DIRECT v3.0 - Thread 1

[dlapine]

Wow, just listened the NPR segment. Nice job Ross.

I've got great respect for any astronaut, let alone someone who went to the moon, but there were points in the conversation that reflected less on the person and more on the NASA, "not invented here" mentality.

One of the guests, astronaut Alan Bean, replied to Ross's description of DIRECT with a really telling statement.

"I've spent 18 years at NASA ... and NASA had developed a wonderful methodology in making trade offs between these kinds of ideas... sometimes, early on, I would go against them, but I was found to be wrong, so I don't go against this NASA methodology anymore."

Listening to Ross succinctly describe the breakdown of the $30 billion Ares I/V costs versus the savings generated by building a single vehicle and reusing as much as possible was wonderful.

It was a serious response and was the perfect antidote to the when Harrison Schmitt interrupted him after Ross gave the $12 billion cost estimate for DIRECT.

"You know as well as I do that those kind of numbers are fict... are just kind of something that will change with time as other people realize that you have to reduce risk."

I've never understood why NASA would be so hostile to a good idea, before this.

Anyways, Ross did an excellent job in being professional and trying to bring the NASA people on board. He truly tried to avoid confrontation- I can see why you're the spokesman.

[brihath]

Wow, just listened the NPR segment. Nice job Ross.

I've got great respect for any astronaut, let alone someone who went to the moon, but there were points in the conversation that reflected less on the person and more on the NASA, "not invented here" mentality.

One of the guests, astronaut Alan Bean, replied to Ross's description of DIRECT with a really telling statement.

"I've spent 18 years at NASA ... and NASA had developed a wonderful methodology in making trade offs between these kinds of ideas... sometimes, early on, I would go against them, but I was found to be wrong, so I don't go against this NASA methodology anymore."

 

With apologies to Al Bean, I am sure there we a lot of people who disagreed with that statement right after January 27, 1967.  Even back in the glory days there were failures of oversight and too much overconfidence in their designs.

[Lobo]

I'm so jealous.  I'd love to meet any of the Apollo astronauts.  But Harrison Schmidt is one of my personal favorites.

Tell him "hi" from us Ross!

Announcement:

"To The Moon"
NPR -- Science Friday with Ira Flatow
(broadcast Friday, July 17th, 2009)

http://www.sciencefriday.com/program/archives/200907171

Guests:

Alan Bean, Apollo 12 Astronaut & Moon-walker
Dr. Harrison Schmitt, Apollo 17 Astronaut & Moon-walker
Andrew Chaikin, Author and Journalist
Ross Tierney, Founder of The DIRECT Team


I would be very grateful if someone could please ensure this gets recorded somehow!


Regards,

Ross Tierney
www.directlauncher.com
www.launchcomplexmodels.com
--
"Why is there not more thinking in the direction
of developing the simplest scheme possible?"
                        -- John C. Houbolt, 1961

[randomly]

Here's a link to the archived audio of the Science Friday show on the NPR site for those that missed it.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106733865

I also want to express my appreciation to the Direct team for developing and pushing the Jupiter concept to national attention. It may be the only concept that preserves a useful HSF and HLV program in the face of the future budget pressures. Special thanks to Ross for his tactful, diplomatic, and marvelously effective advocacy of the Jupiter system. I doubt that DIRECT would have got anywhere near the traction or exposure it has without his seemingly endless energy to champion the concept with such tactful and rational arguments.

If it does come about that a Jupiter like SDLV 2 launch architecture becomes the new NASA baseline I'm sure egos will push it to being relabeled and respun as NASA derived. That would be unfortunate, for the very idea that a handful of 'renegade' engineers could buck the bureaucracy and push a launcher concept that becomes the future of NASA spaceflight is the quintessentially American triumph of the underdog story. It's actually a great message to send in these hard times.

[drdave]

While searching through the HSF Committee web site, I ran across their request to review a series of documents for the second sub-group (Exploration Beyond LEO).  Right on the main page they say:

The Committee wants your comments on #3

The link takes you to:

Download a Graphic of the Committee Subgroups Structure and Membership (pdf, 277k)
Download the current Subgroups Progress Report (pdf, 23k)
Exploration Beyond LEO: Process and Progress  (pdf, 144k)
This document describes the process and progress of the Exploration Beyond LEO Subgroup. The document presents some preliminary scenarios for U.S. human space flight that the subgroup is analyzing. The Committee wants your comments on this document and on the scenarios presented.

From their “Process and Progress” document

Specifically, the “Exploration Beyond LEO” subcommittee will examine the following questions:

1. What are the appropriate destinations and sequences of exploration for human exploration beyond LEO;

2. What should be the mode of surface exploration  (if any);

3. What is the strategy within the human space flight program for coordinating human and robotic exploration;

4. What are the assumed launch vehicle(s) to LEO (in terms of mass to orbit and shroud diameter);

5. What are the options for in-space fuel/oxidizer storage and transfer;

6. What is the role that space technology research and development will play;

7. What is our strategy for engaging international partners in the development of the program;

8. What is our strategy for engaging commercial entities?

Also:

The first subcommittee-defined scenario, Lunar Base, is a close derivative of the current program, with some simplifications.

Lunar Global is a scenario in which a base or
outpost is not assembled on the Moon, but instead the Moon is explored by a coordinated series of extended duration human sorties and robotic exploration. In both these cases, implications for subsequent Mars exploration will be considered.

Moon to Mars, or more completely Moon on the way to Mars, is a scenario in which the primary objective is Mars exploration, and all systems are designed for Mars. Only when it is beneficial to use the Moon as a true test bed for these Mars exploration systems will flights to the Moon be conducted.

Mars First is a plan to exclusively pursue human exploration of the Mars as fast as possible, without using the Moon as a first destination.

Finally, Flexible Path is a scenario that allows humans to visit a wide number of inner solar system bodies, objects and locations, but not go to the surface of those with deep gravity wells. Destinations besides Moon and Mars would include the Earth-Moon and Earth-Sun Lagrange points, near-Earth objects (NEOs) and the moons of Mars. There is nothing implied in this scenario that surface exploration might not follow, simply that exploration would first exploit all that could be done without landing on a planetary surface.

Are rhese a series of softball questions aimed at the strength of Direct?

Certainly Question 5 opens up the discussion of Propellant Depots, which have been discussed at length here.

And The Flexible Path scenario is my favorite:  don’t get bogged down in gravity wells until you know you really need to go there.  Let the robots do the work.

[dougkeenan]

Just curious Ross, how did you get a invitation for that show?

[luke strawwalker]

So Ross, will you ever offer Jupiter-130/246 models?  I might have to pick up one, although I can wait as you are understandably busy (I would love to see lego make a Jupiter model, dont ask why...)

Make it a model rocket and I'll buy two.    Altho technically you might be able to kitbash one using a shuttle kit.

Dr. Zooch is supposed to be coming out with a Jupiter model rocket... (user "zerm" here on the board)  Maybe PM him for more information...

Later!  OL JR

[cgrunska]

i like that flexible path idea..

[rocketguy101]

Make it a model rocket and I'll buy two.    Altho technically you might be able to kitbash one using a shuttle kit.

I put plans to scratch build a J-120 (Direct 2.0) on Rocketry Planet.  Video of the flight is here on the Direct site

[drdave]

i like that flexible path idea..

It's basically the exploration path that Robert Farquhar advocated in the March-April 2008 Issue of the Planetary Society Report.  He called the Moon Base proposal a cul-de-sac which would suck up all money for decades to come.  On this forum, his articles on Lagrange points are well known.  They make the logical long term jumping off points for the rest of the Solar System.

So, is this invitation from the 475 nm Commission an invitation for someone not associated with Direct to give a three minute brief on how Direct answers key sub-group questions and the Flexible Path option?

Can we steal from the 3 minute presentation thread?

