|
|
Saturn Launch Vehicle Variants |
|
|
Saturn Launch Vehicle Variants |
MLV = Modified Launch Vehicle
INT = Intermediate Payload Class
Vehicle
MS = Modified Stage; i.e. MS-IC = Modified S-IC Stage.
Saturn IB Costs from 1965 based on an order of 30 vehicles at 6 per year. Final cost does not include transportation or launch costs.
S-IB Stage: $6.28 million ($43.47 million in 2010 Dollars)
S-IVB Stage: $5.98 million ($41.4 million in 2010 Dollars)
Instrument Unit: $3.49 million ($24.16 million in 2010 Dollars)
Government Supervision and GSE: $2.25 million ($15.58 million in 2010 Dollars)
Total Cost Per Saturn IB: $18 million ($124.6 million in 2010 Dollars)
$/lb to Orbit (42,000 lb payload): $429/lb ($2,969/lb in 2010 dollars)
Saturn Derivative Costs (Based on buys of two INTermediate vehicles each year alongside two Saturn V's).
Saturn IB with 120” Solids: $50 million recurring cost ($297 FY10) + $67 million non-recurring costs, 78 klb to 100 n.mi ($3,807/lb in FY10)
156” SRM + S-IVB: $46 million recurring cost ($273.31 FY10) + $162 million non-recurring costs, 108 klb to 100 n.mi ($2,530/lb in FY10)
260” SRM + S-IVB: $41 million recurring cost ($243.6 FY10) + $183 million non-recurring costs, 95 klb to 100 n.mi ($2,564/lb in FY10)
S-IC + S-IVB: $69 million recurring cost ($409.97 FY10) + $31 million non-recurring costs, 132 klb to 100 n.mi ($3,105/lb in FY10)
They were very confident of getting launch costs in the range of $200 to $260 per pound; which translates to about $1,253 to $1,629 per pound in 2010 dollars, if a low cost S-IVB were developed. In fact, there was a cost estimate by the Aerospace Corporation which estimated $260/lb to LEO on the basis of a 15-vehicle buy of the 260” SRM + S-IVB configuration, and a launch rate of five a year.
Changes for the low cost S-IVB would have likely been:
Low cost insulation, likely similar to the sprayed on external insulation used for the S-II; as the internal tank insulation was very expensive and time consuming to install.
Flat wire used for all wiring, reducing wiring cost to 16% of prior costs.
A machined interstage structure, instead of the skin/stringer construction which consumed thousands of rivets and cost more than the hydrogen tank.
Reducing documentation count from 97 to 44, and checking calibrations against spec, rather than individually calibrating and publishing each one.
Eliminating hot-firing at Stennis before each launch for unmanned missions. According to Stages to Saturn, the cost of firing each S-IVB cost $3.2 million per stage.
Developing a simplified Instrument Unit that would cost only $1 million in 1968~ dollars.
(I have combined some costs to provide a rough ballpark figure for each one; you should check the report for more details.)
S-IC / S-IVB (INT-20) and S-IC / S-II (INT-21) Families
Notes: INT-20/21 costs were based on six launches a year for five years, next to six Saturn V launches a year during that period. Also, there is a single cost of DDT&E to implement all eight engine configurations possible across the INT-20/21 family.
Facility changes at KSC alone would have been an additional mobile launcher, mobile service structure, and firing room upgrades to maintain the 6 x INT + 6 x SAT-V launch rate a year.
DDT&E: $164~ million ($1.1 billion in 2010)
R&D Flight Tests: $60.8 million (one test for INT-20 under MSFC ground rules regarding man-rating) ($409.19m in 2010)
INT-20 Unit Cost: $60.5 million ($407m in 2010)
INT-21 Unit Cost: $74.6 million ($502m in 2010)
First Delivery: If Authority to Proceed was given in January 1968, the first vehicle would be AS-516 in February 1970; 25 months later.)
Total Program Cost: $2 to $2.4 billion (depending on what mixture of INT-20/21 are procured over the 30-vehicle run) ($13-16.15 Billion in 2010)
SAT-V-3B
Notes: SAT-V-3B costs are based on six launches a year, next to six launches a year of a Saturn IB using the new MS-IVB-3B stage developed for this vehicle. All three stages are lengthened (MS-IC-3B by 20 feet; MS-II-3B by 15.5 feet, and MS-IVB-3B by 16.5 feet); and use advanced engines (5 x F-1A, 7 x 400 klbf toroidal aerospike and 1 x 400 klbf toroidal aerospike).
Performance is 367,400 lbf to 100 n.mi. for two stage, and 160,000 lb to TLI for three stage.
Facility Changes would have been:
Modified transporters for longer stages, specifically a new ocean transport for the MS-IVB-3B since it's length now precludes SUPER GUPPY transportation
Relocation/Modification of VAB high/low bay access platforms.
Construction of a brand-new mobile service structure that is taller, since there's no time to rework an existing MSS to be taller due to flight rates of existing Saturn Vs.
SAT-V-3B scheduling and timing is based around the assumption that almost four years will be required for the 400 klbf toroidal aerospike LH2 engine to be successfully developed.
DDT&E: $1,097.6 million ($7.3 billion in 2010)
R&D Flight Tests: $325.6 million (two launches) ($2.19 billion in 2010)
Unit Cost: $116.7 million (2-stage) ($785.4m in 2010) $139 million (3-Stage) ($935.49m in 2010)
First Delivery: If Authority to Proceed was given in January 1968, the first vehicle would be AS-537 in September 1973; 69 months later.)
Total Program Cost: $5.26 Billion based on a 30-vehicle run. ($35.4 billion in 2010)
SAT-V-23(L)
Notes: The first and third stages are lengthened (MS-IC-24(L) by 20 feet and MS-IVB-24(L) by 16.5 feet); and four 260” diameter liquid rocket boosters (LRBs) are attached to the core, each booster having two F-1 engines. Engines are standard F-1 and J-2. There was an alternate study, the SAT-V-24(L) which used F-1As, but it couldn't fit within the VAB's height limit.
Performance is 579,300 lbf to 100 n.mi. for two stage, and 220,200 lb to TLI for three stage.
Facility Changes would have been:
Modified transporters for longer stages, specifically a new ocean transport for the MS-IVB-24(L) since it's length now precludes SUPER GUPPY transportation.
A new dynamic test stand, due to launch weight exceeding Saturn V stand foundation capability by 30%.
A 2 million square foot manufacturing facility to produce 24 LRBs a year.
A new test stand at Stennis for LRB acceptance firing.
Relocation/Modification of VAB high/low bay access platforms.
LC-39 pad and flame trench modifications to support the V-23(L) configuration.
Replacement of crawler transporters due to heavier weights.
Construction of a brand-new mobile service structure that is taller, since there's no time to rework an existing MSS to be taller due to flight rates of existing Saturn Vs.
SAT-V-23(L) scheduling and timing is based around the LRB facilities and testing.
DDT&E: $944.9 million ($6.36b in 2010)
R&D Flight Test Vehicles: $413.6 million (two launches) ($2.78b in 2010)
Unit Cost: $142.5 million (2-stage) ($959m in 2010) ($163.8 million (3-Stage) ($1.1b in 2010)
First Delivery: If Authority to Proceed was given in January 1968, the first vehicle would be AS-535 in May 1973; 64.9 months later.)
Total Program Cost: $5.86 Billion based on a 30-vehicle run. ($39.43b in 2010)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
(I have combined some costs to provide a rough ballpark figure for each one; you should check the report for more details.)
10 Year Production Run at Six Per Year Launch Rate
SAT-INT-17
DDT&E: $151.5 million
R&D Flight Test: $226 million (two launches)
Average Operational Launch Cost: $108 million
Total Program Cost: $7,142.5 million
Availability from ATP: 70 months
SAT-INT-18.5
DDT&E: $245.9 million
R&D Flight Test: $219 million (two launches)
Average Operational Launch Cost: $109 million
Total Program Cost: $7,009.9 million
Availability from ATP: 24 months
SAT-INT-18.7
DDT&E: $250 million
R&D Flight Test: $221 million (two launches)
Average Operational Launch Cost: $110 million
Total Program Cost: $7,081 million
Availability from ATP: 24 months
SAT-INT-20
DDT&E: $157.5 million
R&D Flight Test: $178 million (two launches)
Average Operational Launch Cost: $89 million
Total Program Cost: $5,656.5 million
Availability from ATP: 24 months
SAT-INT-21
DDT&E: $163.9 million
R&D Flight Test: $235 million (two launches)
Average Operational Launch Cost: $117 million
Total Program Cost: $7,440.9 million
Availability from ATP: 24 months
SAT-V-3B
DDT&E: $1,097.6 million
R&D Flight Test: $299 million (two launches)
Average Operational Launch Cost: $150 million
Total Program Cost: $10,376 million
Availability from ATP: 70 months
SAT-V-4(S)B
DDT&E: $431.6 million
R&D Flight Test: $312 million (two launches)
Average Operational Launch Cost: $156 million
Total Program Cost: $10,117 million
Availability from ATP: 42 months
SAT-V-25(S)
DDT&E: $603.1 million
R&D Flight Test: $322 million (two launches)
Average Operational Launch Cost: $161 million
Total Program Cost: $10,606 million
Availability from ATP: 43 months
SAT-V-23(L)
DDT&E: $944.9 million
R&D Flight Test: $390 million (two launches)
Average Operational Launch Cost: $195 million
Total Program Cost: $13,054 million
Availability from ATP: 64 months
10 Year Production Run at Two Per Year Launch Rate
SAT-INT-17
DDT&E: $151.5 million
R&D Flight Test: $337 million (two launches)
Average Operational Launch Cost: $168 million
Total Program Cost: $3,855.5 million
Availability from ATP: 70 months
SAT-INT-18.5
DDT&E: $245.9 million
R&D Flight Test: $403 million (two launches)
Average Operational Launch Cost: $202 million
Total Program Cost: $4,433 million
Availability from ATP: 24 months
SAT-INT-18.7
DDT&E: $250 million
R&D Flight Test: $405 million (two launches)
Average Operational Launch Cost: $204 million
Total Program Cost: $4,457 million
Availability from ATP: 24 months
SAT-INT-20
DDT&E: $157.5 million
R&D Flight Test: $351 million (two launches)
Average Operational Launch Cost: $175 million
Total Program Cost: $3,860 million
Availability from ATP: 24 months
SAT-INT-21
DDT&E: $163.9 million
R&D Flight Test: $415 million (two launches)
Average Operational Launch Cost: $208 million
Total Program Cost: $4,569 million
Availability from ATP: 24 months
SAT-V-3B
DDT&E: $1,097.6 million
R&D Flight Test: $545 million (two launches)
Average Operational Launch Cost: $273 million
Total Program Cost: $7,098.6 million
Availability from ATP: 70 months
SAT-V-4(S)B
DDT&E: $431.6 million
R&D Flight Test: $582 million (two launches)
Average Operational Launch Cost: $291 million
Total Program Cost: $6,835.6 million
Availability from ATP: 42 months
SAT-V-25(S)
DDT&E: $603.1 million
R&D Flight Test: $611 million (two launches)
Average Operational Launch Cost: $306 million
Total Program Cost: $6,109 million
Availability from ATP: 43 months
SAT-V-23(L)
DDT&E: $944.9 million
R&D Flight Test: $652 million (two launches)
Average Operational Launch Cost: $326 million
Total Program Cost: $8,117.9 million
Availability from ATP: 64 months
Saturn IB / Centaur – (Drawing of Shroud)
MLV Saturn IB-5 – 3/4 length 260" SRM replacing S-IB
Stage.
MLV Saturn IB-5A –
full length 260" SRM replacing S-IB Stage.
MLV Saturn IB-5B,
further modified full length 260" SRM – to be launched
from a silo (!!!)
MLV-SAT-IB-CORE (Stretched tanks)
MLV-SAT-IB-13.7A (2 x 120"
7 segment SRM)
MLV-SAT-IB-13.7B (2 x 120" 7 1/3 segment
SRM)
MLV-SAT-IB-11.7A (2 x 120" 7 segment
SRM)
MLV-SAT-IB-11.7A(T) (4 x 120" 7 segment SRM and 20' S-IB
tank extension)
MLV-SAT-IB-11.7B (4 x 120" 7 1/3 segment SRM)
Saturn V Payload Fairing – A 260” diameter payload fairing was proposed for the Saturn V with varying lengths (30.5 ft, 55 ft, 80 ft and 109 ft).
Saturn Improvement Studies - A Summary - Case 330 (28 October 1966) (PDF) – This details the various proposals studied during FY66 for improving the Saturn family.
Saturn V Performance — Effect of Engine Thrust Increase on Weight In Earth Orbit - Case 330 (28 July 1968) (PDF) – This studied the effect of increasing Saturn V t/w ratio beyond 1.2 for unmanned missions to find out how much extra payload could be placed into orbit.
Saturn V ELV (Extended Launch Vehicle) – Four strap on UA-1207 SRMs on an otherwise normal Saturn V to enable six-man direct manned lunar landing with a TLI payload of 85 metric tons.
A Study of Saturn V and Intermediate Vehicle Improvement Programs – Executive Summary Report (NASA TM X-53723) (16 April 1968) (5 MB PDF)
Saturn V Growth and Flexibility (11.7 MB PDF) – This summarizes INT-20, INT-21, and various uprating options (Advanced Engines, Stretched Stages, Solid Boosters and Liquid Boosters)
Saturn V with J-2S – From the start, it was always intended to integrate the J-2S into the Saturn V line; and many studies were made regarding this.
Comments on the J-2S Engine Impacting on the Saturn V Program – Case 103 (4 December 1968) (PDF)
Systems Description – J-2S Improvement Study (D5-15772-2) (30 April 1969) (55.5 MB PDF)
Saturn V – Two Stage Space Station + CSM – This proposal suggested launching with live S-IC and S-II Stages, and a dummy S-IV stage that was made up as a space station; using the traditional outer mold line, including the SLA, to enable launch of a space station and a space station manning mission on the same launch vehicle.
SAT-V-Product Improved (F-1A, S-IC 20' longer, J-2S on S-II)
MLV-SAT-INT-20
MLV-SAT-INT-21 – Two stage vehicle with
S-IC + S-II stages. (Performance Graph)
(Alternate Performance
Graph)
MLV-SAT-V-3B
MLV-SAT-V-4(S)B - (S-IC 28' longer,
J-2S on S-II, 4 x 120" SRM)
MLV-SAT-V-22(S) - 4 x 120"
SRM
MLV-SAT-V-23(L)
MLV-SAT-V-25(S) - (S-IC 41.5' longer, J-2S
on S-II, 4 x 156" SRM)
MLV-SAT-V-25(S)U
Saturn V – RIFT/S-N
Through the NERVA program, it was proposed to replace the chemical S-IVB stage with a nuclear-powered S-N stage.
At first, only the reactor would be launched as payload – RIFT – Reactor In Flight Test (DWG), until eventually an operational system (DWG) was reached.
S-IVC Orbital Launch Vehicle (OLV): Designed for a total lifetime of 30 days in LEO before hydrogen boil-off was large enough to affect its performance.
