Author Topic: The VSE Booster Switch  (Read 6032 times)

Offline AndyMc

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 313
  • Liked: 25
  • Likes Given: 405
The VSE Booster Switch
« on: 05/22/2006 04:02 pm »
The latest, I told you so, from Jeffrey F. Bell.

http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/The_VSE_Booster_Switch.html

In this, his latest thoughts on the subject, he appears to be casting doubts about the 5 segment SRB. What I would like to know is what Atlas derived booster could take their place? Would its development costs be more or less that what will have to be spent on the 5 segment SRB? Maybe they will be the next thing to go.............

Offline Bill White

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2018
  • Chicago area
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: The VSE Booster Switch
« Reply #1 on: 05/22/2006 04:56 pm »
A quote from the essay:

The political argument for the Shuttle-derived boosters was always the strongest. Mike Griffin's many cheerleaders cited them as an example of his political acumen. Even some critics accepted them as an inevitable result of the pork-barrel politics that keeps the manned space program alive in the absence of any real national need.

But there hasn't been any outcry from space-district congressmen at these radical changes in a program that was supposedly optimized to satisfy them. Nobody is denouncing Mike Griffin for what seems to be a blatant example of bait-and-switch tactics.

It's easy to see why. None of these changes actually diverts any money to another district.


Hmmm . . .

CLV and CaLV are now NOT really shuttle derived and yet none of the usual politicians are screaming. Isn't that a big political win for Griffin? A basis for building continuing political support after January 2009?

He also now gets an EELV derived HLLV without Boeing being prime contractor.  If CaLV was Delta IV variant/upgrade the above quoted constraints would not have been fulfilled. Atlas? It's those Russian engines, again.

= = =

The good news is that Griffin walked away from SSME when the data indicated (apparently) that he should do so.
EML architectures should be seen as ratchet opportunities

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37439
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21448
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: The VSE Booster Switch
« Reply #2 on: 05/22/2006 05:07 pm »
Just because the CaLV uses the RS-68 means it is EELV's derived.  It takes more than an engine to be a derivative.  Also Boeing doesn't own the RS-68 anymore.

Offline kraisee

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10560
  • Liked: 807
  • Likes Given: 40
RE: The VSE Booster Switch
« Reply #3 on: 05/22/2006 08:38 pm »
Jeff Bell comes across as typical attention seeker journalist with an equally typical big ol' "My Rocket's Better Than Yours" stick up his butt.

His personal choice wasn't selected and he's just being bitter towards NASA (and he's FAR from being the only one it seems).   I personally consider his journalistic approach a joke and his opinions are biased towards his own self-worth, not any real benefit to the space program.

Being that his articles only seem to contain bitter opinions, I personally think they are less worthwhile than most of the stuff on that really awful usspacenews.com site.

People like Bell will kill political support for the entire VSE more efficiently than anthing else by simply creating a feeling of lack of confidence.   Deliberately aiming to destroy confidence in NASA is irresponsible if he really supports that space program.   If the politico's are given reason start to question the VSE, the game comes to an end.

Lets not be handing the anti-space lobbyists any ammunitition.

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

Offline wannamoonbase

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5399
  • Denver, CO
    • U.S. Metric Association
  • Liked: 3104
  • Likes Given: 3853
RE: The VSE Booster Switch
« Reply #4 on: 05/22/2006 10:50 pm »
Quote
kraisee - 22/5/2006  3:25 PM

Jeff Bell comes across as typical attention seeker journalist with an equally typical big ol' "My Rocket's Better Than Yours" stick up his butt.

His personal choice wasn't selected and he's just being bitter towards NASA (and he's FAR from being the only one it seems).   I personally consider his journalistic approach a joke and his opinions are biased towards his own self-worth, not any real benefit to the space program.

Being that his articles only seem to contain bitter opinions, I personally think they are less worthwhile than most of the stuff on that really awful usspacenews.com site.

People like Bell will kill political support for the entire VSE more efficiently than anthing else by simply creating a feeling of lack of confidence.   Deliberately aiming to destroy confidence in NASA is irresponsible if he really supports that space program.   If the politico's are given reason start to question the VSE, the game comes to an end.

Lets not be handing the anti-space lobbyists any ammunitition.

Ross.

Yep, I concure.  

I find it interesting to read other proposed vehicles, but at some point many of these plans are nice ideas with glossy picutres.  Pictures are easy and cheap.  Spending the 10's of billions of dollars to get it built and working is where the Rocket Science and Engineering comes in.  NASP, X-33, X-34, etc. have all nice nice shiny pictures.

Anyone with a silver bullet that will put 100+ mT into LEO please step forward.

Wildly optimistic prediction, Superheavy recovery on IFT-4 or IFT-5

Offline kraisee

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10560
  • Liked: 807
  • Likes Given: 40
RE: The VSE Booster Switch
« Reply #5 on: 05/23/2006 12:06 am »
Quote
wannamoonbase - 22/5/2006  6:37 PM

Anyone with a silver bullet that will put 100+ mT into LEO please step forward.

