Author Topic: DIRECT v3.0 - Thread 1  (Read 676541 times)

Offline rsp1202

  • Elite Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1083
  • 3, 2, 1 . . . Make rocket go now
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: DIRECT v3.0 - Thread 1
« Reply #160 on: 06/03/2009 01:20 AM »
That's a 'difficult' proposition, to say the least, but is not completely unprecedented.   Here is an image showing Gemini 12 lifting off from LC-19 at the same time as an Atlas Agena lifts off from LC-14 a few miles away.   This was done specifically to enable a docking between the two spacecraft in LEO.
That's probably a composite.  The Gemini was launched more or less on the Agena's first pass over the launch site.


That's correct. G12 was launched after Agena.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 30837
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 9070
  • Likes Given: 292
Re: DIRECT v3.0 - Thread 1
« Reply #161 on: 06/03/2009 01:21 AM »




This sort of thing *has* been done before.

Ross.

Nope, photoshop.  There haven't been simultaneous space launches

Online TrueBlueWitt

  • Space Nut
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1970
  • Mars in my lifetime!
  • DeWitt, MI
  • Liked: 59
  • Likes Given: 67
Re: DIRECT v3.0 - Thread 1
« Reply #162 on: 06/03/2009 01:50 AM »
My biggest worry is that the review panel does not go right to the source for information with regards to Direct. If they rely on numbers and data put out by NASA, then I fear it will not be a true Direct review.

Already their are rumors that Hawes has already tried to block any non-Contractors from providing official testimony information to the panel. From what I have read on here, Hawes will also provide data and analysis for the panel. I don't see him painting a pretty picture for Direct.

Either we cross our fingers and hope the panel sees through the bull, or hopefully the Team gets their shot to present to the panel so they can hear it straight.

If they were looking for data RIGHT NOW (for example) where would (they) look?


I agree with you Gladiator and Mars.. right now is NOT the time to be a day late and dollar short!

I know the DIRECT team works incredibly hard, but for whatever reason they seem cursed to release the next great version(or data) a week or two behind when it was really needed. 

Someone out there a magician with web sites and getting data loaded? 
DIRECT team seems like they could really use some more help on the outside.
« Last Edit: 06/03/2009 01:58 AM by TrueBlueWitt »

Offline robertross

  • Canadian Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17769
  • Westphal, Nova Scotia
  • Liked: 439
  • Likes Given: 3131
Re: DIRECT v3.0 - Thread 1
« Reply #163 on: 06/03/2009 01:58 AM »

I know the DIRECT team works incredibly hard, but for whatever reason they seem cursed to release the next great version(or data) a week or two behind when it was really needed. 


I'm sorry, but I don't know how you can say that.

Consider this: If they had released the rebuttal WAY back when Griffin left (to be assured it was met with favourable eyes), it would be buried in a pile.

The new administrator, the one who truly needs to see this at first glance, may not be confiremd for another month.

The same goes for the Augustine panel. I have no doubt Direct will have it's day in the limelight, and on that day it will be ready for the world to see. Just in the nick of time will do nicely.  :)
Remembering those who made the ultimate sacrifice for our rights & freedoms, and for those injured, visible or otherwise, in that fight.

Offline tnphysics

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1072
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: DIRECT v3.0 - Thread 1
« Reply #164 on: 06/03/2009 02:15 AM »
Is their a way to use the excess CLV lift capacity without propellant transfer, other than using elliptical orbits?

Online TrueBlueWitt

  • Space Nut
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1970
  • Mars in my lifetime!
  • DeWitt, MI
  • Liked: 59
  • Likes Given: 67
Re: DIRECT v3.0 - Thread 1
« Reply #165 on: 06/03/2009 02:25 AM »
Wasn't someone from DIRECT supposed to be on one of the "Space" TV shows tonight?  Or do I have the wrong day?

Anyone rember which show?  Any comments from someone that watched it?

Online DigitalMan

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 392
  • Liked: 39
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: DIRECT v3.0 - Thread 1
« Reply #166 on: 06/03/2009 02:25 AM »
Ross, I know you've done lots of graphs on cost comparisons, however, considering the questions about cost that come up regularly, is there a breakdown in the new presentation such as:

1) Components that will be used as is, no changes whatsoever

2) Components that have to be altered

3) New components

4) Requalification efforts

5) ?

There is also the changes to infrastructure to consider.  A simple, clear table with a side-by-side comparison of the vehicles (including Ares) showing where the components come from and where the $$$ and time are needed can eliminate a lot of potential doubts (or at least restrict them to components that aren't already flying and well proven).  Even if you plan to keep costs in a separate presentation an at-a-glance table could be easier to grasp even though these concepts are discussed throughout the 2.0 presentation.
« Last Edit: 06/03/2009 02:28 AM by DigitalMan »

Offline clongton

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10253
  • Connecticut
    • Direct Launcher
  • Liked: 1983
  • Likes Given: 614
Re: DIRECT v3.0 - Thread 1
« Reply #167 on: 06/03/2009 02:35 AM »
Wasn't someone from DIRECT supposed to be on one of the "Space" TV shows tonight?  Or do I have the wrong day?

Anyone rember which show?  Any comments from someone that watched it?

Ross should be on right now. Started at 10:00 pm Eastern
Chuck - DIRECT co-founder
I started my career on the Saturn-V F-1A engine

Offline Andy USA

  • Lead Moderator
  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 961
  • Los Angeles, California
  • Liked: 113
  • Likes Given: 76
Re: DIRECT v3.0 - Thread 1
« Reply #168 on: 06/03/2009 03:13 AM »
Thank you Ross for your very thorough response. Is there an equivilant forum someplace for the Ares program I wonder?


Yes here http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=collapse;c=3;sa=collapse;#3 Top section is Ares, second section is Orion, third section is Ares V and Lunar. Your currently in the four section, which is for alternatives.

Offline Bill White

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2019
  • Chicago area
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: DIRECT v3.0 - Thread 1
« Reply #169 on: 06/03/2009 03:35 AM »
Wasn't someone from DIRECT supposed to be on one of the "Space" TV shows tonight?  Or do I have the wrong day?

Anyone rember which show?  Any comments from someone that watched it?

Ross should be on right now. Started at 10:00 pm Eastern

Just now, I heard a terrific point from Ross that he should amplify and increase focus on. NASA needs a good story to tell, a narrative context for the space program.

Robert McKee, a respected teacher of screenwriting has said/written that

Quote
A good story, told well, will ALWAYS sell, always.

Perhaps what NASA needs are a few good narrative engineers.

Anyway, what is the NASA narrative all about?
« Last Edit: 06/03/2009 03:36 AM by Bill White »
EML architectures should be seen as ratchet opportunities

Offline kraisee

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10408
  • Liked: 237
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: DIRECT v3.0 - Thread 1
« Reply #170 on: 06/03/2009 04:14 AM »
Wasn't someone from DIRECT supposed to be on one of the "Space" TV shows tonight?  Or do I have the wrong day?

Anyone rember which show?  Any comments from someone that watched it?

Ross should be on right now. Started at 10:00 pm Eastern

Ahhh, two hours of non-stop talking on The Space Show!

Given that I'm normally quite terrified at the prospect of all such public 'appearances', I think that went pretty well and my "stage terror" didn't really come out, whew! :)

I'll be around to answer questions for a while still.

Ross.
« Last Edit: 06/03/2009 04:21 AM by kraisee »
"The meek shall inherit the Earth -- the rest of us will go to the stars"
-Robert A. Heinlein

Offline Gregori

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 196
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: DIRECT v3.0 - Thread 1
« Reply #171 on: 06/03/2009 04:44 AM »
I have a stupid question about the upper stage.....

Are the RL-10 engines restartable in space like the J2X?

Do they need to be restartable?

Offline kraisee

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10408
  • Liked: 237
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: DIRECT v3.0 - Thread 1
« Reply #172 on: 06/03/2009 04:48 AM »
There are no stupid questions! :)

Yes, RL-10's are already designed to be re-startable.

