Using an EELV vs Ares 1 or Jupiter

[montmein69]

<p>My question is related to the hypothesis that an existing EELV could be used to launch Orion and its crew.</p><p>I didn't find a similar topic in the existing list. </p><p>Which one could be used ? Does it need to lower the weight of the craft or, on the contrary,&nbsp; allow some extra- possibility ? </p><p>Does the launch process&nbsp; match with a human one (number of g ....)</p><p>Could you evaluate the technical modifications needed to get it man-rated ?&nbsp;&nbsp; and the other needs (pad ... crawler ...) ..; and the cost ?</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Does anyone think that the Ares 1 option could be stopped at this moment of its development ? </p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[rubicondsrv]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>My question is related to the hypothesis that an existing EELV could be used to launch Orion and its crew.I didn't find a similar topic in the existing list. Which one could be used ? Does it need to lower the weight of the craft or, on the contrary,&nbsp; allow some extra- possibility ? Does the launch process&nbsp; match with a human one (number of g ....)Could you evaluate the technical modifications needed to get it man-rated ?&nbsp;&nbsp; and the other needs (pad ... crawler ...) ..; and the cost ?&nbsp;Does anyone think that the Ares 1 option could be stopped at this moment of its development ? &nbsp;&nbsp; <br />Posted by montmein69</DIV><br /><br />delta IV heavy is the only EELV that currently can lift orion.</p><p>atlas V heavy could if it existed anywhere but on paper</p><p>&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[windnwar]

Atlas V heavy would also have quite a bit more payload to orbit then Delta IV heavy, and would definately exceed what Ares 1 is capable of. If they go with Atlas it'd also mean we'd most likely start U.S. production of the engine, which they already have licensing for. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font size="2" color="#0000ff">""Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." --Albert Einstein"</font></p> </div>

 

[rubicondsrv]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Atlas V heavy would also have quite a bit more payload to orbit then Delta IV heavy, and would definately exceed what Ares 1 is capable of. If they go with Atlas it'd also mean we'd most likely start U.S. production of the engine, which they already have licensing for. <br />Posted by windnwar</DIV></p><p>US production of rd180 is not nearly that simple.</p><p>not only do you need production capability, you need engeneering support.</p><p>it would cost several billion dollars to do that.</p><p>&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[rubicondsrv]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>US production of rd180 is not nearly that simple.not only do you need production capability, you need engeneering support.it would cost several billion dollars to do that.&nbsp; <br />Posted by rubicondsrv</DIV><br /><br />also atlas V heavy has never flown.</p><p>as deltaIV found out flying three cores produces a different environment than 1 core.</p><p>&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[BrianSlee]

Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>My question is related to the hypothesis that an existing EELV could be used to launch Orion and its crew.I didn't find a similar topic in the existing list. Which one could be used ? Does it need to lower the weight of the craft or, on the contrary,&nbsp; allow some extra- possibility ? Does the launch process&nbsp; match with a human one (number of g ....)Could you evaluate the technical modifications needed to get it man-rated ?&nbsp;&nbsp; and the other needs (pad ... crawler ...) ..; and the cost ?&nbsp;Does anyone think that the Ares 1 option could be stopped at this moment of its development ? &nbsp;&nbsp; <br />Posted by montmein69</DIV><br /><br />Not only could it be stopped but it should be.&nbsp; For the cost of Ares we could launch hundreds of Delta IV heavy vehicles. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p>"I am therefore I think" </p><p>"The only thing "I HAVE TO DO!!" is die, in everything else I have freewill" Brian P. Slee</p> </div>

 

[windnwar]

Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>US production of rd180 is not nearly that simple.not only do you need production capability, you need engeneering support.it would cost several billion dollars to do that.&nbsp; <br />Posted by rubicondsrv</DIV><br /><br />While i'm not arguing it would be an expense to begin producing the RD-180 domesticaly, its a reasonable expense as we are in need of a high performance RP1 engine. While there are few things I agree with as far as Griffin is concerned, the Atlas vehicle is a better vehicle overall. I'm quite certain that LM is up to the task of flying a heavy, they simply are waiting for someone to buy the ride. The payload to orbit differences alone make it worth the investment. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font size="2" color="#0000ff">""Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." --Albert Einstein"</font></p> </div>

 

[Swampcat]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>as deltaIV found out flying three cores produces a different environment than 1 core.&nbsp; <br /> Posted by rubicondsrv</DIV></p><p>Yes, but the problem that caused the first Delta IV-H flight to come up short of its planned orbit was not insurmountable. As evidenced by the second flight, that concern appears to have been put to bed.</p> <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>

 

[rubicondsrv]

Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Yes, but the problem that caused the first Delta IV-H flight to come up short of its planned orbit was not insurmountable. As evidenced by the second flight, that concern appears to have been put to bed. <br />Posted by Swampcat</DIV><br /><br />true but the point was that just saying build atlas V heavy and use that is not as simple as it apears. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[rubicondsrv]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'> The payload to orbit differences alone make it worth the investment. <br />Posted by windnwar</DIV><br /><br />for the same investment you could further upgrade delta IV heavy and have a more&nbsp;proven design.</p><p>also iirc there are not pads for a heavy atlas V so that would also need to be built.</p><p>delta is a the more cost effective option.</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[Boris_Badenov]

<font size="2">Delta IV Heavy, Atlas V Heavy & Falcon 9 Heavy should all be used to orbit Orion. NASA has put all their eggs in one basket for too long. In this instance, I think they should have the spacecraft built & then&nbsp;put out the call for the rocket. Not the other way around.</font>&nbsp; <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#993300"><span class="body"><font size="2" color="#3366ff"><div align="center">. </div><div align="center">Never roll in the mud with a pig. You'll both get dirty & the pig likes it.</div></font></span></font> </div>