From: aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer)
Subject: Re: What about Saturn?
Organization: Evil Geniuses for a Better Tomorrow
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 16:29:38 GMT

In article <15AUG199222342936@judy.uh.edu> wingo%cspara.decnet@Fedex.Msfc.Nasa.Gov writes:

>I am proposing using the F1A engines and a new set of tanks to launch both
>medium and heavy payloads. 

I encourage you to look into this. The more options the better. However,
I note two things:

1. This would make one of the same mistakes of Shuttle again. Making all our
    launch capacity d3ependent on F-1s isn't good when the F-1s are grounded.

2. I note with interest that you have a lot of confidence in this yet you
   have almost none in HL Delta or Titan V. This seems odd since the latter two
   have had far more design effort put into them and require far less
   development.

>There is congressional testimony
>that states that the cost of reviving the Saturn is no more than for NLS and
>that is by someone that opposes the Saturn.  I don't have the reference anymore
>but Wales I think does.  So enough talk without any backup.
{That was me. The numbers for Saturn development are (in billions):

Item           Original       Restart        First Unit
S-IC STAGE      2.88           1.73           0.20
S-II STAGE      3.66           2.19           0.16
S-IV STAGE      2.09           1.25           0.07
F-1 ENGINES     1.80           0.54           0.10
J-2 ENGINES     1.73           0.52           0.06
Instrument      0.05           0.52           0.06
Unit
   SUBTOTAL    12.21           6.77           0.66

Vehicle         0.30           0.33           0.03
Integration
Software        0.10           0.14          
Program         0.20           1.45           0.03
Support
Fee             1.00           0.87           0.07
Subtotal        1.60           2.79           0.13

Facilities      2.17          2.51           
   KSC          2.00          1.97           
   SSC          0.17           0.54          
Shrouds         0.20           0.52           0.02
Operations                                    0.05

Grand Total    16.18          12.59           0.86  (first
                                             flt)
                                              0.59  (50
                                             flt ave)
   Table 1 - Saturn V Original and Restart Estimates ($ in
                         billions)1



This shows that Saturn restart is likely to be a bit more expensive
than NLS.

I also did analysis of launch costs of Saturn and other HLV's. This includes
both launch costs and amortization costs (including interest). The results
where (assumes 50 flights and 9% interest):



Vehicle   DDT&E  Amortization    Launch   Total   Payload  Cost/lb
                                 Costs    Cost
HL Delta    500    14.6          152      166.6   100,000  1666
Titan V     500    14.6          187      201.6   115,000  1753
Titan V+    500    14.6          187      201.6   150,000  1344
Saturn V 12,590   367.71         590      957.71  275,000  3843
NLS 3    12,000   350.48         100      450.48  100,000  4505
  Table 2 - HLV Launch costs



As you can see, the real problem with launcher development is the huge
developmant costs which dominate the final cost of the vehicle for
Saturn and NLS. The Delta and Titan derived HLVs however emphasize
maximum leverage from existing parts and wide saftey margins. This 
\allows them to deliver payload at lower costs than even today's
launchers. NLS and Saturn with their high devleopment costs actually
make getting payload into space MORE expensive than with MLV's.

   Allen
-- 
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Allen W. Sherzer | "If they can put a man on the Moon, why can't they     |
|  aws@iti.org     |  put a man on the Moon?"                               |
+----------------------250 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX----------------------+
Newsgroups: sci.space