Sea Dragon in the 21st century?

[JasonW3]

Ok,

     I'm probably whipping a dead horse with this one, but;
     Assuming one were to build the Sea Dragon today with today's tech, costs etc, assuming one went for hydrogen peroxide / kerosene for both stages,  (Yes, I know that there would be a drop in mass to orbit, but how much would it be?) and assuming that you were to make two versions, both cargo rated, for now, one that would boostp to 500 tones to orbit and one that boosted 200 tons to orbit, (the upper stage using a plug nozzle and ballute for re-entry and splash down, the lower stage using simply the ballute system) how long would it take to test, using bthe testing that has gone before as a starting point, (and the smaller, 200 ton bird as a proof of principle craft) and how much would such a program cost to set up and operate today?

     I put forth that construction costs, (at least labor) should be lower due to advances in technologies, the avionics should cost a fraction of what they would have in the 1960's and due to the fact that that your using non-cryogenic fuels fueling costs should also be lower.
     However, I realize that hydrogen peroxide is both somewhat corrosive and volitile in high concentrations, but the savings in cryogenics costs should offset this cost greatly.

     Again, I need to know how much mass is sacrificed by going all hydrogenperoxide on both stages, instead of the Kerosene / LOX mix for the first stage and the LH2 / LOX mix for the upperstage.
     Then I need real world costs for construction, testing, towing out to sea, launching, recovering the ballist tankage, and both the first and second stages.  Could this be a cost effective alternative, due to economies of scale, to what we now have?  (Which is nothing).

     From what I have gathered so far, the current administration doesn't want NASA piloting ANY craft, but simply a conmmercial company boosting scientists into space, flying them to the Moon and Mars, and acting as the maintenance people for the craft involved, while the scientistsare chauffered there.  (Maybe even to the point of both b ase constrruction and ground vehicle driving?  Great.  First dune buggy driver/mechanic on Mars.   Hmmm... Still...  That WOULD be one hell of a title, now wouldn't it?)

Jason

[kraisee]

Sorry, but you are correct:   This has already been beaten to death, over on the main Sea Dragon thread:-

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=9733.0

Ross.

[JasonW3]

Sorry, but you are correct:   This has already been beaten to death, over on the main Sea Dragon thread:-

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=9733.0

Ross.

Thanks Ross,

     No offense to you, but with the NIH mindset that most from the "Industry" seem to have here, well...

     Sorry to have bothered you folks here.  I'll just go back over to my corner like a good little "no not a thing about the space industry" dweebs and shut up.

Jason

[MarsInMyLifetime]

From the Space Operations budget (2nd paragraph):
 
 "Though the fleet of Space Shuttle orbiters will be retired once their role in ISS assembly is complete in 2010, portions of the Space Shuttle's legacy (including manufacturing facilities, ground operations equipment, launch pads, flight hardware, workforce skills, and experience) will be the foundation for the exploration vehicles being developed by the NASA Exploration Systems Mission Directorate (ESMD). This budget provides for careful planning, optimized utilization, and responsive disposition of processes, personnel, resources, and real and personal property, focused upon leveraging legacy assets for Exploration programs' safety and mission success."
 
 Doesn't this seem to preserve the use of those resources in a way where a HLV could meet Exploration needs?
 

[JasonW3]

From the Space Operations budget (2nd paragraph):
 
 "Though the fleet of Space Shuttle orbiters will be retired once their role in ISS assembly is complete in 2010, portions of the Space Shuttle's legacy (including manufacturing facilities, ground operations equipment, launch pads, flight hardware, workforce skills, and experience) will be the foundation for the exploration vehicles being developed by the NASA Exploration Systems Mission Directorate (ESMD). This budget provides for careful planning, optimized utilization, and responsive disposition of processes, personnel, resources, and real and personal property, focused upon leveraging legacy assets for Exploration programs' safety and mission success."
 
 Doesn't this seem to preserve the use of those resources in a way where a HLV could meet Exploration needs?
 

Yes...
    But one that will be WAY too expensive and WAY over-engineered for a cargo job.  They keep for getting the KISS principle - Keep It Simple Stupid!

Jason

Jason