NASA to build Saturn VI (in-line SDLV)

[SpaceKiwi]

The side-mount option <i><b>should</b></i> be easier, quicker, and cheaper. The trade-off is payload capacity, but it will still be greater than Shuttle.<br /><br />With the inline, I think you begin to move so far from the vehicle you are supposedly deriving from, that you might as well clean sheet the project and see if you can't get a neater solution to the problem within a longer timeframe and spending more money.<br /><br />Griffin has said often he wants to go with the launcher he already owns. Moving things inline, it might appear to the public like he is still using the guts of the STS but it is going to be a vastly different beast. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em><font size="2" color="#ff0000">Who is this superhero?  Henry, the mild-mannered janitor ... could be!</font></em></p><p><em><font size="2">-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</font></em></p><p><font size="5">Bring Back The Black!</font></p> </div>

 

[grooble]

Maybe the US dep. of defence will cough up the dollar. They might want the capability for some space weapon program.<br /><br />

 

[botch]

I don't think so, just think of the public uproar caused by a 100 tonne space weapon? Besides, how many f22's or whatever would you be able to buy instead of a space (doctor evil voice) 'lazuur'.

 

[henryhallam]

<font color="yellow"> The LEO payload is 95 mt so I have no idea what where the 120 mt version came from or what the configuration is.</font><br /><br />Was that with 3 or 4 SSMEs?<br /><br />Given this and the fact that the only lead we have on this is one sentence on the Nasawatch website I'm beginning to have a few doubts. But it will be interesting to see what Griffin pulls out of his hat. Also I suppose the payload capacity depends a bit on the orbit inclination and altitude. Would the difference between the 52 degree ~400km ISS orbit and a 28 degree 200km orbit be enough to account for the difference in payload capacity?

 

[botch]

Thanks for the correction shuttle_guy, I took the article at face value.<br />Does anyone know if NASAwatch been a reliable source of info in the past?

 

[nilstycho]

No kidding. I was going to ask the same thing. An SDV with 120 ton to LEO sounds a lot like Ares--which, you might remember, was the topic of my first post on SDC <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /><br /><br />This leaves me with a lot of questions. SSMEs or RS-68s? What about the upper stage? How many boosters? ASRMs, LFBBs, or neither? If neither, how many SRBs? Won't four SRBs give the payload a mighty good shake? This isn't going to be man-rated, is it? And finally, if you're replacing the main engines, adding a new upper stage, redesigning the ET, and refurbishing the VAB and pad, are you <i>allowed</i> to call it SDV? <img src="/images/icons/tongue.gif" /> This whole business sounds fishy.<br /><br />Let me be the first to say: bring on the SpaceX BFR!

 

[adzel_3000]

Article re-print but of interest....<br /><br />"Shaken and stirred <br />New NASA administrator Michael Griffin has given the agency a kick in the pants in the search for its next heavylift launcher <br /><br />NASA's new administrator, Michael Griffin, has hit the ground running and with the intent, it seems, of thoroughly shaking up the lumbering organisation. Within mere weeks of his rapid confirmation by Congress, Griffin has made clear that NASA is not moving fast enough to replace the Space Shuttle, that the Shuttle will not fly again until NASA is sure it is safe, and that a robotic mission to repair the Hubble space telescope is off the table and a Shuttle servicing mission is to be planned.<br /><br />So far this bold style of leadership is earning the new administrator a reputation as a no-nonsense decision maker who will cut through the sedentary NASA bureaucracy. Griffin made clear it was the Shuttle programme team that took the decision to delay launch of the return-to-flight mission to mid-July, but that decision must have been easier to take knowing that NASA's new leader is respected by politicians and, so far it seems, the public. <br /><br />During his confirmation hearing, Griffin said that 2014 was too long to wait for the first manned flight of the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) given that the Shuttle must be retired in 2010. He has been true to his words, and a single contractor team will be chosen by the end of this year instead of 2008, with the CEV to fly as early as 2010. Griffin also said he would review his predecessor's decision not to send a Shuttle to repair the Hubble. Again true to his words, and despite delaying the Shuttle's return to flight, he has ordered NASA to move ahead with a servicing mission as soon as NASA feels comfortable the Shuttle is flying safely. The study will be conducted alongside return-to-flight activity. <br /><br />Now Griffin has waded into the debate over the heavylift launch vehicle needed to realise the USA's visi

 

[aaron38]

How similar is this design to the ARES booster proposal used in Mars Direct? Visually, they look very similar.<br /><br />http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/ares.htm

 

[spacefire]

<font color="yellow">he X-38 was to be launched by the Shuttle. It have very little return capability.</font><br />he probably means the CRV <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[gladiator1332]

This is interesting:<br /><br />http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/neep533/SPRING1999/lecture33.pdf

 

[starfhury]

Why bother with the SDLV anyway? Why not just attach the SRBs to the Delta IV core section. It's designed to handle two huge side mounted boosters already. How hard would it be to build one of those vs. an in-line or side mount SDLV? Doing so would get rid of the shuttle and the ET and provide a ready made configuration to go. In this case it really doesn't make much sense to come up with a completely new SDLV when Atlas and Delta are there and the SRBs can be used with them with out man rating the whole stack. NASA should just buy Delta IV cores and reuse the SRBs to build the HLV. It'd probably the fastest, cheapest way to go. All the components are in existence. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[gpurcell]

Hm. I wonder if this means the flyback boosters will be back on the table....

