I would like to find references for some of the claims in the wikipedia article. 1) DIRECT has studied infrastructure at Canaveral. It might be enough to document what Ares is planning. I had seen a request for proposals to alter Highbay 3 and add 22 service floors. I read in a powerpoint that there are to be three lightweight Ares I Mobile Launch Platforms, the three current MLPs would be adapted early for Ares V, and three more MLPs would be made for Ares V. What I do not know is whether Ares V could launch from either launchpad. I presume DIRECT could, but I do not know for sure. Maybe it's enough just to wheel another MLP to the same pad after the first Ares V launches. I think references to these questions would help the article's claims that DIRECT was better on reuse of existing facilities and not any worse on multiple launches.
Who or what constitutes a valid reference?
Thanks for that, those clarify wiki's position. I still think we need to decide on this thread what we're going to accept as a source, because the wiki rules give us some leeway. Specifically are we going to use what Ross says on the forum as a source (under the `quotation' wiki rules) or should we stick to Directs published literature?
Self-published sources (online and paper)Anyone can create a website or pay to have a book published, then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason self-published media, whether books, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, blogs, Internet forum postings, tweets etc., are largely not acceptable.[nb 4]
If we are going to do this, let's do it right. Below is the "Payload Capacity" section of the article, anyone see anything that needs to be changed? I will make the updates on Wikipedia every other day, and post a new section.Payload capacityThe payload capacity of Ares V to low earth orbit, according to NASA, is 188,000 kg. This is more than the largest proposed Jupiter rocket (Jupiter-246 Heavy with 5 segment SRBS) which is claimed to lift about 120,000 kg to LEO [34[Reference http://www.launchcomplexmodels.com/Direct/documents/Baseball_Cards/J246H-41.5004.08001_EDS_090608.jpg ]]. For potential Mars missions more launches per mission would thus be required using Jupiter instead of Ares V and the mission modules would need to be separated in more different parts. However, NASA's Design Reference Mission 5.0 completed in 2007 only requires a 125mt+ launch vehicle with a 10m+ diameter shroud for a Mars mission with 6 separate Ares V launches. The Jupiter rocket fulfills the requirements of the Design Reference Mission with only a very narrow shortfall in payload to LEO , while fulfilling the volume requirements.The Jupiter rockets are shorter in height than the Ares V, permitting very long payload fairings and thus greater total internal volume than possible with the taller Ares V which quickly encounters restraints due to height limitations within the Vehicle Assembly Building at KSC.
This could probably be much, much shorter.And I don't think Ares V is anywhere neat 188 t at present.Quote from: NUAETIUS on 08/03/2009 04:15 amIf we are going to do this, let's do it right. Below is the "Payload Capacity" section of the article, anyone see anything that needs to be changed? I will make the updates on Wikipedia every other day, and post a new section.Payload capacityThe payload capacity of Ares V to low earth orbit, according to NASA, is 188,000 kg{{The rest of the article uses tonnes. Personally, I would stick to that or change all mass references to kg!}}.{{Citation needed}} This is more than the largest proposed Jupiter rocket (Jupiter-246 Heavy with 5 segment SRBS) which is claimed to lift about 120,000 kg to LEO [34[Reference http://www.launchcomplexmodels.com/Direct/documents/Baseball_Cards/J246H-41.5004.08001_EDS_090608.jpg ]]. For potential Mars missions more launches per mission would thus be required using Jupiter instead of Ares V{{comma?}} and the mission modules would {{need to be separated in more different parts | I think this could be said a little more suavely--I can't beat it at this time, however!}}. However, NASA's Design Reference Mission 5.0 completed in 2007 only requires a 125mt+ launch vehicle {{any vehicle or Ares V as mentioned at the end of this sentence?}} launch with a 10m+ diameter shroud for a Mars mission with 6 separate Ares V launches.{{fact}} The Jupiter rocket fulfills the requirements of the Design Reference Mission with only a very narrow shortfall in payload to LEO , while fulfilling the volume requirements.The Jupiter rockets are shorter in height than the Ares V, permitting very long payload fairings and thus greater total internal volume than possible with the taller Ares V which quickly encounters restraints due to height limitations within the Vehicle Assembly Building at KSC.{{fact}}fotoguzzi's note: Is DRM 5.0 specifying 6 x Ares V launches? I think a way to rephrase the above is that the DRM 5.0 spec calls for n tonnes mass in 6 x 125 t loads.{{Citation needed}} The Jupiter-whatever would be able to transfer the same mass with n-many more launches with a maximum of n tonnes per launch.{{Citation needed | baseball card}} DIRECT believes that no single payload module would need to exceed n tonnes of mass.{{Citation needed | this might be very hard to verify}} Further, DIRECT believes that the total cost of the n launches would be much less than with Ares V.{{Citation needed| I think this might be easier to verify, but still not easy.}}
If we are going to do this, let's do it right. Below is the "Payload Capacity" section of the article, anyone see anything that needs to be changed? I will make the updates on Wikipedia every other day, and post a new section.Payload capacityThe payload capacity of Ares V to low earth orbit, according to NASA, is 188,000 kg{{The rest of the article uses tonnes. Personally, I would stick to that or change all mass references to kg!}}.{{Citation needed}} This is more than the largest proposed Jupiter rocket (Jupiter-246 Heavy with 5 segment SRBS) which is claimed to lift about 120,000 kg to LEO [34[Reference http://www.launchcomplexmodels.com/Direct/documents/Baseball_Cards/J246H-41.5004.08001_EDS_090608.jpg ]]. For potential Mars missions more launches per mission would thus be required using Jupiter instead of Ares V{{comma?}} and the mission modules would {{need to be separated in more different parts | I think this could be said a little more suavely--I can't beat it at this time, however!}}. However, NASA's Design Reference Mission 5.0 completed in 2007 only requires a 125mt+ launch vehicle {{any vehicle or Ares V as mentioned at the end of this sentence?}} launch with a 10m+ diameter shroud for a Mars mission with 6 separate Ares V launches.{{fact}} The Jupiter rocket fulfills the requirements of the Design Reference Mission with only a very narrow shortfall in payload to LEO , while fulfilling the volume requirements.The Jupiter rockets are shorter in height than the Ares V, permitting very long payload fairings and thus greater total internal volume than possible with the taller Ares V which quickly encounters restraints due to height limitations within the Vehicle Assembly Building at KSC.{{fact}}fotoguzzi's note: Is DRM 5.0 specifying 6 x Ares V launches? I think a way to rephrase the above is that the DRM 5.0 spec calls for n tonnes mass in 6 x 125 t loads.{{Citation needed}} The Jupiter-whatever would be able to transfer the same mass with n-many more launches with a maximum of n tonnes per launch.{{Citation needed | baseball card}} DIRECT believes that no single payload module would need to exceed n tonnes of mass.{{Citation needed | this might be very hard to verify}} Further, DIRECT believes that the total cost of the n launches would be much less than with Ares V.{{Citation needed| I think this might be easier to verify, but still not easy.}}
Here's the latest version of the PF graphic. The base image was provided by Ross, I pulled the Altair graphic from an early PF image provided by Ross, and I made the engine graphic at the base.