Hypothetical Lunar Architecture

[spacelifejunkie]

A lamens' imagination here...<br /><br />My first thought when I viewed the lunar architecture for getting back to the moon was "why use a smaller rocket when you already have a big one?" The arguing going on about whether or not to use "the stick" or modifying a Delta rocket is moot. How much more capable would our moon missions be if we used two Ares V's for an earth rendezvous before going to the moon? Let SpaceX or whoever resupply the ISS and let's go to the moon with 8-10 people for long stays using the bigger rockets. Go big or go home I say. I just thought I'd muddy the waters a little more.<br /><br /><br />SLJ

 

[holmec]

That's interesting point of view.<br /><br />In my musings, I came up with the idea of using a permanent refuelable tug and a permanent refuelable lunar lander and it seems that you would maximize your launcher use by being able to launch more crew or consumables rather than launching multiple and one time use systems. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#0000ff"><em>"SCE to AUX" - John Aaron, curiosity pays off</em></font></p> </div>

 

[spacelifejunkie]

Even more good ideas. I admit that my opinions carry little weight and there are millions of factors that I can't even think of that would stand in the way. BUT, it seems that switching over to using two Ares V's as well as improving the lander and incorporating a tug are minor changes that could be done in the future. Once we've been able to prove that we can go back safely and accomplish some missions, let's ramp this up with more capability without investing in a brand new architecture.<br /><br /><br />SLJ