Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bob B.
How many manned launches have been scrubbed within 24-hours of the planned launch time that resulted in a subsequent delay of over one-month? I think you’ll find very few, if any. By the final hours of a countdown the vehicle has already gone through extensive check-out. The types of faults that occur during this time seem to result in delays of hours or days, not weeks or months. I suspect the LSAM/EDS will not launch until the CEV is well within its countdown and all systems are go. I think the chances of a long delay between LSAM/EDS launch and CEV launch is not unacceptably high. Could it happen as you suggest? Of course, but I think you’re over dramatizing the risk.
One possible and simple solution to the problem is to launch the CEV first. If the LSAM/EDS launch is scrubbed, then you bring the crew back down. The CEV is reusable and launched on a much smaller and less expensive rocket. If the mission is aborted after CEV launch, the amount of cost squandered is considerably less than if a CaLV/LSAM/EDS is wasted.
|
"How many manned..."
The problem is that the launches of a moon missions are not like other launches, they must happen in some exact hours of some exact days of some exact months, the "30 days" available are not in a single, full month but distributed in over three months.
"the LSAM/EDS will not launch until the CEV is well within its countdown..."
I fell that this is not possible, in fact NASA has planned 30 days of orbital loither time (and, after the ESAS report,
has extended it to 95 days!)
"One possible and simple solution to the problem is to launch the CEV first..."
I've already thought (months ago) to this alternative, but I've immediately excluded it.
I explain why:
The CEV/SM will have six months of orbital life but
only in stand-by, without astronauts aboard, running in lunar orbit.
With four astonauts, the life support will ends within (I think)
two weeks max.
Well, since the CaLV/LSAM/EDS is much more complex than CLV/CEV, it may have two, three, five, ten times more problems and delays than CLV/CEV.
Every time the delay of the (second) CaLV launch exceed two weeks, the astronauts must come back to earth and try again.
I think that you may agree with me that space flights (especially the launch and re-entry) are too dangerous to fly (also)
WITHOUT ANY REASON!
If the CaLV will have
ONE delay you must risk the life of
two crews in one mission!
But, if the CaLV will have
FIVE problems in
SIX months (that may happen... see the Shuttle!) you must launch
SIX crews for
one mission, then,
$6 billion of CLV/CEV hardware lost and a
big risk for
24 astronauts... 20 of which will go in orbit (and risk their life!)
FOR NOTHING, not even the satisfaction to walk on the moon!!!!!!
In other word, with the
"one-and-half" launch architecture you have two (
both bad!) options:
a) Launch the CaLV/LSAM as
FIRST and risk to lose
$6 billion of hardware and the moon mission.
b) Launch the CaLV/LSAM as
SECOND and risk (without any good reason) the life of
four or eight or twelve or more astronauts (if the CaLV/LSAM launch will delay
one or two or three or more times).
THE ONLY WAY TO SAVE MANY BILLIONS, HUMAN LIFES AND MOON MISSIONS IS THE SINGLE-LAUNCH ARCHITECTURE
.