This is not a NASA Website. You might learn something. It's YOUR space agency. Get involved. Take it back. Make it work - for YOU.
Commercialization

Using Commercial Launchers and Fuel Depots Instead of HLVs

By Keith Cowing
NASA Watch
March 30, 2011
Filed under , ,

Near Term Space Exploration with Commercial Launch Vehicles Plus Propellant Depot, Dr. Alan Wilhite and Dr. Douglas Stanley, Dale Arney and Chris Jones, GRAs Georgia Institute of Technology/ National Institute of Aerospace
“The Propellant Depot Hypotheses
* Large in-space mission elements (inert) can be lifted to LEO in increments on several medium-lift commercial launch vehicles (CLVs) rather than on one Heavy Lift Launch Vehicles (HLLVs)
* The heavy in-space transportation mission elements are beyond the payload capability of medium-lift CLVs; however, 80 to 90 percent of their mass is propellant that can be delivered in increments to a Propellant Depot and transferred to the in-space stages
* Saves DDT&E costs of HLLV
* Low-flight-rate HLLV dominated by high unique fixed costs. Use of CLVs eliminates these costs and spreads lower fixed costs over more flights and other customers.
* Use of large re-fueled cryo stages save DDT&E/ops costs for advanced propulsion stages (e.g., SEP)”

NASA Watch founder, Explorers Club Fellow, ex-NASA, Away Teams, Journalist, Space & Astrobiology, Lapsed climber.

One response to “Using Commercial Launchers and Fuel Depots Instead of HLVs”

  1. EVERETT L WILLIAMS says:
    0
    0

    It is too bad that this article has attracted little comment, because the subject is critical to our future in space. Propellant depots along with modular assembly of unfueled elements will save money at every point in the process. If a mission does not have to carry fuel to orbit, its structure can be much lighter and more appropriate to the actual mission rather than being bulked up to withstand boost to orbit. Carrying fuel to orbit in purpose-built tankers itself will be cheaper than carrying everything to orbit in one package. Think of what a car would become if it had to carry all the fuel for a coast-to-coast trip from the beginning of the trip. The SLS/Orion combination is a full-employment project for the Shuttle work force, having nothing to do with the current needs for a workforce to launch missions. If we wish to preserve that workforce, then we need to have them working on science and technology for the future rather than on repetition of the past.