A_M_Swallow - 2/1/2008 4:28 AMThe man-rated extra heavy EELV design specification does not have to come from LH or Boeing. It could come from a 'retired' employee.
meiza - 29/12/2007 11:44 AMChuck, you're really limping with semantics.You're trying to present NASA's decision about Heavy Lift as something that can not be questioned or even talked about.Yet you propose direct that questions NASA's decision about Ares I and V.We are talking about NASA's decisions here. You keep missing the point. We are not talking about making maximum profit in selling crazy customers something they don't need, but about guiding NASA to make the best decisions for the future of humankind.John Houbolt is relevant too. A propellant depot with multiple launchers is a procedure and an idea and a general architecture. It actually is quite close to the choice of direct vs LOR lunar mission. NASA did NOT have the heavy lifter needed to do a direct mission. It was contemplating Nova at the time, since Saturn would have been iffy at best for the great mass needed. LOR enabled a smaller launch vehicle to do the mission. Most results in the least time.This all is much closer to the question than Direct vs Ares which is just arguing which type of heavy lifter is going to be used.
meiza - 2/1/2008 8:06 PMNo, the guy lives on an island and wants to move some furniture over the course of a few months to his new summer cottage that's a few tens of kilometers away from his home. He would probably be best off by renting a moving service company (they have employees too who can help), or if that won't do, a van from a company and getting friends to help and doing a few trips with the van. Note that none of the furniture items is so big that it doesn't fit in a van. (None of the ESAS craft are so big they don't fit on an EELV.) A van that is existing on the island and rentable or even buyable. If he's trying to buy a truck that would have to be transported from the mainland, it would take a year because one would need to build a deeper port and all, and it'd cost a huge amount of money. He should get some advice from smarter friends to get rid of that idea, or even seek psychological help for his delusions of grandeur. He would have to sell the truck after the one trip anyway, and he'd make a big loss in that.
meiza - 3/1/2008 1:06 AMNo, the guy lives on an island and wants to move some furniture over the course of a few months to his new summer cottage that's a few tens of kilometers away from his home. He would probably be best off by renting a moving service company (they have employees too who can help), or if that won't do, a van from a company and getting friends to help and doing a few trips with the van. Note that none of the furniture items is so big that it doesn't fit in a van. (None of the ESAS craft are so big they don't fit on an EELV.) A van that is existing on the island and rentable or even buyable. If he's trying to buy a truck that would have to be transported from the mainland, it would take a year because one would need to build a deeper port and all, and it'd cost a huge amount of money. He should get some advice from smarter friends to get rid of that idea, or even seek psychological help for his delusions of grandeur. He would have to sell the truck after the one trip anyway, and he'd make a big loss in that.
Jim - 2/1/2008 1:15 PMQuoteA_M_Swallow - 2/1/2008 4:28 AMThe man-rated extra heavy EELV design specification does not have to come from LH or Boeing. It could come from a 'retired' employee.That is useless. It doesn't mean that ULA (LM or Boeing) will buy into it
JIS - 3/1/2008 2:32 AMIt's more like the guy owns a pick-up and want to relocate 1000km away. His car (after some mods and repairs) can carry petrol just for that 1000km trip and just small part of his furniture. Unfortunatelly there is no petrol station on the way. He can also buy expensive truck which can carry all his furniture all the way there. What stratgy will he use? What if he knows he is relocating there and back every 6 months?1. buy the truck to do everything in one trip, use pick-up just for moving few remaining boxes.2. repair pick-up, build a petrol station at the half way and make a lot of traveling between here and there every six months.
A_M_Swallow - 3/1/2008 12:18 PMQuoteJim - 2/1/2008 1:15 PMQuoteA_M_Swallow - 2/1/2008 4:28 AMThe man-rated extra heavy EELV design specification does not have to come from LH or Boeing. It could come from a 'retired' employee.That is useless. It doesn't mean that ULA (LM or Boeing) will buy into itThis is a political problem. Think why I put retired in quotes.
A_M_Swallow - 3/1/2008 1:18 PMIf ULA is not interested in a COTS type contract then try something similar to the Private Finance Initiative used by the British Government when it wants a new hospital built.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_Finance_InitiativeSay a contract to launch n off man-rated 100mT payload LV for 15 (or 20) years. ULA can find its own bank to lend it the money.
A_M_Swallow - 3/1/2008 1:18 PMThe managers at Government Contractors tend to fall into line when civil servants start waving billion dollar contracts under their nose. The companies will have to believe that they have a reasonable chance of making a profit..
meiza - 3/1/2008 3:31 PMIt's the American taxpayers who pay NASA, it's not as if it's some quirky person's own money. One can question the customer's desires. Why is everyone so bent on this analogy of "the customer is always right". It breaks down really quickly. NASA has been wrong in it's ideas countless times before too.
They are spending the money, come hell or high water. And to rub salt into the wound, they are spending it on heavy lift.
meiza - 3/1/2008 7:00 PMYou're performing your "the dye is cast so don't discuss" speech again. It's not about car sales for ULA, it's the future of human spaceflight and spacefaring and the timetable of that.
yinzer - 3/1/2008 8:30 PMWhat money are they spending on "heavy lift"? As near as I can tell they are spending money on the five-segment SRB, on J-2X development, and on designing the Orion. None of those are useful only in a heavy-lift architecture.QuoteThey are spending the money, come hell or high water. And to rub salt into the wound, they are spending it on heavy lift.Come hell, high water, or a change in congress or the administration. See the history of the ISS.
clongton - 3/1/2008 6:08 PMTheir version of heavy lift is the Ares-V. The Ares-I is a setup. They are using it to build the Ares-V. The 5-segment SRB is an Ares-V necessity.The J-2X is an Ares-V necessity.They are building the Ares-I for the sole purpose of building the Ares-V.They are spending the money to get the heavy lift.Once they have it, Ares-I will be retired.After ISS is retired Griffin has no plans to do anything at all in LEO, so Ares-I won't be needed.Orion will fly on the Ares-V.
Jim - 3/1/2008 1:06 PMQuoteA_M_Swallow - 3/1/2008 12:18 PMQuoteJim - 2/1/2008 1:15 PMQuoteA_M_Swallow - 2/1/2008 4:28 AMThe man-rated extra heavy EELV design specification does not have to come from LH or Boeing. It could come from a 'retired' employee.That is useless. It doesn't mean that ULA (LM or Boeing) will buy into itThis is a political problem. Think why I put retired in quotes.still not applicable. NO 'retired' employee is going to have a say in what NASA astronauts fly. NASA has no say in commercial astronauts
yinzer - 3/1/2008 12:04 AMQuoteclongton - 3/1/2008 6:08 PMTheir version of heavy lift is the Ares-V. The Ares-I is a setup. They are using it to build the Ares-V. The 5-segment SRB is an Ares-V necessity.The J-2X is an Ares-V necessity.They are building the Ares-I for the sole purpose of building the Ares-V.They are spending the money to get the heavy lift.Once they have it, Ares-I will be retired.After ISS is retired Griffin has no plans to do anything at all in LEO, so Ares-I won't be needed.Orion will fly on the Ares-V.Griffin may have those plans, but he doesn't get to decide. The Ares V needs the J-2X and the 5-segment SRB, but it also needs many billions of dollars appropriated by the congresses of the mid-2010s. If they think that the Ares V is too expensive and demand that NASA go back and come up with something that fits within existing budgets or else not go to the moon at all, then there's no Ares V. Simple as that.