Re: CBO Report: Alternatives for Future U.S. Space-Launch Capabilities


Michael Kent wrote:
Ed Kyle <edkyle99@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Cost, from the government customer's perspective, is the same as
the manufacturer's price in this instance. $350 million isn't the
manufacturer's cost to build/launch. It is the government's cost.

The past is a good guide for the future when it comes to space launch.

The Air Force flew two Titan IVs per year, year after year after year.

It is no coincidence that the CBO estimates in this document that
Boeing will launch one to two Heavies per year.

But the cost of the Delta IV Heavy does not rely primarily on the flight
rate of the Delta IV Heavy. It relies primarily on the flight rate of
the Delta IV family of vehicles, and that means it relies primarily on
the flight rate of the Delta IV Medium.

Boeing designed the Delta IV around a flight rate much higher than two
Delta IV's a year, which is why its per-flight cost has skyrocketed.
You can't separate Heavy and Medium flight rates like you're trying to
do here and get an accurate picture of the Delta IV cost situtation.

Mike

Delta IV Heavy uses a different second stage than the smallest
Delta IV Medium versions, so there is some separation between the
two. But I offered the Heavy example for comparison purposes only.
The Medium category also provides an example of the over-optimism
in the EELV payload projections.

During the 1990s, the only Medium class U.S. expendables in service
were Atlas II/III, Delta 2, and Titan 2. These flew an average of 6.3,

8.2, and 0.7 times per year, respectively. In the heavy category,
the big Titan's managed about 2.7 launches per year, although much
of this consisted of an end-of-Cold-War surge at the start of the
decade.

Now Boeing originally considered creating a Delta IV Light version that

would replace Delta 2 and Titan 2 one-for-one, but this didn't pan out
cost-wise, so away slipped 8.9 EELV flights per year, leaving just
the 6.3 Mediums and the 2.7 Heavies - requiring perhaps one-dozen
EELV cores per year (assuming that EELV kept all of the Atlas
commercial work, which did not happen). That might have been
enough if the EELV contest had stayed "winner take all", but it still
fell
far short of the 30 or 40 or 60 per year numbers bandied about when
Boeing was building Decatur. My point is that the rosy payload
projections for both the Heavy and Medium categories were fantasy.

Of course DoD decided to keep both EELVs, leaving insufficient
work to be divided between two parallel programs. Current projections
are for 4-6 Mediums and 1-2 Heavies per year (only 3-6 EELV cores
per company per year).

- Ed Kyle

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Air Force Signs Off on SRB-CEV
    ... >> more metal, fiberglass, etc.) than a Delta 7920, ... a Delta IV Light would cost about ... > Ed, if dry mass is the sole determinant of launch vehicle cost, what ... As for the EELV price increases, ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Air Force Signs Off on SRB-CEV
    ... >> active launch vehicle - the launcher that has ... >> launchers cost more than Delta 2, ... That is still tens of $millions less than an EELV, ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: EELV Cost Almost Doubles
    ... You're forgetting that EELV doesn't replace just the Titan IV, ... EELV programs will cost more than Titan IV and Atlas-Centaur combined, ... the Delta II line and re-introduce the Delta IV-Light. ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Air Force Signs Off on SRB-CEV
    ... > launchers cost more than Delta 2, ... > Delta 2 class launcher. ... There's no way it would cost that much ... to ass-rate an EELV, and i'll bet the mission costs would be lower, too. ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: 14" Band Saw advice
    ... materials, it may account for 50 percent of the time, and cost, of building ... The DELTA had the 'advertising budget' and a very nice finish. ... Fence, Gauge, and 'extras' included. ... Harbor Freight offering. ...
    (rec.woodworking)
Loading