And yes, they will need to be.   A typical Lunar EDS missions would need them to burn once to complete the launch, injecting the Upper Stage/Payload into circular Low Earth Orbit.   Then they will loiter there for some time (up to 5 days in some situations), and they will then need to then perform the TLI Burn as well.

One of our alternative architecture options also uses them to "brake" into Lunar Orbit as well, so in that particular scenario they would actually see them being used three times.

Ross.
« Last Edit: 06/03/2009 04:50 AM by kraisee »
"The meek shall inherit the Earth -- the rest of us will go to the stars"
-Robert A. Heinlein

Offline kraisee

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10408
  • Liked: 237
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: DIRECT v3.0 - Thread 1
« Reply #173 on: 06/03/2009 04:53 AM »
PRESENTATION TIME!

Okay, ahead of placing this up on the website (hopefully Wednesday!) I wanted to deliver a "Preview" copy of the ISDC Presentation here first.

Be aware that this copy HAS NOT GOT A FINISHED APPENDIX YET!!!   That's still "in work" right now.   We also plan to add a series of "comments" throughout the presentation to make up for the fact that we don't have someone actually talking you through the various slides -- as the Presentation is really designed to be presented.

So here is a "not-quite-finished writing the Appendix" version of the Presentation specifically for NSF readers to enjoy:-

http://www.directlauncher.com/documents/DIRECT_ISDC_2009_NSF_Preview.pps


To make the animation sequence work you will need the .wmv video and will need to place it in the same folder as the .pps file.   You can get the .wmv version here:-

http://www.directlauncher.com/media/video/STS_to_Jupiter-246.wmv

Enjoy!   And feedback is welcome.

Ross.

[EDIT:   If you have problems accessing those, try replacing 'directlauncher.com' with 'launchcomplexmodels.com/Direct']
« Last Edit: 06/03/2009 09:16 PM by kraisee »
"The meek shall inherit the Earth -- the rest of us will go to the stars"
-Robert A. Heinlein

Offline veryrelaxed

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 133
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: DIRECT v3.0 - Thread 1
« Reply #174 on: 06/03/2009 04:54 AM »
May I ask here what the stance of the Direct team is on the (potential) use of EELVs (D4 and A5)  in NASA's human space exploration efforts?  In a short paragraph.

Thank you.

Offline kraisee

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10408
  • Liked: 237
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: DIRECT v3.0 - Thread 1
« Reply #175 on: 06/03/2009 05:09 AM »
May I ask here what the stance of the Direct team is on the (potential) use of EELVs (D4 and A5)  in NASA's human space exploration efforts?  In a short paragraph.

Thank you.

DIRECT intends to use Delta-IV Heavy starting in 2014/15 for lifting routine crew rotation missions to ISS.   (Note: We chose DIVH for a number of reasons, but one of which is because its upper stage is larger than the current Centaur and thus has a greater potential "throw" capability -- and we want to use that on top of Jupiter-130 for some very specific missions).

We are designing the Jupiter-130 to be able to do crew+cargo missions to ISS, but we expect to really only need those for a handful of missions around 2012-2015.   The key intention of using these early flights is as a "stepping stone" to enable us to transition the Shuttle workforce smoothly across the "gap" and into the Exploration Program more effectively.

Because the human-rated EELV schedule doesn't affect many jobs, the priority for us is to expedite the SDLV system as much as possible.


We ultimately intend that the primary focus of the Jupiter systems will move to 'beyond LEO' missions after 2015/16 though, although the capabilities in LEO will still prove useful from time to time (Hubble Servicing Mission #6, anyone?).

We wish to phase most ISS duties over to EELV/COTS systems around 2015 or so, with only the odd Jupiter delivering any required "big stuff" to ISS only once every few years after that.


In addition to ISS duties, we intend to provide a lot of work to the EELV-class systems around 2018/19/20 to begin delivering some pretty serious quantities of propellant to an orbiting Depot in LEO, in support of 'advanced' HSF Exploration missions.

I'm talking about somewhere around 400-600 metric tons of LH2/LOX being delivered to LEO every year, so that would require a *lot* of EELV-class flights.   There's a great opportunity there to get all the commercial operators to really compete for those contracts -- and that sort of competition is good for everyone.

The same Depot arrangement opens the door for foreign partners to also 'buy' seats and payload mass on missions heading to the Moon, Mars or Beyond too.   And all nations who don't have their own space programs would need to contract for Propellant Deliveries on the world launch services market -- and US companies can compete for that business as well!

We believe this is a pretty good model which combines all the strengths of SDLV, EELV and COTS systems into one unified program and "spreads the wealth" quite fairly to everyone.

Ross.
« Last Edit: 06/03/2009 05:17 AM by kraisee »
"The meek shall inherit the Earth -- the rest of us will go to the stars"
-Robert A. Heinlein

Offline veryrelaxed

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 133
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: DIRECT v3.0 - Thread 1
« Reply #176 on: 06/03/2009 05:19 AM »
Understood.  Thanks for the response, Ross.  I think the 'synergy' of various factors/currently operational capabilities may well come into play as NASA 'gets managed past the ESAS'

Offline TranquillityBase

  • Official Lurker
  • Member
  • Posts: 9
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: DIRECT v3.0 - Thread 1
« Reply #177 on: 06/03/2009 06:00 AM »
Just finished reading ithe ISDC Direct presentation.

Well done Ross, Chuck and Co. 

I liked the structure and the way you tackled the NIH syndrome head on.  Anyone not familiar with what Direct offers, must, after reading this, question the folly of Ares!

Keep up the good work.
DIRECT - The Sooner the Better

Offline kraisee

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10408
  • Liked: 237
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: DIRECT v3.0 - Thread 1
« Reply #178 on: 06/03/2009 06:10 AM »
Over on the DIRECT v2.0 thread, I just noticed Jon posted the below comment.

If there is anything else there which I've missed, please re-ask it here.

One of the best 'alternative' mission profiles which we have been able to confirm so far is that of using the EDS to perform the LOI as well as the TLI.

Because the lander doesn't have to perform the LOI, it results in a lander which is considerably smaller and lighter than the current CxP design.   This solves almost all of the Altair's height/stability issues and might even allow the thing to fit inside an 8.4m PLF again too.   At this size and mass the LSAM & CEV will *easily* fit on a J-130, thus improving both costs and safety for each mission.   Also by having multiple engines on an RL-10-powered EDS you get high Isp and a great deal of engine-out capability for the LOI as well, which is nice.

With this profile we're seeing about 10% extra payload mass to the Lunar surface as well -- and that's the real point.

Heh.  So my old joke about how "real lunar transfer vehicles deliver their payload all the way to lunar orbit, not just pansying out at TLI" actually bears up to physical reality?

~Jon

In this precise architecture, yes, it seems to.

We're getting 17,084kg landed payload to the Lunar surface using the 'regular' EOR-LOR LSAM-does-LOI approach and we're getting 19,147kg using the alternative EOR-LOR EDS-does-LOI approach.

Even more interestingly, the Descent Module is roughly half the size too -- and that solves an awful lot of Landing Stability and Cargo-Unloading problems as well.

We are still "growing" our confidence levels with this approach, but it seems pretty solid.

Ross.
« Last Edit: 06/03/2009 06:11 AM by kraisee »
"The meek shall inherit the Earth -- the rest of us will go to the stars"
-Robert A. Heinlein

Offline veryrelaxed

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 133
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: DIRECT v3.0 - Thread 1
« Reply #179 on: 06/03/2009 06:11 AM »
As a side note (and I am going to shut up past this), please tone down on the 'Ares&NASA'   You want to win hearts and minds who have invested and are indeed investing *their hearts and minds*, and folks who *will have to implement yours* if they are asked to.  And some posts here have spoken to this effect.  Ares goes on because folks carry on -- it is not helpful to tell them "RESET what you are doing and do a different thing, ' cause it's better".

Tags: