Re: How about a "Double-Barrel" Ares I?
- From: gaetanomarano <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2007 05:22:01 -0700
On 29 Lug, 22:03, Cruithne3753
<cruithneThirtySevenFiftyTh...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I've been following that there have been concerns whether it would beo o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
powerful enough to put an Orion into orbit, leading to the development
of the 5-seg SRB, and then that might not be enough either.
So, why not "double-barrel" a pair of 4-segs mounted side by side, with
either the rest of the stack mounted asymmetrically on top of one SRB or
symmetrically with an inverse Y-shaped connection?
o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
with an overweighted Orion and an underpowered Ares-I there are only
THREE ways to launch this vehicle: CUT the Orion's mass OR add power
to the Ares-I OR both
add power to the Ares-I is not easy since the 5-seg.SRB and the J-2x
second stage can't give so much more than planned
then, if they STILL want to launch a six-seats (too big) Orion for 3-4
astronauts' missions, the ONLY way is to CHANGE the Ares-I design with
something better and more powerful
the idea of a twin standard SRB is not new and I've also suggested an
Ariane5-derived version in my AresF design:
http://www.gaetanomarano.it/articles/024aresF.html
use two 4-seg.SRB with a ballast is a GOOD solution (since that
boosters are already available, cheap and man-rated) but,
unfortunately, it needs also a bigger 2nd stage/tank with TWO engines
(two J-2x or two Vulcain-2) since great part of the Ares-I lack of
power seems due to the 2nd stage
it's NOT TRUE that a twin-4-seg.SRBs costs more than a 5-seg.SRB,
infact, despite the hardware of the twin-SRB version costs (nearly)
twice than a 5-seg.SRB Ares-I, the REAL "price" per launch will be
LOWER since the 4-seg.SRB allows to save three years and $3 billion of
R&D time and work to develop the 5-segments SRB
two 4-seg.SRB (and a ballast) costs about $90M per Ares-I launch while
a single 5-seg.SRB could cost $50-60M, but, with only 12 orbital + 12
moon missions planned in the next 20 years, the shared 5-seg.SRB R&D
costs will be over $60M per booster, then, the real price of a 5-
seg.SRB will be (at least) $120M each
clearly, the BEST solution of the problem isto CUT the Orion's mass,
but NOT deleting VITAL or redundant safety systems!!!
the RIGHT way is to apply many small changes to the Orion's design as
suggested in this article:
http://www.gaetanomarano.it/articles/031easyways.html
and (most important) adopt the (lighter) "underside-LAS" suggested
here:
http://www.gaetanomarano.it/articles/020newLAS.html
that works like ALL rockets work, as cleraly explained in this
comparison image:
http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/4808/lasow9.jpg
o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
.
- Prev by Date: Re: VTVL?
- Next by Date: Re: Russian spaceship maker fights bankruptcy
- Previous by thread: Re: Northrop Grumman to Buy Builder of SpaceShipOne, First Manned Commercial Space Rocket
- Next by thread: Re: How about a "Double-Barrel" Ares I?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
