| |
 |
|
|
Science Forum Index » Space Forum » Why not Minuteman?
Page 1 of 2 Goto page 1, 2 Next
|
| Author |
Message |
| ed kyle |
 Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2004 3:47 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
I've recently been reading about the Minuteman ICBM
system. More than 2400 of these missiles were built
over the years. As many as 1000 at a time stood watch
in underground silos, fitted with thermonuke warheads.
More than 840 were launched on test missions or, in
two instances, as part of Minotaur space launch
vehicles.
Today, 500 Minuteman III missiles remain on duty.
There are probably some spares that are not in silos.
(I would guess 100-150). 450 Minuteman II missiles
were removed from service during the early 1990s. I
think that the solid rocket motors for many of these
have been stored.
Altogether the U.S. must have several hundred spare
Minuteman II rockets on hand. Studies have shown that
each one is capable of boosting about one-half ton
to low earth orbit, for about half the cost of
Pegasus, which offers similar capability. Minuteman
should be relatively reliable. More than 98% of the
Minuteman I and II tests were successful.
The problem is that these Minuteman assets have been
reserved for U.S. Defense launches. Why not make this
resource, capable of boosting perhaps 200-300 tons into
low earth orbit altogether, available for commercial
and civil space launches? Wouldn't such activity
provide benefits to the taxpayers who paid for
Minuteman?
- Ed Kyle |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Charles Phillips |
| Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2004 4:38 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
edkyle99@hotmail.com (ed kyle) wrote:
Quote: I've recently been reading about the Minuteman ICBM
system. More than 2400 of these missiles were built
over the years. As many as 1000 at a time stood watch
in underground silos, fitted with thermonuke warheads.
More than 840 were launched on test missions or, in
two instances, as part of Minotaur space launch
vehicles.
Altogether the U.S. must have several hundred spare
Minuteman II rockets on hand. Studies have shown that
each one is capable of boosting about one-half ton
to low earth orbit, for about half the cost of
Pegasus, which offers similar capability. Minuteman
should be relatively reliable. More than 98% of the
Minuteman I and II tests were successful.
The problem is that these Minuteman assets have been
reserved for U.S. Defense launches. Why not make this
resource, capable of boosting perhaps 200-300 tons into
low earth orbit altogether, available for commercial
and civil space launches? Wouldn't such activity
provide benefits to the taxpayers who paid for
Minuteman?
- Ed Kyle
For one thing - it would make it impossible to sell other boosters until
the Minutemen were all used up. At the current flight rate that would be
a long time!
So we sit on them while we hope the commercial space launch business can
recover.
We used a lot of the Titan and Atlas boosters to launch DoD and government
payloads - that mainly took place back when the government was not potentially
in competition with industry for launch services. The VAMP (Vandenberg Atlas
Modification Plant) was a hive of activity at one time, and I think they
modified it to refurbish Titans as well.
Charles
Charles
http://www.academ.com/info/macintosh/
All Statements Are Personal Opinion Only |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Charles Phillips |
| Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2004 4:38 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
edkyle99@hotmail.com (ed kyle) wrote:
Quote: I've recently been reading about the Minuteman ICBM
system. More than 2400 of these missiles were built
over the years. As many as 1000 at a time stood watch
in underground silos, fitted with thermonuke warheads.
More than 840 were launched on test missions or, in
two instances, as part of Minotaur space launch
vehicles.
Altogether the U.S. must have several hundred spare
Minuteman II rockets on hand. Studies have shown that
each one is capable of boosting about one-half ton
to low earth orbit, for about half the cost of
Pegasus, which offers similar capability. Minuteman
should be relatively reliable. More than 98% of the
Minuteman I and II tests were successful.
The problem is that these Minuteman assets have been
reserved for U.S. Defense launches. Why not make this
resource, capable of boosting perhaps 200-300 tons into
low earth orbit altogether, available for commercial
and civil space launches? Wouldn't such activity
provide benefits to the taxpayers who paid for
Minuteman?
- Ed Kyle
For one thing - it would make it impossible to sell other boosters until
the Minutemen were all used up. At the current flight rate that would be
a long time!
So we sit on them while we hope the commercial space launch business can
recover.
We used a lot of the Titan and Atlas boosters to launch DoD and government
payloads - that mainly took place back when the government was not potentially
in competition with industry for launch services. The VAMP (Vandenberg Atlas
Modification Plant) was a hive of activity at one time, and I think they
modified it to refurbish Titans as well.
Charles
Charles
http://www.academ.com/info/macintosh/
All Statements Are Personal Opinion Only |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| MattWriter |
| Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2004 5:22 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
<< >I've recently been reading about the Minuteman ICBM
Minuteman by itself makes a marginal booster: a Minuteman II or III can't put
anything into orbit without at least replacing the third stage with a
commercial stage like Orbus-7. You likely want to add a lighter payload shroud
and a shock-reducing system.
That should still add up to a cheaper booster than anything out there now.
However, use of ICBMs as launchers is restricted by DoD policy to avoid
competition with the US small launcher makers (only Orbital, when the policy
was written). It's a case where the interests of payload owners (esp.
academic programs) are in conflict with rocket builders.
Matt Bille
(MattWriter@AOL.com)
OPINIONS IN ALL POSTS ARE SOLELY THOSE OF THE AUTHOR |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| MattWriter |
| Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2004 5:22 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
<< >I've recently been reading about the Minuteman ICBM
Minuteman by itself makes a marginal booster: a Minuteman II or III can't put
anything into orbit without at least replacing the third stage with a
commercial stage like Orbus-7. You likely want to add a lighter payload shroud
and a shock-reducing system.
That should still add up to a cheaper booster than anything out there now.
However, use of ICBMs as launchers is restricted by DoD policy to avoid
competition with the US small launcher makers (only Orbital, when the policy
was written). It's a case where the interests of payload owners (esp.
academic programs) are in conflict with rocket builders.
Matt Bille
(MattWriter@AOL.com)
OPINIONS IN ALL POSTS ARE SOLELY THOSE OF THE AUTHOR |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Henry Spencer |
| Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2004 5:57 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In article <88d21cfd.0401081247.7d96538b@posting.google.com>,
ed kyle <edkyle99@hotmail.com> wrote:
Quote: Altogether the U.S. must have several hundred spare
Minuteman II rockets on hand...
Not quite as many as you might think, because there have been a lot of
suborbital Minuteman launches from Vandenberg to Kwajalein for tests,
Minuteman crew training, and missile-defence R&D.
Quote: Studies have shown that
each one is capable of boosting about one-half ton
to low earth orbit, for about half the cost of
Pegasus, which offers similar capability.
Although it should be noted that a Minuteman gives a *very* rough ride --
high Gs and high vibration. (There has been some work on vibration
isolation for payloads, using Minuteman as the test case...)
Quote: The problem is that these Minuteman assets have been
reserved for U.S. Defense launches. Why not make this
resource, capable of boosting perhaps 200-300 tons into
low earth orbit altogether, available for commercial
and civil space launches?
Because with some specialized exceptions, the government got out of the
launch-services business in 1986. It has been government policy ever
since not to compete against US commercial launch providers. This hasn't
been followed quite as consistently as one might like, but it's still a
sensible policy, and should not be lightly discarded in favor of starting
yet another state-run airline.
Note that SpaceX is in the final stages of building a launcher which (if
the press releases are to be believed) will have a larger payload at lower
cost, not to mention a softer ride. So why bother?
--
MOST launched 30 June; science observations running | Henry Spencer
since Oct; first surprises seen; papers pending. | henry@spsystems.net |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Henry Spencer |
| Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2004 5:57 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In article <88d21cfd.0401081247.7d96538b@posting.google.com>,
ed kyle <edkyle99@hotmail.com> wrote:
Quote: Altogether the U.S. must have several hundred spare
Minuteman II rockets on hand...
Not quite as many as you might think, because there have been a lot of
suborbital Minuteman launches from Vandenberg to Kwajalein for tests,
Minuteman crew training, and missile-defence R&D.
Quote: Studies have shown that
each one is capable of boosting about one-half ton
to low earth orbit, for about half the cost of
Pegasus, which offers similar capability.
Although it should be noted that a Minuteman gives a *very* rough ride --
high Gs and high vibration. (There has been some work on vibration
isolation for payloads, using Minuteman as the test case...)
Quote: The problem is that these Minuteman assets have been
reserved for U.S. Defense launches. Why not make this
resource, capable of boosting perhaps 200-300 tons into
low earth orbit altogether, available for commercial
and civil space launches?
Because with some specialized exceptions, the government got out of the
launch-services business in 1986. It has been government policy ever
since not to compete against US commercial launch providers. This hasn't
been followed quite as consistently as one might like, but it's still a
sensible policy, and should not be lightly discarded in favor of starting
yet another state-run airline.
Note that SpaceX is in the final stages of building a launcher which (if
the press releases are to be believed) will have a larger payload at lower
cost, not to mention a softer ride. So why bother?
--
MOST launched 30 June; science observations running | Henry Spencer
since Oct; first surprises seen; papers pending. | henry@spsystems.net |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Henry Spencer |
| Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2004 6:04 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In article <20040108172257.12363.00002741@mb-m05.aol.com>,
MattWriter <mattwriter@aol.com> wrote:
Quote: ...It's a case where the interests of payload owners (esp.
academic programs) are in conflict with rocket builders.
It's possible in principle to serve both, by *selling* (as opposed to
giving away) the Minuteman hardware, and using the money to fund a launch-
voucher scheme for deserving payload owners.
Assuming you can find anyone who wants to buy the things at a fair price,
that is.
--
MOST launched 30 June; science observations running | Henry Spencer
since Oct; first surprises seen; papers pending. | henry@spsystems.net |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Henry Spencer |
| Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2004 6:04 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In article <20040108172257.12363.00002741@mb-m05.aol.com>,
MattWriter <mattwriter@aol.com> wrote:
Quote: ...It's a case where the interests of payload owners (esp.
academic programs) are in conflict with rocket builders.
It's possible in principle to serve both, by *selling* (as opposed to
giving away) the Minuteman hardware, and using the money to fund a launch-
voucher scheme for deserving payload owners.
Assuming you can find anyone who wants to buy the things at a fair price,
that is.
--
MOST launched 30 June; science observations running | Henry Spencer
since Oct; first surprises seen; papers pending. | henry@spsystems.net |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Greg D. Moore (Strider) |
| Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2004 6:37 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"ed kyle" <edkyle99@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:88d21cfd.0401081247.7d96538b@posting.google.com...
Quote: I've recently been reading about the Minuteman ICBM
system. More than 2400 of these missiles were built
over the years. As many as 1000 at a time stood watch
in underground silos, fitted with thermonuke warheads.
More than 840 were launched on test missions or, in
two instances, as part of Minotaur space launch
vehicles.
Today, 500 Minuteman III missiles remain on duty.
There are probably some spares that are not in silos.
(I would guess 100-150). 450 Minuteman II missiles
were removed from service during the early 1990s. I
think that the solid rocket motors for many of these
have been stored.
Altogether the U.S. must have several hundred spare
Minuteman II rockets on hand. Studies have shown that
each one is capable of boosting about one-half ton
to low earth orbit, for about half the cost of
Pegasus, which offers similar capability. Minuteman
should be relatively reliable. More than 98% of the
Minuteman I and II tests were successful.
The problem is that these Minuteman assets have been
reserved for U.S. Defense launches. Why not make this
resource, capable of boosting perhaps 200-300 tons into
low earth orbit altogether, available for commercial
and civil space launches? Wouldn't such activity
provide benefits to the taxpayers who paid for
Minuteman?
Meanwhile what do you tell private companies that are bidding on that
market?
"Sorry, you're out of business for the next 300 launches?"
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Greg D. Moore (Strider) |
| Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2004 6:37 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"ed kyle" <edkyle99@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:88d21cfd.0401081247.7d96538b@posting.google.com...
Quote: I've recently been reading about the Minuteman ICBM
system. More than 2400 of these missiles were built
over the years. As many as 1000 at a time stood watch
in underground silos, fitted with thermonuke warheads.
More than 840 were launched on test missions or, in
two instances, as part of Minotaur space launch
vehicles.
Today, 500 Minuteman III missiles remain on duty.
There are probably some spares that are not in silos.
(I would guess 100-150). 450 Minuteman II missiles
were removed from service during the early 1990s. I
think that the solid rocket motors for many of these
have been stored.
Altogether the U.S. must have several hundred spare
Minuteman II rockets on hand. Studies have shown that
each one is capable of boosting about one-half ton
to low earth orbit, for about half the cost of
Pegasus, which offers similar capability. Minuteman
should be relatively reliable. More than 98% of the
Minuteman I and II tests were successful.
