Author Topic: My reason for this SDLV talk  (Read 11721 times)

Offline Bruce H

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 175
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: My reason for this SDLV talk
« Reply #20 on: 12/09/2005 12:09 AM »
Facinating that on their site they give a big section on the U.S. Shuttle to the ditch and crew escape.

http://www.buran.ru/htm/shuttle.htm

Offline publiusr

  • Elite Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1540
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 2
RE: My reason for this SDLV talk
« Reply #21 on: 12/09/2005 07:48 PM »
Quote
RedSky - 8/12/2005  3:24 PM

I finally found that page again showing the proposed recovery of the Energia zenit boosters:

http://www.buran.ru/htm/09-3.htm

Edit:  Also, from the graphic at the bottom of the page of the landed booster, apparently it also had some landing retro rockets (like the Soyuz does a second before touchdown).  You can see the little "crater" there depicted on the ground.  Also, in the small illustration earlier on that page (picture #9), the landing seems to show a "puff" of the landing rockets.

That is my favorite site. Simpler versions of those boosters are the first stage of Boeing's Sea Launch--with half-strength RD-170s cut in half to form RD-180 for Atlas V.

So both Boeing and LockMart use Energiya strap-on tech.

Heavy Lift DOES sell.

Offline Super George

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 207
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: My reason for this SDLV talk
« Reply #22 on: 01/03/2006 02:43 AM »
How do you feel now, Kraisee, following the ESAS report? Happier, in-different, disilliousioned?

Offline possum

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 223
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: My reason for this SDLV talk
« Reply #23 on: 01/17/2006 06:45 PM »
The biggest reason the ESAS looks the way it does, and we don't just cancel Shuttle and begin the SDLV heavy lift, is the desire for the US to have manned access to space.  I know, I know, we don't have that now because the Shuttle is still grounded, but it is a system that we have in place today.  The CEV allows us to replace the Shuttle with a minimal gap in access to space, and then we can begin building the SDLV.  We could cancel Shuttle and build the SDLV, but we would not fly that until 2012 or later and that would leave us with a huge gap (and that's assuming we don't have years of delays).  Launching ISS modules on the SDLV would take even longer, they are designed and qualified to fly on Shuttle.  To fly them on SDLV would require a strongback structure to hold the modules and, more importantly, would require an on-orbit space tug, an item which in itself would take many years to develop and test.  All of this capability is in place with the Shuttle and the thinking is we can fix it and fly for another 5 years easier than jumping ship (pun intended) and going with a new system that we don't even know we will get.

The huge advantage of Shuttle is that it is here now, it has funding, and it keeps us going.  Also, it pays all the bills.  At KSC, 90% of everything is paid for by Shuttle.  If you cancel it tomorrow, you can close the gates at KSC and let everything rot in the salt air.  When you come back in 5 years to do SDLV, it will all be a pile of rust.  You may say we could keep the people and maintain things until the new program is up and running, and that is just what we are doing with the Shuttle.  You see, the Shuttles are paid for, so they are free.  It is the people and the facilities spread out all over the country that cost $4.5 billion per year, the hardware is paid for and the fuel is cheap.  So keeping the Shuttles around just keeps the peoples skills honed until the new system comes on line.  Anyone who thinks cancelling Shuttle will save any money is naive.  You have to lay people off and close facilities to save money and no politician will support that idea, at least not in their district.  Besides, if you lay everyone off and shut down the facilities, when it comes time to do the new program it will cost you more to rebuild the facilities and retrain new people.  The only way to accelerate SDLV is more money.  By the way, you cannot have SDLV without CEV because the CAIB report, and NASA's new philosophy, says to separate crew and cargo as much as possible for safety reasons.

Offline CuddlyRocket

RE: My reason for this SDLV talk
« Reply #24 on: 01/18/2006 08:49 AM »
Quote
rmathews3 - 17/1/2006  7:45 PM

...the desire for the US to have manned access to space.  I know, I know, we don't have that now because the Shuttle is still grounded, but it is a system that we have in place today.
There is no gap in US manned spaceflight capability at the present time. The Shuttle could be launched in extremis. It is a policy decision that keeps the Shuttle grounded, not a lack of capability.

Offline possum

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 223
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: My reason for this SDLV talk
« Reply #25 on: 01/20/2006 01:14 PM »
Quote
CuddlyRocket - 18/1/2006  3:49 AM
There is no gap in US manned spaceflight capability at the present time. The Shuttle could be launched in extremis. It is a policy decision that keeps the Shuttle grounded, not a lack of capability.

I understand and agree, I was just trying to head off any negative comments about the fact that we are not presently flying.  Many people are ready to throw the Shuttle away now, but I think it still has some usefulness left in it, i.e. finish the Station.  It is a very reliable launch vehicle (highest demonstrated reliability of any launch vehicle flown more than 15 times, manned or unmanned), the problem is that when something goes wrong there is no crew escape, you are at the mercy of the problem at hand when things turn south.

Offline publiusr

  • Elite Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1540
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 2
RE: My reason for this SDLV talk
« Reply #26 on: 01/26/2006 10:42 PM »
Quote
rmathews3 - 17/1/2006  1:45 PM

The biggest reason the ESAS looks the way it does, and we don't just cancel Shuttle and begin the SDLV heavy lift, is the desire for the US to have manned access to space.  I know, I know, we don't have that now because the Shuttle is still grounded, but it is a system that we have in place today.  The CEV allows us to replace the Shuttle with a minimal gap in access to space, and then we can begin building the SDLV.  We could cancel Shuttle and build the SDLV, but we would not fly that until 2012 or later and that would leave us with a huge gap (and that's assuming we don't have years of delays).  Launching ISS modules on the SDLV would take even longer, they are designed and qualified to fly on Shuttle.  To fly them on SDLV would require a strongback structure to hold the modules and, more importantly, would require an on-orbit space tug, an item which in itself would take many years to develop and test.  All of this capability is in place with the Shuttle and the thinking is we can fix it and fly for another 5 years easier than jumping ship (pun intended) and going with a new system that we don't even know we will get.

The huge advantage of Shuttle is that it is here now, it has funding, and it keeps us going.  Also, it pays all the bills.  At KSC, 90% of everything is paid for by Shuttle.  If you cancel it tomorrow, you can close the gates at KSC and let everything rot in the salt air.  When you come back in 5 years to do SDLV, it will all be a pile of rust.  You may say we could keep the people and maintain things until the new program is up and running, and that is just what we are doing with the Shuttle.  You see, the Shuttles are paid for, so they are free.  It is the people and the facilities spread out all over the country that cost $4.5 billion per year, the hardware is paid for and the fuel is cheap.  So keeping the Shuttles around just keeps the peoples skills honed until the new system comes on line.  Anyone who thinks cancelling Shuttle will save any money is naive.  You have to lay people off and close facilities to save money and no politician will support that idea, at least not in their district.  Besides, if you lay everyone off and shut down the facilities, when it comes time to do the new program it will cost you more to rebuild the facilities and retrain new people.  The only way to accelerate SDLV is more money.  By the way, you cannot have SDLV without CEV because the CAIB report, and NASA's new philosophy, says to separate crew and cargo as much as possible for safety reasons.

Well spoken!

Tags: