Author Topic: CLV Scale-Up  (Read 16450 times)

Offline kraisee

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10560
  • Liked: 807
  • Likes Given: 40
RE: CLV Scale-Up
« Reply #20 on: 11/25/2005 08:32 am »
Quote
bad_astra - 24/11/2005  3:06 PM

No, with the infrastructure that makes sense; LEO embark-disembark stations, Lunar Cyclers, Mars Cyclers, and a robost space economy able to support them. We should be where 2001 had us, and we can't get there with two or three heavy lift launches per year. It simply won't bring about CATS. I'm not trashing the Griffin plan. My only objection to his plan is the SDHLV. If he does get it designed and built, I hope at least that private industry by that time has a good track record in putting humans in orbit and can then show a cheaper way to maintain a lunar base. If that's the case, fine, keep a few battleship Magnums around to do major chores like the launch of an elevator countermass or the hub of a torus station.

But without some sort of HLLV, how do you get any of that infrastructure you mention up there in the first place?

I'm sure not in favour of doing it the slow, expensive, arduous and over-complicated 'lego brick' approach like we've done with ISS.   If we'd had an HLLV-class launcher capable of putting 120MT up each shot, we could have finished the whole ISS in just three flights and been on to doing something else just two years later.

If you have to build a house, you don't try to bring in all the soil, wood, concrete bricks, roofing parts etc in the back of your family car, you get a lot of it delivered on the back of a big honking truck, don't you?   Same basic principle applies here.

Until we have *built* all that infrastructure already you need a way to put it up there, and right now the cheapest way is on a BIG rocket.

There is no rocket in the world capable of putting more than about 5 tons of stuff into Lunar orbit right now.   None.   And if you try building a space station 5 tons at a time, you'll probably be at it for a hundred years!

Even the Magnum SDLV can only put about 60 tons into Lunar orbit.   That's about three ISS modules - maximum, and you need dozens of them for even a relatively simplistic space station like ISS is.   If you want an extravagant spinning wheel, you're probably looking at 1000 tons.

Nobody has the capability to launch anything really large right now, so we have to build a simpler infrastructure early on just to start the building of the infrastructure you're on about.   And that's what's going on right now.   These are merely the first steps, but the key is that NASA is *finally* back on the path it should have been following since Apollo.   At last, we can pick up again after Nixon dropped the ball entirely.   Sure there's been a 30 year break in progress, but at last we have an opportunity to continue the progress once again.

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

Offline bad_astra

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1926
  • Liked: 316
  • Likes Given: 553
RE: CLV Scale-Up
« Reply #21 on: 11/26/2005 07:57 pm »
Incremental building failed because it relied on a transportation system that may cost somewhere between $500,000,000 to a gigabuck to launch. Incremental building would have worked fine (and in a manner of speaking it did work fine despite the costs), had we had cheaper access to space, and not relied soley on the shuttle for some of the components.
"Contact Light" -Buzz Aldrin

Offline kraisee

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10560
  • Liked: 807
  • Likes Given: 40
RE: CLV Scale-Up
« Reply #22 on: 11/27/2005 01:58 am »
Quote
bad_astra - 26/11/2005  3:57 PM

Incremental building failed because it relied on a transportation system that may cost somewhere between $500,000,000 to a gigabuck to launch. Incremental building would have worked fine (and in a manner of speaking it did work fine despite the costs), had we had cheaper access to space, and not relied soley on the shuttle for some of the components.

And the reason that expensive LV was used was two-fold: because it was *thought* it would be a lot cheaper than the Saturn-V it replaced, and because the crew required for assembly was also launched at the same time - and there were NO alternatives to that when ISS was announced.

What's done is done, and history can't be changed.   The only thing we can do is create our future from this point on.

To build a large-scale infrastructure we're talking about here (and I'm in favour of it), the simple fact is that you have to lift a LOT of heavy metal and other items from the Earth's deep gravity well into space, and as you point out, that really costs.

As the table below will show, the Magnum SDLV is the most cost effective launcher we're ever going to get.

NASA's current plan on the table to make the SDLV will finally open up the possibility to launch materials into space for just $2,800 per kg ($1,269 / lb).

That's about a quarter the cost per kg of ANY US launcher, past or present!

Only the Russian Proton can get even close to that cost/performance figure, but it can only loft 1/6th of the payload the Magnum will be able to.

If anyone can show NASA another realistic option, and I'm sure NASA will talk to you.

