The Non-Innovator's Dilemma

Rand Simberg writes:

Rand Simberg writes:

What if the OSP itself fails?

Then, worst case, they ground the OSP until they find the problem. The
launch
infrastructure continues to launch other payloads, and remains productive.

But the "manned space program" is shut down once again.

And the OSP may or may not be grounded entirely. If you consider the two
fatal
Soyuz accidents, neither would have grounded a Progress.

Sure, it may not. But it also may. It remains a potential
single-point failure, for a minimal requirement, that's not
justifiable to the taxpayers. At least this one.


Rand, you seem to be making the best the enemy of the good. With the shuttle,
the SRBs are also a single point-failure, and the ET, and the SSMEs. A serious
failure of any of these will ground the entire US manned launch infrastructure.
The fact that the Shuttle wrecks an orbiter and goes idle for a year or two
every fifty flights or so is an important part of its cost structure, and
shouldn't be ignored. Historically, failure costs for the shuttle have been
more expensive than the other recurring costs such as ETs, SRB refurbishment,
etc.

With an OSP designed to use two different launchers and a parallel cargo
spacecraft, the single point failures are restricted to those OSP components
that are common to both the OSP and the cargo craft. And a failure affecting
the orbital spacecraft will idle only the infrastructure that supports that
small orbital spacecraft, not an entire huge integrated spacecraft and
launcher.

Before you can conclude than an OSP will cost more than the shuttle, you need
to work that factor into your calculations.

Will McLean

On 22 Sep 2003 13:32:07 GMT, in a place far, far away,
(McLean1382) made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:

Rand Simberg writes:

Rand Simberg writes:

What if the OSP itself fails?

Then, worst case, they ground the OSP until they find the problem. The
launch
infrastructure continues to launch other payloads, and remains productive.

But the "manned space program" is shut down once again.

And the OSP may or may not be grounded entirely. If you consider the two
fatal
Soyuz accidents, neither would have grounded a Progress.

Sure, it may not. But it also may. It remains a potential
single-point failure, for a minimal requirement, that's not
justifiable to the taxpayers. At least this one.


Rand, you seem to be making the best the enemy of the good.

No, because IMO, OSP isn't "good." It costs far too much for far too
little value.

--
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: