Transterrestrial Musings

Comments

Let me try an idea here. I am sure you all can shoot it down in flames so by bringing into this den of alt-spacers this idea will get the real "acid test" treatment.

;-)

Thiokol SRBs have 99.5%+ reliability, right? 112 shuttle flights with 2 SRBs per flight. 1 failure out of 224 SRBs fired with crew at risk and cold weather was to blame.

Okay, how much does 1 SRB cost? Add an LH2 upper stage and launch SeaLaunch style by a 100% private operation off of a converted oil rig perhaps in interantional waters.

No NASA, no standing army. Do it 100% private sector style with minimal overhead.

How much would it cost? How much could it lift?

Could it lift a dry TransHab (fully assembled, just with minimal atmosphere and NO water) - -that stuff comes up on a 2nd launch.

= = =

CATS needs demand, a place to go. Building a space hotel by hook or by crook (damn the costs) creates demand to motivate investment in CATS.

Posted by Bill White at June 25, 2004 07:47 AM

How many shuttle flights have there been?

This site says 112 flights:

http://www.faqs.org/qa/qa-4533.html

Other sites say 96 missions.

Posted by at June 25, 2004 08:14 AM

I don't know why you're trying it here. It doesn't seem to have much of anything to do with this post.

Posted by Rand Simberg at June 25, 2004 08:28 AM

Hi bill the acid test of concept of the SRB'S with LH2 upper stage has been thought of before.
http://www.spacecongress.org/2004/Panel-4/2Collins.pdf
reference page 10 for picture of shuttle derived launchers.

Posted by Harold LaValley at June 25, 2004 09:12 AM

I don't recall disparaging the blogsphere but I probably did, most everything comes under my shotgun from time-to-time. (My main critique of them is that sometimes they get a bit full of themselves.) I've long thought however that being a devil's advocate is a Good Thing.

On that note, the first commenter does bring to the table something I intend to focus on to a degree, the business end of space tourism. (The PHB and bean counter stuff.) Boring to many, but now that it's just around the corner, it's time to start thinking hard about it.

Posted by Derek L. at June 25, 2004 09:24 AM

Well, that just happens to be something we at XCOR have been doing for the past five years. Glad other people are finally figuring that out.

Posted by Aleta Jackson at June 25, 2004 11:24 AM

I've known it for quite a while, and posted it on occasion to sci.space.*, but the posts have been little noted. The vast majority of the space acess folks and fandom concentrate on the 'sexy' engineering instead of the nuts-and-bolts.

Please drop by and leave your comments Aleta, all are welcome and we'll all learn some things by-and-by.

Posted by Derek L. at June 25, 2004 12:29 PM

A single SRB would have problems with roll control, wouldn't it?

Posted by Paul Dietz at June 25, 2004 01:28 PM

Yes, unmodified, but I think that there are actually some people in the astronaut office who are enamored with such a concept. You'd have to (at a minimum) add some kind of fins or roll-control thrusters.

Posted by Rand Simberg at June 25, 2004 02:19 PM

I'm interested in just about anything that is involved in making private spaceflight a reality. A friend was mentioning recently (before the spaceflight) that the private space news is now much more interesting - and there is more of it - than NASA news.

Scaled has a technical update on the spaceflight. Nothing really new, but it does give a little more detail:

http://www.scaled.com/projects/tierone/logs-WK-SS1.htm

Posted by VR at June 25, 2004 04:25 PM

The vast majority of the space acess folks and fandom concentrate on the 'sexy' engineering instead of the nuts-and-bolts.

It's been noted before that the business guys are needed to ensure that the dreams and schemes can return a decent ROI. I see a counterpart to the computer-geek world - the suits (no offense) are needed to interface between the hackers and the messy grubby world . . .

Posted by Brian at June 25, 2004 07:03 PM

HOW ARE YOU GENTLEMEN. ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO US.

Ooops. Sorry. Wrong Cats. ;)

Posted by Thief at June 26, 2004 01:38 AM

Some google time reveals Thiokol is pushing the lone SRB plus upper stage idea.

http://www.spaceflightnow.com/news/n0404/28rockets

Excerpt:

"Using existing boosters, external tank and shuttle main engines, an unmanned shuttle-derived vehicle could lift 160,000 pounds to low-Earth orbit and be operational as early as 2008, Kahn said. Using five-segment boosters and a stretched eternal tank, up to 200,000 pounds could be delivered to LEO by the 2011-2015 timeframe.

Beyond that, major upgrades would be required, including shifting the cargo carrier to the top of the vehicle. While he did not provide details, Kahn said up to 225,000 pounds could, in theory, be launched using shuttle-derived hardware.

At the same time, a medium-lift vehicle would be almost "a gimme."

"If you want to put up something smaller, just take one of the (shuttle solid-fuel) motors, put on a liquid second stage ... and you could put up 35,000 or 40,000 pounds," Kahn said. "You could use it as your CEV (crew exploration vehicle) launcher since most of its heritage is man-rated systems."

= = =

Thiokol VP Kahn also said much the same in his May 5th testimony to the Senate.

= = =

Why is this relevant here?

Some back of envelope calulations suggest that a lone SRB with RL-10 upper stages bought "off the shelf" could reduce launch costs below $2000 per pound, maybe below $1500 per pound.

