tater

Sounds plausible from what I am hearing.

Note on the idiotic, grossly overpriced EUS: The EUS tank volume is ~388 m3. New Glenn's stage 2, also hydrolox, and 7m in dia holds ~354m3 of props. The Isp of Be-3U is lower, 440s vs 460.1, still, the shocking difference in price is the thing—that 7m stage will be thrown away every launch on a vehicle competing on price with F9/FH. It will not cost $2.8B per stage, nor $280M per stage, not even $28M per stage. $2.8M is probably not high enough for stage cost... but it has to be on the order of 500X cheaper than EUS.

mechazilla

The initial (or first revision, actually) contract was for Artemis I – III, this might cover ground if the insanely expensive EUS is delayed. Note that $200M for 3 LVSA adapters is $66.6M each for a frustum of a cone.

The RVacs are only used in space, so perhaps less spaghetti-piping at the bottom is more reliable for the gimbal engines on restart for landing?

It has a kick stage. Rocket Lab built the spacecraft based on their Photon upper stage.

hehe

Unsure why, & I can only assume an NSF diagram was made by observing tanked being moved and counting rings (albeit harder now that everything is inside).

The only current "real" payload in any numbers for LEO is Starlink V2 sats. The other payload is props for refilling HLS. That's all it's gonna fly, so non-tank volume is not super critical. Also:

The bulk of payload mass is generally residual props, so tanks make more sense.

From NSF vid showing ring counts for the current V1 vs the V2 version (the V2 ship in question already being stacked). 1 ring added, payload section reduced by 2 rings (not counting any ring section with even part of a dome in it). Useful for spitballing variant capabilities.

With the pressurized volume of an A380, you could put several hundred seats in a SS for short hops.

Yeah, avoiding direct entry, then using a similar “shuttle” SS to bring the crew home. Then the transfer vehicle only needs TPS scaled to aerobraking vs full reentry.

Is this the refilling burden for just the LMO transfer ship vs a normal SS with (as per your argument) X people? If that is the case it makes me think instead of return ships doing direct entry, why not have the transfer ship burdened with more than 2.5X refilling flights, and give it the dv to aerocapture to LEO with enough of a burn it can do it in 1 pass, then circularize?

Wow that Sierra Space might actually buy ULA. It's a bold strategy. Let's see if it pays off for 'em.

It could have to do with road transit to and from a port area, they might have to widen roads to make corners with something that long. Or perhaps even dredge closer to starbase to have a take-out on/off of a barge (however they ship it)