Author Topic: Edward Lu Calls for More, Smaller NASA Launches  (Read 28950 times)

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15391
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 8566
  • Likes Given: 1356
Edward Lu Calls for More, Smaller NASA Launches
« on: 12/21/2009 03:58 pm »
Former astronaut Edward Lu discusses ideas for a more responsive NASA.  He argues for more launches, of smaller rockets. 

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/21/opinion/21lu.html?_r=1&ref=opinion

Here's a guy who speaks from experience. 

 - Ed Kyle

Offline rdale

  • Assistant to the Chief Meteorologist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10390
  • Lansing MI
  • Liked: 1415
  • Likes Given: 171
Re: Edward Lu Calls for More, Smaller NASA Launches
« Reply #1 on: 12/21/2009 04:00 pm »
Here's a guy who speaks from experience. 

I'm not familiar with what he does now - what sort of experience does he have with developing new launch systems?

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15391
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 8566
  • Likes Given: 1356
Re: Edward Lu Calls for More, Smaller NASA Launches
« Reply #2 on: 12/21/2009 04:05 pm »
Here's a guy who speaks from experience. 

I'm not familiar with what he does now - what sort of experience does he have with developing new launch systems?

None that I know of, but there's that Doctoral degree in applied physics, two Shuttle missions, one Soyuz flight, and one ISS Expedition.  He works for Google now, the company that is on the verge of taking over the world (a $25b annual revenue company that is aiming for $100b).  :) 

I think it is more than fair to say that he knows what he's talking about.

At any rate, I'm not sure that he's necessarily calling for development of new rockets.  Options for small rockets launched by small teams already exist.

Lu, BTW, coauthored an interesting paper on an elegant method to save Earth from asteroid impacts.  ;)
http://mblogs.discovermagazine.com/sciencenotfiction/tag/edward-lu/

 - Ed Kyle
« Last Edit: 12/21/2009 04:17 pm by edkyle99 »

Offline rsnellenberger

  • Amateur wood butcher
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 839
  • Harbor Springs, Michigan
  • Liked: 371
  • Likes Given: 55
Re: Edward Lu Calls for More, Smaller NASA Launches
« Reply #3 on: 12/21/2009 05:32 pm »
Quote
There is no reason American companies could not build a similar, but modernized, medium-sized, economical workhorse of a rocket that is simple enough to sustain frequent launching. If NASA were to promise to buy one such rocket a week, the manufacturers could also profitably sell copies for launching commercial spacecraft and satellites — at much lower than current prices — and this would spur the development of space-based industries in fields like telecommunications, earth imaging and even space tourism.

Sorry, but if this is an example of a guy who "knows what he's talking about", we need to find another guy...

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15391
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 8566
  • Likes Given: 1356
Re: Edward Lu Calls for More, Smaller NASA Launches
« Reply #4 on: 12/21/2009 07:21 pm »
Quote
There is no reason American companies could not build a similar, but modernized, medium-sized, economical workhorse of a rocket that is simple enough to sustain frequent launching. If NASA were to promise to buy one such rocket a week, the manufacturers could also profitably sell copies for launching commercial spacecraft and satellites — at much lower than current prices — and this would spur the development of space-based industries in fields like telecommunications, earth imaging and even space tourism.

Sorry, but if this is an example of a guy who "knows what he's talking about", we need to find another guy...

He rode the R-7 Soyuz rocket to orbit.  During the 1970s and 1980s, the Soviet's launched *more* than one R-7 per week to orbit - specifically 1,091 of them during that 20 year span.

Perhaps his point is exaggerated, and perhaps it is not just NASA that would be needed to support the flight rate, but he does know exactly what he is talking about - his point is based on historical reality.

 - Ed Kyle
« Last Edit: 12/21/2009 07:24 pm by edkyle99 »

Offline libs0n

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 476
  • Ottawa
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Edward Lu Calls for More, Smaller NASA Launches
« Reply #5 on: 12/21/2009 07:59 pm »
Quote
If NASA were to promise to buy one such rocket a week, the manufacturers could also profitably sell copies for launching commercial spacecraft and satellites — at much lower than current prices — and this would spur the development of space-based industries in fields like telecommunications, earth imaging and even space tourism.

I'd set it up like this.  NASA makes a bulk order of 52 vehicles a year, taking advantage of the economy of scale of such a large order.  NASA then resells the slots it purchased for cost, and the launch company is forbidden to sell more launches until those slots are consumed.  Then NASA would not be buying 52 flights, but rather the interval between the actual usage and the total, until such point as actual usage exceeds the total.

Offline agman25

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 452
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Edward Lu Calls for More, Smaller NASA Launches
« Reply #6 on: 12/21/2009 08:09 pm »
What exactly are the 52 payloads. Who needs them and who pays for them?

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37441
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: Edward Lu Calls for More, Smaller NASA Launches
« Reply #7 on: 12/21/2009 08:17 pm »
  NASA then resells the slots it purchased for cost,

NASA can't do that.

Offline libs0n

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 476
  • Ottawa
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Edward Lu Calls for More, Smaller NASA Launches
« Reply #8 on: 12/21/2009 09:15 pm »
  NASA then resells the slots it purchased for cost,

NASA can't do that.

Then, for the purpose of discussion, some specific arrangement that allows the basic concept.

-The specific procurement is variable of some nature and for every actual mission NASA reduces their future orders by one.  The delay from order to launch should play into this.
-A bill is passed granting NASA the freedom to act in such a manner.
-A new rocket buying agency is created, and endowed with such freedom, and NASA must buy rockets through them.
-NASA contracts with a third party company to do the buying for them, and the third party resells slots and reimburses NASA. 
-Or the launch company itself does the above or some variation.

Idealized execution, the details, of the basic idea, NASA buying lots of launches, is amorphous and so too the execution of any further notion I present.  Actual professionals would work out the programmatic details of such a mandate.  I accede that my notions may indeed be unimplementable.

edit: Also don't want to derail thread, and the thread concept of NASA just buying block of launches, using them for whatever purpose, with the company selling further launches, stands on its own for its own merits.
« Last Edit: 12/21/2009 09:25 pm by libs0n »

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37441
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: Edward Lu Calls for More, Smaller NASA Launches
« Reply #9 on: 12/21/2009 09:51 pm »
-A bill is passed granting NASA the freedom to act in such a manner.
-A new rocket buying agency is created, and endowed with such freedom, and NASA must buy rockets through them.
-NASA contracts with a third party company to do the buying for them, and the third party resells slots and reimburses NASA. 


None of these are realistic.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37441
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: Edward Lu Calls for More, Smaller NASA Launches
« Reply #10 on: 12/21/2009 10:00 pm »

He rode the R-7 Soyuz rocket to orbit.  During the 1970s and 1980s, the Soviet's launched *more* than one R-7 per week to orbit - specifically 1,091 of them during that 20 year span.

Perhaps his point is exaggerated, and perhaps it is not just NASA that would be needed to support the flight rate, but he does know exactly what he is talking about - his point is based on historical reality.

USSR had a command based economy where cost was not a factor

Offline Proponent

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7277
  • Liked: 2782
  • Likes Given: 1462
Re: Edward Lu Calls for More, Smaller NASA Launches
« Reply #11 on: 12/21/2009 10:20 pm »
John Walker wrote a piece on this topic in 1993.

Offline Nascent Ascent

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 739
  • Liked: 124
  • Likes Given: 106
Re: Edward Lu Calls for More, Smaller NASA Launches
« Reply #12 on: 12/21/2009 11:02 pm »
John Walker wrote a piece on this topic in 1993.

Yes, and I'm willing to bet that Elon Musk has read this and taken many of the points to heart.

Offline libs0n

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 476
  • Ottawa
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Edward Lu Calls for More, Smaller NASA Launches
« Reply #13 on: 12/21/2009 11:32 pm »
What exactly are the 52 payloads. Who needs them and who pays for them?

Let's say Booster X delivers 10 mt to LEO(or whatever to GEO or interplanetary) for around 40 million a shot in this program(and is a modular booster that can be used in missions that require greater capability).  52 flights is 520mt of mass orbited a year for 2.08 billion dollars.  This could cover the launch needs for all of NASA's ISS, Science, and 2 or so lunar missions for a total that is not egregious.

edit: Rachet up or down whatever the cost you think would be the outcome.  60 million a pop/ 3.12 billion.  80 million/4.16 billion.
« Last Edit: 12/22/2009 12:04 am by libs0n »

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37441
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: Edward Lu Calls for More, Smaller NASA Launches
« Reply #14 on: 12/22/2009 12:06 am »
What exactly are the 52 payloads. Who needs them and who pays for them?

Let's say Booster X delivers 10 mt to LEO(or whatever to GEO or interplanetary) for around 40 million a shot in this program(and is a modular booster that can be used in missions that require greater capability).  52 flights is 520mt of mass orbited a year for 2.08 billion dollars.  This could cover the launch needs for all of NASA's ISS, Science, and 2 or so lunar missions for a total that is not egregious.

edit: Rachet up or down whatever the cost you think would be the outcome.  60 million a pop/ 3.12 billion.  80 million/4.16 billion.

The problem is

52 x 400 million per spacecraft is 20 billion a year.
« Last Edit: 12/22/2009 12:06 am by Jim »

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15391
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 8566
  • Likes Given: 1356
Re: Edward Lu Calls for More, Smaller NASA Launches
« Reply #15 on: 12/22/2009 12:08 am »

He rode the R-7 Soyuz rocket to orbit.  During the 1970s and 1980s, the Soviet's launched *more* than one R-7 per week to orbit - specifically 1,091 of them during that 20 year span.

