We’d be riding yet another turtle on its slowpoke way to parts unknown, only instead of being where we are today, we’d be back to square one. No one can tell me that they’ll shave years off development just because the configuration is a little different and the equipment design a little less innovative. Same thing with the EELV-based designs.

The problem is bigger than how you stack the rockets. It’s the culture of constant self-doubt that is making progress nearly impossible. Too many interests are looking out only for themselves rather than the nation’s overall objectives. And, as has well been said, we are stuck in a rut entirely of our own making.

This reflects a growing problem within the US, not just confined to NASA. As a society, we have grown so profligate and litigious that many projects like Orion are significantly delayed, simply because there’s too much bureaucracy, meddling, and money. No one wants to trim the fat, because everyone’s got their fingers in the pie.

A comparable example of this trait is the Ground Zero reconstruction in lower NYC. Eight years after 9-11, and not a single building or permanent memorial is up. Litigation still continues. Compare this with the Tokyo SkyTree project, a 2000′ ft tower under construction that it scheduled to be be finished in less than 3 yrs.

A further example is the TARP recovery bill, which in 10 months has created a total of 30,000 jobs (as opposed to the sum bonuses one Wall St. investment firm paid to its execs out of the TARP monies in FY Q2…monies that could have funded 100,000 jobs at 30K a yr).

A disturbing trend, pointed out by Carl Sagan in the 1990s, was the lack of ‘pure’ science research, and the near-monopoly of corporate-funded research with ‘tech’ applications as endgoals. He reasoned that corporate oversight in research effected a stasis on ‘hard’ science research, while investing billions in developing a better cellphone/TV/whathaveyou.

It also has been posited that science has reached an endpoint as far as ‘hardcore’ technologies are concerned. Yes, we can build smaller microprocessors and smarter cars…but initiatives like the SST, the SpacePlace, etc have been stalled since the 1970s. I sense that we hit a ceiling with the shuttle, one we’ll never eclipse unless we undergo a quantum shift in the philosophy and ethics of science research coupled by a forward-thinking approach that eschews the cumbersome ‘pork barrel’ waste and is more focused on results. As a culture, we seem to have lost view of the ‘grand scheme’…resulting in an ossification of initiative similar to that experienced by Qing dynasty China (who labeled Western science as barbarous), Middle Eqypt (who ignored the use of horses) and Mayan civilization (who built roads but did not utilize the cart-wheel)

It’s easy for people to chant “yes we can!” when a political candidate discusses developing clean coal tech…but actually getting it to work requires hard science. Just imagine if we handled the Manhattan Project the way we’re handling the manned space program…we’d have the atom bomb developed around the same time Elvis recorded “Jailhouse Rock”. Some of this stuff is so important, we can’t waste time ‘milking it’.

Like Buzz said, the journey from Explorer 1/X-15 to Apollo 11 took a little over 10 years…

Perhaps the 60s were a renaissance decade…and we’re now stuck in a rut, both culturally and scientifically. Fin de seicle type stuff.

The Protons are still considered under development. The Ares I is also under development, and would be more powerful than any Proton. The Ares I would be less powerful than the Angara A7, however, but more powerful than the Angara A5. The Angara is under development as well.

The Falcon 9 Heavy is in the late stages of development and would have a thrust greater than that of the Ares I and the Angara A5.

The Ares V super heavy lift vehicle, of course, would be in a whole different league altogether and would have more than four times the lifting power of the Angara A7. The Ares V would be 35 per cent more powerful than the most powerful rocket in history, the Saturn V.

Source: Wikipedia.

“the Atlas III and Atlas V use Russian-designed/built NPO Energomash RD-180 engines. These engines are now prepared for license production by Pratt and Whitney company in the US.” – source: Wikipedia

The strongest rocket that IMO could be made available again is the the russian Enegija – used once to lift the russian Shuttle. The RD-18x engines are directly decendants from the Energija.

Next to that I’ve read in in the Wernher von Braun biography “Dr. Space” that the Shuttle engines are revamped versions of second stage Saturn engines desigend by von Braun’s team. Here also NASA is using – granted: updated – 60s tech.

Next to that the Vulcain engines developed privately for Ariane-5 are also very powerful and modern boosters.

Nevertheless: If they use Orion to land on the moon again be sure I’ll be glued to the TV screen…(-;

In the same vein, part of the reason government taxes us so much is because they pour so much money into welfare programs that don’t teach people how to fish (as the old saying goes) but just gives them enough fish to get them to keep voting for the guy that gives them the fish.

So while the government is wasting money on cradle to grave handouts, we don’t have any money left to fund a truly exciting new space vehicle development program like Apollo was and the shuttle originally was. NASA’s funding is only .6% of the USA’s yearly budget!

If you look at what we have in terms of overall national power, we actually have it pretty good, assuming that Project Constellation is maintained.

We still have both EELV’s (Boeing’s Delta and Lockheed Martin’s Atlas, both now jointly operated), either of which can easily serve as the world’s most powerful boosters (aside from the Shuttle STS). In fact, the Heavy versions of both are, I believe, the most expendable powerful operational rockets in the world today (though nothing compared to the Saturn V). See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_heavy_lift_launch_systems

We also have the Falcon 9 Heavy, a privately funded vehicle whose development is progressing nicely. We have already have a prototype private space station in orbit, operated by Las Vegas-based Bigelow Aerospace. Virgin Galactic is using Burt Rutan’s technology for its VSS Enterprise-class spaceships. The COTS program which has contracted out for Spacex’s Falcon and Orbital Science’s Cygnus program and other hardware under development, is doing well.

And then there is the X-37 and probably a number of other highly guarded, highly developed programs not generally known to the public. Some of the latter include top secret payloads about which nothing except the name is known.

What can be done with this technology is limited only by the imagination and the laws of physics.

See also “Space Shuttle, Jr.,” a magazine article I found after posting my initial message above about the X-37. Comes complete with large photos.

http://www.airspacemag.com/space-exploration/Space-Shuttle-Jr.html?c=y&page=4