🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Feb5.224039.16747@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> jbh55289@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu writes:
>... Ariane V is not as
>dependant on Hermes as has been sugested.  It is the planned launch vehicle
>for the European polar orbiting platform and for the free flying Columbus 
>module ... ESA has
>been developing various payload adapters and fairings...

However, even ESA members have been known to express doubts about Ariane 5
being larger than optimal for the commercial market.  While it has other
customers, Hermes is the payload that determines its size, and it has been
enlarged several times as Hermes has gained weight.  A more modest step up
from Ariane 4 would make more sense as a commercial launcher.

>I can't see it being stopped.  There has been too much of an investment in 
>manned spaceflight by Europe, and I can't see them throwing away their only
>chance at autonomy for the next two decades.  It's possible Hermes will be
>downsized, but I don't see the point of designing a whole new, smaller vehicle.
>What would you build that would be cheaper than Hermes?  A Gemini capsule?

A semi-ballistic capsule would be a lot smaller, simpler, and cheaper than
Hermes, for nearly the same capabilities.  Several such designs have been
proposed over the last few years, notably a very well-thought-out proposal
from British Aerospace that was written up in JBIS.  The Hermes advocates
have made the same mistake NASA made twenty years ago:  trying to build
one vehicle for two very different goals, an economical and reliable
operational vehicle that also greatly advances technology.  If they had
built a capsule for operational spaceflight and an experimental mini-Hermes
for advancing spaceplane technology, both could have been flying by now.
-- 
SVR4:  proving that quantity is         | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
not a substitute for quality.           |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry