T/space Offers Earth Orbit CXV by 2008

[space_dreamer]

I have a feeling about this, I think T/space will get the money and build the CXV!

 

[jurgens]

Interesting, Airlaunch LLC claims that their vehicle will cost $5million per flight and deliver 900kg to a 200km LEO orbit, thats about 35% more mass for less money!!<br /><br />Also, even more interesting is that the vehicle can be easily scaled up to around 10,000lb simply by making the rocket bigger. I guess that is how they plan on getting the CXV into orbit. Seems interesting. <br /><br />http://www.airlaunchllc.com/

 

[crix]

No kidding. The t/space architecture is the freshest and most innovative design while also making the most clear the sustainability of Moon to Mars. <br /><br />There are only a couple downsides: the risk of a required mating from the CEV to a earth reentry vehicle and they also heavily bank upon the realities of lunar ISRU which is unproven at this point. The cost savings of making all our fuel on the Moon would be tremendous but I can't help but wonder how much frozen lunar water exists. ... Tearing the earth apart for oil and the moon for water. <br /><br />I really liked Griffin's analogy of steamship boilers and current space hardware. We have some experience but lack enough to build super reliable systems. That would need to change in the form of ultra reliable redevous/mating hardware and software for the t/space plan to work. I wonder how successful it would be to build some of these components via Sourceforge.

 

[crix]

That pic is outdated.

 

[spacefire]

I don't mind TSpace's design-even if it is a capsule, if it is cheaper than the Soyuz. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[jurgens]

The AirLaunched Rocket they want to make bigger currently is projected to cost $5million per launch, so a larger version would probablly cost around $7-10 million. Then they need to build the CXV to put ontop of the rocket, so it might in fact be cheaper then $20million which afaik is the cost of a soyuz.

 

[wvbraun]

As Soyuz launch costs $60 million. Or was it $30 million? Does anyone know for sure?

 

[spacefire]

it costs 20mil for one person to buy a seat on the Soyuz, isn't the actual price or a launch more like 30mil? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[starfhury]

Ohhh, I like t/Space's idea even if the ship is a capsule. Very clever and out of the ordinary. It would go right back the Bell X-1 which was launched from a mother ship and the concept was just recently provided to be very cheap by Burt Rutan and Scaled Composites. I really like this approach more than what I've seen from the current CEV build plans. <br /><br />If I read this correctly, all they would do is put 4 to 6 people into a small capsule and shoot them off to the ISS or something. The capsule can get back to earth however, whenever. But in the mean time you can launch a bunch of them quick and cheap. Two or three mother planes and a production factory to churn out a bunch of booster/capsules. The CEV would be space only. In fact at this point I'd say since the CEV would never return to earth, give it a nuke power plant to make it powerful and more fuel efficient so that it can get people and heavy loads to the moon and back. Future CEVs would be solar sail equipped pushed by powerful lasers. One in earth orbit and another in lunar orbit. It would leverage all our current assests. Aircraft, space stations and spacecraft. I hope they get the money to pull it off. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[gladiator1332]

Crix,<br />where did you get that image from? Just wondering if there are any others. Pretty interesting design.

 

[crix]

Wow! Now we're talking. Yeah, when you break out of the current paradigm of space flight you slowly begin to realize what could be done, like your building off the idea of space-bound-only CEV and suggesting we merge Prometheus with it! Hell yeah! This baby should be worthy of a USS title.<br /><br />The "final" reports (of the original NASA funding... note the date in the PDFs) for the CEV are here:<br />http://exploration.nasa.gov/documents/cer_reports.html<br /><br />Those pics and a bunch of others are in the t/space PDF.

 

[gladiator1332]

It is a great idea, but they will run into trouble in one area. I'm sure LM and Boeing will like the idea of building their CEV, they are not affected in that area. However, not only do they want their CEV, Boeing wants the Delta 4 to be used and Lockheed wants the Atlas. <br />Part of Boeing's problem is, there really isn't much of a need for the D4H. Yeah, there will be some heavy payload missions, but mostly it is the medium variant that will be used. Project Constellation gives the D4H something to do. <br /><br />I think T-Space has finally hit the nail on the head with this one. Not only will the big companies be somewhat pleased, the little companies will also be pleased. Their plan includes everyone. <br /><br />Also, Boeing and LM can now concentrate on going to the Moon and Mars, and not have to worry about the ISS and LEO. They don't have to design this all around all purpose vehicle.

 

[gladiator1332]

And you know what else I like about this plan? Any country can use it. All they have to do is buy the booster and capsule off of us, and then attach it to the modified heavy lifting plane of their choice.<br /><br />US: 747<br />Russia: An-225<br />Europe: A-380<br /><br />Pretty much if you have one of those planes and a runway you have the abilities to launch this spacecraft.

 

[wvbraun]

One more reason why I don't see this happening: Griffin wants *one vehicle* both for servicing the space station and for lunar missions. It appears to me that he has already made up his mind when I read his recent comments on the CEV.<br />But maybe he will go for the CXV as a back-up... Steidle (the head of ESMD) certainly indicated that he would think about a non-traditional approach to the CEV.

 

[jurgens]

well, the D4H and the Atlas V would still be used to launch the actual CEV/Propulsion Module/Hab Module/Lunar Module... It's just that now they don't have to manrate those rockets. Instead T/space provides the CXV for transferring the crew from Earth-LEO, and Lockheed/Boeing provide LEO-Moon-Mars.

 

[gladiator1332]

Well that's a good thing, then this plan really does make everyone happy.

 

[jurgens]

well the CXV could be used to send cargo/people to the space station. <br /><br />I think personally this might be the better approach. Don't put all your eggs in one basket.

 

[crix]

The CXV could go to the ISS or a craft that would take you to the moon. Pretty please, Griffin.

 

[crix]

It seems that most people on SDC dig the t/space approach. Is there anything we could collectively do to let NASA know that space enthusiasts support t/space? Would it even matter?

 

[gladiator1332]

And this is a jump to the future. Think about it, most sci-fi novels dealing with a trip to the Moon, from 2001: ASO to a book I'm reading called Moonfall, there is some sort of transport from Earth to LEO/space station and then a craft to take you to the Moon. <br />Eventually a station might be built at L1 or at the perfect inclination for missions to the Moon and Mars, and NASA is going to need some form of a transport. T-Space is going to give them one for $100 million more than a Harry Potter movie. <br />They promised they would listen to the little guys this time through, well let's hope NASA keeps their word and jump on this.

 

[crix]

Agreed. And a functioning CXV would be more exciting than even a 400 million dollar Harry Potter movie. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

 

[gladiator1332]

You could go the letter/petition route, or write a few editorials for well known space related websites. Someone might see it there. <br />Or maybe make a website about it, and get it listed on some well known sites. You just have to get the idea out there, and let it be known that it has suporters.<br />I honestly agree with you there, NASA needs to know there are people surrporting this option.

 

[wvbraun]

I think t/space will do a good job of selling its concept, they don't need our help (but I would sign a petition <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" />).

 

[gladiator1332]

Yeah, there really isn't much we can do, its really up to T-Space. But it would be fun to raise a little hell. (In a friendly way of course) <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

 

[lycan359]

<br />Hah! I guess if NASA goes with the t/space idea, Lockheed Martin will have to drop thier lifting body design.<br /><br />I like this plan! <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />