Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bob B.
I’m sorry but I just don’t see the big deal. We don’t launch the LSAM/EDS until we’re confident the CEV is ready to go. If there is a last minute glitch that postpones the launch, there will be a couple more launch opportunities each day thereafter. I can’t envision a delay of more than a few days unless a major malfunction occurs. In the unlikely event that occurs then we’ll be out the cost of a LSAM/EDS, but that is probably not our biggest problem in that case.
|
Near all the manned and unmanned missions and programs (satellites, probes, ISS, Shuttles, etc. despite the experience of
HUNDREDS' launches)
have had, have and will have little and big delays because they are complex (and very expensive!) machines that can't be launched if not
ALL is
OK.
When the moon missions will starts, the CLV/CEV will have only
a few launches of experience then may have
dozens of unknown problems and
delays before each launch.
Don't forget that the CLV will be
all manned missions on an
experimental rocket (and with a launch cost
four times higher than a sat launch!), then, the caution (and delays) of unmanned launches will be multiplied by
TEN.
But the main problem of the "one-and-half" launch is
NOT "inside the rockets" but
"inside the architecture".
With the "one-and-half" architecture,
a few weeks of delay (that may happen
many times) will
kill the entire mission (and $6 billion...), while, with the
single-launch architecture, also
TWO YEARS of delays will
NEVER kill the mission and burns billions!
Also, if the first two-four moon missions will fail due to a "sum of delays",
NASA will be forced to STOP all missions and restart from ZERO with a different (and reliable) architecture that means
10+ years of research/delay, $20+ billion of
extra R&D funds and the launch of the first new US' moon missions
not in 2020 but
in 2030 (when
China, Russia, Europe, India, Japan, Egypt, Tonga, Brazil, etc. will already have their own hotels for tourists on the moon surface...)
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bob B.
Gaetanomarano, I just think you’re getting all worked up over something that is very unlikely to happen.
|
Unfortunately I think that may happen (and will happen).
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bob B.
Is the scenario you describe any more risky that the LSAM ascending and docking with the CEV in lunar orbit? If we’re to return to the Moon, difficult and risky tasks are inevitable. I don’t see how the dual launch method can be avoided; there is just too much mass that must be lifted to orbit.
|
Not true.
I think that the entire VSE plan must be changed to be different that the (very risky) Apollo missions, but the comparison (between the LSAM/EDS/CEV docking and the LSAM/CEV docking in lunar orbit)
can't be made for many reasons like...
1. the CEV/SM will have a stand-by orbital wait time of
SIX months, twice the LSAM/EDS
2. the lunar orbit of the CEV/SM will be very low and very fast, also, it will be equatorial and without the problem of the earth rotation (since the moon don't rotate by itself); that means
over 50 launch windows per day (and
ALL good for a launch from moon surface!)
3. the LSAM lunar departure may happen in the moon day or night while the LSAM/EDS departure may happen
ONLY in
some days of the
moon night (that reduces the 95 days orbital loither time to
30 days only)
4. the CEV/SM will be
remote-controlled (while the LSAM/EDS will be only a
"dumb" system), then, if the LSAM remains in a lower orbit and can't reach the CEV, the latter can be
remote-controlled from earth (or from the LSAM)
to fly towards the LSAM and dock with it!
Then, the LSAM/CEV rendez-vous and docking in lunar orbit will be
1000 TIMES more successful than the (
very critic!) LSAM/EDS/CEV rendez-vous in earth orbit!
The only (
big!) risk for the LSAM will happen if the moon departure's single engine will not work (since the astronauts will have oxygen, water, food and energy for only a few days).
This is the reason why I (and others) suggest to change also this part of the VSE/ESAS moon architecture.
.