|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
High-flight rate Medium vs. New Heavy lift launchers
Not long ago it looked like the Medium lift market was
over-subscribed with Proton, Ariane-5, Sea Launch, Atlas-5 and Delta-IV. Now with the retirement of Shuttle and a new plan for manned exploration coming into being, we've got to ask ourselves: 1) Launch lots of medium payloads or 2) Go Heavy I've got to argue in favor of #1, hoping that the economics of all these medium lift launchers will reduce the overall cost of these plans. Standardize the payloads (a la the building of MIR) and assemble what you need for each mission. Pay companies for the results (e.g. fuel delivered to the right orbit). If one feels it necessary to go for heavy lift, can't we at least think in terms of "Delta-IV Super Heavy", such that our flight hardware makes use of the engineering and production already in use (and that will stay around if the politics of heavy lift fails)? Finally, there is the issue of what expertise we lose when we shut down a heavy lift capability (Saturn V, Energia, Shuttle). Certainly we don't mind losing the cost of the standing army, but are we going to lose the facilities for large fuel tanks or recoverable strap-ons? - Cris Fitch San Diego, CA http://www.orbit6.com/ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
NASA's X-43A flight results in treasure trove of data | Jacques van Oene | Space Shuttle | 0 | April 7th 04 06:42 PM |
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide | Steven S. Pietrobon | Space Shuttle | 0 | April 2nd 04 12:01 AM |
High-flight rate Medium vs. New Heavy lift launchers | Cris Fitch | Technology | 40 | March 24th 04 04:28 PM |
Clueless pundits (was High-flight rate Medium vs. New Heavy lift launchers) | Rand Simberg | Space Science Misc | 18 | February 14th 04 03:28 AM |
Space Station Crew & Students Are 'Partners In Flight' | Ron Baalke | Space Station | 0 | December 16th 03 09:09 PM |