*


-----Original Message-----
From: Fischer, David [mailto:dfischer@ball.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2004 7:19 AM
To: Chris Walker
Subject: FW: LV performance to GEO

Hi Chris,
FYI, some news on the Atlas V launch capabilities.  I don't think it's
worth making any signfiicant changes to the proposal now but you might
point out where you talk about LVs that we can do this trade and impress
the reviewers.
-Dave

-----Original Message-----
From: Purmort, David 
Sent: Monday, April 19, 2004 6:59 PM
To: Fischer, David; Turner-Valle, Jennifer
Subject: LV performance to GEO

Dave, Jen,

	After reading these slides a second time.  See attached file at
bottom.  It looks like Atlas V can put 3800 kg into GEO ,,,(not just
GTO)  for 140 M$.

	So there is NOT an additional upperstage cost penalty like I was
thinking at first.  (there would be with the delta II)

	But it looks like the Atlas guys have figured out how to do the
GTO orbit circularization *  some other way.

	This is relavent to the question Jen was asking about whether
GEO was better than LEO...I initially shyed away from this
Option but as you can see from these charts.  There is plenty of
capacity on the EELV manifest and they don't charge extra for it.
You might want to pass this along to the STO PI.

	To make a long story short,  on the EELV,  it costs the same to
go to L2 or GEO.  For a 2500 kg payload you might select a Atlas V 531
for direct to GEO for 140$M.  Or if you wanted to go to L2, you would
select a Atlas V 401 for 140M$.  Either one would get you all the way to
your mission orbit...

Dave Purmort

-----Original Message-----
From: Smith, Shawn 
Sent: Friday, April 16, 2004 1:22 PM
To: Purmort, David
Subject: LV performance

David,

Please take a look at the attached charts, which summarize EELV
performance to GTO and also direct GEO performance. You did not specify
a mass, so I included all NLS options. I did not include L2 performance
since you said you already had that.  Several LV's can deliver you
straight to GEO and the way NASA is pricing their launch vehicles these
days, there is essentially no difference in planning costs unless you
jump up to a heavy vehicle.  BTW- there is an Atlas V heavy lifter.  If
you need performance numbers for that, I will have to go to ILS for that
info.  Same cost as Delta IV heavy.

As far as I know, Atlas V is developing a solid motor upper stage for
the pluto kuiper mission, but Delta is not.  I don't know the details of
their efforts (Star 48 or something different?).  The performance
numbers are gross payload mass to orbit.  I'm assuming your going to
bookkeep a star 48 motor or whatever on the s/c side.

Hope this covers what you needed.


 * 


thanks


Shawn Smith
DI Launch Manager
Ball Aerospace & Technologies Corp
FA-3
Ph: 303-939-5033 (Boulder)
email: ssmith@ball.com