From: aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer)
Subject: One Small Step for a Space Activist... Vol 3 No 9
Organization: Evil Geniuses for a Better Tomorrow
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 19:31:28 GMT


           One Small Step for a Space Activist...
                             By
                  Allen Sherzer & Tim Kyger

There is an old saying in Mexico: What cannot be remedied
must be endured. With the July House appropriations vote and
with the retirement of Rep. Traxler (D-MI) it looks like Space
Station Freedom is out of remedy mode and into endure mode.
With all its flaws and costs it looks like Freedom WILL be
built (in some form anyway). At the same time, Freedom's huge 
costs will consume the funds needed to go back to the Moon
and on to Mars. How can we endure this?

On the plus side, station supply will mean placing a lot of
mass into LEO, and this could make the market for launch
services a LOT bigger, which could help reduce launch
costs. But the way things currently are, NASA intends to use
only the Shuttle (with its high cost) for resupply. Not only
will this deny the advantages of a larger market but it will
add huge costs to the Station life cycle.

If a way to resupply Freedom could be found which didn't
require Shuttle, the payback would be enormous. Not only
would the larger launch markets lower costs, but non-Shuttle
based resupply could mean that the entire Shuttle program
can be phased out, freeing up roughly three BILLION every year.

So what do we need to do? We need to: 1)Fly about 160,000
pounds of supplies and experiments up and about 50,000
pounds back down (returned cargo will need low-G return);
2)Fly four crew to and from Freedom four times a year; and
3)An Orbital Transfer Vehicle needed to transport payloads
to Freedom (this is needed since we are eliminating
Shuttle).

A heavy lift vehicle would be one way to meet requirement one.
such an HLV would lift 100,000 pounds to Freedom orbit and would
carry a reusable logistics module. The logistics module would
have an aerodynamic shape (perhaps like DC-Y or an Apollo
capsule) and be capable of returning 20,000 pounds to Earth.

Such an HLV should be a commercial procurement where the
government buys launch services only (as required by current
federal law). Two candidates are Heavy Lift Delta (see One
Small Step... Vol. 2 No 2) and Titan V (see One Small 
Step... Vol. 2 No 3). Both manufacturers have already offered
to sell launch services for either vehicle for less than $200
million per launch (including development costs).

The reusable Logistics Module is harder to cost out since it
doesn't exist yet. However similar efforts have costed out
around $3 billion for development; we'll toss in an extra
$100M per flight for recurring costs. At four flights per
year and amortizing development over ten years we get a cost
of about $200M per flight (including interest).

Meeting requirement 2 is easy: we can use a Russian Soyuz-TM
launched on an Atlas or Titan vehicle. All the components
exist today and have been used extensively. The only thing
which hasn't been done is integration of Soyuz on a US
launcher but since launcher/payload interfaces haven't been
standardized this should pose no serious problems. In
quantity, Atlas launches can be had for about $60 million
plus 20 million each for Soyuz. Observant readers will also
note that this eliminates the ACRV problem.

Finally, we need an Orbital Transfer Vehicle (OTV) to move
payloads to Freedom. This capability is not strictly needed
and will be rarely used but will allow us to phase out
Shuttle. This vehicle has already been costed at $3 billion
to develop.

This gives us the following costs for each year:

1. Atlas Soyuz launches (8 @ 80M each): $640M

2. Logistics modules (4 @ 200M each)  :  $800M

3. Heavy Lift Vehicles (4 @ 200M each)  :  $800M

4. Orbital Transfer Vehicle (1 @ 300M)  :  $300M

All this adds up to $2,540 million per year, which is about
half the cost of maintaining Shuttle. Using this approach would
therefore save us all about $2,500 million per year. In addition,
since it uses multiple launch vehicles with backups for every
launcher, it could be even more reliable than Shuttle.

So where does the money to develop all this come from? The answer
lies with the public sector. Many of the components needed are
available today. Contractors have already offered to build the HLVs
themselves if the government will agree to buy them. All we need do
is allow Freedom to provide the market and they will come.

                     Legislative Roundup

                            SSTO/SSRT
Sources say that Senator Pete Domenenici (R-NM) has recently
been briefed on SSRT and emerged an enthusiastic supporter.
The Senator is on the Appropriations Committee and is the
ranking Republican on the Budget Committee. He could be a
powerful ally.

The next vote is the Senate Appropriations Committee's Defense
Subcommittee currently expected for September 14. We need to get
letters to every Senator before then.

                      Commercial Space
The full House has voted on and passed the Omnibus Commercial Space
Act. However action by the Senate is looking less and less likely.

                       NSS Petition Drive
NSS has endorsed Dr. Zubrin's petition calling on the next president
to devote serious effort to SEI. Watch this space for progress reports.

-- 
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 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?"                               |
+----------------------227 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX----------------------+