Author Topic: "Heavy" CaLV performance figures  (Read 53630 times)

Offline wingod

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1305
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: "Heavy" CaLV performance figures
« Reply #140 on: 12/01/2006 02:55 PM »
Quote
TyMoore - 22/11/2006  9:20 AM

I would also add that the flame trench and water deluge sound suppression systems would almost certainly be 'overloaded' by the jet blasts from a 4 SRB+Core LV.  I used to think that it was more or less pretty easy to just hang a couple of extra SRB's off of an inline vehicle for extra thrust--but 4 segment SRB's are very heavy.  A 5 segment SRB is even heavier (closer to 1.6-1.8 million pounds each.) By the time redesigns ripple throughout the system, you end up with almost a completely different vehicle (that may deceptively have the same moldline--but the changes are interior!) And the crawler/transporters are showing signs of age and wear--and spare parts are almost non-existant for them.

An even larger vehicle may even overload the gravel beds of the crawler roads...which would require 'rebuilding' a good chunk of all of the launch infrastructure.

So it would seem that in order to go bigger than CaLV would require assembling a fully liquid vehicle, with liquid boosters...

It is difficult to create a new vehicle within the constraints of the existing infrastructure--thus I tend to think that CaLV is just about as big an LV as one can get without building a new VAB,  new transporters, and a new Launch Complex--and that is a BIG chunk of change right there...not to mention the realestate needed...


All that would be needed for the MAX design is a new pad, which the Ares V is going to need anyway.  The MAX four segement design comes from one of the original Von Braun (American) team members who worked the Redstone/Saturn1/Saturn V vehicles.  The MAX two segement design would not need a new pad (or even significant mods to the existing pad) and would allow for the stretch out in funding for the new pad.  The DDT&E for the four booster system would have been mostly amortized by the two segement version, no two completely separate developments as is today and would be cheaper to implement than Direct.


Offline wingod

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1305
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: "Heavy" CaLV performance figures
« Reply #141 on: 12/15/2006 08:50 PM »
It is now my understanding that for the two SRB version of the Max a new pad is not needed.  The diameter of the main stage is still 27 feet and the footprint on the MLP is exactly the same as for the STS.  It is only when you go to the four booster version that a new pad is needed.  Also, the avionics are exactly the same as is the Earth Departure stage, creating significant commonalities of design and flight heritage between the various versions of the system.


Offline TyMoore

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 482
  • Eureka, CA, USA
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: "Heavy" CaLV performance figures
« Reply #142 on: 12/17/2006 12:43 PM »
What about overloading the crawler/transporters? Won't a MAX four, 4-segment SRB configuration vehicle exceed the maximum load carrying capability of these machines? (About 8 or 9 million pounds.)

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 11187
  • Likes Given: 331
Re: "Heavy" CaLV performance figures
« Reply #143 on: 12/17/2006 01:26 PM »
Quote
TyMoore - 17/12/2006  8:26 AM

What about overloading the crawler/transporters? Won't a MAX four, 4-segment SRB configuration vehicle exceed the maximum load carrying capability of these machines? (About 8 or 9 million pounds.)

there are going to be new ones for the CaLV anyways

Offline TyMoore

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 482
  • Eureka, CA, USA
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: "Heavy" CaLV performance figures
« Reply #144 on: 12/17/2006 06:42 PM »
I wasn't aware that NASA would replace the crawler transporters: it makes sense, though; the old ones are getting difficult to find parts for. Is there a link to the specs for the new machines?

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 11187
  • Likes Given: 331
Re: "Heavy" CaLV performance figures
« Reply #145 on: 12/17/2006 06:45 PM »
Quote
TyMoore - 17/12/2006  2:25 PM

I wasn't aware that NASA would replace the crawler transporters: it makes sense, though; the old ones are getting difficult to find parts for. Is there a link to the specs for the new machines?

Too early for that.  Need to design the CaLV first

Offline wingod

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1305
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: "Heavy" CaLV performance figures
« Reply #146 on: 12/24/2006 05:27 PM »
Quote
TyMoore - 17/12/2006  7:26 AM

What about overloading the crawler/transporters? Won't a MAX four, 4-segment SRB configuration vehicle exceed the maximum load carrying capability of these machines? (About 8 or 9 million pounds.)

The crawler/transporter is based upon a strip mining drag line frame and propulsion system.  Those things are much bigger today and there are plenty of them in operation and you can place an order any time you want.

Also, the MAX/2SRB initial design would fit just fine on the existing STS footprint, which is one of the reasons to use it.  It is only when the heavier lift is needed that you go to for segments.  Also, you have amortized 85% of the development costs of the four or six segement versions when you built the first one.  


Offline publiusr

  • Elite Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1540
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 2

Tags: