Post by Grand Lunar on Feb 6, 2009 8:37:54 GMT -4
There's something that keeps nagging me.
Not long ago, I looked at the concept for the Direct rockets (Direct 2.0 to be precise).
I also recently read the Popular Mechanics article on them, compared to the Ares rockets (the text itself went on mostly on the people involved; a diagram made a stage by stage comparison between the two).
This may be because I'm no aerospace engineer, but looking at them, the Direct rockets seem to be the better way to go; simplistic, quicker to develope, and more total mass to the moon.
I'm actually surprised NASA didn't use this design. From figures I've seen, the LEO design can put more weight up than the Ares 1. Seems this would mean that the Orion wouldn't need the weight savings that have been done to it's design.
I've read NASA's objections to Direct on their site. I do not believe they are valid.
Any thoughts or discussions or insites?
Not long ago, I looked at the concept for the Direct rockets (Direct 2.0 to be precise).
I also recently read the Popular Mechanics article on them, compared to the Ares rockets (the text itself went on mostly on the people involved; a diagram made a stage by stage comparison between the two).
This may be because I'm no aerospace engineer, but looking at them, the Direct rockets seem to be the better way to go; simplistic, quicker to develope, and more total mass to the moon.
I'm actually surprised NASA didn't use this design. From figures I've seen, the LEO design can put more weight up than the Ares 1. Seems this would mean that the Orion wouldn't need the weight savings that have been done to it's design.
I've read NASA's objections to Direct on their site. I do not believe they are valid.
Any thoughts or discussions or insites?