Re: ...Nasa/Griffin LYING about Public Support for Moon/Mars Missions!

Jeff Findley wrote:
<William.Mook@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1162854841.751998.309400@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Using off-the-shelf rocket technology and economizing construction,
while making the vehicle fully reusable, while also increasing the size
of the vehicle, could provide benefits if done carefully. So, one can
imagine a common element, say the space shuttle External Tank (ET)
redesigned to operate in clusters and return to Earth via glide back
landing. Six of these properly outfitted could loft 500,000 kg into
LEO. And at $500 million per vehicle, and 50 uses per vehicle, and $40
million recurring costs per launch, we have a total cost of $50 million
- or $100 per kg mission. 1/100th the price of the Delta IV heavy, and
10x the cost of an aircraft, and 5,000x the price of a container ship.

As always, your cost estimates appear to be pure fantasy. That and I
thought for sure you were in killfile hell...

Jeff

Dreams yes. Fantasy, no! lol. Dreams with eyes wide open, and
therefore dangerous I suppose! haha..

Judging you from your response I'm saddened too that you don't know how
to run your killfile! lol. Otherwise I'd be spared your foolish
comments.

You have absolutely no basis whatever for saying what you do about my
cost estimates. ROM estimates are easy to come by and defend. Even a
passing knowledge of vehicle costs clearly show $500 million per
vehicle is doeable.

The costs of an RS-68 rocket engine is well known, the cost of the ET
is well known, the masses including structural fractions involved are
easy to estimate, and the cost of reusable structures are easy to
estimate along with avionics and development program costs - based on
past experience and projected future advances.

A reusable ET sized propellant tank equipped with deployable subsonic
wings that masses 1.6 mllion pounds is easily propelled by three RS-68
engines.

A cost of $60 million for a boost element of this type in quantity is
easily defended. $80 million for each orbital element is also easy to
justify.

If you have another cost estimate I'd like to hear it rather than your
pronouncements..

Reusability on the order of 50 flights per element, is also easily
defended. The shuttle achieves this.

A fleet of three vehicles, consisting of a total of 21 boost elements
and 3 orbital elements along with 63 RS-68 engines, are purchased for
$1,500 million in this estimate. $500 million for each vehicle. 50
launches, $10 million cost per launch for the vehicle. Another $40
million in recurring costs, including recovery and refurb, and with a
500 tonne payload you have $100 per kg, 1/100th today's expendable
costs.

A total of 150 flights over 12 years at a grand total of 75,000 tonnes
to orbit at a cost of $7.5 billion.

These estimates are based on a hard look at the equipment and how it is
used, not fantasy.

Seven elements operating with a propellant cross-feed arrangement so
that they fly as three stages. This is non-controversial as well. The
Russians have proposed similar heavy lift designs. The seven tanks when
viewed from above can be numbered as follows;

(1) (2)
(3) (4) (5)
(6) (7)

1 and 6 feed 3
3 feeds 4

2 and 7 feed 5
5 feeds 4

all engines fire at lift off, which is a good thing.

At first 1,2, 6 & 7 drain to feed all the elements, and they are
discarded when empty. This is the first stage.

Four aircraft loiter downrange near their ballistic impact point at
launch. When the booster elements re-enter and slow to subsonic speeds
small wings deploy and the elements become subsonic gliders.

Those loitering aircraft use GPS signals sent from the element to the
aircraft, so the aircraft can close with the gliders and snag the
subsonic gliders to tow them back to the launch center for release and
landing at a conventional airstrip. The clamps that held the elements
together also serve as attachment points for landing gear. A
hypersonic speeds the booster element operates as a ballistic re-entry
vehicle.

Meanwhile elements 3 and 5 drain to feed the remaining 3 elements and
the entire array continues to climb and increase speed. When 3 and 5
are empty, they too are released and re-enter further downrange to be
captured by two tow planes loitering near their impact points at
launch. These elements too are towed back to the launch center.

Element 4 continues to near orbital speed at the launch center
antipode, the payload, sitting in an orbiter element atop the final
booster element is released and a small RL10 cluster pushes the 500 ton
payload into a circular orbit.

Element 4 re-enters descends and reenters the atmosphere near the
launch center. This element slows to subsonic speed, and glides to a
landing without air tow assistance.

The orbiter built around a shortened version of the booster elements
deploys its payload, and returns to the launch cente after deorbiting
by choosing its deorbit location. Again the element, maneuvers only in
the subsonic speed regime, and operates ballistically in the hypersonic
regimes.

What can you do with this vehicle?

Well, a 500 ton payload means that twenty 25 tonne satellites can be
orbited at once with this veihcle. Enough to populate a single plane
with a global wireless comsat network. 24 launches provides 24 planes
of coverage for the entire planet, and global wireless coverage with
any wireless device on the planet.

This system, using phased array microwave links to paint stationary
doppler corrected virtual cells on the ground, routers on orbit to
connect them all, and open optical links to connect between satellites,
will pay for the rocket fleet by charging $1 per megabit channel per
year, with 50 billion channel capacity. This will pay for the fleet,
even if its 10x costlier than I estimate, but it won't keep the fleet
busy!

This larger system will be built after a smaller scale vehicle costing
far less, launches 600 two tonne satellites also costing less to prove
out a smaller 5 billion channel system that operates and sells channels
for $5 per year..

Okay, so that's some of my dreams about commercial space flight over
the next 10 years. The dream continues! lol. What about the next 30?

Let's look at those!

