http://www.russianspaceweb.com/tks_followon.html

also south korea has announced that it is useing the first stage of the angara rocket for there upcoming korean LV, to be launched at Goheung(which is under construction).

It looks like S korea is paying to finish developement of the angara, which could be the future russian manned launch vehicle

But if politics or NIH syndrome doesn't it allow we could rush an apollo derivative manned tug in a few years yes I know it will not meet the full CEV requirments but it could be used as a test mule for the full CEv system.
But the quickist thing we can do is dust off the X38 and turn it from the CRV to an assured access vehical this could be ready very quickly and later could be used in as a componet of constellation but it's a little short on room so four vs 6 people.
Or just dangle a 200 million infront of the Xprize startups they will build something quickly.
On the shuttle and finishing ISS building shuttle-c is a great ideal as you will get a 80ton launch vehical in the deal .You can launch all remianing modules fully equipted and stocked .This launch vehical also would be very usefull to the constellation program later.for launching parts that are too heavy for the existing EELVs such as trans lunar stages and lunar habs and just about everything on a mars mission.

Also on launching an ISS module on anything other then a shuttle you will need tug or to add engines to the modules.
To launch an ISS module on an EELV you need more then a cradle.
This is the reason the russian modules are more cramped then the US ones even though they are about the same size on the out side.They had to have their own propulsion and navigation this stuff is not light or small. it may be possible to have a shuttle capture and drag an ISS module launched by an EELV or use a soyuz/progress to move it.
Though shuttle-c is so powerful you could launch a manuvoring module with an ISS module and still have payload capacity to burn.
Just base it on a proven satilite bus or the whole back end of the ESA ATV.

The apollo or the Russian TKS http://www.russianspaceweb.com/tks_followon.html would make a usefull tug and could form the first part of constelation.
The baseline TKS http://www.russianspaceweb.com/tks.html is still manufactured and one is part of ISS minus the reentry capsule.

Griffin has the potential to be the best NASA Administrator, ever.

But as you say, the true believers will not let something as inconvenient as facts sway their convictions.

For those that need to know the [url=http://prod.nais.nasa.gov/eps/eps_data/113638-SOL-001-006.doc]Acronym List[/url] and a [url=http://prod.nais.nasa.gov/eps/eps_data/113638-SOL-001-011.doc] glossary[/url]

[url=http://prod.nais.nasa.gov/eps/eps_data/113638-SOL-001-001.doc]Final Request for Proposal (RFP) NNT05AA01J, Crew Exploration Vehicle, Phase 1 Contract[/url]

[quote]The Nation’s Vision for Space Exploration sets a goal of developing a new Crew Exploration Vehicle by 2014 that is capable of carrying astronauts beyond low Earth orbit and a goal of landing astronauts on the Moon no later than 2020. The CEV represents one building block in a future exploration architecture that can send astronauts to the moon and form the basis for exploration missions to other destinations.

Crew Exploration Vehicle is a full and open competition. The anticipated period of performance is September, 2005 through December, 2008.[/quote]

[url=http://prod.nais.nasa.gov/eps/eps_data/113638-SOL-001-005.doc]Scope of the Crew Exploration Vehicle Statement of Work[/url]

[quote]• Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) – The system that transports humans to Low Earth Orbit (LEO), Lunar Orbit and back to Earth.
• Crew Transportation System (CTS) – The CEV, the CEV launch vehicle, and the ground systems necessary to operate the CEV.
• Constellation – The elements of the Constellation System of Systems including the CEV Launch Vehicle, Lunar Surface Access Module, Earth Departure Stage, Ground Support System, In-Space Support System, Destination Surface Systems, and other Constellation Systems such as a common docking mechanism, common rendezvous and proximity operations sensors, the common Constellation communications architecture, flight crew equipment including provisions for EVA, and standardized human interfaces.[/quote]

[url=http://prod.nais.nasa.gov/eps/eps_data/113638-SOL-001-004.doc]Statement of Objectives for the Crew Exploration Vehicle[/url]

[quote]On January 14, 2004, the President of the United States directed the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to embark on a robust space exploration program that will advance the Nation’s scientific, security, and economic interests. To meet the goals and objectives of our new vision, NASA plans to deploy a set of systems, large and small, that will be integrated into a “system of systems”. This includes Earth-to-orbit and in-space transportation systems, systems required for human health and performance, and robotic systems that will assist humans as they travel and explore.

CEV is the first component in the system-of-systems that will be built under the NASA Constellation Program and is the subject of this request for proposals.

• Spiral 1: Earth Orbit Capability. Spiral 1 establishes the capability to test and checkout crew transportation system elements in Low Earth Orbit in preparation for future human exploration missions to the Moon. As new exploration elements necessary for future spirals are developed, they will be tested with the Spiral 1 CEV in the space environment to prepare for future exploration. The objective of crewed access to low earth orbit will be met by 2014.
• Spiral 2: Extended Lunar Exploration. Spiral 2 establishes the capability to conduct human exploration missions on the surface of the Moon for extended durations. In this context, extended duration is defined as the capability to support the crew on the surface of the Moon for a minimum of four days. This objective will be met in the 2015-2020 timeframe.
• Spiral 3: Long Duration Lunar Exploration. Spiral 3 establishes the capability to conduct routine human long duration missions on the surface of the Moon to test out technologies and operational techniques for expanding the human presence to Mars and beyond. Missions in Spiral 3 will extend in duration from those obtained in Spiral 2 up to several months to serve as an operational analog of future short stay Mars missions. This objective will be met after 2020.

A key aspect to spiral development will be to develop new technologies that improve performance and lower cost over time. This is crucial to maintaining affordability and achieving the Nation’s goals for future exploration.

[b]The CEV is designed from the outset as a key element of the Constellation “System of Systems” meeting at minimum Spiral 2 requirements with a clear plan to meet Spiral 3 requirements. Meeting Spiral 3 from the outset is a goal.[/b]

• Spiral 1 components include the CEV, a CEV launch vehicle, and ground support systems infrastructure. The CEV and launch elements will safely transport the crew from the surface of the Earth to Low Earth Orbit and return them to the Earth’s surface at the completion of the mission. The Launch System provides the capability to launch the CEV to Low Earth Orbit. The CEV provides the necessary crew habitation functions during ascent, on-orbit, and entry, including mission aborts.
• Spiral 2 consists of the Spiral 1 elements, or derivatives of those elements, plus the Earth Departure Stage (EDS) to transport elements to the lunar vicinity as well as the Lunar Surface Access Module (LSAM) that provides the capability for the crew to access the lunar surface. The CEV provides crew habitation from launch to lunar orbit and return to the Earth surface, including aborts during Earth ascent. The CEV provides the transportation functions to return from lunar orbit to the Earth surface. The EDS provides the propulsive accelerations needed to transfer the various flight elements (CEV and LSAM) from Low Earth Orbit to lunar orbit and provides the deceleration for lunar orbit insertion. The LSAM provides the crew habitation and transportation functions from lunar orbit, to the lunar surface, and return back to lunar orbit. In addition, the LSAM provides the capability for the crew to conduct science and perform routine EVA on the surface of the Moon. Finally, the Cargo Delivery System (CDS) is used to deliver un-crewed elements to low Earth orbit and/or lunar orbit. The CDS consists of an EDS and a Cargo Launch Vehicle.
• Spiral 3 requires various additional surface elements to support the crew for the long duration missions. These surface elements have not been completely defined at this point, but will provide basic functional capabilities including habitation, communication, power, extended range mobility, enhanced science capabilities, and other functions.

For purposes of this request for proposals, industry is expected to provide an initial concept for a CEV spacecraft that shall:

1. Have a total gross liftoff weight (GLOW) of less than 20 metric tons.
2. Provide an abort capability during all phases of flight.
3. Be 2-fault tolerant to hardware component failures within safety critical systems except where design to minimum risk is approved by NASA.
4. Integrate with the Launch Vehicle (LV) to achieve low earth orbit.
5. Integrate with the Earth Departure Stage (EDS) to achieve lunar orbit.
6. Integrate with the Lunar Surface Access Module to achieve lunar surface mission objectives.
7. Integrate with Ground Support Systems for launch processing and mission control.
8. Integrate with In Space Support Systems to support overall Constellation command, control, communication, and information requirements.
9. Be capable of orbital maneuvers and rendezvous/docking with other Constellation systems.
10. Be capable of return from lunar orbit to the earth surface without assistance from external Constellation elements.
11. Be capable of supporting human life from launch on the earth surface through mission complete on earth surface during a maximum CEV crewed mission duration of 16 days.
12. Abort capability independent of LV or EDS flight control.
13. Be capable of unmanned operations for test flight purposes during Spiral 1 efforts and during lunar surface activities for Spirals 2 and 3.
14. Minimizing ground processing interfaces while maintaining redundancy separation standards and minimizing potential hazards.
15. Provide the capability to conduct missions with 1, 2, 3, and 4 crewmembers with a minimum habitable volume of 3.54 cubic meters per crew member.

