![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I am lurker here, because you guys know this stuff way too much more
than I. Guess that is why I am not a rocket scientist. So I wanted to ask this question as I must have missed it somewhere. With the annoucement of the Ares vehicles and such, what are is Nasa anticipating on using for launch facilities. Will they use the the LC39 complex? Secondly with the vehicles being designed as they are, do ya'll think they will ever use the vandenberg facilites for manned launches? Thanks in advance all. David |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Snoopyto wrote:
I am lurker here, because you guys know this stuff way too much more than I. Guess that is why I am not a rocket scientist. So I wanted to ask this question as I must have missed it somewhere. With the annoucement of the Ares vehicles and such, what are is Nasa anticipating on using for launch facilities. Will they use the the LC39 complex? Yes. Secondly with the vehicles being designed as they are, do ya'll think they will ever use the vandenberg facilites for manned launches? No. D. -- Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh. -Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings. Oct 5th, 2004 JDL |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tue, 04 Jul 2006 12:44:55 -0400, Snoopyto wrote:
With the annoucement of the Ares vehicles and such, what are is Nasa anticipating on using for launch facilities. Will they use the the LC39 complex? Ares 5 is definitely planned for launch from Complex 39. Its size and shape is dictated by the Vehicle Assembly Building. Ares 1, because construction needs to begin before the Shuttle is retired (i.e., before the Shuttle is done with Complex 39) is a little more in flux. NASA is weighing several options... Overhaul Pad 39B for Ares 1 beginning in 2007. Build a new Pad 39C for Ares 1. Covert Launch Complex 40 (former Titan III/IV) for Ares 1. Overhauling Pad B would be the cheapest method, but would most interfere with Shuttle operations, particularly the desire for a rescue launch capability for the 2008 Hubble mission (STS-125). Pad 39C would be much more expensive, but could be tailor-made for Ares 1, which might reduce operational costs. It would probably be located inland, between 39A and 39B, instead of north of 39B where a third pad for Apollo was once planned. Pad 40 makes use of a currently vacant launch facility, but is rather farther from the Complex 39 infrastructure NASA wants to use to cut development costs. Secondly with the vehicles being designed as they are, do ya'll think they will ever use the vandenberg facilites for manned launches? No. Had NASA chosen an EELV (Delta IV or Atlas 5) to launch CEV, it might have been pretty easy to do, (Delta IV is flying from the old Shuttle pad at Vandenberg) but they didn't. Brian |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tue, 4 Jul 2006 11:44:55 -0500, Snoopyto wrote
(in article ): I am lurker here, because you guys know this stuff way too much more than I. Guess that is why I am not a rocket scientist. So I wanted to ask this question as I must have missed it somewhere. With the annoucement of the Ares vehicles and such, what are is Nasa anticipating on using for launch facilities. Will they use the the LC39 complex? Secondly with the vehicles being designed as they are, do ya'll think they will ever use the vandenberg facilites for manned launches? Thanks in advance all. David I think Jorge has already posted that one of the LC39 pads is being eyed for conversion for Ares I starting as early as next year or early '08. He mentioned this in a very recent message (within the last week or so). As for VAFB, the answer is almost certainly no. Not only are the former shuttle facilities at SLC 6 now devoted to Delta IV use, but there's no need for polar launches of the Ares family of vehicles. The site can't be used for equitorial launches due to down-range safety constraints. -- Herb "Everything is controlled by a small evil group to which, unfortunately, no one we know belongs." ~Anonymous |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Brian Thorn" wrote in message
news ![]() On Tue, 04 Jul 2006 12:44:55 -0400, Snoopyto wrote: With the annoucement of the Ares vehicles and such, what are is Nasa anticipating on using for launch facilities. Will they use the the LC39 complex? Ares 5 is definitely planned for launch from Complex 39. Its size and shape is dictated by the Vehicle Assembly Building. Ares 1, because construction needs to begin before the Shuttle is retired (i.e., before the Shuttle is done with Complex 39) is a little more in flux. NASA is weighing several options... Overhaul Pad 39B for Ares 1 beginning in 2007. Build a new Pad 39C for Ares 1. Covert Launch Complex 40 (former Titan III/IV) for Ares 1. Overhauling Pad B would be the cheapest method, but would most interfere with Shuttle operations, particularly the desire for a rescue launch capability for the 2008 Hubble mission (STS-125). Pad 39C would be much more expensive, but could be tailor-made for Ares 1, which might reduce operational costs. It would probably be located inland, between 39A and 39B, instead of north of 39B where a third pad for Apollo was once planned. Pad 40 makes use of a currently vacant launch facility, but is rather farther from the Complex 39 infrastructure NASA wants to use to cut development costs. Secondly with the vehicles being designed as they are, do ya'll think they will ever use the vandenberg facilites for manned launches? No. Had NASA chosen an EELV (Delta IV or Atlas 5) to launch CEV, it might have been pretty easy to do, (Delta IV is flying from the old Shuttle pad at Vandenberg) but they didn't. Brian On top of that, I can't really think of much you'd be able to do with the resulting orbit (polar/near polar) from Vandenberg. (Maybe I'm just not thinking out of the box?) |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Thanks for the answers everyone. I didn't realize the Deltv IV was
laucnhing from that pad, much less how much was different. I was thinking since they were using Delta IV engines, some might be similiar. One last question, why would you only do equitorial launches instead of polar launches for leaving earth? Sorry if that is dumb question but just something I was thinking about. Thanks David |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Snoopyto wrote:
One last question, why would you only do equitorial launches instead of polar launches for leaving earth? If you launch due east from the equator (or close to it), you get a free head start since Earth is rotating at 465 m/s. If you launch north or south you get no advantage and have to provide this energy yourself. If you launch west, you have to accelerate to 465 m/s just to stand still, then make the full burn to orbit. What this means in practice is that you can carry bigger payloads if you launch to the east. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]() wrote in message oups.com... Snoopyto wrote: One last question, why would you only do equitorial launches instead of polar launches for leaving earth? If you launch due east from the equator (or close to it), you get a free head start since Earth is rotating at 465 m/s. If you launch north or south you get no advantage and have to provide this energy yourself. If you launch west, you have to accelerate to 465 m/s just to stand still, then make the full burn to orbit. What this means in practice is that you can carry bigger payloads if you launch to the east. There are some uses for polar orbits, otherwise there would be no orbital launches from Vandenberg. But I can't think of any that make sense for manned missions. 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) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Space Calendar - April 24, 2006 | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 0 | April 24th 06 05:24 PM |
Space Calendar - April 24, 2006 | [email protected] | News | 0 | April 24th 06 05:24 PM |
Space Calendar - January 26, 2006 | [email protected] | News | 0 | January 28th 06 01:41 AM |
Space Calendar - November 23, 2005 | [email protected] | History | 2 | November 25th 05 03:36 AM |
Space Calendar - November 23, 2005 | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 2 | November 25th 05 03:36 AM |