Nasa unveils Space Launch System vision, 2017?

[Bignate603]

How are we going to afford this?

I feel terrible for the "younger" generation ... we're leaving you with a horrible mess.

Honestly, the budget for this is so tiny it doesn't really matter. The president can sneeze and it will cost more money than this.

Heh... I guess that I have to start rooting for the Chinese to take over the lead in the space race. This project is little more than a money grab for the aerospace contractors who were building the shuttle... there is practically no innovation here.

Seriously... it's basically an updated Saturn V made out of old space shuttle parts! How lame is that?

It's not really a money grab as much as a thing to prop them up. The government knowingly does that to keep certain suppliers alive when they don't have an easy way to find anyone else that can do that job. If the companies go under all the people that have certain skills get kicked to the curb. The ability to make certain things would disappear and it would take decades just to get back to where we are right now.

At this point either we need to commit to go ahead on one of these big projects or we need to give up on our space program. At this point they're just barely keeping the space industry on life support. They're just paying to keep it alive but aren't paying enough to actually get anything out of the money we're putting into it.

The problem is that there isn't too much room for innovation. There are no breakthroughs in rocket technology on the horizon.

I still don't get why they're using shuttle engines though, or their obsession with using liquid hydrogen as a propellant. Part of me wishes they'd dust off the plans for the old F-1 engines and build a new Saturn V. We're already re-using the Apollo era J-2s.

Why wouldn't they use liquid oxygen and hydrogen? Per unit mas it produces the most thrust. Last month I heard Elon Musk (head of SpaceX) speak about some things they are working through. He said fuel was the least of his concerns because it was such a tiny fraction of the total cost, roughly 0.1% of the cost of the launch. At that small of a fraction of the cost who cares if the liquid oxygen and hydrogen cost more than other alternative fuels as long as they increase the lifting power of the rocket?

 

[ichy]

Why wouldn't they use liquid oxygen and hydrogen? Per unit mas it produces the most thrust. Last month I heard Elon Musk (head of SpaceX) speak about some things they are working through. He said fuel was the least of his concerns because it was such a tiny fraction of the total cost, roughly 0.1% of the cost of the launch. At that small of a fraction of the cost who cares if the liquid oxygen and hydrogen cost more than other alternative fuels as long as they increase the lifting power of the rocket?

Liquid H2 also takes up more volume. It's not really the hydrogen thing that makes me wonder (although as far as I can tell they never even considered an RP-1 fueled first stage) it's this obsession with reusing the space shuttle main engines. Sure they're amazing pieces of technology, but they're expensive as hell. According to wiki an SSME costs nearly three times as much as one of the RS-68 engines used on the Delta IV. Seeing as how these engines won't be re-used I don't get why they're using a very expensive and complex re-usable design.

 

[sao123]

Liquid H2 also takes up more volume. It's not really the hydrogen thing that makes me wonder (although as far as I can tell they never even considered an RP-1 fueled first stage) it's this obsession with reusing the space shuttle main engines. Sure they're amazing pieces of technology, but they're expensive as hell. According to wiki an SSME costs nearly three times as much as one of the RS-68 engines used on the Delta IV. Seeing as how these engines won't be re-used I don't get why they're using a very expensive and complex re-usable design.

the REASON for using the SSME's are twofold:

1) The F1 is a kerosene engine which can produce a ton of thrust, moreso than 3 SSME's combined. however, it is very innefficient. The very efficient Liquid Hydrogen Oxygen SSME produce a much better power to weight ratio and a longer burn time.

2) The SSMe is the first liquid fule engine which has a variable thrust with a throttle rated for a range of 69% to 104% of thrust.

 

[ichy]

2) The SSMe is the first liquid fule engine which has a variable thrust with a throttle rated for a range of 69% to 104% of thrust.

Why would this launcher need to be able to throttle down? The Saturn V handled the heavy acceleration towards the end of each stage's burn (they'd accelerate more because most of the weight of fuel had been burned off) by shutting down the center engine early.

 

[CaptnKirk]

this still looks very similar to some of the later stages of what "Jupiter Direct" Proposed... very interesting.

