Alternative Launcher For Returning To the Moon

DIRECT Launcher writes, "A grass-roots effort, based around a group of engineers, managers, and others involved in the US space program, is proposing an alternative launch vehicle for NASA to adopt for the new Lunar Exploration program. The new vehicle offers serious performance and cost savings totaling $35 billion over the next twenty years. The proposal was presented to NASA last week. The concept would make possible future Hubble Space Telescope servicing missions after Shuttle has retired, allow for all the remaining ISS elements to be launched after all, free up cash to fund the JIMO mission again, and also allow NASA to return to the moon three years early."

Re:Is reuse limiting ourselves?

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree. If we ever want to go to Mars or make a sizable Moon base we will need a heavy lift rocket. This rocket that covers everything will carry less weight than a Saturn V. That is unsatisfactory. While I think the Ares I is fairly foolish (we could modify a Delta IV or even an Arianne V cheaper), the Ares V is a piece of must-have technology. The Ares V will be able to toss 130 tons (and perhaps as much as 170 tons) into LEO. And it won't have to be man-rated thereby reducing its cost. It seems to me that if the DIRECT people were serious they would have proposed that the Ares V do all of this since it is already set to be built. But instead they propose their own pet rocket.

All that this is going to do is divert US space exploration. We really don't need any more diversions considering we haven't been on the Moon in 35 years.

Re:Save even more money, ditch the project

[Megane]

There is a decent argument of using it as a dry space-dock where we could build and launch deeper space exploration vehicles for less fuel costs.

That would be great... if the ISS were on a more equitorial orbit. As it is, it's on a rather inclined orbit, chosen to make it easier for Russian launches.

Re:Save even more money, ditch the project

[AKAImBatman]

That would be great... if the ISS were on a more equitorial orbit.

Who mentioned the ISS? They were talking about construction yards on the Moon.

As for the ISS, it's too bad that it's a political boondoggle. It's essentially worthless right now, but at least allows us to fly the flag. (Hey look! We got a Space Station!) Once the Ares V comes online, the ISS will be worthless, useless, and easily replaceable. Being able to launch 130 metric tonnes to LEO means that we could launch a complete ISS replacement in only two launches! It has taken 17 shuttle flights to get the ISS to its currently incomplete state. In that time, the hardware that's already in space has been deteriorating due to the difficulties in maintaining the build/maintenance schedules, and compatibility issues between American and Russian hardware.

If we wanted to fly JIMO, we'd take the money out of the ISS's budget. It's too bad that would effectively kill the Shuttle Program. Killing the Shuttle Program would mean political suicide for manned flight, which would lead to the implosion of the CEV program.

Stupid politics.

Re:You guys are missing the most important point..

[Firethorn]

I think added capacity is the simplest part to explain...

Removing the shuttle saves 68 tons for the thing empty, 108 tons loaded.

Add in the 25 tons that's the maximum payload the shuttle can lift, and it gets real easy to believe they can lift almost a 100 tons by redesigning the shuttle lift platform a bit to remove the need for the shuttle. You loose some tons because one of the things they have to do is move the shuttle's engines to the central tank.

There's no practical reason why we couldn't make a space station type module, or even a Bigelow one, into a satellite servicer with the addition of thrusters, which could be refueled by supply missions.

You don't do lab work in a 'shuttle', you do it on a station which stays up there. You launch and recover people using lighter and therefore cheaper vehicles.

Re:RS-68?

[AKAImBatman]

Single-flight Lunar missions in the same style as Apollo are planned - mainly to be used for Crew Rotation to the planned Lunar science base.

Got a link? The last plan that NASA announced was to launch the Lunar Lander + Moon Booster as cargo, then have the Orion dock with the lunar module. This was what was shown in NASA's presentation video [youtube.com]. This plan did NOT call for the Ares-V to be man-rated.

If that's changed, then you should probably update the Wikipedia Info [wikipedia.org] on Project Constellation. Remember to cite your sources.