Re: How to take a "free" ET to orbit.


"Craig Fink" <WeBeGood@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:13jr3v1n519ho9b@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Jeff Findley wrote:


"Craig Fink" <WeBeGood@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:13jp0opb5fka480@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Derek Lyons wrote:

Craig Fink <WeBeGood@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Ron Paul's term in office would start in 2009, while the Shuttle
program
is still active. Consider a true and meaningful change in our Countries
direction, consider Ron Paul in 2008! ;-)

By 2009 it will be too late - as the facilities to manufacture tanks
will no longer exist.

There will still be some tanks laying around somewhere.

Tanks which are unsuitable for this purpose since they have no way to
grab
them (with the RMS/SSRMS), no attachment points to fix them to ISS, and
etc. Beyond that, who's going to foot the bill for the higher ISS reboost
fuel
costs due to the additional drag? There is no such thing as a free lunch
or launch.

Drag isn't an issue to adding RMS arm grapple fixtures to various points
on
the tank. There are plenty of acceptable locations to attach some
prelaunch.

I mean the drag on ISS due to the increased area caused by the ET. Even if
it's end on into the velocity vector, it's still a pretty big cross
sectional area.

I told you zero cost to NASA, NASA wouldn't be footing any bill when all
is
said and done. It's the investors who foot the bill, and consequently get
the profits. That is the whole concept of Privatizing LEO, capitalism, and
free markets.

Sorry, but you're going to have to get NASA to certify all design changes to
the ET, ISS, and etc. They're going to be very unwilling to do this.
Anything that could impact the shuttle/ISS schedule costs money. There is
no such thing as free to NASA, even if you get someone else to pay to modify
the ET.

As far as I know NASA will foot the bill for ISS reboost fuel, I was
calling
it delta-V. That shows up on the "profits" side of the equation for the
investors.

You mean your scheme to recover the LOX/LH2 to work? Theoretically
possible, but not practical given the timeframe. There is no hardware on
ISS to recover this, there is no cryogenic tankage to store it, and last,
but not least, there are no engines on the ISS or the shuttle which can be
used to burn that LOX/LH2. And if you think private investors will want to
foot the R&D bill for this forget it, since NASA will have to approve all
of this hardware since it will be directly interfacing to the
shuttle/ET/ISS.

Yes, NASA is going to have to pay someone to reboost ISS from
now until 2015. It may as well be someone with an incinerator rocket
engine. The same one that was used to deorbit the SOFI.

A SOFI burning rocket engine does not exist. Tools to gather up and store
the SOFI to use by this engine also do not exist. Again, NASA will have to
approve all of this hardware since it will be directly interfacing to the
shuttle/ET/ISS. Fat chance.

Nobody said
anything about trying to get NASA to pay for reboosting ETs additional
mass
at the Space Station. I would expect NASA to pay for reboosting the ETs
mass. But, I might charge NASA for trash disposal, and sell them delta-V.

Good luck with that. We're seeing that private investors are very leery of
investing in COTS transportation to ISS, which actually has some support
from NASA, including actual government money. What makes you think they'll
want to invest in this "free" ET scheme?

Jeff
--
"When transportation is cheap, frequent, reliable, and flexible,
everything else becomes easier."
- Jon Goff


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Improved lunar landing architecture
    ... >>> And the one thing that NASA won't grasp or do in a million years is to ... ISS was cut down from 7 to 3 people. ... > ban NASA spending on a Moon base, until they had finished the ISS. ... >>Lunar program. ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Improved lunar landing architecture
    ... Well, it is still a little early for the Chinese to beat NASA, one ... ISS was cut down from 7 to 3 people. ... >Lunar program. ... Suppose that astronauts land at the equator, go to a hut to change ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Bush says about the shuttle....and that the White House would not be all that upset if it never
    ... NASA is faced with a dilemma right now: It wants to fly 19 Space ... these missions - at the rate it wanted to fly the missions. ... would reduce the shuttle flight rate to 2 missions per year, ... workforce, stop building the ISS, and live with the consequences. ...
    (sci.space.shuttle)
  • Re: WHATS NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 16 Mar 07 Washington, DC
    ... NASA BUDGET: NO ROOM FOR THE ALPHA MAGNETIC SPECTROMETER. ... scheduled to go to the ISS on a 2008 shuttle flight. ... A well-defined mission? ...
    (sci.physics)
  • CRS report on INA and ISS
    ... The Iran Nonproliferation Act of 2000 was enacted ... Russia in connection with the International Space ... The ISS is currently under construction in orbit. ... beginning in April 2006 for which NASA must pay. ...
    (sci.space.policy)
Loading