Next Space Shuttles

[holmec]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>That is a laugh. The tourist market is not going to support a HLLV. Bigelow is the upper limit right now. The cost of development of a HLLV wouldn't be bought down by any tourist market<br /><p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />Really...Hide and watch. There is a reason why C-5, and Boeing 747 exist, and the big cargo carrying oceanic ferries. If the air industry and the ship industry ended up doing this what makes you think the rocket industry is any different? I tell you its not. <br /><br />The history of the 747 is what got me thinking about this. Until the 747 passenger airlines sold expensive seats and only a relatively few people crossed the ocean in plane. When 747 passenger airliners came, the market opened up. Why because they finally had a plane that could cross the oceans and carry enough people to bring down the price tag. <br /><br />Later air freight became popular. UPS, FedEx, DHL.<br /><br />Remember a ship called Titanic? I visited the artifact display when it passed by here in the mid west. One fact that stood out is that the ship was designed so large to bring the common man across the ocean. That is to bring down the price tag.<br /><br />Did you see the video on SpaceShipOne? Where they rolled out to do the first space flight? Thousands of people gathered to see it off. They were in all kinds of vehicles. That is the market. It does exist. Uptil now the space launch companies have failed to tap into that market.<br /><br />You can laugh now. But this is going to happen. Don't gamble with history, you'll lose. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#0000ff"><em>"SCE to AUX" - John Aaron, curiosity pays off</em></font></p> </div>

 

[j05h]

<i>> Did you see the video on SpaceShipOne? Where they rolled out to do the first space flight? Thousands of people gathered to see it off.</i><br /><br />I was there, I saw it. Not the first suborbital flight, but the first XPrize flight in Sept '04. My best friend and I flew out to watch the flight and camped out on that desert night. The crowd at Mojave was HUGE. That Silly Little SpaceShip changed everything.<br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[vattas]

Why would you need to repack it for interplanetary travel?<br /><b>J05H</b>:My understanding is that they use a foam in the walls, but repacking ability would increase mission flexibility for later interplanetary flights.<br />

 

[jimfromnsf]

Bad analogy. There are no destinations for orbital equivialents of 747's, C-5's or Titanics and won't be for decades. The South pole research station is the analogy for years to come for space settlements. Bigelow and the "other" stations don't need HLLV's.

 

[jimfromnsf]

No, I am saying that we in the in the space launch business do say that the launch vehicle does go to orbit.

 

[j05h]

<i>> Why would you need to repack it for interplanetary travel? </i><br /><br />My interest isn't in packing it during travel (crew lives in it then) but instead is packing an inflatable module back up to fit behind a heatshield for aerobraking. It might also be easier to decommission whole modules for landing them on Mars or storing on orbit between uses. I'm not sure, Bigelow's the boss on this issue. My major concern is being able to get the modules into place at their destination. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[rocketwatcher2001]

<font color="yellow">Bad analogy. There are no destinations for orbital equivialents of 747's, C-5's or Titanics and won't be for decades. The South pole research station is the analogy for years to come for space settlements. Bigelow and the "other" stations don't need HLLV's.</font><br /><br />I disagree. Try to start a website called "South Pole dot com" and see how many people are joining up. Space is the place where many of us want to go, myself included. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[holmec]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>No, I am saying that we in the in the space launch business do say that the launch vehicle does go to orbit.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />Wouldn't be more accurate to say 'up to orbit'?<br /><br />What is said in a particular field (ie lingo) may be common in that field but may cause confusion for the rest of the world. The reason is context. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#0000ff"><em>"SCE to AUX" - John Aaron, curiosity pays off</em></font></p> </div>

 

[holmec]

yeah no one wants to put a hotel in antartica. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#0000ff"><em>"SCE to AUX" - John Aaron, curiosity pays off</em></font></p> </div>

 

[holmec]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>Bigelow and the "other" stations don't need HLLV's.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />Well how would you know? Your company doesn't tap into this market. You have no experience in it. <br /><br />And NASA is making the ARES V. A rocket a class of its own. A rocket that can launch the equivalent weight of 4 40 foot cargo containers. To me this looks like the beginning of a class of launchers that could start to be commercially viable. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#0000ff"><em>"SCE to AUX" - John Aaron, curiosity pays off</em></font></p> </div>

 

[holmec]

thanks Jo5h<br /><br />I wish I had been there at the time. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#0000ff"><em>"SCE to AUX" - John Aaron, curiosity pays off</em></font></p> </div>

 

[rocketwatcher2001]

<font color="yellow">yeah no one wants to put a hotel in antartica.</font><br /><br />No kidding. Can you imagine what a conversation would sound like if a father wanted to take his family to Antartica?<br /><br />"Hey kids, we are going to Antartica next summer, it's going to be great, we'll freeze our butts off while we listen to whales eat brine-shrimp, can you believe it?"<br /><br />Now imagine the same conversation but with Space instead.<br /><br />"Hey kids, next summer we are going to space, we are going to spend the weekend orbiting the Earth, can you believe it?"<br /><br />Which do you think is going to get a better response? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[thereiwas]

The thought of little kids literally bouncing off the walls in a space station gives me the willies.

