PDA

View Full Version : Direct Launcher



MaDeR
2006-Dec-04, 11:11 PM
Looks nice, what with Reality Check(tm)? How do you all think about it?

Direct Launcher (http://www.directlauncher.com/)

For me, it sounds convincing, but IANAE.

(sorry if this was already)

Nowhere Man
2006-Dec-05, 02:35 AM
This sounds/looks a lot like the proposals put forward by member gaetanomarano. Search for some of his threads on alternatives to NASA's plans.

Fred

Cugel
2006-Dec-05, 09:46 AM
The plan is presented and discussed in depth on the nasaspaceflight forum.
(In the Ares-I section, topic: "Direct goes Live").
You can visit and read it without having an account.

gaetanomarano
2006-Dec-05, 02:53 PM
This sounds/looks a lot like the proposals put forward by member gaetanomarano. Search for some of his threads on alternatives to NASA's plans.

Thank You Nowhere Man

that's true, I've suggested to use the SAME (ready available, cheap and man-rated) Shuttle hardware in my (May 12) article [ http://www.gaetanomarano.it/articles/005_SLVnow.html ] and (in the same days) on some space forums (three months before the "Stumpy" and four months before the "Direct"...)

however, I think that the BEST use of my "FAST-SLV" is for 3-astronauts resized moon missions to DOUBLE the number of moon missions with the SAME money and avoid the problems of an 1.5x (or 2x) launch architecture as explained here: http://www.gaetanomarano.it/articles/004.html

.

gaetanomarano
2006-Dec-05, 03:00 PM
The plan is presented and discussed in depth on the nasaspaceflight forum.
(In the Ares-I section, topic: "Direct goes Live").
You can visit and read it without having an account.

I've not (nor I want to have) access to nasaspaceflight.com so I had not the opportunity to say them that their "Stumpy" and "Direct" summer's "new ideas" have nothing of "new" since I've suggested them in May, also, NASA has already evaluated different architectures including some 2x and 3x launches with EELV

.

Cugel
2006-Dec-05, 05:04 PM
I've not (nor I want to have) access to nasaspaceflight.com so I had not the opportunity to say them that their "Stumpy" and "Direct" summer's "new ideas" have nothing of "new" since I've suggested them in May, also, NASA has already evaluated different architectures including some 2x and 3x launches with EELV

.

Well, the Direct 'inventors' are the first to point out that this approach is actually suggested by NASA in the ESAS proposal as ESAS LV 24/25 vehicle.
(With the 3 SSME's replaced by 2 RS-68's for cost reduction)
They also admit the whole idea is an absolute no-brainer. If you want to inherit from the Shuttle, this is the most obvious solution. I believe Robert Zubrin has suggested something similar in his Mars direct plan (15 years ago?)

I think you should join NSF (it's free) and engage in a few spicy discussions.
(We have one Bob.B but NSF is a small standing army of those guys)
I'm looking forward to it!

gaetanomarano
2006-Dec-05, 06:27 PM
...this approach is actually suggested by NASA...

you're right, there is nothing new in the "Direct" approach and in other "alternative" proposals (that suggest to use EELVs or a new Shuttle-C)

however, I think that the "1.5 launch architecture" is NOT the best and cheaper way to come back to the moon

.

publiusr
2006-Dec-22, 07:12 PM
Direct is a compromise we might be able to live with. It doesn't have the black zones EELVs have.

Many astronauts do no like EELVs.

Delta IV esp. has a disposal problem.

i.e. the thing rises pretty much straight up--and certain abort profiles yield 27 gs on the astronauts.

They hate it.