LOM is already down around 1 in 80 for the 6-engine Ares-V. This would be something like 1 in 60, maybe?
LOM is already down around 1 in 80 for the 6-engine Ares-V. This would be something like 1 in 60, maybe?Ross.
Quote from: kraisee on 01/16/2009 04:36 amLOM is already down around 1 in 80 for the 6-engine Ares-V. This would be something like 1 in 60, maybe?Ross.So we're down to shuttle level safety? I guess that means we're good to go! :-)
Is it still the plan to launch Orion first, to be followed by EDS/LSAM? If so, Orion should be cheaper so a mission scrub would be less costly than if you lost an EDS/LSAM. Safer, too, because there's less pressure to launch the manned craft.
If three 5.5 segment SRBs can't to mounted why no four 4-sgment SRBs? That would be 16 segments versus 16.5 and the criss-cross mounting pattern would probably be easier to engineer.
Last I heard it was Altair/EDS first, followed by Orion a few days or hours later, but I could be wrong.
WRT to plume impingement, you could stick three of the RS-68Bs on the side of the core stage (like the outboard F-1s on a Saturn V), and other three in the centre (like the inboard H-1s on a Saturn I/IB). Again this is challenging (in that it requires some actual engineering), but not a killer.
The 3 SRB is not viable
It will take X years, cost Y dollars, and means we have to tear down and rebuild all the launch infrastructure.
Just having some fun, Jim. Besides, if someone showed up at your office and said "Here's $30 billion if you can make this work", would you show them the door?
Especially since it can't fit over the flame trench
Quote from: Jim on 01/17/2009 05:43 pmEspecially since it can't fit over the flame trenchIf this can't fit over the flame trenches, then neither can Ares V, meaning any necessary widening of the flame trench should have already been budgeted for...