.

the problem of the 1.5 launch architecture is largerly explained in this thread It's a little complex problem. Can we solve it together? >>>

however, I think that a single-launch archtecture is better than a 1.5 l.a. to avoid all (possible) missions' fail due to a "sum of delays" of the second launch (like happen, for months, at every Shuttle launch...)

but, also if the new rockets will be very reliable and never happen any delay, the advantages of an SLV or (best) the FAST-SLV are INCREDIBLE: a GIANT saving of time and R&D costs, less hardware costs, 50% more missions with the same funds, 4+ moon missions per year, etc.

.

Oh Lord, Gaeto!! Are you still out there and still at it??!! I just signed up for this forum, but perhaps life's too short to go through this again.

See ya...............

the discussion (here) is very interesting, democratic and educated

if you read the previous posts (of all users) you'll find many good arguments

comments (and civil critics) are welcome

.

And Eye Catching
On both sides of the issue.
It doesn't look that way to me. There have been some very good and thorough critiques of your arguments, and they have been largely dismissed or trivialized.

you're right... but... since colors and bold options are available in the forum's editor... I don't resist to the temptation to use them (like in my website...)

true

if I have an opinion about an argument (and I really think that it's right) I support it in my discussions, of course

.

Yep, he's up to his old tricks here and at the New Mars forum.

Jon

my opinions/proposals are not "old tricks", only different from "standard" (and the NewMars' forum is mainly about rockets' man-rating)

welcome here JonClarke

.

The more friends CaLV has, the better. Over at www.nasaspaceflight.com are some ESAS alternatives--one of which was a CLV based on an engine-equipped ET without solids.

That I could get behind--because that evolves into a true HLLV/CaLV.

Stick may be a distraction.

it can be made, but it's not a good solution because:

1. still don't has all the advantages of a single-launch architecture

2. it needs too much (expendable) liquid engines to give the same thrust of the (reusable) SRB, then, it costs too much

.

I'd like a two CaLV launch myself. One for a direct ascent/lander like the original NOVA payload--and one big insertion/crasher stage.

it's possible, of course, but costs too much and can't solve the risk of a mission fail due to a sum of delays of the second launch

I prefer a single big rocket to send the full moon mission (only) OR (only) the extra-moon hardware for better, longer and safer missions

.

.

the high costs and big risks to fail are only the two main problem of the VSE architecture

the third big problem of VSE is that it will be a big regress in space exploration as "number of flights and astronauts in space"

I think the Shuttles are too old and too dangerous to fly and must be grounded NOW

but the NASA decision to abandon ALL researches about a new, cheap and reliable "new Shuttle" is WRONG

without an (old or new) Shuttle (and only a little capsule) the entire space exploration will have a BIG REGRESS

I explain my opinion in my new "VISUAL" article www.gaetanomarano.it/articles/008visual.html

what do you think about?

.

I don't think it is really relevant to compare a moon lander to a LEO shuttle.

__________________
To the regular visitor of internet bulletin boards it is clear that it's an excellent idea your parents get to choose your real name.

true, but... "LEO is half-way to the Moon and beyond" ...then, an highly reduced cargo/crew LEO ability means LESS space exploration (in general)

.

Must be the new math... 300 miles VS >250000 miles = 1/2

"to infinity and beyond"

One could turn the argument around, and claim that yet another shuttle capable of LEO only means less space exploration...

__________________
To the regular visitor of internet bulletin boards it is clear that it's an excellent idea your parents get to choose your real name.

no, its only a "philosophical vision" of the space exploration that I've read in a space forum

but it's true... if you can't send big payloads in LEO... how can you hope to explore the universe?

.

And yet the new cargo vehicle would be able to send much larger payloads into LEO than the shuttle can. I fail to see the problem here...

in 2020... and 90% of them (due to "funds") ONLY to launch the LSAM/EDS...

.

.

I think that the new VSE moon missions (absolutely!) need the launch of some Crew Habitats on the moon and a Lunar Space Station (better with reusable LSAMs) BEFORE to first manned moon mission to avoid many risks for the astronauts if something goes wrong on the moon or in lunar orbit: www.gaetanomarano.it/articles/009_LSS.html

.

Have you notified NASA and its contractors of your concerns? What did they say?

Were they able to provide you with any of the papers they've undoubtedly written to study the problems you outline? If so, what did you think of their own analysis?

the forums/blogs/personalwebsites' main purpose is "publish opinions" (and I do it, no more, no less)

.

You do realize that we've landed on the moon before? Why is it so important to have all this extra equipment? Why is the currently planned future missions so much more dangerous than the landings during the 1960s/70s?

Give the scientists involved some credit. I'm sure the've thought of all kinds of contingencies and worse case scenarios that most of us would never dream of.

__________________
"The universe is driven by the complex interaction between three ingredients: matter, energy, and enlightened self-interest." - G'Kar

the same reason (to-day) we can't accept to travel 100 passengers with a '60 airplane or drive a car without 8+ air-bags or use a medicine without a ten-years FDA test, etc. etc. etc.

the same reason (to-day) we can't accept another Apollo1/Apollo13/Challenger/Columbia like "part of the game"

.

or drive a car without 8+ air-bags

My car (1995 Toyota) doesn't have any airbags.

__________________
Howling from the Shadows

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. --- JayUtah

You can't reason an irrational person out of an irrational belief. --- Noclevername

Apollo: The History and the Hoax
Enter the World of Athran

Is there a way to configure Firefox (temporarily) for a B&W display? My eyes are starting to hurt quite a bit, although for some reason I suddenly feel very patriotic.

__________________
A person's name, or a mark representing it, as signed personally or by deputy, as in subscribing a letter or other document.

Yeah, the Text is getting to me too.

__________________
Aim high (but don't blow yourself up)!- Homer Hickam

In Soviet Russia, UFO report you!- Phil Plait

Carl Sagan may have seen a pale blue dot, but I see a sapphire.- Doug Phillips, Discovering Alabama.

Clear skies Maksutov.

Being a Belgian, seeing all these Dutch colours gives me averse patriotic feelings

__________________
To the regular visitor of internet bulletin boards it is clear that it's an excellent idea your parents get to choose your real name.

I keep thinking that somewhere on this board, there's a scorecard for wooism that's based on excessive bolding, oversized text, and use of color.

Be darned if I can find it.

__________________
The last time I felt a warm fuzzy feeling, I was informed by my doctor that it was just gas.

link