Thande
Donor
The Titan was produced on a larger scale than the Saturn, though, was my point.But the Titan was rather expensive to build, probably more than Saturn IB...
The Titan was produced on a larger scale than the Saturn, though, was my point.But the Titan was rather expensive to build, probably more than Saturn IB...
The Titan IIIC (and the modernised Titan 4) had a payload very similar to Saturn IB, around 17 metric tons.
But the Titan was rather expensive to build, probably more than Saturn IB...
Btw Apollo diameter was 3.9 m when Titan core is only 3.05 m.
But the Titan 4 had a 4.3 m Centaur G, using a large shroud. So Apollo could have fit well...
Here's another. I've found an article narrating how the Shuttle program was nearly killed on 23th April 1970. I'll post a link if you're interested.
Yeah I was wrong.
Maybe I mistaken the Titan III with the Titan IV, which upgrade made very expensive...
I have others ideas for non wanky space WIs.
Here's another. I've found an article narrating how the Shuttle program was nearly killed on 23th April 1970. I'll post a link if you're interested.
It would make a nice whatif : the shuttle program is scrapped, and replaced by a spacecraft launched by a Titan III.
There would be three options in this case
- A lifting body for USAF (one of the atmospheric vehicles was send, two times in orbit by a Titan III in 1972, but this was scrapped in favor of the Shuttle)
- A downgraded Apollo
or
- the "small" Big Gemini
For NASA.
What happen after that, no idea!
This is just a crude atempt...
Considering NASA options (Apollo or Big Gemini) they would cost much, much less than the Shuttle. They would be ready much, much earlier : Big G needed only four years after go head to fly (1967 - 1971) ; Apollo was already flying.
In short NASA has a new manned vehicle for cheap and in 1975.
In think this would allow launching Skylab 2 and maybe others space stations. Maybe we can see a smaller, 100% Nasa, Skylab-like ISS around 1985 ?
So would it be launched atop the Saturn INT-20? Not sure what you meant there.Well IMHO it would be possible to have a kind of Shuttle in this ATL.
What, like the Dyna-Soar?Yes it would be. This program depend how ambitious NASA is in the 80's.
Oh, you mean this would follow a generation of Gemini use?Well it won't be wanky if you build this thing instead of X-33 for example.
In fact the lifting body I imagined would COMPLEMENT the Gemini / Apollo capsule.
On one hand, a manned, highly reliable system which is not reusable ;
; on the other hand, an unmanned, highly capable, reusable platform.
Here's an atempt.
Let's say NASA manage to keep Saturn INT-20 only around 1970.
This is not wankin' if you go this way.
No Saturn V (way too expensive) no saturn 1B.
Why keeping Saturn INT-20 ? because it is much less expensive, having only the S-I topped by S-IVB.
Without the heavy, 500 tons S-II second stage the mighty S-I accelerate too much; thus Saturn INT-20 only had three F-1, not five.
This also helped reducing costs.
Saturn INT-20 is a viable option and probably less expensive than the Shuttle.
If Nixon OMB still consider it as too expensive, drop the S-I and its F-1s engines and replace them by a pressure-fed or a solid.
Its LEO payload is around 45 metric tons.
with such rocket you can launch
- Apollo or Gemini heavy spacecrafts
- An unmanned lifting body
- Space Station Modules.