United Launch Alliance made its first strong public pitch to reverse NASA's decision to develop the Ares I rocket to launch the Orion spaceships envisioned to replace the space shuttle, saying it could save money and time by using the existing Delta IV Heavy that currently launches military and private spacecraft.And, an independent review by Aerospace Corp. backed up some of the company's claims, saying that the Delta IV Heavy could deliver Orion and a crew of astronauts to low-Earth orbit, where they would hook up with a powerful "Earth Departure Stage" that would still have to be launched on a new Ares V rocket.
However, the two companies' representatives provided members of a White House panel today with varying estimates of how long it would take to reach the first flight.
Mike Gass of United Launch Alliance estimated Delta 4 could launch Orion by 2014. The Aerospace study estimated it might take as long as seven years to make sure the Delta 4 was safe enough to fly humans to orbit. (Gass is pictured above).
Aerospace Corp. also agreed with United Launch Alliance's assessment that the Delta IV development could be cheaper. But the company's analysis noted that dropping NASA's proposed Ares I rocket likely would increase the cost of developing the necessary heavy-lift Ares V rocket enough to offset that savings long-term.
Aerospace Corp. also expressed concerns about whether canceling the Ares I program could harm some aerospace companies, particularly those in the field of working with solid rocket motors because of a long period of time where there might not be strong enough demand to keep them in business and retain critically skilled engineers.
The testimony was part of an all-day session by the panel chaired by former Lockheed Martin Corp. executive Norman Augustine. The group is assigned to study NASA's human space flight plans and report back to President Obama with recommendations about how best to go forward.
5 comments:
This is a no-brainer and should have been at the forefront of the discussions for the new proposed moon missions. The Delta IV is an excellent launch vehicle and can be configured multiple ways. It's heavy lift configuration should be more than adequate for materials and supplies. It is new, cheaper, and has extra mission capacity due to the softening of the commercial market and the existence of the Atlas V. They can also expand missions by building Pad A next door.
The sticky point will be the acceptance of the idea by the Air Force.
Until NASA gets past the "not invented here" mentality, there is little chance that common sense will prevail and Ares I be canceled. Had this same mentality been around in the 1960's there would have been no Mercury-Redstone, Mercury-Atlas, or Gemini-Titan flights.
According to Av Week article...Ares I launch cost will be $1.35 billion...anyone know if that includes cost of Orion?
Ares I has been designed to be man-rated, and is a precursor to the Ares V design. Having worked in the industry, myself, I've seen that the cost (and paperwork required) to man-rate a launch vehicle is often under-estimated, as in this case. The level of scrutiny is almost overwhelming for everyone involved. The Ares I design is basically a platform to do R&D and pave the way for the Ares V vehicle.
One of the biggest problems I see with any of these proposals is the fact that they assume existing engineering criteria. The fact of the matter is, any system produces specific loads and environments of its own. Any system would have to start from scratch to create not only the contractual negotiations (including any posssible lawsuit from existing Ares contractors) but also the new loads and environments set which any design is based off of. That takes years of effort to start with.
Post a Comment