NASA says they finally have the money, political backing, will and also the resources to do it.

They've also got a pretty good track-record, being the only organisation who made a moon rocket previously, *AND* they are the only ones who run a 100+ mT HLLV program right now too - they just rolled out the next flight to the pad a few days ago.   I, for one, think they can really do it.

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

Offline wannamoonbase

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5399
  • Denver, CO
    • U.S. Metric Association
  • Liked: 3104
  • Likes Given: 3853
RE: The VSE Booster Switch
« Reply #6 on: 05/23/2006 01:49 am »
kraisee, I agree with you.  

I was just making a point that some people think that some lone guy in  a garage is one day going to make a new rocket design that gets to orbit on a thimble full of baking soda and lemon juice and be fully reuseable.

I know that NASA can do it.  If only, for the last 25 years, they had been leaving the 100 mt in orbit instead of bringing it back the size of the moonbase (or mars for that matter) would have been huge.  Instead we have a partially complete space station with two handy men onboard, but that is another discussion.

But over the next 25 years maybe we can get out into the solar system.

If it takes 25 years to go from the moon to mars fine at least we are going somewhere in the mean time.

Despite the rise of China and India and the fall of the USSR and all the other things going on in the world, nothing can beat the US when it comes to deciding to do something.  The education and brains are here, the willingness to take risk is here.  And you can't just create that.
Wildly optimistic prediction, Superheavy recovery on IFT-4 or IFT-5

Offline tesh90

  • Member
  • Member
  • Posts: 74
  • Liked: 7
  • Likes Given: 1
RE: The VSE Booster Switch
« Reply #7 on: 05/23/2006 09:00 am »
I know I'm drifting off the point from this thread but I just don't think that we are serious about going into space.  Right now there is just no political will nor the physical necessity, to do so.  All this talk, about which booster is best and from which species it is derived from, is just that, talk.  I don't believe that anything serious will come out of this dabble into space venturing, or should I say space stumbling.  

I believe that the real break through will come in an unexpected manner.  All atempts to arrive at this break through have so far prooved unsuccessful, e.g. the cold war, space races between nations, weaponisation of space and space tourism.  The breakthrough might occur if big capitalist industries get interested.  I don't mean the current lot (Boeing, LM, etc.) as they seem only interested in preserving themselves and mantaining their powerbase.  

I fear that the breakthrough will only start to happen when the resources here, on terra ferma start to run out.  Resources like, copper, nickle, iron and rare metals will eventually run out.  Fossil fuels will probably run out a lot earlier.  Eventually, industries will have to form that willl go out and get these things from places out with of earth.

As is usually the case, preparation for this outcome will be left to the last minute and will not be happening in our life times.

I wish and hope to be prooved wrong...

Offline kraisee

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10560
  • Liked: 807
  • Likes Given: 40
RE: The VSE Booster Switch
« Reply #8 on: 05/23/2006 10:26 pm »
I personally think NASA can, and will, do this push.   While I think this will be the start of the long-term exploration fo our solar system, I do agree that it isn't all that big a push.

That's nothing to do with NASA, its the US Congress' decision.

As long as the US Space Program rates just 1.93% of the entire national Budget, or put another way, 3.8% of the funding the Defense Department commands currently, then you can see how low-priority the space program is to the US Government.

If Space was more important to the nation, the space program might command 10% or maybe 20% of the entire federal budget and then you could expect a LOT more results, but it doesn't.

No commerical enterprise sources seem willing to put up those sorts of sums either so how can we ever truly expect to be pushing very fast anywhere in the solar system?

The annual US Budget is *the* clearest direct indication of what is and what isn't the nation's main priorities.   NASA isn't all that high in the pecking order when you look at the figures.

Just be glad that we're finally starting to go out there again at all, instead of sitting permanently for decades in LEO with our thumbs up our butts.

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

Offline wannamoonbase

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5399
  • Denver, CO
    • U.S. Metric Association
  • Liked: 3104
  • Likes Given: 3853
RE: The VSE Booster Switch
« Reply #9 on: 05/26/2006 03:26 am »
kraisee I agree with you again.  

I think the funding level (if STS and ISS were not eating most of it) would be fine.

You could do a reasonable moon program and even a slower but effective Mars program.

I think the funding level is reasonable to be sustainable.  If it spiked or doubled it likely would not be sustainable unless it could seriously pay for itself by finding some type of Magic Beans in space to sell back on earth.

This next 4 year (maximum) transition period of getting out from under the 800 Gorilla STS program is the true struggle.  CLV, CEV and CaLV are all manageable if the STS funding was available.

I think the step wise and phased approach that Griffin has supported makes good sense.  (In the big strokes macro way, the details can be argued and are certainly evolving.)
Wildly optimistic prediction, Superheavy recovery on IFT-4 or IFT-5

Offline publiusr

  • Elite Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1539
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: The VSE Booster Switch
« Reply #10 on: 06/09/2006 10:19 pm »
I just want CaLV built as quickly as possible.

Tags:
 

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