Perhaps his point is exaggerated, and perhaps it is not just NASA that would be needed to support the flight rate, but he does know exactly what he is talking about - his point is based on historical reality.

USSR had a command based economy where cost was not a factor

Regardless the economic system, the USSR clearly benefited from the commonality that allowed R-7 to be a do-all booster - launching cosmonauts, cargo, spy satellites, comsats, science sats, etc..  The high flight rate of both booster and Zenit/SoyuzProgress type payload had to have driven down unit costs, even for Central Planner Communists!  :)

 - Ed Kyle 

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15391
    • Space Launch Report
  • Liked: 8566
  • Likes Given: 1356
Re: Edward Lu Calls for More, Smaller NASA Launches
« Reply #16 on: 12/22/2009 12:14 am »
What exactly are the 52 payloads. Who needs them and who pays for them?

Let's say Booster X delivers 10 mt to LEO(or whatever to GEO or interplanetary) for around 40 million a shot in this program(and is a modular booster that can be used in missions that require greater capability).  52 flights is 520mt of mass orbited a year for 2.08 billion dollars.  This could cover the launch needs for all of NASA's ISS, Science, and 2 or so lunar missions for a total that is not egregious.

edit: Rachet up or down whatever the cost you think would be the outcome.  60 million a pop/ 3.12 billion.  80 million/4.16 billion.

The problem is

52 x 400 million per spacecraft is 20 billion a year.

Another problem is that 520 tonnes is probably too much. 

This year, U.S. based rockets launched the equivalent of 282 tonnes LEO capability.  That's a little more than 5.4 tonnes per week, about a Delta 2's worth.  Rather than a Delta 2 every week, how about an Atlas 5-401 twice per month?  That's about an STS program, budget-wise.  To make it pay off, *everything* would fly on this rocket - crews, gov and civil satellites, deep space craft, propellant, etc. 

Twice per month is completely realistic.  There were 24 U.S. based launches this year, after all!

 - Ed Kyle
« Last Edit: 12/22/2009 12:21 am by edkyle99 »

Offline Antares

  • ABO^2
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5181
  • Done arguing with amateurs
  • Liked: 371
  • Likes Given: 228
Re: Edward Lu Calls for More, Smaller NASA Launches
« Reply #17 on: 12/22/2009 12:59 am »
the USSR clearly benefited from the commonality that allowed R-7 to be a do-all booster - launching cosmonauts, cargo, spy satellites, comsats, science sats, etc.

And yet you argue against EELV for a crew launcher.  ???
If I like something on NSF, it's probably because I know it to be accurate.  Every once in a while, it's just something I agree with.  Facts generally receive the former.

Offline jongoff

  • Recovering Rocket Plumber/Space Entrepreneur
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6807
  • Lafayette/Broomfield, CO
  • Liked: 3987
  • Likes Given: 1684
Re: Edward Lu Calls for More, Smaller NASA Launches
« Reply #18 on: 12/22/2009 01:13 am »
What exactly are the 52 payloads. Who needs them and who pays for them?

Let's say Booster X delivers 10 mt to LEO(or whatever to GEO or interplanetary) for around 40 million a shot in this program(and is a modular booster that can be used in missions that require greater capability).  52 flights is 520mt of mass orbited a year for 2.08 billion dollars.  This could cover the launch needs for all of NASA's ISS, Science, and 2 or so lunar missions for a total that is not egregious.

edit: Rachet up or down whatever the cost you think would be the outcome.  60 million a pop/ 3.12 billion.  80 million/4.16 billion.

The problem is

52 x 400 million per spacecraft is 20 billion a year.

Which is part of why I don't think you'll ever see high flight rates out of a vehicle designed primarily to launch spacecraft, or large numbers of people or cargo.  There's just not enough demand today to justify flying even a 5mT to orbit vehicle 50x per year...

...but a small reusable, say one that could only carry one pilot and one passenger--barebones--or one smallsat, or a small bit of cargo or a thousand pounds of propellant...then you might be talking about something that could realistically get the 50+ flights/yr demand rate you need to make an RLV business case close.

~Jon

Offline Antares

  • ABO^2
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5181
  • Done arguing with amateurs
  • Liked: 371
  • Likes Given: 228
Re: Edward Lu Calls for More, Smaller NASA Launches
« Reply #19 on: 12/22/2009 01:40 am »
Complete WAI: What about slave labor, i.e. college students?  How many of the 52 $400M spacecraft could become $20M spacecraft?  What would be the real ramifications of that?  You'd have to have real integrators and real analysts checking the work and real QC/QA.  A cheap no-test FS bus, no new instruments (COTS if possible)....
If I like something on NSF, it's probably because I know it to be accurate.  Every once in a while, it's just something I agree with.  Facts generally receive the former.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1