Scalability of Launch Vehicles for Tourism

Hi everyone:

Clearly, by scaling up a launch vehicle to carry more passengers, you
should be able to reduce per-passenger costs.

But my question is, what types of vehicles are easiest to scale up? I'm
thinking, especially, of HTHL (Rutan) vs. VTVL (Carmack). My gut
feeling is VTVL, but I was wondering if some more educated people could
help me out with this.




--
Direct access to this group with http://web2news.com
http://web2news.com/?sci.space.policy

On Sat, 05 Jul 2003 00:58:33 +0200, in a place far, far away, "M.
Scott" made the phosphor on my
monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that:

Hi everyone:

Clearly, by scaling up a launch vehicle to carry more passengers, you
should be able to reduce per-passenger costs.

Better to scale up flight rate.

--
simberg.interglobal.org * 310 372-7963 (CA) 307 739-1296 (Jackson Hole)
interglobal space lines * 307 733-1715 (Fax) http://www.interglobal.org

"Extraordinary launch vehicles require extraordinary markets..."
Swap the first . and @ and throw out the ".trash" to email me.
Here's my email address for autospammers:

"M. Scott" wrote:

Hi everyone:

Clearly, by scaling up a launch vehicle to carry more passengers, you
should be able to reduce per-passenger costs.

Yes, but that's worthwhile only if the traffic/market is large
enough.

As with aircraft, you have to fill a certain number of seats just to
break even on flight costs. That's more easily reached on a small
spacecraft today, as it was on a DC-3 back when it was introduced. But
the traffic back then would not have supported a 747 capacity aircraft,
even if it flew only once a week. (and they aren't making mone, if you
can't keep them flying as much as practical)

Whenever demand to reach LEO ramps up enough, larger vehicles will
make more sense than flying the hell out of smaller ones.

But my question is, what types of vehicles are easiest to scale up? I'm
thinking, especially, of HTHL (Rutan) vs. VTVL (Carmack). My gut
feeling is VTVL, but I was wondering if some more educated people could
help me out with this.

Personally, I think once you need to put more than about 100,000
pounds (or the approxamate equivalent in passengers...again, as with
aircraft, these ships should be able to function as people or cargo
carriers) in one shot, VTVL is the way to go. At smaller sizes, you can
make an argument for a wider variety of designs.

And Phil Bono was looking as VTVL with massive passenger/cargo
capability back in the sixties...

Do standard ELVs really scale well at all?

Taking a quick look at the history of small ELVs, no one has simply taken an
ELV and scales it up in all three dimensions. I assume this is because the
mass fraction and efficiency drop off if you do, and the frontal area rises
more than necessary.

If you have a small (say Minotaur-class) ELV, does scaling up for more payload
make sense at all, or is there a limited degree to which it works, after which
you go for a new design?

Thanks,


Matt Bille
)
OPINIONS IN ALL POSTS ARE SOLELY THOSE OF THE AUTHOR