Replies

they still can't manage even to come close to equally Saturn 5's lift capability

They could do even better if they had a mission requirement to lift so much. But there is no mission except Space Shuttle launches. Maybe Bush's new project guidelines will require some serious tonnage in orbit and on the moon. Then we'll see stuff.

My earlier comments in mind, I sincerely hope I will be proven wrong in terms of development costs for something new. In manned spaceflight, however, you don't launch until the weight of the paperwork exceeds the weight of the launch vehicle and it sounds to me that a lot of heavy paper already exists. Even if we had to push the validation of the paper into present day standards, it would be cheaper. Even new paperwork has to be validated, so you don't save anything there.

New design or Old, you still have to bend metal, specify custom parts, having the design in hand has to be cheaper than starting with a blank slate.

Don't get me wrong: FULLY reusable is the way to go. We can't just throw material to the heavens forever and expect to really stay in space. However, for expediency, if you need to get something done now, why not use something proven that you can build much sooner. Develop the reusable systems in parallel. Private enterprise is already persuing this parallel path.

Also, let's not de-orbit all those nice F1 engines, reuse them at least a few times. Incrementally "slim down" the big momma with lighter, stronger, and simpler technologies, and increase mass-to-orbit in the process.

They could do even better if they had a mission requirement to lift so much.

"If you build it they will come." Haven't we had a whole slate of little puny missions to Mars because we can't get enough throw-weight behind a bigger craft? Real soon the President is going to announce a return to the Moon with a permanent base. They will need a 100-ton lifter and more.