The $50 billion made each year from the global wireless web created
thus far can be plowed back into vehicle and payload development. This
is an amount of money greater than what NASA spends. And this would be
used in part to develop the P&W Triton nuclear rocket engine into a
space tug. This 15,000 lbf engine also produces significant electrial
power on board. At $90 million a copy, this automated tug stays on
orbit and is refueled with hydrogen propellant by a low orbiting
payload. In fact, by removing the oxygen tank from a booster element,
replacing the RS-68 with RL-10 cluster, and making a space for the
Triton to automatically dock and draw off hydrogen, a nifty payload
module capable of placing 350 tonnes anywhere in the solar system
becomes possible.

With a 900 sec Isp, and significant electrical power, this Triton based
system can boost 350 tons to high orbits or to orbits around the moon,
or even to mars - and return to Earth after its done. The orbiter with
internal hydrogen tank can then deorbit and land after the Triton tug
detaches. If the Triton ever needs serviced, it can power down, and
ride the orbiter to the ground, and be detached on the ground.

The nuclear tug's first mission will be to move satellite clusters
around and send payloads across interplanetary space. Later, this
stage can lift gigawatt scale inflatable powersats to geosynch orbit
and beyond to provide power where its needed by laser beam. The power
the GW scale solar powersats produce make them worth far more than $100
per kg on orbit.

The massive power requirements of planet earth and these satellite's
ability to deliver power reliably and safely anywhere its needed by
solar pumped laser, on Earth or in space, mean that many more than 150
launches can be supported by demand for these satellites.

3 GW usable electrical power delivered continuously throughout the year
in 10 kW increments anywhere its needed in the cislunar system, at a
cost of $0.03 per kWh, means that a total of $790 million per year can
be generated per satellite. Satellite costs are estimated to be less
than $220 million, and lifetimes in excess of 10 years. Thus, for $270
million, over $8 billion in revenues can be generated. 150 satellites
like this would generate another $120 billion per year in profits.

Of course the demand for power would be enough to expand the fleet well
beyond the 3 ships in inventory. Once a month flight ratess would
become three time a week flight rates and the number of ships in
inventory would rise to 40 to support it. Over 10 years 1500
satellites would be orbited and $1,200 billion per year would be
generated from this source..

The P&W triton rocket can also be adapted to a reusable interplanetary
stage, providing electrical power while in transit to planets and while
at the planet. Using this technology an interplanetary wireless web
can be established across the solar system.

WIth this communications backbone in place a large numbers of automated
probes can be deployed to send data through this network back to Earth.
Users on Earth can tap into an ever growing database of interplanetary
events. This data will be freely available up to a certain point, and
then data is sold to interested parties beyond a certain level.

The triton rocket will be adapted to a power only version making is a
space reactor and to provide far more electrical energy for use with
ion rockets operating at 5,000 sec Isp, This will form the basis of an
advanced interplanetary stage. The core elements will also used to
power large manned space stations, and planetary bases including those
located on the moon and mars.

The very large complement of automated interplanetary probes will
determine the precise location and disposition of all the solar systems
riches within a short period of time. With this information in hand a
fleet of nuclear pulse driven superships can be built by levarging the
revenue stream generated at this point and the known value of the
materials discovered. These superships will not only be capable of
deploying vast manned payloads across the solar system quickly, they'll
also be capable of using the nuclear pulse propulsion process to
retrieve massive quantities of material from across the solar system,
and return that material to Earth orbit.

Other nuclear pulse launchers designed for use in Earth orbit loft
massive factorysats into orbit to tear these resources apart and create
a manufacturing infrastructure of unprecedented proportions in space.
These can also be used to launch huge segments of lunar and martian
industrial complexes. Asteroids can be orbited around the moon mars
and other planets as well, anywhere humans choose to live.

The goods and products flowing out of this vast space network expands
our cacities in space, and provides products across the face of the
world. In time nearly all industrial, manufacturing farming and mining
activities will be displaced to orbit, and the Earth will be a vast
wildlife preserve with 10 billion people spread evenly over the most
beautiful parts of Earth (only 4.,5% of the total), with food, fiber,
goods and services, including transportation, delivered cleanly and
safely and silently from orbit. With 2.5 people per household, on
average, this is 1.3 acres per homesite .

Over time people will migrate to personal space colonies on orbit,and
eventually those will travel across interplanetary space, and
ultimately, interstellar space.

I've given some thought to all this in detail, but not for a number of
years - and those details will change over time,but the broad strokes I
think are rather clear.





"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a
little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor
safety"
- B. Franklin, Bartlett's Familiar Quotations (1919)

I disagree with Ben, I think people are always deserving of liberty and
safety, whether or not they are wise enough to secure it for themselves.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Northrup Grumman - CEV Prime
    ... You're carping. ... it wouldn't prove your claim that an orbital vehicle ... Musk's Falcon can launch a Gemini-class capsule. ... So, if it costs Communists $2.2 billion to do something, it must cost ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Death Sentence for the Hubble?
    ... >>Launching weight is not free.If doesn't matter if the weight is the launch ... >>thrust, the more the cost. ... >>reasons why some launch cost more than others. ... >>vehicle selection and pricing you are sadly mistaken. ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Re: Death Sentence for the Hubble?
    ... >>Launching weight is not free.If doesn't matter if the weight is the launch ... >>thrust, the more the cost. ... >>reasons why some launch cost more than others. ... >>vehicle selection and pricing you are sadly mistaken. ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Its In-Line (Shuttle Derived)
    ... >scheduling costs due to being in a particular orbit plane. ... >on the equator and you restrict launch sites or further reduce payload ... >in launch to Mars, so factor in a big margin. ... >Ever seen a comparison of cost per pound to orbit vs. lift capacity? ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Jonathans Space Report, No. 616
    ... The orbit I gave in the last JSR for the secret PAN communications ... The first Meteor-M satellite was launched on Sep 17. ... Several small satellites were deployed on the same launch. ... Launch vehicle was the Soyuz-2-1b with a Fregat upper stage. ...
    (sci.space.news)