Author Topic: NASA has 5-Seg CLV Alternatives (The Stumpy Thread)  (Read 76101 times)

Offline kraisee

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10408
  • Liked: 239
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: NASA has 5-Seg CLV Alternatives (The Stumpy Thread)
« Reply #160 on: 08/09/2006 11:24 PM »
Quote
Jim - 9/8/2006  7:02 PM

what is the link to josh's post with the ESAS cost estimates?

Here: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=3487&posts=3

Ross.
"The meek shall inherit the Earth -- the rest of us will go to the stars"
-Robert A. Heinlein

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31276
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 9559
  • Likes Given: 299
Re: NASA has 5-Seg CLV Alternatives (The Stumpy Thread)
« Reply #161 on: 08/10/2006 12:27 AM »
I have another cost estimate and it is as valid as Ross's

The difference between a 82mT In-Line 2x4 SRB, 3xSSME CLV and two 25mT In-Line 1x4 SRB, 1xSSME CLV's is"
tankage - 2 upperstages vs mod ET
avionics - 2 Stick's means there is an extra set
Engines -  The Stick has one less.

The costs associated with these differences is a wash.  2 upperstages = 1 mod ET and 1 SSME = 1 avionics suite

Therefore the cost of the 82mT In-Line 2x4, 3xSSME CLV is twice that of the ESAS CLV or 2 x $113m or $226m

2.0 launch solution:
82mT In-Line 2x4, 3xSSME CLV Variable: $226m/flight - Fixed $1,272 (ESAS CaLV cost)
82mT In-Line 2x4, 3xSSME CaLV (exactly the same as above, but with payload shroud and EDS $40m ) Variable: $266m/flight - Fixed ZERO
6 CLV + 2 CaLV Flights/year + 10% Reserve: $3.5Bn

Offline kraisee

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10408
  • Liked: 239
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: NASA has 5-Seg CLV Alternatives (The Stumpy Thread)
« Reply #162 on: 08/10/2006 12:59 AM »
That is simply impossible.

The cost for the original ESAS CaLV, including 2 x 5seg SRBs, plus 5 x SSME main engines, plus 1xJ-2X upper engine is only $179.44m

Are you seriously trying to make a case that a vehicle with obviously cheaper SRB's, two fewer SSME's and no Upper at all is going to be more expensive?

Sorry, but that's crazy.

My figures were based on another set of figures I have which I'm not allowed to release.   In short the SSME and SRB costs are lower to NASA than I published, but the figures I have are clearly marked as export controlled, so I simply won't publish them.

As an engineer 'inside', you may be able to research the costs and see these numbers for yourself.

Ross.
"The meek shall inherit the Earth -- the rest of us will go to the stars"
-Robert A. Heinlein

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31276
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 9559
  • Likes Given: 299
Re: NASA has 5-Seg CLV Alternatives (The Stumpy Thread)
« Reply #163 on: 08/10/2006 01:29 AM »
Quote
kraisee - 9/8/2006  8:46 PM

That is simply impossible.

The cost for the original ESAS CaLV, including 2 x 5seg SRBs, plus 5 x SSME main engines, plus 1xJ-2X upper engine is only $179.44m

Are you seriously trying to make a case that a vehicle with obviously cheaper SRB's, two fewer SSME's and no Upper at all is going to be more expensive?
Ross.

No, just that all the cost estimates (especially ESAS) are full of crap.  My numbers are just as valid.  So the ESAS CLaV numbers are just as suspect too.

1.  Those SRB and SSME's numbers don't mean squat unless they are under contract, which neither are.
2.  And the EELV's costs are much lower than published also.


Offline kraisee

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10408
  • Liked: 239
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: NASA has 5-Seg CLV Alternatives (The Stumpy Thread)
« Reply #164 on: 08/10/2006 03:19 AM »
The ESAS Report which was publicly released is NOT the same report which was presented to NASA.

One ACI copy got placed on NASAWatch by accident on the first day it was released and having studied that, I will confirm that there are a LOT more details in it than the version available today.

Further, I have seen some of the sections (and apendices) which NASA have not yet released.   There are an awful lot of details in the Full version of the ESAS Report which most people will never get to see, and all the LV variants are detailed very thoroughly indeed, down to sub-system costs, with cost figures sourced directly from the relevant manufacturers themselves.

EVERY one of the Atlas, Delta, and Shuttle-derivatived figures are correct and accurate in the report.   I believe you just have gripes you're trying to exercise, and no basis for them, so I hereby challenge you to back up your claim that the "cost estimates... [in the] ...ESAS are full of crap", or please retract that statement and refrain from doing it again.

Ross.
"The meek shall inherit the Earth -- the rest of us will go to the stars"
-Robert A. Heinlein

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31276
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 9559
  • Likes Given: 299
Re: NASA has 5-Seg CLV Alternatives (The Stumpy Thread)
« Reply #165 on: 08/10/2006 11:53 AM »
ESAS is full of crap.  My numbers prove it.  There is not much difference between 2 CLV's and one CaLV.  The costs should be close.    The ESAS was written backwards like a faked scientific report.  The conclusion was given and the report was written to support it.  The answer was in here: http://www.planetary.org/programs/projects/aim_for_mars/study-report.pdf

OSP was going to use EELV's in 2003 .  You know why?  Because Griffin wasn't the Admin at the time.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31276
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 9559
  • Likes Given: 299
Re: NASA has 5-Seg CLV Alternatives (The Stumpy Thread)
« Reply #166 on: 08/10/2006 01:08 PM »
"EVERY one of the Atlas, Delta, ..... figures are correct "  They did not have access to these

Offline kraisee

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10408
  • Liked: 239
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: NASA has 5-Seg CLV Alternatives (The Stumpy Thread)
« Reply #167 on: 08/10/2006 06:06 PM »
Quote
Jim - 10/8/2006  8:55 AM

"EVERY one of the Atlas, Delta, ..... figures are correct "  They did not have access to these


Sorry Jim, but I'm going to call "B#ll$h!t" on that statement.   Prove it or retract it.

Just saying something is wrong does not make it so.   Where is your evidence?   The reason you haven't provided it is because you have nothing but your opinion to fall back on.


The LV team reviewing the concepts for the ESAS Report had all the facts and figures for thirty different rocket concepts, and dozens of sub-variants too.

The ESAS LV team got them directly from the manufacturers in *every* case.   Engineers from the related LV programs were actually involved in the analysis process for evaluating their LV in order to ensure they got the best performance out of each trade, in a fair and balanced manner.

They aren't fantasy figures, and you have ZERO evidence proving otherwise, other than your highly biased opinion.

The ESAS LV team got the hardware specifications directly from the manufacturers in every case, and did thorough independant analysis.   In all cases, the ESAS Team required engineers from the manufacturers themselves to actually be involved in the analysis process of evaluating "their" LV in order to customise trajectories and flight controls in a bid to tailor them for the best possible performance out of each trade.

I've got a lot of the different figures already, unofficially, and I can independantly confirm that happened.   I am trying to get this information released through the FOIA process, but it is a complex request and involves export controlled material, so I can not publish what I have in a public forum until they provide final releasable versions.


I have also personally "run the numbers" using my own (admittedly rough) tools here, and I have been able to validate every one of the configurations I have personally been interested in checking out; including Atlas-V Heavy, Atlas-V Heavy (ESAS revised manned variant), Atlas Phase 2 (ESAS RMV), Delta-IV Heavy (ESAS RMV), Shuttle-C, plus a variety of SRB-based CLV concepts and CaLV concepts.

Through a contact at LM I have gathered some numbers on the various Atlas Phase designs (V, P1, P2, P3A and P3B), sourced purely from within LM itself - and I will personally confirm that they are the SAME figures as those used in the ESAS Trade analysis data (which has never been published and may never see the light of Public daylight), but I have seen it and can validate much of it (although I haven't finished my own analysis of the P3B yet and can't validate that rocket yet).

I have also seen the ESAS costs for Atlas HLV, Delta HLV and for the CLV.   I now understand for myself why the EELV's were not cost effective.   The costs to NASA to shut down the whole of LC-39 and all the other Shuttle-specific infrastructure totals billions and billions.   Closing down SDLV facilities would also costs 6,500 jobs at KSC, 45,000 jobs at JSC, and about the same at MSFC.   And that doesn't take into account any of the jobs at the manufacturers sites around the country, but a similar number of sub-contractor job losses was expected.

Now, Jim, seriously: If you can back-up your claim, do so - NOW.   Or give it a rest.

Ross.
"The meek shall inherit the Earth -- the rest of us will go to the stars"
-Robert A. Heinlein

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31276
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 9559
  • Likes Given: 299
Re: NASA has 5-Seg CLV Alternatives (The Stumpy Thread)
« Reply #168 on: 08/10/2006 07:06 PM »
I personally know an ESAS team member.  the report was written backwards

The OSP contract proposals, not study, numbers were lower than in the ESAS.   If one number is wrong, then the others are suspect.  Atlas Phase 2 would not cost $1B to develop, especially since it is less of a change than Atlas II to Atlas III

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31276
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 9559
  • Likes Given: 299
Re: NASA has 5-Seg CLV Alternatives (The Stumpy Thread)
« Reply #169 on: 08/10/2006 07:13 PM »
Quote
kraisee - 10/8/2006  1:53 PM

The costs to NASA to shut down the whole of LC-39 and all the other Shuttle-specific infrastructure totals billions and billions.   Closing down SDLV facilities would also costs 6,500 jobs at KSC, 45,000 jobs at JSC, and about the same at MSFC.   And that doesn't take into account any of the jobs at the manufacturers sites around the country, but a similar number of sub-contractor job losses was expected.

Ross.

This is what is going to kill the VSE.  It is not about exploration.  It is a jobs program.  It is weighed down by all these people and won't achieve goals because after paying all of the people there won't be money available to explore with.  We will be stuck with a dead end program like the shuttle

Offline kfsorensen

  • aerospace and nuclear engineer
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1541
  • Huntsville, AL
    • Flibe Energy
  • Liked: 99
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: NASA has 5-Seg CLV Alternatives (The Stumpy Thread)
« Reply #170 on: 08/10/2006 07:35 PM »
Quote
Jim - 10/8/2006  2:00 PM

Quote
kraisee - 10/8/2006  1:53 PM

The costs to NASA to shut down the whole of LC-39 and all the other Shuttle-specific infrastructure totals billions and billions.   Closing down SDLV facilities would also costs 6,500 jobs at KSC, 45,000 jobs at JSC, and about the same at MSFC.   And that doesn't take into account any of the jobs at the manufacturers sites around the country, but a similar number of sub-contractor job losses was expected.

Ross.

This is what is going to kill the VSE.  It is not about exploration.  It is a jobs program.  It is weighed down by all these people and won't achieve goals because after paying all of the people there won't be money available to explore with.  We will be stuck with a dead end program like the shuttle

Yup.

Offline yinzer

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1509
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: NASA has 5-Seg CLV Alternatives (The Stumpy Thread)
« Reply #171 on: 08/10/2006 07:58 PM »
If the only justification is jobs, that leaves the program completely at the mercy of the political fates of the relevant representatives and senators.  Anyone care to guess how much money will be steered to JSC now that they aren't represented by the Speaker of the House any more?  Any other NASA centers with representation up for grabs?

On the other hand, if the government (and the people) feel that they are getting something of value out of the program other than welfare for aerospace engineers and technicians, the program is a lot safer.  Freedom/SSA almost got canceled, and it was only turning it into ISSA and bringing on board the "cooperate with the Russians now that the Cold War is over" crowd that kept it alive.
California 2008 - taking rights from people and giving rights to chickens.

Offline mlorrey

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2133
  • International Spaceflight Museum
  • Grantham, NH
  • Liked: 10
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: NASA has 5-Seg CLV Alternatives (The Stumpy Thread)
« Reply #172 on: 08/10/2006 11:12 PM »
Quote
Jim - 9/8/2006  5:14 PM

82mT In-Line 2x4, 3xSSME CLV Variable: $192m/flight

It doesn't add up.   2x SRB @ $45m, 1 ET  @  $52M, 3x SSME @ $40m = $262M and doesn't include avionics and mods to ET.


The cost of a SLWET varies considerably with production rates. At ~16/year, the cost is about $750,000 per tank, according to NASA's own parametric studies. By building the launcher family out of the same core tankage, production rates are maximized and per tank costs are minimized.

One suspects that higher production rates for SRBs will reduce their price as well.
VP of International Spaceflight Museum - http://ismuseum.org
Founder, Lorrey Aerospace, B&T Holdings, ACE Exchange, and Hypersonic Systems. Currently I am a venture recruiter for Family Office Venture Capital.

Offline mlorrey

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2133
  • International Spaceflight Museum
  • Grantham, NH
  • Liked: 10
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: NASA has 5-Seg CLV Alternatives (The Stumpy Thread)
« Reply #173 on: 08/10/2006 11:20 PM »
Quote
Jim - 10/8/2006  2:00 PM

Quote
kraisee - 10/8/2006  1:53 PM

The costs to NASA to shut down the whole of LC-39 and all the other Shuttle-specific infrastructure totals billions and billions.   Closing down SDLV facilities would also costs 6,500 jobs at KSC, 45,000 jobs at JSC, and about the same at MSFC.   And that doesn't take into account any of the jobs at the manufacturers sites around the country, but a similar number of sub-contractor job losses was expected.

Ross.

This is what is going to kill the VSE.  It is not about exploration.  It is a jobs program.  It is weighed down by all these people and won't achieve goals because after paying all of the people there won't be money available to explore with.  We will be stuck with a dead end program like the shuttle

For once, I agree with Jim (I'm shocked too). VSE is so ill considered an "exploration program" as to be tantamount to building a fleet of Hawaiian dugout catamarans to explore the Pacific, simply because we know it was done that way once in the past.

The only way to acheive any real increase in human exploration is to cut the standing army, and go with a launcher program that enables that. If you can't do that, then NASA doesn't belong in human space exploration, Congress and the people would be better served to just set up a series of prizes, just as (to use a historical referent) British Parliament set up the Longitude Prize, for the private exploration and commercialization of space.

Stop wasting tax dollars on jobs programs that are gussied up to look like pioneering heroism.
VP of International Spaceflight Museum - http://ismuseum.org
Founder, Lorrey Aerospace, B&T Holdings, ACE Exchange, and Hypersonic Systems. Currently I am a venture recruiter for Family Office Venture Capital.

Offline kfsorensen

  • aerospace and nuclear engineer
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1541
  • Huntsville, AL
    • Flibe Energy
  • Liked: 99
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: NASA has 5-Seg CLV Alternatives (The Stumpy Thread)
« Reply #174 on: 08/11/2006 12:02 AM »
Quote
mlorrey - 10/8/2006  6:07 PM

For once, I agree with Jim (I'm shocked too). VSE is so ill considered an "exploration program" as to be tantamount to building a fleet of Hawaiian dugout catamarans to explore the Pacific, simply because we know it was done that way once in the past.
Yup.

Offline Propforce

  • Sky is NOT the limit !!
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 811
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: NASA has 5-Seg CLV Alternatives (The Stumpy Thread)
« Reply #175 on: 08/11/2006 12:52 AM »
Quote
vanilla - 10/8/2006  4:49 PM

Quote
mlorrey - 10/8/2006  6:07 PM

For once, I agree with Jim (I'm shocked too). VSE is so ill considered an "exploration program" as to be tantamount to building a fleet of Hawaiian dugout catamarans to explore the Pacific, simply because we know it was done that way once in the past.
Yup.

Well geez, Vanilla... don't hold back, tell us how you REALLY think?


Offline kfsorensen

  • aerospace and nuclear engineer
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1541
  • Huntsville, AL
    • Flibe Energy
  • Liked: 99
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: NASA has 5-Seg CLV Alternatives (The Stumpy Thread)
« Reply #176 on: 08/11/2006 01:03 AM »
Quote
Propforce - 10/8/2006  7:39 PM

Well geez, Vanilla... don't hold back, tell us how you REALLY think?
Yup.

That's how I really think.   :)

Offline publiusr

  • Elite Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1540
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: NASA has 5-Seg CLV Alternatives (The Stumpy Thread)
« Reply #177 on: 08/18/2006 08:04 PM »
Quote
mlorrey - 10/8/2006  6:07 PM

This is what is going to kill the VSE.  It is not about exploration.

It most certainly is, sir. I think more of VSE than any mini-spaceplane idea I've seen.

And EELV is a jobs program too--and if you want space to pay--it means jobs--that is a GOOD thing.

I think more of our NASA chief than libertarian frauds and their lies.

I find Ross's suggestion reasonable in that it will give us a good interim HLLV right away, and will allow not only for CEV but will alow for, perhaps, large biconic designs to be tested in LEO at a later date--with an insertion stage launched atop a larger Ares later on.

Ross should be commended.

Bravo.

Offline publiusr

  • Elite Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1540
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: NASA has 5-Seg CLV Alternatives (The Stumpy Thread)
« Reply #178 on: 08/24/2006 08:15 PM »
Speaking of OSP. Ross DSD concept is just large enough that something like an OSP would work and not have to fight weight so very much--as Kliper and even Hermes would have had to do.. So it could launch a big capsule with a lot of water and some ISS material-- or a biconic craft in LEO for tests--or an OSP type craft---all top mount. The heavy cargo and lander segments would be launched from another pad perhaps.


Offline kraisee

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10408
  • Liked: 239
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: NASA has 5-Seg CLV Alternatives (The Stumpy Thread)
« Reply #179 on: 08/24/2006 08:40 PM »
Actually I didn't come up with the idea, so I don't want the credit.

The idea simply presented itself as the simplest possible solution to take what we have now and make a better LV out of it.   Then when I checked, it had already been proposed and was actualy anaylsed in the ESAS (the EOR-LOR option) - although with a few minor changes, like putting the LOI burn on the CEV instead of the LSAM.   With the latter conclusions in the ESAS though, putting LOI on the LSAM for the EOR-LOR option works even better than their CEV-LOI option.   But the decision appears to have already been made to go with the 1.5 solution by that third stage of the anaylis.

All I am trying to do is promote the idea as the most effective design available, fullfilling all the requirements better and covering all the bases (economic, political, technical & performance) even better than I believe any of the other alternatives do.

To do that I have created a "face" and a "name" for people to relate to it: "Direct"ly ;)

I'll take credit for that, maybe.

Ross.
"The meek shall inherit the Earth -- the rest of us will go to the stars"
-Robert A. Heinlein

Tags: