|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
NASA studies new booster (UPI)
"Dholmes" wrote in message ... "TKalbfus" wrote in message ... Most of these I actually find kind of worrisome. A robotic shuttle could eat massive amounts of money and free up very little for a moon program. Why is that? Its only electronics. The Shuttle is already highly automated, it launches by itself and it could land by itself. The only thing you get is a little more mass and now need to risk men. You need to check the tiles, the engines, and everything else the shuttle requires. There is no savings in manpower or other equipment. You still need to do basically everything you do for a manned shuttle. So it still costs $3 billion dollars plus. Which means there is no money freed up to go to the Moon. No, you're mistaken. The variant chosen will be a cargo module on top of the current Shuttle tank, probably with engines in it, a Shuttle-C type system, but not reusable. That will markedly reduce costs as most of the money spend by the Shuttle program is making sure the manned vehicle doesn't blow up. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
NASA studies new booster (UPI)
"ed kyle" wrote in message om... (ed kyle) wrote in message . com... Brian Thorn wrote in message . .. On 27 Feb 2004 18:07:03 -0800, (ed kyle) wrote: See: "http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20040227-105754-2873r" Analysis: NASA studies new booster By Frank Sietzen It says that some version of EOR is likely for Project Constellation, with manned capsules carried by EELV rockets, but cargo lofted by something an order of magnitude more powerful. Um, wouldn't that mean a booster capable of something like 500,000 lbs. to LEO? Yikes. Only if CEV weighs 50,000 pounds. It should weigh much less than that. After all, 3-man Soyuz TM weighs only 7.15 metric tons (15,766 pounds). Shenzhou is believed to weigh about 7.8 tons. A straight Delta IV-Medium (no strap-on boosters even) can put at least 10.5 metric tons into LEO (the most recent such rocket put 10.56 tons into a 186x401km parking orbit, not counting the dry mass of the second stage). I think you may be in for a rude shock. From what little I have seen we are talking about just under 50,000 pounds of which 2/3's will be fuel. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
NASA studies new booster (UPI)
"Dr. O" dr.o@xxxxx wrote in message ... "Dholmes" wrote in message ... "TKalbfus" wrote in message ... Most of these I actually find kind of worrisome. A robotic shuttle could eat massive amounts of money and free up very little for a moon program. Why is that? Its only electronics. The Shuttle is already highly automated, it launches by itself and it could land by itself. The only thing you get is a little more mass and now need to risk men. You need to check the tiles, the engines, and everything else the shuttle requires. There is no savings in manpower or other equipment. You still need to do basically everything you do for a manned shuttle. So it still costs $3 billion dollars plus. Which means there is no money freed up to go to the Moon. No, you're mistaken. The variant chosen will be a cargo module on top of the current Shuttle tank, probably with engines in it, a Shuttle-C type system, but not reusable. That will markedly reduce costs as most of the money spend by the Shuttle program is making sure the manned vehicle doesn't blow up. One would hope that is the way they go. That would allow savings and heavy launch mass. A win win situation. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
NASA studies new booster (UPI)
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
NASA studies new booster (UPI)
Nonsense. The Orbiters are much too valuable.
Really? How much value do they generate? Seems to me, the Shuttle can't be operated profitably. What we need is a Shuttle we really don't have to worry too much about after it has delivered its payload. The Shuttle C is one approach, but what if we make an automated flyback shuttle that is cheap enough so that we can build many more. In other words if the shuttle returns its a bonus, otherwise we used a new shuttle right out of the factory. The shuttles are cheaply built and don't have many fail-safe systems for reentry. Reentry saves on costs for building more, but we are not going to hold up a launch based on uncertainty on the heat shield, if it works we get to use it again, but if it doesn't their are other shuttles. The thing is we mass produce the shuttle. If you want to launch 1 shuttle a week for the next year you build 52 shuttles. The shuttles are cheap and expendible. Ideally a shuttle should cost no more than an external tank. Tom |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
NASA studies new booster (UPI)
Nonsense. Do you think astronauts are the only people whose lives are
worth anything? The only thing an unmanned orbiter would do is increase the risk to people on the ground. This is not Trantor! Their are only 6 billion people living on Earth and the chance of a piece of space debris hitting someone on the head is small. I suppose you've never been outside of your city and you think the whole world is one sprawling metropolis. Tom Tom |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
NASA studies new booster (UPI)
On 02 Mar 2004 03:26:40 GMT, in a place far, far away,
(TKalbfus) made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: Nonsense. The Orbiters are much too valuable. Really? How much value do they generate? They allow NASA to continue a manned space program. Seems to me, the Shuttle can't be operated profitably. That's not relevant to what I said. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
NASA studies new booster (UPI)
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
NASA studies new booster (UPI)
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
NASA studies new booster (UPI)
TKalbfus wrote:
Nonsense. The Orbiters are much too valuable. Really? How much value do they generate? Seems to me, the Shuttle can't be operated profitably. What we need is a Shuttle we really don't have to worry Well, their value cannot be less than what it would take to full-fill the present plans for shuttle flights using Soyuz launches bought from Russians. Tom -- Sander +++ Out of cheese error +++ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide | Steven S. Pietrobon | Space Shuttle | 0 | April 2nd 04 12:01 AM |
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide | Steven S. Pietrobon | Space Shuttle | 0 | February 2nd 04 04:33 AM |
Selected Restricted NASA Videotapes | Michael Ravnitzky | Space Station | 5 | January 16th 04 05:28 PM |
NASA Selects Explorer Mission Proposals For Feasibility Studies | Ron Baalke | Science | 0 | November 4th 03 11:14 PM |
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide | Steven S. Pietrobon | Space Shuttle | 0 | September 12th 03 01:37 AM |