Future man in space/shuttle replacement vehicles

As a follow-on to recent discussions of the shuttle or manned space
exploration in several threads on these two groups, an illustration of
one of NASA's current concepts for future space exploration vehicles is
temporarily available at

http://www.stanford.edu/~siegman/shuttle_replacement.gif

If anyone can supply a link to this same graphic on an official NASA or
other website, I'd be glad to have it.

AES wrote:
As a follow-on to recent discussions of the shuttle or manned space
exploration in several threads on these two groups, an illustration of
one of NASA's current concepts for future space exploration vehicles is
temporarily available at

http://www.stanford.edu/~siegman/shuttle_replacement.gif

Gee, looks like we've gone back to the Mercury/Gemini/Apollo
design era with these two. The manned craft will obviously have
to splash down in the ocean!

--
Cliff

The manned craft will obviously have to splash down in the ocean!
Obviously, just like the Soyuz, right?

Oh wait.. Soyuz lands on... well, land. If Rogalo parachutes are
used, no reason these new guys can't land on a runway or the front lawn
at KSC.

Ben Hallert
PP-ASEL

Ben Hallert wrote:
The manned craft will obviously have to splash down in the ocean!

Obviously, just like the Soyuz, right?

Oh wait.. Soyuz lands on... well, land. If Rogalo parachutes are
used, no reason these new guys can't land on a runway or the front lawn
at KSC.

The Russians have been doing it for almost 50 years, I doubt the US has
learned the economics of this yet.

Ben Hallert wrote:
The manned craft will obviously have to splash down in the ocean!
Obviously, just like the Soyuz, right?

Oh wait.. Soyuz lands on... well, land. If Rogalo parachutes are
used, no reason these new guys can't land on a runway or the front lawn
at KSC.

Ben, my main point, that you apparently missed, is that NASA
intends to go back to the methods of 40 years ago. But with
the disaster that has been the shuttle program, I guess this
inclination is understandable.

--
Cliff

Ben Hallert wrote:

The manned craft will obviously have to splash down in the ocean!

Obviously, just like the Soyuz, right?

Oh wait.. Soyuz lands on... well, land. If Rogalo parachutes are
used, no reason these new guys can't land on a runway or the front
lawn at KSC.

Er, why not make that the parking lot at KFC, where they will be
able to get their supper immediately?

:-)

Ben, my main point, that you apparently missed, is that NASA
intends to go back to the methods of 40 years ago. But with
the disaster that has been the shuttle program, I guess this
inclination is understandable.

--
Cliff


I kind of agree... seems like a capsule program is a step backward... but
then again, isn't it cheaper to build a brand new Saturn V rocket and capsul
for every launch, then it is to refit a "re-usable" shuttle (just pulling
that out outa my rear, but i seem to recall somewhere seeing that building a
SatV in todays dollars is still cheaper than refitting a shuttle)? I still
don't see why a capsule system can't be "re-usable" boosters seperate,
deploy chutes and land, lower stages sep and land, upper stages will likely
be lost, but crew capsul can be reused..... The real downside i see to that
particular system is the need for two vehicles at each launch... cargo and
crew, why not beef up the cargo launch system, and throw the crew cap on top
of it, ship them individually as needed to support the ISS with
crew/supplies.

Frankly I think the ideal way to go would be a single stage to space
aircraft, that can land, get fuel/supplies, and be back in space within a
few days, but i don't see that anytime soon.

Tangental: I once heard the former NASA head-honcho Goldin
give a speech on NASA's vision for the future of GA. It was his
notion that one day, almost every family will have a plane in their
driveway and that the planes and ATC would be automated, so
that you'd only have to punch in GPS coordinates and the plane
would take you there. It was, of course, music to the ears of the
AOPA (Aircraft Owners & Pilots Assoc.) conventioners... and
utterly rediculous. =R=

"AES" wrote

As a follow-on to recent discussions of the shuttle or manned space
exploration in several threads on these two groups, an illustration of
one of NASA's current concepts for future space exploration vehicles is
temporarily available at

http://www.stanford.edu/~siegman/shuttle_replacement.gif

Bring back the Saturn 5-B!
Someone still has the drawings around, I'll bet!
--
Jim in NC

nooneimportant wrote:

I kind of agree... seems like a capsule program is a step backward... but
then again, isn't it cheaper to build a brand new Saturn V rocket and capsul
for every launch, then it is to refit a "re-usable" shuttle (just pulling
that out outa my rear, but i seem to recall somewhere seeing that building a
SatV in todays dollars is still cheaper than refitting a shuttle)?

Well, it might be, but we haven't had the capability of building a Saturn V for
well over a decade now. It would probably take 10 years to redevelop the
manufacturing facilities.

The Russians still have their mass lifters, though, and we collaborate with them
these days.

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.