Quote from: spacenut on 05/19/2016 02:34 amHow much per launch would the SLS cost if they launched say 4 per year? Its a simple question but I think everyone has their own answer depending on their opinion of SLS. Some like to throw in the development cost too. According to them SLS costs billions per launch. Others like to quote only the marginal cost, leaving out the yearly program support cost. From their viewpoint SLS cost about $300 million per launch.My favored way to look at it is the entire yearly budget divided by the number of flights. The rocket is in development right now so its hard to say what the fixed or marginal costs will be. It is probably going to keep getting roughly the same budget each year so $2 billion might not be a bad guess. If they can launch 4 a year then a ball park figure is probably in the neighborhood of $500 million per launch give or take a lot. The program requirements are up to 3 launches a year. It has been debated if they can do more than that without too much difficulty.In general since the fixed costs can be spread out over more launches the price per launch will keep decreasing as the number of launches increases. With a high fixed support cost two launches a year represents a substantial increase over just one launch a year in the price per kg.
How much per launch would the SLS cost if they launched say 4 per year?
I despise this argument to defund SLS. The U.S. will need this world's-most-capable rocket to get humans to Mars. It will also need Falcon Heavy and Vulcan Aces and Ariane 6 and whatever other launch vehicle is developed and available. This is no small task. Thinking small won't get it done. It will take the full might of the aerospace industry, marshaled by government.
Within about 2 years the world will see American landers on the Moon
Manned landings appear to be possible in the new president's second term.
What design of launch vehicle and reentry capsule are used to get astronauts to the Deep Space Habitat in lunar orbit has not yet been decided.
Quote from: edkyle99 on 05/19/2016 02:46 pmI despise this argument to defund SLS. The U.S. will need this world's-most-capable rocket to get humans to Mars. US government is not going to fund manned mars missions.
I despise this argument to defund SLS. The U.S. will need this world's-most-capable rocket to get humans to Mars.
I despise this argument to defund SLS. The U.S. will need this world's-most-capable rocket to get humans to Mars. It will also need Falcon Heavy and Vulcan Aces and Ariane 6 and whatever other launch vehicle is developed and available. This is no small task. Thinking small won't get it done. It will take the full might of the aerospace industry, marshaled by government. In my opinion. - Ed Kyle
Jim's assumption aside (we've had thread after thread where he trots out his pet opinion that governments should have no role in manned solar system exploration),
Don't forget that US support for the ISS only happened for solidly geopolitical reasons: the US didn't want bankrupt Russian aerospace firms selling their know-how to people like Saddam Hussein. There would need to be a similar overriding US national security motive for any government involvement in an accelerated Mars program.
Quote from: A_M_Swallow on 05/18/2016 10:08 pmWithin about 2 years the world will see American landers on the Moon Nonsense.a. There are no NASA landers in design much less productionb. There are no commercial ones even close to launching in that time frame And if they did, they have no affect on NASA funding
Quote from: A_M_Swallow on 05/18/2016 10:08 pmManned landings appear to be possible in the new president's second term.The next president doesn't care about manned lunar missions.
Quote from: A_M_Swallow on 05/18/2016 10:08 pmWhat design of launch vehicle and reentry capsule are used to get astronauts to the Deep Space Habitat in lunar orbit has not yet been decided.Because there is no Deep Space Habitat in lunar orbit program for astronauts to go to and there won't be one since the next president doesn't care about space
For the first SLS flight, the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) and the University of Tokyo will jointly create and provide two CubeSats, EQUULEUS (EQUilibriUm Lunar-Earth point 6U Spacecraft) and OMOTENASHI (Outstanding MOon exploration TEchnologies demonstrated by NAno Semi-Hard Impactor). EQUULEUS will help scientists understand the radiation environment in the region of space around Earth by imaging Earth’s plasmasphere and measuring the distribution of plasma that surrounds the planet. This opportunity may provide important insight for protecting both humans and electronics from radiation damage during long space journeys. It will also demonstrate low-energy trajectory control techniques, such as multiple lunar flybys, within the Earth-Moon region.JAXA also will use the OMOTENASHI to demonstrate the technology for low-cost and very small spacecraft to explore the lunar surface. This technology could open up new possibilities for future missions to inexpensively investigate the surface of the moon. The CubeSat will also take measurements of the radiation environment near the moon as well as on the lunar surface.[...]The Italian company Argotec is building the ArgoMoon CubeSat under the Italian Space Agency (ASI) internal review and approval process. ArgoMoon will demonstrate the ability to perform operations in close proximity of the Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage (ICPS), which will send Orion onto its lunar trajectory. It should also record images of the ICPS for historical documentation and to provide valuable mission data on the deployment of other Cubesats. Additionally, this CubeSat should test optical communication capabilities between the CubeSat and Earth.
Quote from: the_other_Doug on 05/19/2016 03:20 pmJim's assumption aside (we've had thread after thread where he trots out his pet opinion that governments should have no role in manned solar system exploration), The opinion also includes that the governments aren't going fund it anyways. Almost 60 years since going to the moon and still have only words and no money to go back.
Quote from: Jim on 05/19/2016 05:30 pmQuote from: the_other_Doug on 05/19/2016 03:20 pmJim's assumption aside (we've had thread after thread where he trots out his pet opinion that governments should have no role in manned solar system exploration), The opinion also includes that the governments aren't going fund it anyways. Almost 60 years since going to the moon and still have only words and no money to go back. Correct. And anyone here who thinks this will change with the next president really ought to step out of phantasy-land.
Quote from: edkyle99 on 05/19/2016 02:46 pmI despise this argument to defund SLS. The U.S. will need this world's-most-capable rocket to get humans to Mars. It will also need Falcon Heavy and Vulcan Aces and Ariane 6 and whatever other launch vehicle is developed and available. This is no small task. Thinking small won't get it done. It will take the full might of the aerospace industry, marshaled by government. In my opinion. - Ed KyleJim's assumption aside (we've had thread after thread where he trots out his pet opinion that governments should have no role in manned solar system exploration), I will completely agree with you, Ed. We will need all of the resources you mention to mount any manned BLEO expeditions. All of the various commercial launchers and commercial satellite developers will have plenty of work in such efforts, if they want to bid for it.I keep seeing this as a logical result of how such large projects must be funded in today's funding environment. You just can't afford to do an Apollo-style program where all of the various elements are funded at the same time, all of which are scheduled to be complete and available for a series of scheduled and funded missions.You have to develop the pieces serially and not in parallel
First, SLS is implied as the 'world's most capable rocket.' FH (with either the 1.7M or 1.9Mlbf thrust booster version) will lift more payload than SLS's first 'block' as shown by your and others' calculations.
It would take three fully-expendable Falcon Heavies to match the payload of one SLS Block 1B trans-Mars. It would take four Falcon Heavies to match one SLS Block 2. I expect that Falcon Heavy and/or others like it will be needed to support deep-space missions, but the missions will be built around the unparalleled deep space throw-weight offered by SLS.
An affordable launcher that can lift smaller payloads is more useful than a big one that is too expensive to operate. In times of tight money, you can scale back to fewer loads, but at least you are making some progress.