Brown Bess/Spencer Launcher

In November 2005, Henry Spencer presented a well thought out
concept for creating a lower-cost lunar exploration launch system,
consisting of a dual launch of identical 100 tonne LEO class
launch vehicles. He called the ET-based (no SRBs!) launcher
"Brown Bess", but I still call it the "Spencer". :-)

Henry's concept slashes launcher program costs by maximizing
common hardware. This means eliminating the SRB, the SSME,
and the "Stick" Crew Launch Vehicle. The "Spencer" launcher
itself consists of two modified External Tanks stacked atop one
another, with Stage 1 powered by seven RS-68s and Stage 2
powered by two RS-68s. One launch orbits a trans-lunar injection
stage while the other orbits a CEV-lunar lander stack. The
payloads rendezvous and dock in low earth orbit.

I like the concept (even NASA's ESAS study recognized that a
twin-launcher setup would cost less per mission than the planned
"1.5-launcher mission), but I've wondered about the lack of a
smaller LEO-only crew launcher. NASA might need a 20-25 tonne
LEO payload launcher for ISS missions, for example.

Then it occurred to me that Henry's 100 tonne TLI stage might
be about the right size for a crew launcher second stage -
although it might need a J-2X to power it. All that would be
needed to boost it and its CEV payload to low earth orbit
would be an ET-based first stage with about 430 tonnes of
propellant, powered by perhaps three RS-68s (a kind of
souped-up Delta IV Heavy with only two parts instead
of four).

In order not to violate Henry's planned commonality, this crew
launch first stage could be a full-size "Brown Bess" first stage,
shorn of four RS-68s and only filled to about 60% of its
maximum propellant loading capacity. The resulting crew
launcher would stand about 260 feet tall, much shorter than
NASA's "Stick" and would weigh a bit less than 630 tonnes
at liftoff, far less than the current 907 tonne "Stick" design.
This "Mini" would probably take longer to develop than Stick,
but it would hasten development of the 100 tonne launcher by
getting both ET-based stage and TLI stage production
underway. All that would be needed to build the "Brown
Bess" would be the insertion of the ET-based second stage
(which could be powered by five J-2X engines if they were
developed) and the addition of four RS-68s to the first stage.

By the way, the recent news that NASA may be having
trouble figuring out how to fit its ever-growing Cargo Launch
Vehicle concept through the VAB doors, which by the way
may now end up being powered by RS-68s instead of the
originally planned SSMEs, makes Henry's idea look better
every day.

- Ed Kyle

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Brown Bess/Spencer Launcher
    ... Henry's concept slashes launcher program costs by maximizing ... powered by two RS-68s. ... NASA might need a 20-25 tonne ... launch first stage could be a full-size "Brown Bess" first stage, ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Brown Bess/Spencer Launcher
    ... Henry's concept slashes launcher program costs by maximizing ... powered by two RS-68s. ... NASA might need a 20-25 tonne ... launch first stage could be a full-size "Brown Bess" first stage, ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Brown Bess/Spencer Launcher
    ... Henry's concept slashes launcher program costs by maximizing ... powered by two RS-68s. ... NASA might need a 20-25 tonne ... launch first stage could be a full-size "Brown Bess" first stage, ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Brown Bess/Spencer Launcher
    ... Ed Kyle wrote: ... Henry's concept slashes launcher program costs by maximizing ... powered by two RS-68s. ... NASA might need a 20-25 tonne ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: the "Spencer Launcher"
    ... > A couple of months back, Ed Kyle wrote: ... > A launcher with such a noble name :-) ought to be thought out from scratch, ... to believing that money will ever materialize for the ... > The first stage is a shuttle ET, ...
    (sci.space.policy)