The problem is that these Minuteman assets have been
reserved for U.S. Defense launches. Why not make this
resource, capable of boosting perhaps 200-300 tons into
low earth orbit altogether, available for commercial
and civil space launches? Wouldn't such activity
provide benefits to the taxpayers who paid for
Minuteman?
Meanwhile what do you tell private companies that are bidding on that
market?
"Sorry, you're out of business for the next 300 launches?"
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| ed kyle |
| Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2004 10:51 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)" <mooregr@greenms.com> wrote in message news:<yQlLb.128618$JW3.104138@twister.nyroc.rr.com>...
Quote: "ed kyle" <edkyle99@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:88d21cfd.0401081247.7d96538b@posting.google.com...
....
The problem is that these Minuteman assets have been
reserved for U.S. Defense launches. Why not make this
resource, capable of boosting perhaps 200-300 tons into
low earth orbit altogether, available for commercial
and civil space launches? Wouldn't such activity
provide benefits to the taxpayers who paid for
Minuteman?
Meanwhile what do you tell private companies that are bidding on that
market?
"Sorry, you're out of business for the next 300 launches?"
Maybe you would give them a chance to participate - as
Orbital Sciences has done with Minotaur. Perhaps they
loose a few launches of their more costly booster, but
make up the difference on launch volume.
- Ed Kyle |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| ed kyle |
| Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2004 10:51 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)" <mooregr@greenms.com> wrote in message news:<yQlLb.128618$JW3.104138@twister.nyroc.rr.com>...
Quote: "ed kyle" <edkyle99@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:88d21cfd.0401081247.7d96538b@posting.google.com...
....
The problem is that these Minuteman assets have been
reserved for U.S. Defense launches. Why not make this
resource, capable of boosting perhaps 200-300 tons into
low earth orbit altogether, available for commercial
and civil space launches? Wouldn't such activity
provide benefits to the taxpayers who paid for
Minuteman?
Meanwhile what do you tell private companies that are bidding on that
market?
"Sorry, you're out of business for the next 300 launches?"
Maybe you would give them a chance to participate - as
Orbital Sciences has done with Minotaur. Perhaps they
loose a few launches of their more costly booster, but
make up the difference on launch volume.
- Ed Kyle |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| ed kyle |
| Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2004 10:54 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Charles Phillips" <triples@nospam.ev1.net> wrote in message news:<vvrjecgvj3rmef@corp.supernews.com>...
Quote: edkyle99@hotmail.com (ed kyle) wrote:
The problem is that these Minuteman assets have been
reserved for U.S. Defense launches. Why not make this
resource, capable of boosting perhaps 200-300 tons into
low earth orbit altogether, available for commercial
and civil space launches? Wouldn't such activity
provide benefits to the taxpayers who paid for
Minuteman?
For one thing - it would make it impossible to sell other boosters until
the Minutemen were all used up. At the current flight rate that would be
a long time!
So we sit on them while we hope the commercial space launch business can
recover.
Let the other companies participate in the process
by bidding to access the surplus hardware. The result
should be a higher overall launch rate and a lower
cost to payload users. The Air Force gets to oversee
more launches. Everyone is happy.
- Ed Kyle |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| ed kyle |
| Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2004 10:54 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Charles Phillips" <triples@nospam.ev1.net> wrote in message news:<vvrjecgvj3rmef@corp.supernews.com>...
Quote: edkyle99@hotmail.com (ed kyle) wrote:
The problem is that these Minuteman assets have been
reserved for U.S. Defense launches. Why not make this
resource, capable of boosting perhaps 200-300 tons into
low earth orbit altogether, available for commercial
and civil space launches? Wouldn't such activity
provide benefits to the taxpayers who paid for
Minuteman?
For one thing - it would make it impossible to sell other boosters until
the Minutemen were all used up. At the current flight rate that would be
a long time!
So we sit on them while we hope the commercial space launch business can
recover.
Let the other companies participate in the process
by bidding to access the surplus hardware. The result
should be a higher overall launch rate and a lower
cost to payload users. The Air Force gets to oversee
more launches. Everyone is happy.
- Ed Kyle |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
Page 1 of 2 Goto page 1, 2 Next
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Fri Dec 05, 2008 6:38 am
|
|