Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!wuarchive!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!rice!eunomia.rice.edu!bro
From: bro@eunomia.rice.edu (Douglas Monk)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: best of all worlds
Message-ID: <1990Oct10.003603.4936@rice.edu>
Date: 10 Oct 90 00:36:03 GMT
References: <10265.2708917a@pbs.org> <49492@olivea.atc.olivetti.com> <143360@sun.Eng.Sun.COM>
Sender: news@rice.edu (News)
Organization: Rice University, Houston
Lines: 66

In article <143360@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> jmck@norge.Eng.Sun.COM (John McKernan) writes:
>In article <49492@olivea.atc.olivetti.com> donehoo@olivee.olivetti.com (Doyle W. Donehoo) writes:
>>In article <10265.2708917a@pbs.org> pstinson@pbs.org writes:
>>>We could design the next generation Apollo as a lunar taxi that would fit
>>>inside a Shuttle.
>>
>>What a great idea!
>
>No, what a dumb idea. The posting you quote envisioned launching an
>Apollo derivative in two pieces on shuttles, followed by fuel on a
>Titan IV, and then rendezvousing the whole mess in Earth orbit. At $500
>million per shuttle launch, an estimated $200 million for the Titan IV,
>and God only knows what amount for the to be developed Apollo
>derivative, the cost would be well over 1.5 billion per launch. And
>that huge expense only results in a relatively tiny lunar lander on the
>moon. NASA needs to get its launch costs under control before it puts
>up a space station, let alone goes back to the moon.

Let's try this again, with a little reworking:

Reusable Lunar shuttle (Low Earth Orbit to Lunar Orbit to Lunar Surface to
Lunar Orbit to Low Earth Orbit: if you like direct trajectories, remove
the "to Lunar Orbit" sections :-), manned section fits in the shuttle payload 
bay, propulsion section containing fuel goes up on Titan IVs. Assemble in 
LEO.

Fly to moon, land, fly back.

Lunar shuttle is reusable and waiting in LEO *ONLY for more fuel* (bring up
on Titan IVs) and life support expendables (bring up cheapest way).

With *absolutely* no real figures, let's pretend:
	You can fit *two* manned sections in a payload bay.
	You can fit *one* propulsion section with fuel on a Titan IV, or
		*two* without fuel.
	You can fit *two* fuel loads on a Titan IV.
	You can fit *four* life support loads on a Titan IV.

Let's assume you want a Lunar Shuttle fleet of four vehicles.

Initial investment:
	Two Shuttle Flights (for four manned sections).
	Two Titan IV Flights (for four unfueled propulsion sections).
Total launch to LEO investment costs: (by your estimates: $500 million per 
Shuttle flight? Is that right? $200 million per Titan IV? Sheesh.)
	$1.4 billion (about the cost of one Space Shuttle)

Repeat as needed:
For four flights to the moon, you need:
	Three Titan IV Flights.
Total launch to LEO cost of four Lunar Shuttle flights: (by your estimates)
	$600 million.

Exercises for the reader:
	Find more real figures for above. Change as needed :-).
	Add estimates for hardware. (One time costs, remember).
	Add estimates for expendables. (Repeatable costs, remember).
	Offer to pay for it :-).

*note* : I make no claims as to the "reality" of the above. It just seems a
more reasonable way to analyze the original proposal with Mr. McKernan's
figures than he was doing.

Doug Monk (bro@rice.edu)

Disclaimer: These views are mine, not necessarily my organization's.