 

[wvbraun]

"Does anyone know if NASAwatch been a reliable source of info in the past?"<br /><br />Yes, they have been reliable. They broke the news about the VSE in the first place.

 

[botch]

Well that's something, then. Cause for cautious optimism.

 

[aaron38]

Yes, highball negotiating is extremely popular.<br /><br />Also know as the "Dad, can I get a tatoo?" technique.

 

[radarredux]

> <i>http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/neep533/SPRING1999/lecture33.pdf</i><br /><br />Interesting slide presentation by Griffin (from 1999!). He is obviously no stranger to the issue of heavy launch vehicles and lunar architectures and CEV requirements. Some of the topics covered:<br /><br />Several architecture to get to the moon, including:<br /><br /><ul type="square"><li> Lunar Orbit Rendezvous (LOR)<li> Earh Orbit Rendezvous (EOR)<li> Lunar Surface Rendezvous (LSR)<li> Lagrance Point Rendezvous (LPR)<br /></li></li></li></li></ul><br />Transportation architecture summary: Robost lunar base development will require LSR; a heavy-launch vehicle is highly desirable for lunar operations.<br /><br />Given how much he has looked into this over the years, I have to believe the NASA Administrator job is his dream job.

 

[wvbraun]

Wasn't there a blurb some time back in AW&ST that the ESAS team was looking at a LSR architecture as the most likely option? I think that's where they're headed. I can't wait for this report!

 

[gunsandrockets]

"Wasn't there a blurb some time back in AW&ST that the ESAS team was looking at a LSR architecture as the most likely option?"<br /><br />Is this what you are refering to?<br /><br />http://uplink.space.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=missions&Number=225846&fpart=1&PHPSESSID=

 

[wvbraun]

Yes, thank you.

 

[starfhury]

1207:<br /><br />I would totally support you view, but for one thing. The methods your outling really doesn't lead to commerce. It's just get to the moon and back. If anything the ideas being outline is no different than what goes on at McMurdo in Antartica. How long has it been that way? When do you see anyone colonizing Antartica? The current proposals really are following the Antartic scenerio. As long as we follow that scenerio, we'll just have a very very expensive Mcmurdo on the Moon. The cost alone would force us to shut it down almost immediately or not bother at all.<br /><br />The only reason why I think we need wings on an earth return vehicle is because it's just more convenient to fly the return ship to a specific location and roll it into a hanger for refurbishment. In that case absolute return weight or absolute efficiency is less valuable than the other convenience factors. If we speak of a space only vehicle, the phyical appears becomes almost irrelevant. It could be a sphere, square or whatever. It might even have unncessary wings in space for stylistic reasons. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[cdr6]

I hate to be the bearer of bad news but Mr Rutan has next to zilch experience with anything but composites. My own single experience with the man is that he is some what snobbish. (but hey that's my opinion) <br /><br />In any event aside from home built aircraft he has little to offer the aerospace industry. Spaceship One for example is an all composite craft. If you take close note of nose of the machine you will see that the star spangled paint job had been "scratched off" and there are several sensors placed in that "bare"area. <br /><br />Why? Because the resin in GR-EP (graphite epoxy) as used by Rutan, has a melting point of around that of a chocklate chip cookie (@ 350 F). As a matter of fact that is how GR-EP parts are made in a pressure/vacuum assisted oven called an autoclave.<br /><br />So Rutan's expertise is not of much use when reentering the atmosphere from orbitital speeds and altitudes. But he is a good showman I'll give him that.

 

[yree]

Orion Saturn V<br /> <br />Orion Saturn V<br />Orion Saturn V<br />Saturn V-launched Orion<br />Nuclear pulse orbital launch vehicle. Family: Orion. Country: USA.<br /><br />The final iteration of the Orion design was a nuclear pulse propulsion module launched into earth orbit by a Saturn V. The 100 tonne unit would have had a diameter of 10 m to match that of the booster. This would limit specific impulse to 1800 to 2500 seconds, still two to three times that of a nuclear thermal system. A second launch would put a 100 tonne Mars spacecraft with a crew of eight into orbit. After rendezvous and checkout, the combined 200 tonne spacecraft would set out on a round trip to the Mars - total mission duration as little as 125 days!<br /><br />Manufacturer: General Atomic. Payload: 100,000 kg. to a: Mars and back trajectory. Total Mass: 100,000 kg. Core Diameter: 10.00 m. Total Length: 50.00 m. <br />http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/oriturnv.htm<br /><br />http://66.49.163.218/data/orion_summary.pdf

 

[vt_hokie]

That's a good point about Burt Rutan's experience to date. He has expressed an interest and desire to develop an orbital vehicle, and I wonder how realistic that is. Obviously it's a much more complex task. I would be curious to see if he has a design for a craft that can withstand the thermal loads, and if so, how he plans to do it. Not to mention, the vehicle would need to be stable through a much wider range of conditions, and would obviously need a robust attitude control system. It would have to be airtight and maintain pressure for days instead of a few minutes, and be able to provide life support for the crew. I'm sure y'all could add to the list of complications.

 

[rogers_buck]

This is good news I think. Would the new stack have to be man rated or would it meet up with an Atlas/Delta launched manned capsule in orbit?

 

[vt_hokie]

Haha...no, not at all actually! I was born in Bryan, TX but I've lived in the northeast for most of my life. I currently work for Loral in northeast Pennsylvania. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />