Return of Direct Launcher -- Direct 2.0

[gunsandrockets]

The Problem with Direct<br /><br />The problem is that Direct makes a total hash of the ESAS architecture, and I don't mean just the Ares I.<br /><br />1.5 EOR makes no sense with Direct, the current Orion CEV makes no sense with Direct. Direct might as well junk the entire 4-man EOR+LOR plan and go with a clean sheet lunar architecture. Maybe even a 2 man direct flight to the moon!<br /><br />What are the NASA must haves?<br /><br />1) 4 men to the moon<br /><br />2) Apollo shaped reentry vehicle<br /><br />3) Separating cargo launches from crew launches<br /><br />4) Maximum safety factor for crew launch<br /><br />5) Shuttle derived heavy lift cargo vehicle<br /><br />It's possible to maintain all those NASA objectives but more cheaply than the ESAS plan, and without resorting to the misfit of Direct.

 

[jimfromnsf]

You forget #1 requirement, use shuttle infrastructure and personnel.<br /><br />Cheap was never a requirement.<br /><br />Direct acknowledges this requirement. Most of the Direct developers know there are cheaper and better ways of meeting VSE requirements (like using EELV's) but they chose to meet the #1 requirement.