I just hope it gets completely funded.

Most like a configuration of Direct 3.0
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Jupiter_Family.jpg

To restart with ET Shuttle assets, it will take 2 years to yield the first modified unit.
Existing toolsing can load and begin weldments for Hydrogen Tank, less engine mount truss assy and
Oxygen can start lower dome and barrel , extend to second barrel and replace ojive with
upper dome,
which could be a variation of the Hydrogen Upper Dome with the ring frame accepting the spacecraft adapter.

SRB truss and intertank don't change much, feedlines and raceways get extended to meet SSME's.
Mount lower engine truss structure, could be hardened to survive the sub-orbital re-entry, retreive the engines.
This configuration uses 3 engines.

. . . Meanwhile back at the Ranch, turn on subcontractors to produce dome, gore, and barrel sections
and join them with state of the art stir friction welds, increase diameter to 33 Ft. - same as Saturn V was.
Takes 40+ feet out of the rocket stack.
this is the Phase II rocket - the heavy.
Have Kerolox burners made that feeding from Oxygen tanks, separate at 120 seconds, recover
for refurb - takes 3 years to build and deliver as reusable liquid propellant boosters.
This configuration uses 5 engines, and could use 4 Kerolox to extend boost phase and velocity.

Still needs an upper stage to boost and position the Capsule and Service Module.

ATK is proceeding with what used to be the Ares-1, but Boeing is out as the second stage,
replaced by the Vulcan 2, a derivative of the Ariane 5 from EADS, Europe -the Liberty. The 'Stick' is back.
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2011/09/atk-liberty-via-unfunded-nasa-space-act-agreement/

It is scheduled to fly in 2013, about the same time the Flight Test Orion will be ready.
Might fit.
Either can take the Orion up, just where do you want to rendezvous?

Libery Stick to ISS, can also take the Dragon or the CST-100 Space Capsule.
http://boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=1323

Heavy 1 - Direct 3.0 for manned to local inner Solar System, Phase II to deliver and
stage/pre-stage supplies to LaGrange Points

 

[ElFenix]

needs moar strap on boosters

 

[HamburgerBoy]

http://www.worldwatch.org/node/764

What does that have to do with anything? People in developing nations are fucking themselves over.

 

[The Boston Dangler]

What does that have to do with anything? People in developing nations are fucking themselves over.

it has to do with the cost of space travel, and that we went to the moon on the same value as the us cosmetics industry.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

it has to do with the cost of space travel, and that we went to the moon on the same value as the us cosmetics industry.

So what are you saying? That we should sell our wimminz' beauty to explore a stupid rock?

 

[OVerLoRDI]

This thread inspired me to go read up on the Saturn V.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Apollo_8_acceleration.gif

Doubt they'll ever beat that (with similar payloads), but I would love to see them pull it off

 

[ViRGE]

HAHA these fuckers just strapped some solid rocket boosters to it. They've been playing too much Kerbal Space Program.

Hey, don't knock the SRBs. SRBs can get anything into space as long as you are really careful to keep the thing from flying apart.

 

[Blitzvogel]

Here we go......

I really wonder how much extra capability can be gained from just strapping on more SRBs. Going form the standard 2 for all the SLS to put to 4 could probably increase the weight to LEO or beyond considerably, as well as increasing their segment amounts. I love these rocket powered dildo concepts, as they are are aimed for 200+ Metric Tons, and especially the second picture, I can see individual segments of a mini-O'Neill Cylinder being sent up as the outer casing, with construction equipment, supplies, etc being carried in the interior. We could finally actually get around to experimenting with the ideas of large, semi-permanent human habitation with artificial G with such large and wide systems as these.

How 'bout a system like this: with longer external tanks x2, 8 longer SRBs mounted together in pairs on the already established sides of the external tanks (like with Energia), and an even wider upper shell for very wide loads. Such a set up could probably boost the 230 MTs to somewhere between 300-350 MT.

