DIRECT v3.0 - Thread 1

[TrueBlueWitt]

Harrison blaming lack of funding for all NASA's constellation problems.

[TrueBlueWitt]

Ross is doing a GREAT JOB!!!

GO ROSS!

[Pheogh]

Great Job ROSS!!!

[dougkeenan]

Don't hate to do it!  Take issue with it!

edited: Nice job Ross!

[kraisee]

Oh boy, I'm a nervous wreck!

Head to head with Jack Schmitt at the 40th anniversary of Apollo 11!   Wow.

Ross.

[Jorge]

Mission question for J246 EDS and CLV/CaLV: is the latter flight (whenever it happens) expected to ascend to a direct (!) rendezvous with the former?  That is, there's no staging orbit/catch-up like shuttle/ISS?

No, there is always a phasing orbit.

Thanks.  What is the fuel budget for that maneuver?

Fuel budget is, to first order, unaffected by phasing. Large phase angle means you stay in a lower orbit longer and a small phase angle means you raise your orbit quicker. Total delta-V is the same. Phasing is done to expand launch window.

[Pheogh]

You did great and the sum up at the end couldn't have done more for the cause.

[dougkeenan]

First football, now baseball - homerun performance.  I do hope someone encourages Dr. Schmitt to examine the details with an open mind.

[cdhutch]

Oh boy, I'm a nervous wreck!

Head to head with Jack Schmitt at the 40th anniversary of Apollo 11!   Wow.

Ross.

Great job, Ross.  I think you handled yourself well with the Apollo 17 LMP--I suspect he's not too familiar with DIRECT.  I would have been more worried had you started challenging him on geology.

Regardless, your team is getting a lot of good exposure.  Best of luck with the Aerospace analysis and the Augustine panel.

[JMSC]

Oh boy, I'm a nervous wreck!

Head to head with Jack Schmitt at the 40th anniversary of Apollo 11!   Wow.

Ross.

You could catch the nervousness at the end, but great conclusion.  I don't think I have heard a more succinct summary of why the Direct approach is better than the current approach.  One vehicle, more performance 200 mt vs 180 mt, lower development cost, lower operational cost and equal or better safety.

Also, it’s pretty obvious the NASA Alan Bean and Schmidt worked for is not the NASA that exists today.  It's interesting to hear how much it is ingrained their thoughts that NASA today works the same way today as it did during their time, all options are considered and the option that best meets the program goals is what is selected.   I really think your finish was excellent since Bean and Schmidt were obviously quite in the mindset that Von Braun is still in charge and Direct was dismissed by NASA because it was honestly considered and found to have missed the mark, not that it was summarily dismissed early on by ESAS.  Netiher one really had a comeback for your closing statement, other than the standard Brooklyn bridge remark which was old when Apollo was carrying astronauts to the moon.

John

[gladiator1332]

Great job on the show Ross!

I think it was an issue of them just not understanding the concept. It is hard to get that across over the phone.

Jack Schmitt is correct to say that the funding hasn't been there. There is not argument there. I'm sure given the funding Ares could work. But you are dreaming if you believe such funding will ever materialize.
So let NASA continue to complain about the lack of funding...it is a moot subject.

[dougkeenan]

Fuel budget is, to first order, unaffected by phasing. Large phase angle means you stay in a lower orbit longer and a small phase angle means you raise your orbit quicker. Total delta-V is the same. Phasing is done to expand launch window.

"Stay in a lower orbit longer" - so the interceptor does not inject directly at 130nmx130nm, that spec just describes its performance capability?

[Pheogh]

First football, now baseball - homerun performance.  I do hope someone encourages Dr. Schmitt to examine the details with an open mind.

Let's hope that the aerospace report is made public and we all will be able too (examine the details). Just out of curiosity how likely is this? Would you imagine there to be confidential information from the presenters that would prevent this from happening?

[yg1968]

Did anybody record this? I just caught the end of it.

[clongton]

First football, now baseball - homerun performance.  I do hope someone encourages Dr. Schmitt to examine the details with an open mind.

Let's hope that the aerospace report is made public and we all will be able too (examine the details). Just out of curiosity how likely is this? Would you imagine there to be confidential information from the presenters that would prevent this from happening?

It is highly unlikely that we will hear anything publicaly from Aerospace Corp. They were contracted by the Augustine Commission and it is that commission that will receive the results of the analysis.

[zapkitty]

With that in mind you could add 25mT (maybe more?) of "debris retaining" structures to each SRB and still comfortably make orbit with margins intact.

I can answer that... no.

To terminate thrust the steel case must be unzipped. When that happens any addons that attempt to "contain" the debris will fail under the pressure of the still-burning fuel.

The much simpler and much lighter option is to cut the top off of the SRB before unzipping it in order to equalize thrust while the LAS makes its getaway... but even that would be a massive design change, it might torch the capsule on exit anyway, it does not cover SRB casing failures (actual explosions), it delays and may even interfere with the final range safety SRB self-destruct... and may not even work the way we'd want it to.

[Mark S]

Did anybody record this? I just caught the end of it.

I missed it too.  It looks their older shows all have mp3 recordings posted.  We may have to wait until they get that done for this show too.  I have no idea how long that might take.  Maybe a few hours, maybe a few days.

Unless someone else made a copy?

Mark S.

[zapkitty]

It is highly unlikely that we will hear anything publicaly from Aerospace Corp.

Irrelevant. Will these sunshine laws we've heard so much about in relationship to this committee enable a public review of the data touted as being the Direct data?

And even with ITAR and proprietary restrictions, will the Direct team be able to check that they haven't been deliberately shafted a third (or is it fourth) time?

To forestall knee-jerk reactions and attempts at faux diplomacy: It does not matter one way or the other how ethical or impartial Aerospace or the committee may actually be.... is the response just going to be "trust us"?

So how much sunshine will there actually be?

[clongton]

It is highly unlikely that we will hear anything publically from Aerospace Corp.

Irrelevant. Will these sunshine laws we've heard so much about in relationship to this committee enable a public review of the data touted as being the Direct data?

And even with ITAR and proprietary restrictions, will the Direct team be able to check that they haven't been deliberately shafted a third (or is it fourth) time?

To forestall knee-jerk reactions and attempts at faux diplomacy: It does not matter one way or the other how ethical or impartial Aerospace or the committee may actually be.... is the response just going to be "trust us"?

So how much sunshine will there actually be?

FOR THE RECORD:

The DIRECT team has every confidence in both the ethical conduct and technical competence of the leadership and analysts at Aerospace Corp and the members of the Augustine Commission. We fully expect a totally impartial assessment of the various launch options to be provided to the Augustine Commission by the Aerospace Corp. The Augustine Commission will, per their charter, compile the data into a report that clearly details the options, and will provide that to the Obama administration, who will then, in consultation with the members of Congress and the new leadership at NASA, decide the future direction of HSF for this nation. We are confident that because of the work being done by the Commission and by Aerospace Corp, that the options provided will be presented clearly and fairly.

For three and a half years we asked for and worked to get an honest assessment of all the options, on a level playing field, and we believe that is exactly what we got. We have no reason to believe that there is any reason what-so-ever to believe otherwise.

[kraisee]

Let's hope that the aerospace report is made public and we all will be able too (examine the details). Just out of curiosity how likely is this? Would you imagine there to be confidential information from the presenters that would prevent this from happening?

The Augustine Committee's charter makes it clear that they must release everything they get hold of.   Of course, some materials might be classified and they won't be able to release those, but everything else *has* to come out.

Ross.