>>>>>why NASA is so freaking expensive,
how much the Russians really spend to get into space
(a pittance- the rockets cost 4-5 million each!)
and how much a Big Dumb Booster would cost (>>>

What we really need in order to get prices down to <$500/Kg, is an
inherently simple, non re-usable, 3-stage, heavy lift boster. We would
produce 200 of these things per year, in an automated factory, that
continuously passes the boosters along a production line. This would
produce boosters continuously, much like a car factory produces cars.
Boosters with lift capabilities of 50-250 tonnes to LEO, could be produced
in this way. The factory is located on a natural harbour. Upon completion,
each booster is loaded onto a transport ship (converted oil tanker?) and
from then on, it is shipped to the launch site. Even better, it could be
transported by rail, to a near-by launch facility! The lower two stages of
the rocket are kerosine/oxygen fueled. The fuel can be pumped straight out
of a tanker that is docked close to the launch site. The oxygen is
liquified out of the air, using an atmospheric liquification plant. The
whole setup, would be powered by a series of gas turbines or a single
1200-MWe nuclear reactor (built quickly, in less than 5 years). A system
like this would provide cheap, mass produced heavy lift vehicles. Launch
prices of less than $2000/Kg to HEO and $1000/Kg to LEO, could be virtually
guarenteed. But how much would it cost in order to set up this monster
facility?

Tony

Don't the Russians and Sea-Launch already have this capability? I take this
to be so from the statements that the launch of Soyuz only costs $ 4 million
or so.

Jay S. Huebner at jhuebn@...

>>>Don't the Russians and Sea-Launch already have this capability? I take
this
to be so from the statements that the launch of Soyuz only costs $ 4
million
or so.>>>

With regards to sea launch, what sort of size range of booster, can be
practically launched rfrom sea? Could we launch a Saturn-V from a sea
platform?

Tony

>
> Don't the Russians and Sea-Launch already have this capability? I take this
> to be so from the statements that the launch of Soyuz only costs $ 4 million
> or so.
>

Sea Launch launches Zenith, not Soyuz.

>
> With regards to sea launch, what sort of size range of booster, can be
> practically launched rfrom sea? Could we launch a Saturn-V from a sea
> platform?
>

It depends on the size of the platform. Theoretically thewy could be
built any size, it is simply a matter of money.

The thing that made Sea Launch attractive was that there already existed
a proven design for an oil platform which was big enough to launch a
Zenith - the company Kvaerner built it with no difficulty
and for an attractive cost. I doubt if anything much larger than that
is currently available. Also, the bigger they are, the more difficult
(read more expensive) to move around.

>>>>Don't the Russians and Sea-Launch already have this capability? I take
>>>>
> this
> to be so from the statements that the launch of Soyuz only costs $ 4
> million
> or so.>>>
>
> With regards to sea launch, what sort of size range of booster, can be
> practically launched rfrom sea? Could we launch a Saturn-V from a sea
> platform?

That was the BDB idea. You build a BIG rocket, float it in the
sea and launch a 100+ tonnes or so into orbit using really low
tech techniques. You get lousy mass ratios, but then who cares?
Provided you stick to hydrocarbon fuels, Fuel is the cheap bit...

There's a fluffy report at: http://www.ota.nap.edu/pdf/data/1989/8904.PDF

which says lots of stuff, along the lines of 'it might work' and
'many contractors who make lots of money off the existing systems
aren't keen on it' and people who have looked at it get comments
like: 'your work did nothing to extend the state of the art'.

As if trying to cut costs doesn't extend the state of the art????

Anyway do a google search using terms like 'big dumb booster'
and 'minimum cost' and you'll probably find it.

> Tony

civilization?"

> Don't the Russians and Sea-Launch already have this capability? I take this
> to be so from the statements that the launch of Soyuz only costs $ 4 million
> or so.

The Proton (payload 20+ tonnes to LEO) costs about
$5 million, just the rocket.

That makes about $240/kg!

Right now they can't sell it to you for that- they have to
pay for the launch pad on top of that for example; R&D and
some profit etc. The current charge is ~$60-85 million. But
if the rate of launch goes up, then the cost comes down
doesn't it? And with a basic cost of $5 million, it can
come down very quickly.

It seems to me that the only thing stopping the Russians
from heading that way is a *large* order to launch, e.g.
offer them a billion or ten and you'd be amazed at how
many launches you'd get; you'd probably have to wait a
year or two until they geared themselves up, but then...

That would mean, in theory, they could put me into orbit
for about $60000 (allowing for 50% profit, and double my own
weight in life support and cabin and things; you can argue
the numbers if you wish; please do so.)

> Jay S. Huebner at jhuebn@...

civilization?"

Take a look at this brute:-

350 tonnes to LEO
100 tonnes to Lunar orbit

http://vulcain.fb12.tu-berlin.de/koelle/Neptun/Nep2015.html

German design - development cost about 30 billion dollars - half the
cost of the half-assed idea of a nuclear missile shield.

>
> >>>>>why NASA is so freaking expensive,
> how much the Russians really spend to get into space
> (a pittance- the rockets cost 4-5 million each!)
> and how much a Big Dumb Booster would cost (>>>
>
> What we really need in order to get prices down to <$500/Kg, is an
> inherently simple, non re-usable, 3-stage, heavy lift boster. We
would
> produce 200 of these things per year, in an automated factory, that
> continuously passes the boosters along a production line. This would
> produce boosters continuously, much like a car factory produces
cars.
> Boosters with lift capabilities of 50-250 tonnes to LEO, could be
produced
> in this way. The factory is located on a natural harbour. Upon
completion,
> each booster is loaded onto a transport ship (converted oil
tanker?) and
> from then on, it is shipped to the launch site. Even better, it
could be
> transported by rail, to a near-by launch facility! The lower two
stages of
> the rocket are kerosine/oxygen fueled. The fuel can be pumped
straight out
> of a tanker that is docked close to the launch site. The oxygen is
> liquified out of the air, using an atmospheric liquification plant.
The
> whole setup, would be powered by a series of gas turbines or a
single
> 1200-MWe nuclear reactor (built quickly, in less than 5 years). A
system
> like this would provide cheap, mass produced heavy lift vehicles.
Launch
> prices of less than $2000/Kg to HEO and $1000/Kg to LEO, could be
virtually
> guarenteed. But how much would it cost in order to set up this
monster
> facility?
>
> Tony
>
the
money while