 

[ichy]

In the 1960s there were already proposals for a second batch of Saturn Vs which would've used F-1A engines to significantly boost how much they could lift. In addition to that there were even more far-fetched designs with additional liquid or solid fueled strap on motors.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturn_MLV

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturn_V#Proposed_post-Apollo_developments

A number of alternate Saturn vehicles were proposed based on the Saturn V, ranging from the Saturn INT-20 with an S-IVB stage and interstage mounted directly onto an S-IC stage, through to the Saturn V-23(L)[23] which would not only have five F-1 engines in the first stage, but also four strap-on boosters with two F-1 engines each: giving a total of thirteen F-1 engines firing at launch.

Yes I know that the above idea was a total fantasy, but good god it would have been cool.

 

[The Boston Dangler]

Here we go......

I really wonder how much extra capability can be gained from just strapping on more SRBs. Going form the standard 2 for all the SLS to put to 4 could probably increase the weight to LEO or beyond considerably, as well as increasing their segment amounts. I love these rocket powered dildo concepts, as they are are aimed for 200+ Metric Tons, and especially the second picture, I can see individual segments of a mini-O'Neill Cylinder being sent up as the outer casing, with construction equipment, supplies, etc being carried in the interior. We could finally actually get around to experimenting with the ideas of large, semi-permanent human habitation with artificial G with such large and wide systems as these.

How 'bout a system like this: with longer external tanks x2, 8 longer SRBs mounted together in pairs on the already established sides of the external tanks (like with Energia), and an even wider upper shell for very wide loads. Such a set up could probably boost the 230 MTs to somewhere between 300-350 MT.

http://www.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php

 

[sao123]

Why would this launcher need to be able to throttle down? The Saturn V handled the heavy acceleration towards the end of each stage's burn (they'd accelerate more because most of the weight of fuel had been burned off) by shutting down the center engine early.

The purpose of the throttle down is to reduce stress on the frame at Max Q, which is detemined by both velocity of the shuttle and atmospheric pressure at a given altitude.

The SRB's are also able to throttle in a similar range to the SSME's.

 

[ichy]

The purpose of the throttle down is to reduce stress on the frame at Max Q, which is detemined by both velocity of the shuttle and atmospheric pressure at a given altitude.

The SRB's are also able to throttle in a similar range to the SSME's.

Most rockets aren't able to throttle their engine. As far as I know the shuttle is the only launch systems that reduces power going through Max Q.

Also, are you sure about the SRBs? I have never heard of a throttleable solid rocket booster.

 

[epidemis]

http://www.worldwatch.org/node/764

We're getting there fast, patience.

But I wouldn't put much stock in your numbers, there are ALOT of factors playing in here.

 

[AstroManLuca]

http://www.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php

LOL, that's exactly what I thought.

Clearly they need to throw some tri-couplers on there. Because three boosters are better than two!

 

[The Boston Dangler]

LOL, that's exactly what I thought.

Clearly they need to throw some tri-couplers on there. Because three boosters are better than two!

wrap the whole thing in 6 boosters, then wrap it again in 12 more! that's how we roll in ksp

 

[arcenite]

Dude, my shuttle will have 9001 boosters.

Eat my dust!!

 

[Acanthus]

2011 and we are still riding giant explosions into space.

Ugh.

 

[arcenite]

2011 and we are still riding giant explosions into space.

Ugh.

Do you have a better idea?

 

[DrPizza]

Do you have a better idea?

Oh oh oh! Pick me! I have a better idea! Let's stay here. Let's send robots out to explore space. Sending humans at this point is pointless. Robots can do it cheaper, and we don't have to worry about them getting back home.

Double NASA's budget and have them start doing things that give us a little more bang for the buck. Where's the James Webb Space Telescope? How about the DSCVR satellite? How about we send probes to a few of the water logged moons of the solar system and see if there's life there (before we contaminate all those places with life from Earth.) Answering that question - is there life elsewhere - is one of the most profound questions of mankind. Doing thousands of laps in a low earth orbiting space station is little more than theatrics.

 

[OlafSicky]

Welcome to 1960's NASA is in the dumpster, downfall of USA happening now live sad sad

 

[0roo0roo]

wired had some good posts on space
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KH-9_Hexagon
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/201...atellite-was-hidden-from-the-world-until-now/
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/09/space-war-arsenal/