Author Topic: NASA Selects Commercial Firms to Begin Development of Crew Transportation  (Read 118246 times)

Offline clongton

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10751
  • Connecticut
    • Direct Launcher
  • Liked: 3049
  • Likes Given: 1229
Come on.  I recognize your username as well as certain others above.  I know you, and certain others, have been coming to this site for sometime. 

Because of that, I realize that you, and certain others, should very well know it will not take Ares V or equivalent to lift Orion. 

Most importantly I also realize that you, and others, should very well know what is called out, and how, in the 2010 Authorization Act. 

The J-130 will only get the Orion to LEO.

J-130 is not really part of this thread but allow me to correct this completely incorrect statement.
This is the actual performance of the J-130:

Delivery Orbit: 30.0 x 100.0 nm at 51.6
Payload w/ regular NASA GR&A's: 159,777 lbs (72,474 kg)

That's a lot more than just Orion, a *lot* more.
Chuck - DIRECT co-founder
I started my career on the Saturn-V F-1A engine

Offline alexw

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1229
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
... Shuttle could be stretched to provide a bit of cushion to ISS until commercial is running and there is some confidence behind it. 
How do you stretch Shuttle when you do not have the ETs needed to fly?
Shuttle is history. (And, no, it was not Obama who killed it.)
And yes, he was.  He was the one that allowed shuttle to cross the "tipping point", which happened well into his presidency, without any concrete alternatives.  Hence, the GAO report and the ranking the STS program received during the transition. 
    Bush made the decision to end Shuttle. Obama chose not to temporarily resurrect it, a different matter entirely.
    What available alternatives would you regard as "concrete", apart from resurrecting shuttle?

   He chose to continue Soyuz, which is certainly concrete, and he chose to stretch Shuttle a little bit, which is certainly concrete, and he chose to follow through with CCdev, which is less-concrete today but plausibly the fasted option of any new replacement vehicles.
    -Alex

Offline A_M_Swallow

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8680
  • South coast of England
  • Liked: 403
  • Likes Given: 181
Come on.  I recognize your username as well as certain others above.  I know you, and certain others, have been coming to this site for sometime. 

Because of that, I realize that you, and certain others, should very well know it will not take Ares V or equivalent to lift Orion. 

Most importantly I also realize that you, and others, should very well know what is called out, and how, in the 2010 Authorization Act. 

The J-130 will only get the Orion to LEO.

J-130 is not really part of this thread but allow me to correct this completely incorrect statement.
This is the actual performance of the J-130:

Delivery Orbit: 30.0 x 100.0 nm at 51.6
Payload w/ regular NASA GR&A's: 159,777 lbs (72,474 kg)

That's a lot more than just Orion, a *lot* more.

It is still LEO.

Online ugordan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7773
    • My mainly Cassini image gallery
  • Liked: 2008
  • Likes Given: 467
And it's off topic.

Offline Namechange User

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7301
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Come on.  I recognize your username as well as certain others above.  I know you, and certain others, have been coming to this site for sometime. 

Because of that, I realize that you, and certain others, should very well know it will not take Ares V or equivalent to lift Orion. 

Most importantly I also realize that you, and others, should very well know what is called out, and how, in the 2010 Authorization Act. 

The J-130 will only get the Orion to LEO.

J-130 is not really part of this thread but allow me to correct this completely incorrect statement.
This is the actual performance of the J-130:

Delivery Orbit: 30.0 x 100.0 nm at 51.6
Payload w/ regular NASA GR&A's: 159,777 lbs (72,474 kg)

That's a lot more than just Orion, a *lot* more.

It is still LEO.

Yes and thank you for stating the obvious but intentionally looking beyond in order to be difficult. 

I don't care if it is a SDLV, EELV, etc that launches it.  I don't care if it has a J-2 powered upper stage, a cluster of RL-10s, a SEP tug or goes to some depot.

Everything still goes through LEO first.  Just stop. 
Enjoying viewing the forum a little better now by filtering certain users.


Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9820
  • Liked: 1500
  • Likes Given: 897
Update on CCDev-1 and commercial crew:
http://hobbyspace.com/nucleus/?itemid=27126

Offline ChefPat

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1053
  • Earth, for now
  • Liked: 123
  • Likes Given: 1022
Update on CCDev-1 and commercial crew:
http://hobbyspace.com/nucleus/?itemid=27126

Two lines from the Dreamchaser/SNC report piqued my interest.

"/---- Propulsion system also serves in abort
/---- Can land on any runway - no toxic material issues"


Does this claim have implications for Dragon's Propulsive Landing plan?
« Last Edit: 02/12/2011 02:50 pm by ChefPat »
Playing Politics with Commercial Crew is Un-American!!!

Offline Lars_J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6161
  • California
  • Liked: 665
  • Likes Given: 195
Why would it?

Offline Downix

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7087
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 1
Update on CCDev-1 and commercial crew:
http://hobbyspace.com/nucleus/?itemid=27126

Two lines from the Dreamchaser/SNC report piqued my interest.

"/---- Propulsion system also serves in abort
/---- Can land on any runway - no toxic material issues"


Does this claim have implications for Dragon's Propulsive Landing plan?
No, it is to compare against the Shuttle.
chuck - Toilet paper has no real value? Try living with 5 other adults for 6 months in a can with no toilet paper. Man oh man. Toilet paper would be worth it's weight in gold!

Offline Zond

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 216
  • Liked: 40
  • Likes Given: 0
COTS and CCDEV status
14th Annual FAA Commercial Space Transportation Conference

http://www.aiaa.org/pdf/industry/presentations/Alan_Lindenmoyer.pdf

Offline jryodabobs

  • Member
  • Posts: 26
  • Houston
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
COTS and CCDEV status
14th Annual FAA Commercial Space Transportation Conference

http://www.aiaa.org/pdf/industry/presentations/Alan_Lindenmoyer.pdf
Thank you!

Offline gladiator1332

  • Mike Majeski
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2430
  • Fort Myers, FL
  • Liked: 4
  • Likes Given: 5
COTS and CCDEV status
14th Annual FAA Commercial Space Transportation Conference

http://www.aiaa.org/pdf/industry/presentations/Alan_Lindenmoyer.pdf

Interesting! Quick question for anyone who would know...the second to last slide about the Simulator Development. That sim looks quite close Orbiter Space Simulator. Is that just coincidence, or is Orbiter being used?

Tags: