Re: We can meet all our needs through space development

On Jan 30, 6:26 pm, Einar <eina...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jan 30, 3:08 pm, Willie.Moo...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:



On Jan 30, 9:44 am, Ian Parker <ianpark...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 30 Jan, 12:18, Einar <eina...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Jan 29, 2:13 pm, "Mike Combs"

<mikeco...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Einar" <eina...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:b8db2464-6d7e-47c1-b641-870a89468e4e@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

This sounds more like one would hope that the world at 2099
might be like.

Write a schy fy book on this, a suggestion.

It will most certainly remain a very-distant science-fiction-y concept for
as long as we choose to view it as such.

--

Regards,
Mike Combs
----------------------------------------------------------------------
By all that you hold dear on this good Earth
I bid you stand, Men of the West!
Aragorn

Now, SpaceX is still struggling with theyr rocket, Ares is in
development problems...and yet those are a lot less ambitious than
what is suggested here something with 500 ton LEO capability.

It´s plans like these with everything assumed to go right that aren´t
believable.

I don't understand Ares. How is it that almost 40 years ago Armstrong
and Aldrin went to the Moon on top of a Saturn 5? In what respects is
Ares "better" than Saturn? Certainly not in $/Kg.

- Ian Parker- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Its a function of the amount of money spent and how wisely it is
spent.

I have given you my ideas here. Einar says they're not believable and
compares what I have proposed with something on a whole different
order - apples and oranges.

Saturn V cost $9 billion and 6 years to develop - using results of DOD
programs on the E1/F1 an J2 engines with 13 vehicles built and flown.

I propose taking an ET sized airframe propelled by an annular
aerospike engine, with an RS-68 pumpset (3) in each engine - to
produce a ET sized booster- stretched 40% - massing 1,000 tons at lift
off, creating 1,400 tons thrust at lift off - operating 7 at a time to
create a three stage operation to loft 500 tons to LEO. They will
have an advanced thermal protection system and be fully recoverable
with downrange tow planes picking up the pieces.

I estimate that this program will cost $6 billion to complete in 4
years and result in 4 vehicles that put 500 metric tons into orbit
each launch at a cost of $70 million ($10 million per element per
flight)

Why does this seem infeasible? What specifically is infeasible about
it?

Mind you, you are suggesting a difficult and expensive development
program. You are actually suggesting a good number of expensive and
difficult development programs.

You may have some money, but you are not a trillionaire.

I mentioned the other programs to demonstrate that much less ambitious
projects have run into development difficulties, meaning...ought to
have been blatantly obvious...that you program is likely to encounter
development difficulties scales large as well.

Maybe you can find trillions to spend when all of what you are
proposing is added together.

Clearly, the mere development of that craft will take a while.

There will have to be experiments, i.e. the aerospike engine is yet to
actually fly. Now, you might pay for this if you would first use the
thing in a singular to launch satellites for some time, till the bugs
have been worked out.

Then the development curve could be something similar to what say
Kistler is trying to achieve, first trying to establish a reusable
launch veicle and later they intend to expand on it. Space X intents
the same.

Now, that can lead to a family of launch veicles, eventually the large
powerful veicle can be realized in managable steps. Then as you
suggest multibles of that can be used.

This is a development process of something on the order of 20 - 30
years for the veicle alone.

Einar


Lord all-knowing Mook (aka MI5/CIA spook/mole) doesn't much care for
the input of others, especially as long as it's our hard-earned loot
getting spent. Your "20 - 30 years" could be pushed down to perhaps as
little as 10 - 20 years, although China is already doing CATS and
getting bigger and better at it as we speak.

Technically our moon's L1 is what needs to get developed as our first
significant space outpost, as our fuel oasis depot/gateway. At least
this much has been technically doable for decades. Unfortunately, our
Mook doesn't have a clue as to where or of what our Moon L1 is all
about.
. - Brad Guth
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: We can meet all our needs through space development
    ... Saturn V cost $9 billion and 6 years to develop - using results of DOD ... produce a ET sized booster- stretched 40% - massing 1,000 tons at lift ... There will have to be experiments, i.e. the aerospike engine is yet to ... launch veicle and later they intend to expand on it. ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: We can meet all our needs through space development
    ... Saturn V cost $9 billion and 6 years to develop - using results of DOD ... produce a ET sized booster- stretched 40% - massing 1,000 tons at lift ... There will have to be experiments, i.e. the aerospike engine is yet to ... launch veicle and later they intend to expand on it. ...
    (sci.space.policy)
Quantcast