Avron - 26/4/2006 10:45 AMQuoteJim - 26/4/2006 9:08 AMQuoteFransonUK - 26/4/2006 8:21 AMSorry if this sounds dumb, but surely 4x4 seg is cheaper than 2x5seg?Can't really answer that.4x4 might have more VAB and MLP mods 4x4 might have a more expensive ET.2x5 has more development costs (but then can be offset if the Stick uses it)Jim... wanna have a guess at the cost of the 4x4? if the VAB is a no-no.. stack at the pad?
Jim - 26/4/2006 9:08 AMQuoteFransonUK - 26/4/2006 8:21 AMSorry if this sounds dumb, but surely 4x4 seg is cheaper than 2x5seg?Can't really answer that.4x4 might have more VAB and MLP mods 4x4 might have a more expensive ET.2x5 has more development costs (but then can be offset if the Stick uses it)
FransonUK - 26/4/2006 8:21 AMSorry if this sounds dumb, but surely 4x4 seg is cheaper than 2x5seg?
Kayla - 30/4/2006 8:57 AMThere is a down side to a super heavy launcher, all the eggs are in one basket. 1 failure and not only do you loose the EDS, or the LSAM or a signficant piece of a lunar base, you loose it all. With the increase in engine count (without engine out) and staging events the reliability goes down. With smaller mass launches you do add the headache of orbital rendezvous, but each launcher is more reliable. You build in the to the proces backups so that if a launch failure occurs you keep going.
Kayla - 20/4/2006 4:47 PMI think that Kraisee is missing the point. Why hold exploration hostage to development of new rockets???
publiusr - 30/4/2006 4:39 PMQuoteKayla - 20/4/2006 4:47 PMI think that Kraisee is missing the point. Why hold exploration hostage to development of new rockets??? You are missing the point. The LACK of new vehicles is holding exploration hostage! The EELV only apologists are holding exploration hostage. 120 tons to orbit atop CALV needs only one launch with engine out. You will have to expend 15 to 18 such RS-68s on five Delta IVs to do what CaLV will do in but one launch. EELV will cost **more** over time. Five CaLVs and you still have your RS-68 engines produced--but you will have 500 tons in orbit in only five launches.THAT is REAL exploration!
Kayla - 30/4/2006 6:52 PMQuotepubliusr - 30/4/2006 4:39 PMQuoteKayla - 20/4/2006 4:47 PMI think that Kraisee is missing the point. Why hold exploration hostage to development of new rockets??? You are missing the point. The LACK of new vehicles is holding exploration hostage! The EELV only apologists are holding exploration hostage. 120 tons to orbit atop CALV needs only one launch with engine out. You will have to expend 15 to 18 such RS-68s on five Delta IVs to do what CaLV will do in but one launch. EELV will cost **more** over time. Five CaLVs and you still have your RS-68 engines produced--but you will have 500 tons in orbit in only five launches.THAT is REAL exploration!SDLV plans to spend ~$20B on non-recurring prior to the first lunar mission. I’d be a hero if I could get NASA to buy 100 Atlas V HLV’s for $20B! At 5 HLV’s per lunar mission this is 20 lunar missions using HLV’s before SDLV is ready to start launching the first one. Explain to me how the EELV crowd is holding exploration hostage?
wannamoonbase - 30/4/2006 9:55 PMOkay, I have had my fun commenting on the short comings of the ESAS. But unless W wakes up one morning and starts caring about space more than any president since Kennedy the plans aren't going to change.For better or worse we are all going to end up getting the CLV for the CEV. So perhaps we should discuss things other than EELV this and SRB that.Some good comments but rather repeatitive.
gladiator1332 - 30/4/2006 9:56 PMAr ethe pads for said EELVs ready for manned flights? Do they have a crew accessway, ya know, so were not hoisting them up there in a cherry-picker. The EELV option doesn't mean we are just going to slap a CEV on top of the thing and boom were ready to go. There are going to be development costs to ready the EELVs. You are dremaing if you don't think NASA is going to spend a couple billion "manrating" these vehicles.