🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: sci.space.shuttle
Article #3783

Re: Shuttle replacement

#3783
From: wingo%cspara.decnet
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 00:23
46 lines
2946 bytes
In article <1992Nov19.144842.23088@iti.org>, aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes...
>In article <BxxDL7.9Ly@zoo.toronto.edu> henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes:
> 
>>>The US shouldn't be putting it's money into the design of ANY expendable
>>>launcher. We have done that for too long and it's hasn't reduced launch
>>>costs by a dime.
> 
>>Actually, this isn't a very sound argument.... [Henry goes on to say
>>that it hasn't been tried and examples from China and Russia show it
>>CAN be a lot cheaper]
> 
>Allow me to rephrase: NASA has shown that it cannot execute large multi-year
>multi-billion $$ projects in a cost effective manner. Some blame for this
>goes to Congress, and some to NASA. Asking them to do it again will simply
>waste more money and delay the creation of a spacefaring civilization.
> 

No Allan, what has been shown is that when you micromanage a program and or 
cut the budget below the request and or stretch the program to "save money"
Nasa nor anyone else for that matter can complete a job in a cost effective
manner.  There are many NASA programs that have been completed on time and
under budget WHEN that whole budget has been provided AND no recissions or
redesigns or other crap has been foisted on the program.

>I don't doubt that much cheaper expendables CAN be build (Zenith Star
>launchers for example cut costs in half). I simply don't believe that the US
>government can build them.
> 

The baby saturn can do the same thing. Funny thing is that the NLS 1 design
ended up in the single engine configuration that we propose for the Baby 
Saturn.  Oh by the way I have confirmed the existence of at least 8 well
preserved Saturn F1 engines at the Marshall Space Flight center. They are
doing some work on them. However it looks like the cost of refurbing the
F1 test stand is a bit high to implement right now.

By the way Henry, I found out some interesting stuff there are three versions
of  the Saturn V first Stage. These are as follows

S1C-T			Test Stage for Manufacturing and Ground firings
                        This is the one at the Alabama Space & Rocket Center

S1C-D			Dynamic Test model. Was later scrapped at the end of 
                        the program.

S1C-1,2,3....           Flight Saturn S1 C stages.
Technical Details
Message-ID: <20NOV199218230345@judy.uh.edu>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!menudo.uh.edu!judy.uh.edu!st17a
References: <69649@cup.portal.com> <1992Nov18.134348.16504@iti.org> <BxxDL7.9Ly@zoo.toronto.edu> <1992Nov19.144842.23088@iti.org>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!menudo.uh.edu!judy.uh.edu!st17a
From: wingo%cspara.decnet@Fedex.Msfc.Nasa.Gov
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle,sci.space
Subject: Re: Shuttle replacement
Date: 20 Nov 1992 18:23 CST
Organization: University of Houston
Lines: 47
Sender: st17a@judy.uh.edu (University Space Society)
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <20NOV199218230345@judy.uh.edu>
References: <69649@cup.portal.com> <1992Nov18.134348.16504@iti.org> <BxxDL7.9Ly@zoo.toronto.edu> <1992Nov19.144842.23088@iti.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: judy.uh.edu
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41