A lone SRB could be enlarged to 5, 6 or 7 segments and that MIGHT reduce launch costs to $1000 or less per pound.

The SpaceX Falcon V is being offered at $1000 per pound, right?

Are there any CATS or alt-space projects that can offfer $1000 per pound in the near term?

Posted by Bill White at June 26, 2004 11:31 AM

Gosh, what a shocker. Thiokol thinks that it would be a good idea to build a new rocket using an SRB. What are you going to tell me next, that GM thinks we should buy Cadillacs?

Posted by Rand Simberg at June 26, 2004 12:28 PM

Heck yeah!

If Thiokol (at their own expense or Bigelow's expense) puts a J-2 class upper stage on a 5, 6 or 7 segment SRB and throws 50,000 pounds to LEO for $1200 per pound, NASA should buy some.

I predict this will be one option Bigelow looks at for his space hotel. Man-rated Falcon V for paying customers but non-man rated SRB+liquid upper stage for a one launch habitat.

Two launches gets you rooms for a dozen guests.

A three cornered partership (Musk + Bigelow + Thiokol) probably could get a genuine space hotel up without tax dollars. And NO Boeing or Lockmart!

Maybe SpaceHab contributes a TransHab for an equity share and public exposure of their product.

Posted by Bill White at June 26, 2004 01:14 PM

If Thiokol (at their own expense or Bigelow's expense) puts a J-2 class upper stage on a 5, 6 or 7 segment SRB and throws 50,000 pounds to LEO for $1200 per pound, NASA should buy some.

And if pigs had wings and rocket propulsion, NASA should fly them into space as well.

Posted by Rand Simberg at June 26, 2004 02:25 PM

If NASA scraps all shuttle components, including Thiokol SRBs, some folks in Utah will want to sell stuff to someone.

Posted by Bill White at June 27, 2004 07:32 PM

If NASA scraps all shuttle components, including Thiokol SRBs, some folks in Utah will want to sell stuff to someone.

Not if they have to pay development costs. Thiokol is not a manufacturer of launch systems, or entrepreneurial. Again, you don't seem to understand what business the company is in.

Posted by Rand Simberg at June 27, 2004 08:50 PM

"ATK Thiokol is the world's leading developer and producer of solid rocket motors in all vehicle payload classes for U.S. space launch markets. We produce the largest solid rocket motors in the world — the Space Shuttle Reusable Solid Rocket Motor (RSRM) and the Titan IVB Solid Rocket Motor Upgrade (SRMU). Our motors fly on some of the world's most influential launch vehicles."

http://www.atk.com/thiokol/

With that out of the way. Nasa is not the only purchaser of solid fuel engines. The Military is also high on the list of users.

Now if anyone can buy them for whatever the going price is. I say let them go ahead and design there low cost launcher and see if anyone will need it.

Posted by Harold LaValley at June 28, 2004 01:05 PM

Bigelow seems like a good choice to want a booster that can lift a full size TransHab in one throw. For his space hotel.

On orbit assembly of a Transhab cut into pieces does not seem practical.

Proton can do it yet is at a lousy inclination.

Falcon V cannot, very much too small. The Falcon V launch Musk sold to Bigelow was for a 1/3 sized prototype, right?

Delta/Atlas may be too small and are expensive.

A 5 segment SRB with RL-60 engines might be the cheapest option, if we take Russian/Ukrainian of the table.

Other choices?

Posted by Bill White at June 28, 2004 03:45 PM

Bigelow seems like a good choice to want a booster that can lift a full size TransHab in one throw. For his space hotel.

Yes, he would want that. But unlike NASA, he has sense enough not to pay what a Thiokol would be willing to sell it for (i.e., full development costs of the system, on a cost-plus basis).

It's not gonna happen, at least not on Thiokol's dime. You (and Harold LaValley) continue to display a staggering ignorance of the nature of the aerospace industry.

Posted by Rand Simberg at June 28, 2004 10:20 PM

I may continue or do display a staggering ignorance of the nature of the aerospace industry.

In laymans terms the SRB can only be sold to Nasa and no one else. Is that it... tell me what I do not know or understand so I will not stay ignorant to this knowledge.

Is that why full development costs of the system or on a cost-plus subject is always thrown out into the discussions of doing space. They are precluded from selling to anyone but that to which it has been developed for.

I do not and have not worked in the aerospace industry. I am a common american that needs to be convinced with the regards to the high cost of doing space.
So convince me why the cost needs to be so staggering.
I believe in the dream of space exploration 100%..

Posted by Harold LaValley at June 29, 2004 06:53 AM

Anyone can buy SRBs from Thiokol, and Thiokol will sell them to anyone foolish enough to want to purchase them. No one with enough money to do so would waste it developing a vehicle from them for an uncertain market without government subsidization. Even if the costs postulated here are valid on a marginal basis, they don't include the billions of dollars that it would cost to develop the vehicle. It won't happen without a cost-plus contract from NASA, and those never result in low launch costs. Elon Musk, on the other hand, is willing to go forward with something sensible with his own money.

Posted by Rand Simberg at June 29, 2004 07:24 AM

Post a comment