Re: DIRECT question for Oberg, Simberg, Spencer, et. al.

On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 13:23:00 -0700, Frank <landings.geo@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:


The DIRECT Launcher does not, somewhat confusingly, involve a "direct
ascent" mission profile.

Right. The name "DIRECT" refers to direct descendant of Shuttle
hardware and technology. (Compared to new 5-segment SRB, new wider
Exterrnal Tank, etc., in Ares.)

(Which in
another somewhat confusing development, they propose to call
"Jupiter," even though NASA already fielded a Jupiter launcher, some
45 years ago.)

And if they call the thing "Jupiter II" everyone's gonna be looking
for Dr. Smith and Will Robinson. :-)

NASA calls the program Project Constellation and named the spacecraft
Orion. Why the heck aren't the other parts also named for
constellations? Instead of Ares, call the launcher "Aries". Instead of
"Artemis" call the LSAM "Aquarius". This isn't rocket science. Who the
heck is botching NASA PR lately? Did you see that horrible slogan they
came up with?

Brian


.

Relevant Pages
Quantcast