Initial Performance Parameters

1. Launch weight mass trades (both increases and decreases), including taking advantage of performance gains by mass reduction during ascent
2. Ability to abort anytime during all mission phases
3. Inclusion of the LSAM functionality within the CEV system
4. CEV direct return vs. Earth Capture
5. Mission Duration (both manned and unmanned mission phases)
6. Crew size (up to 6 crew members) and crew habitable volume allocations.
7. Splitting CEV functionality into modules (e.g., earth surface to LEO, LEO to Lunar orbit, Lunar orbit to Earth return)
8. Human Rating Requirements cost drivers
9. CEV system support of spiral 3
10. CEV support for transfer of crew to and from International Space Station (ISS)
11. CEV support of Extra-Vehicular Activities (EVA) operations
12. Provisions for common Constellation System elements (eg Docking systems, Communication systems)
[/quote]

I note that the spirals are to use the cev for each and must have a plan for this. Sort of designing the CEV from its destination and working backwards to the starting point for a modular construction.

I really don't think such comments are needed or desirable. Keith Cowing can be a opinionated and a pain, but he is well connected and very often gets the "scoop" on the inside story at NASA.

I have to wonder, keeping in mind your past statements with regard to the Bush Administration, if your opinion of Cowing isn't colored by your dismissal of his and Frank Sietzen's book "New Moon Rising" and it's favorable presentation of the Bush Space Vision.

Regardless of the reason behind it, such statements are not conducive to civil discourse. If Cowing doesn’t meet your standards for journalism I would suggest you simply abstain from using him as a source.

Just as an educated guess, being in the engineering field myself, I would expect that altering the shuttle tank with RS-68’s underneath, altering the tank internally due to the differing fuel/oxygen needs of the RS68 compared to the SSME and adding another stage on top of the ET would be a more involved and expensive undertaking than would man rating a Delta or an Atlas.

It doesn’t make sense to me to use the heavy lift capacity of a shuttle-derived vehicle to launch people, and the medium lift ability of the EELV’s to launch cargo. And I do believe NASA has firmly made the decision that cargo and people will be separated to the extent possible and practical. So if a shuttle derived vehicle has a place in the VSE and if you separate the cargo and people; it would make more sense to me that the cargo would be launched on an unmanned shuttle derived heavy lift vehicle and crews would go up on a man rated EELV.

They have talented people, they spent boatloads of money, they have been at it for years and yet what have they got to show for it all? Bankruptcy?

Just contrast that with SpaceX who are likely to put a satellite into orbit years before Kistler flys anything.

The EELV's were never intended for man-rating, and would significantly delay the process and unnecessarily drive up the cost. Shuttle derived components are the only thing that ACTUALLY makes sense. Put 3 or 4 RL-68's directly under the ET, add an S-4B 2nd stage, and configure the solids as 2, 3 or 4 strap-ons, depending on the launch mass, required delta-V, and the destination. We've already got all this stuff. It's already man-rated, and it all works great, right now. With this configuration, we could do, right now, anything that Project Constellation is likely to require for the next 30 years. We could do it (almost) today.

Look, everything this project needs for launch already exists, in proven configurations, for man-rated flights: all the components, the entire infrastructure, all the personnel, and the entire launch AND manufacturing facilities. It's spelled Shuttle-Derived. To take any other route is, in my humble opinion, just dumb. It would be a decision powered by lobbying influence, devoid of actual thinking, and would be a total disaster for Project Constellation. Delta IV and Atlas V definitely have a place in this vision, but NOT to launch people.

To abandon a proven, man-rated, functioning and completely capable system for one that is unproven, not man-rated, and actually inferior as far as launch capability goes, is just plain dumb. But that’s what NASA has always done. We abandoned the Saturn for absolutely no good reason, and that was a huge mistake. But now we could have Shuttle-derived configurations almost overnight, if only someone at NASA would just have the guts to make the most practical decision, not look back and run with it. My God, wouldn't that be a refreshing change?