW accomplished the task
of rather quickly getting nearly 50t into lunar orbit, and within a mere
60:1 ratio. Now that's downright impressive rocket-science, that is if
you still believe in hocus-pocus physics.
-
Brad Guth



Keep talking, someday you'll say something intelligent.


Rusty

Rusty wrote:
Rusty wrote:
Jeff Findley wrote:
The first manned CEV flight will be Orion 5 in September 2014.

The above is a quote from the following article:

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?cid=4859

So the "safe, simple, soon" of Ares I won't give us a manned mission until
the third quarter of 2014, which is eight years from now. :-P

Jeff
--


Here are lead times for previous U.S. manned spacecraft

Space Contract 1st manned
Craft Issued orbital flight Lead time

Mercury Feb 6, 1959 Feb 20, 1962 3 years 2 weeks

Gemini Dec 22, 1961 Mar 23, 1965 3 years - 3 months

Apollo CM Nov 28, 1961 Oct 11, 1968 6 years - 10-1/2 months

Apollo LM Jan 14, 1963 Mar 3, 1969 6 years - 1-1/2 months

Shuttle Jul 26, 1972 Apr 12, 1981 8 years - 8-1/2 months

Sources:

Mercury Chronology, Gemini Chronology, Apollo Chronology, KSC Shuttle
News Reference.

-Rusty


In addition:

Boeing has been making commercial jet airliners for almost 50-years.
The assembly lines have never shutdown (one model may cease being
built, but another is in production - unlike Apollo - the technology
has not been mothballed). It still takes about 4-years to bring a new
line of jet airliners into service.

Lead times for (1st order to 1st commercial flight)

727 1st order 12/5/60 - 1st commercial flight Feb 1964
737-700 1st order 11/17/93 - 1st delivery to airlines 12/17/97
747 1st order 4/13/66 - 1st commercial flight 1/21/70
757 1st order/go ahead 4/79 - 1st commercial flight 1/1/83
767 1st order 7/14/78, 1st commercial flight 9/8/82
777 1st order 10/15/90, 1st commercial flight 6/7/95

So what is a reasonable amount of time to develop and place in service
a new manned spacecraft and booster?

Ah but this isn't new. It uses tried and tested Shuttle hardware - its
so tried and tested that it doesn't even need to be man rated. The way
this concept was sold a year ago, I think six months would have been
about right.

Alex Terrell wrote:
t and booster?

Ah but this isn't new. It uses tried and tested Shuttle hardware - its
so tried and tested that it doesn't even need to be man rated. The way
this concept was sold a year ago, I think six months would have been
about right.

Name a government aerospace program that hasn't started out being sold
with half-truths, unrealistic performance, low ball cost estimates (
that usually come in at twice the original figure) and an unrealistic
schedule? CEV is no different than the Shuttle when it comes to that.

Rusty

Rusty wrote:

Brad Guth

Keep talking, someday you'll say something intelligent.

I've seen some insanely optimistic predictions in this
newsgroup, but this really takes the cake.

Paul

In article .com,
"Rusty" wrote:

Alex Terrell wrote:
t and booster?

Ah but this isn't new. It uses tried and tested Shuttle hardware - its
so tried and tested that it doesn't even need to be man rated. The way
this concept was sold a year ago, I think six months would have been
about right.

Name a government aerospace program that hasn't started out being sold
with half-truths, unrealistic performance, low ball cost estimates (
that usually come in at twice the original figure) and an unrealistic
schedule? CEV is no different than the Shuttle when it comes to that.

I think that is the point many people have been trying to make: CEV is
no different than the Shuttle almost anyway you look at it. It will not
be safe, nor reliable, nor soon, despite the fact that it uses so-called
"shuttle derived" hardware -- and the only admitted reason for choosing
that design was because it would be safe, reliable, and soon.

The real reason it was chosen, we suspect, was to maintain jobs in
important congressional districts, and the result is going to be no
better than the Shuttle we are retiring.

However, I can't get myself too worked up over this -- by 2014, I
suspect that NASA's launchers will be mostly irrelevant. The more
dangerous, unreliable, and late they are, the more this will be true.
And in the long run I think that's a good thing. This whole process
we're currently witnessing illustrates the problems with government
engineering.

Best,
- Joe