 

[jimfromnsf]

"To me this looks like the beginning of a class of launchers that could start to be commercially viable."<br /><br />Ares V is not going to be commercially viable<br /><br />1. It is a gov't vehicle<br />2. It is not cost effective<br />3. What is the commercial payload?<br /><br />The gov't has always had large launch vehicles, it doesn't mean there is a commercial market.<br /><br />BTW I have experience in all launch vehicle markets and I currently don't work a "company" and I know what other users are doing

 

[jimfromnsf]

"Hey kids, next summer we are going to space, we are going to spend the weekend orbiting the Earth, can you believe it?" <br /><br />1. 1/2 of you are going to be sick for 2-4 days<br />2. You might get clauserphobic<br />3. No internet<br />4. There is a special bathroom you will have to use

 

[docm]

<font color="yellow">3. No internet </font><br /><br />You can't know that. It's doable, we just don't know if it'll be a priority on a private station. My bet is that they'll at least try so customers can share their experiences with Earthbound friends & family. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[rocketwatcher2001]

<font color="yellow">"Hey kids, next summer we are going to space, we are going to spend the weekend orbiting the Earth, can you believe it?" <br /><br />1. 1/2 of you are going to be sick for 2-4 days <br />2. You might get clauserphobic <br />3. No internet <br />4. There is a special bathroom you will have to use</font><br /><br />Just like spending a weekend in an RV, or on a boat, except a thousand times better. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[thereiwas]

Internet in space is an interesting technical challenge. Some tuning of the link and transport protocol layers will be needed (timeouts and packet window sizes). It shares some aspects of the cell-phone connectivity problem, with automatic handoffs as stations move in their orbits. TDRS-like relay stations would help. Email and file transfer is definitely doable. Real-time things like web-browsing and IP-phones would be limited. And probably not a whole lot of bandwidth most of the time. <br /><br />However intra- and inter-vehicle communications within 30 meters or so should be excellent with conventional WiFi technology. That will be useful for arriving and departing craft, as well as between modules without needing to run cables. Firewalls as appropriate. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

 

[jimfromnsf]

"Just like spending a weekend in an RV, or on a boat, except a thousand times better."<br /><br />Not the same, you can always go outside the RV or boat for fresh air.<br /><br />Also I am talking about the next decade, not some Scifi story. And no, there isn't going to be a "breakthrough" to make it happen sooner.

 

[jimfromnsf]

Just another point from hobbyspace:<br /><br />"These companies are treated like sports franchises. Thier "fans" won't call them on failed promises and contintinually "defend" them to the point of being irrational."<br />

 

[PistolPete]

To a certain extent I have to agree. If an Alt.space company has been around for 10 years and hasn't produced so much as one bolt of flight hardware then I don't even consider them. However once a company begins launching stuff then they attain a certain level of credibility that cannot be ignored. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><em>So, again we are defeated. This victory belongs to the farmers, not us.</em></p><p><strong>-Kambei Shimada from the movie Seven Samurai</strong></p> </div>

 

[Swampcat]

Certainly there are people who don't consider the realities of spaceflight when promoting it. The criticism is a fair one and shouldn't be ignored. Reality and the difficulties of making it happen demand a certain amount of skepticism when dealing with proposals for space industry, especially when it includes human spaceflight.<br /><br />OTOH, there are many people with sufficient experience and knowledge willing to stake their wealth, reputations and lives to overcome the difficulties to make it happen. Without these people, their vision and their effort, it will never happen. Is that what you want? Sometimes fairness demands giving credit to those who are trying and making progress.<br /><br />How about throwing us a bone. Do you have anything positive to say about private human spaceflight efforts or is disparaging it more fun? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="3" color="#ff9900"><p><font size="1" color="#993300"><strong><em>------------------------------------------------------------------- </em></strong></font></p><p><font size="1" color="#993300"><strong><em>"I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical. Unsuccessful rebellions, indeed, generally establish the encroachments on the rights of the people which have produced them. An observation of this truth should render honest republican governors so mild in their punishment of rebellions as not to discourage them too much. It is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government."</em></strong></font></p><p><font size="1" color="#993300"><strong>Thomas Jefferson</strong></font></p></font> </div>

 

[lampblack]

<font color="yellow">And no, there isn't going to be a "breakthrough" to make it happen sooner.</font><br /><br />Funny thing about breakthroughs -- nobody ever expects them until they happen. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#0000ff"><strong>Just tell the truth and let the chips fall...</strong></font> </div>

 

[rocketscientist327]

jimfromnsf,<br /><br />You know, I listen to you. I really sit back and try to get what you are saying. I listen to you because you always try to "ground" whatever anyone is talking about. It really doesn't matter what the subject is, the poster is so out of touch with "reality" that he or she has no idea what they are talking about. It get gets old honestly. Not because you do not make valid arguments, it is just the way you word things. <br /><br />I don’t want to get into some silly argument about who has the bigger and best toy. I am just saying that while you may know a lot of things about the space launch industry, I find it hard to believe we would have had achieved LEO with you in my board room shooting down everything that is discussed. JMHO<br /><br />Back on topic!<br /><br />This is interesting:<br /><br />The Saturn V could put 285,000 lbs into earth orbit and 107,000 lbs into orbit around the moon.1<br /><br />The Ares V will put 290,000 lbs into earth orbit and 144,000 pounds into orbit around the moon.2<br /><br />The Falcon 9 Heavy will put 26,455 lbs into geostationary transfer orbit.3<br /><br />The Atlas V will put 18,077 lbs into geostationary transfer orbit.4<br /><br />The Delta IV Heavy can put 28,620 lbs into geostationary transfer orbit.5<br /><br />While private companies are making good strides in getting payloads into orbit, when you really need to put something BIG into orbit, there is no one who can do this but the US Government IE NASA. It is going to be very difficult to have a manned mission to LEO let alone try to get out of orbit.<br /><br />I want to believe in the small, start up companies like Biglow and SpaceX, but we have such a long way to go. So now I have a few questions. We all know that the Saturn V had 3 MILLION moving parts created by the lowest bidder.<br /><br />Who will make Ares I and V? Will it be NASA employees assembling the rockets or will there be some type of USA (United Space Alliance) deal. I know Lockheed Martin is

 

[jimfromnsf]

USA or a followon on contractor will launch the Ares vehicles