Ares V Rocket vs Shuttle

[therocketjohn]

I wonder if anyone is able to describe how many missions it would have taken to build the international space station using the Ares V versus using the Space Shuttle?

 

[therocketjohn]

I wonder if anyone is able to describe how many missions it would have taken to build the international space station using the Ares V versus using the Space Shuttle?

 

[MeteorWayne]

Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I wonder if anyone is able to describe how many missions it would have taken to build the international space station using the Ares V versus using the Space Shuttle? <br />Posted by therocketjohn</DIV><br /><br />I think you would get more response in the Missions and Launches thread, so I will move it there.MW <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[MeteorWayne]

Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I wonder if anyone is able to describe how many missions it would have taken to build the international space station using the Ares V versus using the Space Shuttle? <br />Posted by therocketjohn</DIV><br /><br />I think you would get more response in the Missions and Launches thread, so I will move it there.MW <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[shuttle_guy]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I wonder if anyone is able to describe how many missions it would have taken to build the international space station using the Ares V versus using the Space Shuttle? <br />Posted by therocketjohn</DIV></p><p>This would have been impossible since the iSS assembly requires humans to do the work.</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[shuttle_guy]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I wonder if anyone is able to describe how many missions it would have taken to build the international space station using the Ares V versus using the Space Shuttle? <br />Posted by therocketjohn</DIV></p><p>This would have been impossible since the iSS assembly requires humans to do the work.</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[shuttle_guy]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>This would have been impossible since the iSS assembly requires humans to do the work. <br />Posted by shuttle_guy</DIV></p><p>As far as just lifting the mass...the current mass of the ISS is about 630,000 pounds.</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[shuttle_guy]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>This would have been impossible since the iSS assembly requires humans to do the work. <br />Posted by shuttle_guy</DIV></p><p>As far as just lifting the mass...the current mass of the ISS is about 630,000 pounds.</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[therocketjohn]

Ok, I should ask how would it have been done using a combination of Constellation program vehicles? Can we say, it would have taken x less launches resulting in y less dollars spent? Shouldn't that be part of the Constellation program justification so that space station, Mars, and beyond human rated space craft can be assembled in earth or lunar orbit? I have never seen anything like this reported.

 

[therocketjohn]

Ok, I should ask how would it have been done using a combination of Constellation program vehicles? Can we say, it would have taken x less launches resulting in y less dollars spent? Shouldn't that be part of the Constellation program justification so that space station, Mars, and beyond human rated space craft can be assembled in earth or lunar orbit? I have never seen anything like this reported.

 

[marko_doda]

With Ares V you can build ISS size station with as much as 2 Skylab sized modules assembled in Mir fasion, however you can't make a station as ISS because the design of the ISS (American side) was modeled after the shuttle, with a lot of spacewalks and use of the shuttle arm

 

[marko_doda]

With Ares V you can build ISS size station with as much as 2 Skylab sized modules assembled in Mir fasion, however you can't make a station as ISS because the design of the ISS (American side) was modeled after the shuttle, with a lot of spacewalks and use of the shuttle arm

 

[j05h]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Ok, I should ask how would it have been done using a combination of Constellation program vehicles? Can we say, it would have taken x less launches resulting in y less dollars spent? Shouldn't that be part of the Constellation program justification so that space station, Mars, and beyond human rated space craft can be assembled in earth or lunar orbit? I have never seen anything like this reported. <br /> Posted by therocketjohn</DIV></p><p>It would probably cost more all told - though since Ares is purely a paper rocket it can do anything, cheaper than any real rocket. At least that's what Powerpoint told me.&nbsp; </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[j05h]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Ok, I should ask how would it have been done using a combination of Constellation program vehicles? Can we say, it would have taken x less launches resulting in y less dollars spent? Shouldn't that be part of the Constellation program justification so that space station, Mars, and beyond human rated space craft can be assembled in earth or lunar orbit? I have never seen anything like this reported. <br /> Posted by therocketjohn</DIV></p><p>It would probably cost more all told - though since Ares is purely a paper rocket it can do anything, cheaper than any real rocket. At least that's what Powerpoint told me.&nbsp; </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[pathfinder_01]

Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Ok, I should ask how would it have been done using a combination of Constellation program vehicles? Can we say, it would have taken x less launches resulting in y less dollars spent? Shouldn't that be part of the Constellation program justification so that space station, Mars, and beyond human rated space craft can be assembled in earth or lunar orbit? I have never seen anything like this reported. <br />Posted by therocketjohn</DIV><br /><br /><p style="margin:0in0in0pt" class="MsoNormal"><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman">There was an idea to build Shuttle-C to launch what would become the ISS. Shuttle C would replace the shuttle with a cargo canister. Shuttle C could have put the station up in 4 launches but it was never developed due to cost. The shuttle was already developed and working. Shuttle-C was not. Plus Shuttle-C had other cost problems. <span>&nbsp;</span></font></font></p>

 

[pathfinder_01]

Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Ok, I should ask how would it have been done using a combination of Constellation program vehicles? Can we say, it would have taken x less launches resulting in y less dollars spent? Shouldn't that be part of the Constellation program justification so that space station, Mars, and beyond human rated space craft can be assembled in earth or lunar orbit? I have never seen anything like this reported. <br />Posted by therocketjohn</DIV><br /><br /><p style="margin:0in0in0pt" class="MsoNormal"><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman">There was an idea to build Shuttle-C to launch what would become the ISS. Shuttle C would replace the shuttle with a cargo canister. Shuttle C could have put the station up in 4 launches but it was never developed due to cost. The shuttle was already developed and working. Shuttle-C was not. Plus Shuttle-C had other cost problems. <span>&nbsp;</span></font></font></p>

 

[crazyeddie]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I wonder if anyone is able to describe how many missions it would have taken to build the international space station using the Ares V versus using the Space Shuttle? <br /> Posted by therocketjohn</DIV></p><p>You could look at it this way: Skylab, America's first space station, had a usable livable volume of 368 cubic meters (that of a two-bedroom house). &nbsp;Currently, the ISS has a usable livable volume of 358 cubic meters.....almost the same. &nbsp;Consider that the ISS has required&nbsp;27 Shuttle flights,&nbsp;2 Proton flights,&nbsp;1 Soyuz assembly flight, 31 Progress supply flights, 1 automated transfer vehicle flight, 28 shuttle-based assembly spacewalks, 90 ISS-based spacewalks, and over 745 hours of assembly time. &nbsp;Skylab required <span style="font-weight:bold" class="Apple-style-span">one</span> Saturn V launch and one repair mission to make it operational. &nbsp;</p><p>It would seem that launching one large space station on a heavy-lift booster would make more economic sense than assembling it piecemeal, and it probably does, assuming you're willing to risk putting "all your eggs in one basket". &nbsp;Obviously, you risk losing your entire space station if your booster fails, whereas the loss of one component of the ISS isn't an unmitigated disaster. &nbsp;But possibly the greatest benefit of the ISS is that we are learning how to build large structures in space, and that is very useful knowledge if we are going to someday expand the human presence in the solar system.</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[crazyeddie]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I wonder if anyone is able to describe how many missions it would have taken to build the international space station using the Ares V versus using the Space Shuttle? <br /> Posted by therocketjohn</DIV></p><p>You could look at it this way: Skylab, America's first space station, had a usable livable volume of 368 cubic meters (that of a two-bedroom house). &nbsp;Currently, the ISS has a usable livable volume of 358 cubic meters.....almost the same. &nbsp;Consider that the ISS has required&nbsp;27 Shuttle flights,&nbsp;2 Proton flights,&nbsp;1 Soyuz assembly flight, 31 Progress supply flights, 1 automated transfer vehicle flight, 28 shuttle-based assembly spacewalks, 90 ISS-based spacewalks, and over 745 hours of assembly time. &nbsp;Skylab required <span style="font-weight:bold" class="Apple-style-span">one</span> Saturn V launch and one repair mission to make it operational. &nbsp;</p><p>It would seem that launching one large space station on a heavy-lift booster would make more economic sense than assembling it piecemeal, and it probably does, assuming you're willing to risk putting "all your eggs in one basket". &nbsp;Obviously, you risk losing your entire space station if your booster fails, whereas the loss of one component of the ISS isn't an unmitigated disaster. &nbsp;But possibly the greatest benefit of the ISS is that we are learning how to build large structures in space, and that is very useful knowledge if we are going to someday expand the human presence in the solar system.</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>