Booster:               Max Payload to LEO:     Launch Cost*:   Cost per kg / lb to LEO:
=======================================================================================

US:
Atlas II AS              8,600kg /  19,000lb   $134 million    $15,563/kg / $ 7,053/lb
Atlas V 551             20,050kg /  44,200lb   $254 million    $12,668/kg / $ 5,747/lb
Delta II 7925            5,089kg /  11,200lb   $ 69 million    $13,559/kg / $ 6,160/lb
Delta IV-Medium          8,600kg /  19,000lb   $102 million    $11,860/kg / $ 5,368/lb
Delta IV-Heavy          25,800kg /  56,900lb   $254 million    $ 9,845/kg / $ 4,464/lb
Space Shuttle           16,500kg /  36,400lb   $800 million    $48,485/kg / $21,978/lb
Saturn-V               118,000kg / 260,000lb   $2.4 Billion    $20,339/kg / $ 9,231/lb

Magnum SDLV            125,000kg / 275,750lb   $350 million    $ 2,800/kg / $ 1,269/lb
"The Stick" CLV         25,900kg /  57,135lb   $100 million    $ 3,861/kg / $ 1,750/lb


Russia:
Soyuz ST                 7,800kg /  17,200lb   $ 50 million    $ 6,410/kg / $ 2,907/lb
Proton 8K82M            21,000kg /  46,300lb   $ 65 million    $ 3,095/kg / $ 1,404/lb
Energiya                88,000kg / 194,000lb   $1.3 Billion    $14,772/kg / $ 6,701/lb


ESA:
Arianne 5G              16,000kg /  35,300lb   $198 million    $12,375/kg / $ 5,609/lb


Concepts Vehicles:
Shuttle-C               77,000kg / 170,000lb   $500 million    $ 6,494/kg / $ 2,941/lb
Shuttle-Ares           121,000kg / 267,000lb   $650 million    $ 5,371/kg / $ 2,434/lb

* - All figures adjusted for inflation to equivalent in 2004 US Dollars.


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

Offline realtime

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 574
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 16
RE: CLV Scale-Up
« Reply #23 on: 11/27/2005 05:48 pm »
Nice table.  Where'd you get it?


Offline kraisee

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10560
  • Liked: 807
  • Likes Given: 40
RE: CLV Scale-Up
« Reply #24 on: 11/27/2005 07:32 pm »
Quote
realtime - 27/11/2005  1:48 PM

Nice table.  Where'd you get it?

I collected the info mostly from Mark Wade's Astronautix website.   But his website unfortunately does not provide consistent information for comparing payloads to the same orbit for each launcher.

I had to search a number of other (all official) sites to try to get the correcy payload information to compare payloads to the same orbits for each launcher.

I've tried to calibrate for payload capacity to an ISS-compatible orbit - 51.6deg, 220nm.

I've also tried to validate all the data somewhere else too, just to ensure Mark's figures are right.   And they are :)

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

Offline bad_astra

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1926
  • Liked: 316
  • Likes Given: 553
RE: CLV Scale-Up
« Reply #25 on: 11/30/2005 05:49 am »
I still have a feeling that the books are already cooked  on SDHLV launch prices. Will they take into account the standing army that may well remain mostly intact from the shuttle days? If it is then the actual price/kg to LEO is going to depend very much on the flight rate. If we're going to build it, we'd better REALLY use it.
"Contact Light" -Buzz Aldrin

Offline Dogsbd

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 203
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: CLV Scale-Up
« Reply #26 on: 11/30/2005 04:02 pm »
Quote
bad_astra - 30/11/2005  1:49 AM

Will they take into account the standing army that may well remain mostly intact from the shuttle days?

The "standing army" is primarily for Orbiter processing, the Orbiter goes away in 2010.

Offline Super George

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 206
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: CLV Scale-Up
« Reply #27 on: 11/30/2005 04:54 pm »
Although that will start to go down from 2008 when one orbiter is retired and then in 2010 there's a whole host of workers due for retirement.

Offline kraisee

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10560
  • Liked: 807
  • Likes Given: 40
RE: CLV Scale-Up
« Reply #28 on: 11/30/2005 09:41 pm »
Quote
bad_astra - 30/11/2005  1:49 AM

I still have a feeling that the books are already cooked  on SDHLV launch prices. Will they take into account the standing army that may well remain mostly intact from the shuttle days? If it is then the actual price/kg to LEO is going to depend very much on the flight rate. If we're going to build it, we'd better REALLY use it.

Griffin recently addressed that with his 'takes only 6 people to launch rocketss on a submarine' comments.

He wants to super-streamline the processing of the new LV's, to massively reducethe number of people needed to do the launches.   The people he frees up will be re-directed towards other jobs such as developing CEV, CLV, LSAM, Lunar Rovers, Lunar Habs, Lunar mining equipment, Lunar experiment, Lunar Telescopes, Lunar power systems, and then creating all that Lunar stuff over again, but this time suitable for Mars, along with a spacecraft for the crew to spend 6 months in on a journey there and back too.

NASA has a *HUGE* amount of work to do for this program, and they want to do it with the current workforce numbers.

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

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0