Low Earth Orbit on the Cheap

http://www.dunnspace.com/leo_on_the_cheap.htm

by coderdude • 15 years ago

24 4 15 years ago

dunnspace.com

mindstab• 15 years ago

1994 - A little dated. Interesting to see where we went in difference to the article

coderdude• 15 years ago

Under the Conclusions section:

"The United States needs a means of space access that costs much less than the current launch systems. Foreign competition continues to chip away at the US commercial launch industry. A dramatic expansion in military, civil, and commercial space initiatives could help fuel a technology-based economic revitalization in the United States, but this expansion will not come about unless drastic reductions in space launch costs are achieved." (emphases mine)

SpaceX has done a lot towards meeting the goal of providing drastically cheaper launch vehicles. Their cost per launch is far cheaper than what NASA was able to deliver. Even in 1994 it was apparent that commercial space flight would -- at least in part -- be the key to keeping the United States in space.

Sudarshan• 15 years ago

From the article:

   The Russians have achieved a low-cost, reliable launch capability because,

first of all, they used simple, damage-tolerant designs that were less than optimum by Western standards (from a performance and weight minimiza- tion standpoint). The Soviet boosters and their subsystems were designed to be highly modular, allowing vehicle customization for various missions with- out always requiring completely new launch systems. Soviet launcher modu- larity also provided the opportunity for large manufacturing economies of scale for many components. Either because of pragmatic engineering judg- ment or because of economic necessity, the Soviets reused existing designs for decades, making minor modifications only when necessary. Their launch operations emphasize off-line processing and minimum pad time; and their simple, rugged launch vehicles have required minimal launch pad testing. Also, Russian boosters have enjoyed high launch rates, thus en- hancing manufacturing economies of scale and driving unit costs down. It is interesting to speculate on how well US industries would do if they applied these simple factors in a completely commercially-driven venture. After all, the reliable, low-cost Russian launch capability has been built by a country in which inefficiency and waste have been historically endemic.

iwwr• 15 years ago

The curse of having too much money perhaps?

Low Earth Orbit on the Cheap

Related Stories