www.ditl.org

Wasn't the space race one of the most prosperous economic times in the US?

GrahamKennedy wrote: But there's not really a whole lot of point to going to the moon just to do what they did before over again. They're talking about using moon missions as Mars training. That means landing honking big stuff there - shelters that can hold a dozen people or more, supplies for long term stays, construction gear, god knows what else. Saturn Vs aren't going to cut it in missions anything like that.

Good points but what I meant was that the new ares rockets do not exactly look like they have enough lift to place all the honking big stuff on the moon either. Now I do not know the exact specs but I remember watching a NASA animation about the two ares rockets and the planned new landers etc and all I thought was: " Why aren't they just rebuilt the old stuff because it is basically the same?"

I do not know how far wikipedia can be trusted but a quick look gives us lunar lift capacity of about 40 metric tonnes (saturn V) to 70 metric tonnes (ares V). So altough it almost doubled I doubt it would be enough to really do something meaningful on the moon except taking a few walks.

What I would have expected would have been the use of the ISS as a starting point for vessels going to and fro the moon without landing on earth every time or at least something a bit more advanced than basically the same concept which was used 30 years ago but obviously the technology still isn't advanced enough to make that happen.

Atekimogus wrote:
Good points but what I meant was that the new ares rockets do not exactly look like they have enough lift to place all the honking big stuff on the moon either. Now I do not know the exact specs but I remember watching a NASA animation about the two ares rockets and the planned new landers etc and all I thought was: " Why aren't they just rebuilt the old stuff because it is basically the same?"

Because all the tools, dies and manufacturing facilities that built them are gone. Like Graham says it likely could be done, at a huge expense.

Atekimogus wrote:Good points but what I meant was that the new ares rockets do not exactly look like they have enough lift to place all the honking big stuff on the moon either. Now I do not know the exact specs but I remember watching a NASA animation about the two ares rockets and the planned new landers etc and all I thought was: " Why aren't they just rebuilt the old stuff because it is basically the same?"

You already answered that, it's not basically the same. The new gen rockets are expected to be able to put over 75% more stuff on the moon in a single go than Saturn did. Also, just like Graham said, you rebuild the old rockets and you're limited to redoing the old missions.

Ares is set up as two separate rockets, or it was, because the old NASA admin had it in his head that it was safer to give astronauts their own ride up to orbit separate from cargo and that in not having to man-rate the cargo launcher they could save money. Of course then he made the "safe" man launcher to violate virtually every safe practice of rocketry, the first stage is a re-purposed SRB and the second stage uses a single engine. Secondly, by having to design and build two rockets they incredibly increased their development and operating costs wiping out any savings to be had by not man rating the Ares V. They also thought they could use Ares I (the crew launcher) to ferry crews up to the ISS. Sadly Ares I is a cluster fuck and because it was designed with zero margin what was once a full featured six man launcher is now a bare-bones 4 man launcher that will take two trips to deliver crew to the ISS, again ballooning costs. Simply put, the entire Ares program is one amazing clusterfuck that should have died years ago but NASA refused to entertain any ideas but the one they were already on.

I do not know how far wikipedia can be trusted but a quick look gives us lunar lift capacity of about 40 metric tonnes (saturn V) to 70 metric tonnes (ares V). So altough it almost doubled I doubt it would be enough to really do something meaningful on the moon except taking a few walks.

Wrong. It took 40 tons to get the men there, keep them alive, and do a bit of science. Well, now you've got 30 more tons you can send there, but you've already taken care of the keep-them-alive-and-bring-them-home gear*. So you've got 30 tons you can spend on the pure science and mission extension gadgets. In aerospace 60,000 pounds is a lot of stuff.

What I would have expected would have been the use of the ISS as a starting point for vessels going to and fro the moon without landing on earth every time or at least something a bit more advanced than basically the same concept which was used 30 years ago but obviously the technology still isn't advanced enough to make that happen.

The problem with using the ISS for a starting point is simple. First, you have to actually get people there. You're still going to have to launch rockets to it. Secondly, you still have to fuel your ship so it can leave Earth orbit and make it to the moon. Which means another launch. An orbiting depot can make sense but it requires a very significant commitment of resources and money to make it work. Ideally you have some sort of base established on the moon and refuel your ships there and just make runs to Earth to pick up crew and cargo. The technology to make it happen exists. The problem is that right now no one has the will or free cash to make it happen.

*Yes, it's a bit more complicated with Orion being larger and such but just go with it.

Proposing to use a Saturn V type vehicle to do the proposed jobs of the Ares is similar to trying to pull a 35-foot travel trailer with your AMC Gremlin. Ares is expected to carry larger payloads than the space shuttle, much less a lander and orbital module barely larger than a Gemini capsule.

There's also the fact that the Apollo computers had less memory than my TI-84 Plus has now. So the on board system's needed a overhaul before these missions, that coupled with the lift, etc already pointed out puts the final nail in the coffin for reusing the Saturn V's.

Of course Ares is a clusterf*ck. NASA is now more bureaucracy than anything else. Another issue is politics. Most politicians are cowards when it come to anything really long term, if it'll take longer than an election cycle they tend to not be interested. A character in Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens novel "Freefall" put it best: "None of them's had the guts to stand up and pull a Kennedy and say we belong in space because we damn well belong in space."

Sonic Glitch wrote:Of course Ares is a clusterf*ck. NASA is now more bureaucracy than anything else. Another issue is politics. Most politicians are cowards when it come to anything really long term, if it'll take longer than an election cycle they tend to not be interested. A character in Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens novel "Freefall" put it best: "None of them's had the guts to stand up and pull a Kennedy and say we belong in space because we damn well belong in space."

Say what now