[drdave]

This is the Progress Report for the subgroup "Exploration Beyond LEO":

Subgroup on Exploration Beyond Low Earth Orbit
Dr. Crawley, who leads this subgroup, said that he expects them to analyze
approximately five destination-based scenarios to present to the full Committee. He described the intended method for analyzing each scenario. The subgroup has developed eight questions, the answers to which would help shape the subgroup’s analysis and determine any potential recommendations to the full committee. Two of the questions allow the subgroup to match up the beyond-LEO cases with those leading to LEO. One is the question of what launch vehicles are available; the other is the potential for in-space fuel depots and fuel transfers. The subgroup will also examine assessments of technology, engaging international partners and commercial ventures. In addition to the five subgroupdefined scenarios, several other good comprehensive architectural studies will be examined. One of these is a joint ESA/NASA study completed last year, and another is the report coming out of a “blue sky exercise” that NASA Advisory Council Chairman Dr. Kenneth Ford is leading.

Does any body have information on "the joint ESA/NASA study completed last year" or the "blue sky exercise of Dr. Kenneth Ford"?

[kraisee]

Oceanfront???  I'll bring my suit and flip-flops! :-)

Definitely.   And don't forget your Factor 50 too -- The mid-Summer Florida sunshine will burn you badly in less than an hour if you don't.

Ross.

[Lancer525]

So Ross, will you ever offer Jupiter-130/246 models?  I might have to pick up one, although I can wait as you are understandably busy (I would love to see lego make a Jupiter model, dont ask why...)

Make it a model rocket and I'll buy two.    Altho technically you might be able to kitbash one using a shuttle kit.

Dr. Zooch is supposed to be coming out with a Jupiter model rocket... (user "zerm" here on the board)  Maybe PM him for more information...

Later!  OL JR

I've been fiddling with plans for a parallel staged J-130 for a while now, but I'm having some difficulty finding out enough information on how to separate the RSRMs from the core, and still have the core, RSRMs, and Orion recover separately. I'm also thinking about doing the J-246 as a paralell two stager, with the same recovery options.

It's not nearly as easy to design a flying model as it is to make a static one out of paper.

If any of you guys who are working on the flying model need any help with textures or skins, shoot me a PM and I'd be happy to work with you.

I should have the plans for the J-130 and J-246 in 1/144 scale out by the end of next week, I hope.

And if any of you guys build them, please share your photos and build experiences. I'm always looking at ways to improve the instructions sheets.

 

[kraisee]

I read "No Pre-Registration" to mean that if we are there early enough, we can get in.  True?

I guess.   Though your guess is going to be just as good as mine on this one!

Ross.

[kraisee]

Just curious Ross, how did you get a invitation for that show?

The show's producer came to us.

Ross.

[cro-magnon gramps]

Just curious Ross, how did you get a invitation for that show?

The show's producer came to us.

Ross.

That is great news Ross, let's hope there are more in the pipe line...

[gladiator1332]

Just curious Ross, how did you get a invitation for that show?

The show's producer came to us.

Ross.

That is great news Ross, let's hope there are more in the pipe line...

Meet the Press would certainly be impressive. 

[engstudent]

"If you believe that I have a bridge I want to sell you,"?!

WHAT?!

Its one thing not to be familiar with the concept but quite another to insult the person offering an alternative before you understand what hes saying(I do this sort of myopian, tired brained thing all the time myself But I expect more of the people NASA has sent into space).  I know these guys have been to the moon and are real american heroes.  But they are just men, and they were mistaken, and less than inspirational IMHO.

How can they compare a concept being vetted by the Aerospace Corporation at the orders of the Augustine Commission to by as ridiculous as buying a bridge to nowhere?!  I was disappointed by these comments and probably didn't get as much as I could from the rest of the segment because of it.

Ross handled this much better than I would've.  I think I would've said something regrettable.  You did great Ross.

[engstudent]

Whats this about Meet the Press?  I haven't had a chance to catch up with the thread.

[gladiator1332]

Whats this about Meet the Press?  I haven't had a chance to catch up with the thread.

I offered it up as a possible candidate for which show to "Directify" next.