阿波罗时代几种不幸夭折的重型火箭回顾

阿波罗时代几种不幸夭折的重型火箭回顾

      现在中国开始论证载人登月工程。但载人登月火箭日后的“善后问题”人们关心的却不多。
    今天的中国显然不能够仅仅为单纯登月目标而研制火箭，更要从长远的实际应用基础上，从更大的使用范围空间上来规划载人登月火箭的具体构形。因此从这个角度去反思阿波罗时代土星系列火箭被抛弃的悲剧才更具现实意义。
     一，        土星1B的放弃完全没有必要。

    土星1B 英文数据（http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/saturnib.htm）


Credit: NASA American orbital launch vehicle. Improved Saturn I, with uprated first stage and Saturn IVB second stage (common with Saturn V) replacing Saturn IV. Used for earth orbit flight tests of Apollo CSM and LM.
From Stages to Saturn:
In July 1962, when NASA announced its intention to use the lunar orbit rendezvous, the space agency also released details on the two other Saturn vehicles. The three-stage Saturn V was planned for the lunar mission. A corollary decision called for development of an interim vehicle, the Saturn IB, to permit early testing of Apollo-Saturn hardware, such as the manned command and service modules, and the manned lunar excursion module in Earth orbit, as well as the S-IVB stage of the Saturn V. This decision permitted such flight testing a year before the Saturn V would be available. Chrysler's initial contract, completed late in 1962, called for 13 first-stage Saturn IB boosters and 8 Saturn I first-stage boosters.
In most respects, the new S-IB first-stage booster retained the size and shape of its S-I predecessor. The upper area was modified to take the larger-diameter and heavier S-IVB upper stage, and the aerodynamic fins were redesigned for the longer and heavier vehicle. The Saturn IB mounted its eight H-I engines in the same cluster pattern as the Saturn I, although successive improvements raised the total thrust of each engine to 890 000 newtons (200 000 pounds) and then to 912 000 newtons (205 000 pounds). The thrust increase raised the overall performance of the Saturn IB; the performance was further enhanced by cutting some 9000 kilograms of weight from the stage cluster. A more compact fin design accounted for part of the reduction, along with modifications to the propellant tanks, spider beam, and other components and removal of various tubes and brackets no longer required. Additional weight savings accrued from changes in the instrument unit and S-IVB, and the insights gained from the operational flights of Saturn I. Many times, engineers came to realize designs had been too conservative-too heavy or unnecessarily redundant. The production techniques worked out for the Saturn S-I stage were directly applicable to the S-IB, so no major retooling or change in the manufacturing sequence was required. With so few basic changes in the booster configuration, existing checkout and test procedures could also be applied. At Huntsville, appropriate modifications were made to the dynamic test stand to account for the different payload configurations of the Saturn IB and the same static test stand served just as well for the S-IB first stage, although engineers reworked the stand's second test position to accept additional S-IB stages.
LEO Payload: 18,600 kg (41,000 lb) to a 185 km orbit at 28.00 degrees. Development Cost $: 1,002.200 million. Launch Price $: 107.000 million in 1965 dollars in 1967 dollars.
Stage Data - Saturn IB
Stage 1. 1 x Saturn IB. Gross Mass: 448,648 kg (989,099 lb). Empty Mass: 41,594 kg (91,699 lb). Thrust (vac): 8,241.763 kN (1,852,822 lbf). Isp: 296 sec. Burn time: 155 sec. Isp(sl): 262 sec. Diameter: 6.52 m (21.39 ft). Span: 6.52 m (21.39 ft). Length: 24.48 m (80.31 ft). Propellants: Lox/Kerosene. No Engines: 8. Engine: H-1b. Status: Out of Production.
Stage 2. 1 x Saturn IVB (S-IB). Gross Mass: 118,800 kg (261,900 lb). Empty Mass: 12,900 kg (28,400 lb). Thrust (vac): 1,031.600 kN (231,913 lbf). Isp: 421 sec. Burn time: 475 sec. Isp(sl): 200 sec. Diameter: 6.61 m (21.68 ft). Span: 6.61 m (21.68 ft). Length: 17.80 m (58.30 ft). Propellants: Lox/LH2. No Engines: 1. Engine: J-2. Status: Out of Production. Comments: Saturn IB version of S-IVB stage. Due to lower payload payload, 300 kg saving in structure compared to Saturn V version. Due to deletion of restart requirement, 700 kg saving in propulsion system (primarily reduction in helium for restart).
Gross mass: 589,770 kg (1,300,220 lb).
Payload: 18,600 kg (41,000 lb).
Height: 51.00 m (167.00 ft).
Diameter: 6.61 m (21.68 ft).
Thrust: 7,295.10 kN (1,640,004 lbf).
Apogee: 185 km (114 mi).
First Launch: 1966.02.26.
Last Launch: 1975.07.15.
Number: 7 .
VS质子，大力神4火箭。土星1B技术领先性更明显，也是典型的环保火箭，低碳火箭。
     参考同时代的质子火箭，与土星1B运力相差无几，但到今天已经发射了300多枚，持续使用2018甚至2020年才可能退役。摊派到每枚火箭身上的研制费用已经极低了。
而当年如果土星1B不放弃，将会大大减少挑战者爆炸之后美国不得不“死改”大力神4火箭的困局，甚至根本不必要研制大力神四系列火箭。
     更重要的还在于保留了土星1B，其所用的J2低温大型上面级发动机也一样保留了下来，这会为后世实施深空探测保留了最重要的核心基石。而不必要现在又多花几十亿美元重新研制J2X低温发动机。
     二，        基于土星火箭的F1与J2发动机研制的典型中间运力火箭Jarvis火箭构想的放弃。
Jarvis 的英文数据（l http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/saturnib.htm）
Jarvis launch pad on Christmas Island in the mid-Pacific
Credit: Hughes American orbital launch vehicle. Launch vehicle planned for Pacific launch based on Saturn V engines, tooling. Masses, payload estimated.
LEO Payload: 38,000 kg (83,000 lb) to a 185 km orbit at 28.00 degrees. Payload: 13,000 kg (28,000 lb) to a GTO in 1985 dollars. Flyaway Unit Cost $: 260.000 million.
Stage Data - Jarvis
Stage 1. 1 x Jarvis-1. Gross Mass: 950,000 kg (2,090,000 lb). Empty Mass: 60,000 kg (132,000 lb). Thrust (vac): 15,481.260 kN (3,480,326 lbf). Isp: 304 sec. Burn time: 170 sec. Isp(sl): 265 sec. Diameter: 8.38 m (27.49 ft). Span: 8.38 m (27.49 ft). Length: 35.00 m (114.00 ft). Propellants: Lox/Kerosene. No Engines: 2. Engine: F-1. Status: Study 1985.
Stage 2. 1 x Jarvis-2. Gross Mass: 145,000 kg (319,000 lb). Empty Mass: 15,000 kg (33,000 lb). Thrust (vac): 1,031.983 kN (231,999 lbf). Isp: 425 sec. Burn time: 525 sec. Isp(sl): 200 sec. Diameter: 8.38 m (27.49 ft). Span: 8.38 m (27.49 ft). Length: 10.00 m (32.00 ft). Propellants: Lox/LH2. No Engines: 1. Engine: J-2. Status: Study 1985.
Stage 3. 1 x Jarvis-3. Gross Mass: 13,400 kg (29,500 lb). Empty Mass: 2,000 kg (4,400 lb). Thrust (vac): 3.920 kN (881 lbf). Isp: 312 sec. Burn time: 8,100 sec. Isp(sl): 0.0000 sec. Diameter: 5.18 m (16.99 ft). Span: 5.18 m (16.99 ft). Length: 3.00 m (9.80 ft). Propellants: N2O4/MMH. No Engines: 8. Engine: R-4D. Status: Study 1985.
Status: Study 1985.
Gross mass: 1,154,000 kg (2,544,000 lb).
Payload: 38,000 kg (83,000 lb).
Height: 58.00 m (190.00 ft).
Diameter: 8.38 m (27.49 ft).
Thrust: 13,495.20 kN (3,033,842 lbf).
Apogee: 185 km (114 mi).


      事实上这种基于F1与J2发动机的中间运力火箭只要研制成功，只使航天飞机照样飞行，但日后国际空间站的建设也一样会与今天极大不同。
     关键就在于Jarvis火箭的LEO运力有38吨，在发射重型空间站舱段平台上具有极大的优势。
     同样，今天美国研制韦伯望远镜时也会容易得多。因为这种火箭使用R4D常温上面级时其GTO运力就已经达13吨，已经超过阿里安五火箭；如果改为使用半人马座低温上面级，GTO运力提升为17吨也不是什么难事。
      更重要还在于Jarvis中间运力火箭的芯级直径有8米之大，整流罩直径也一样有8米之巨。这将非常有利于韦伯望远镜之类特殊构形空间飞行器的研制，只使不使用拆叠镜片设计，韦伯望远镜的观测镜面直径也能够做到6米水平，这将能够大大降低韦伯望远镜的研制难度。
     事实上Jarvis的研制构想也是提出于二十世纪八十年代，韦伯望远镜的预研构思也是从那个时代开始。如果Jarvis火箭能够同时上马研制，现在韦伯望远镜早已经可以发射升空了。
     Jarvis这样的LEO运力只有38吨，GTO运力只有13吨的中间运力型完全是可以轻松养活的。仅仅是NASA的特殊构形深空探测器与NRO的巨型电子侦察卫星，就完全能够养Jarvis火箭。
      与EELV，阿里安五相比，Jarvis的运力优势倒是其次，而其所具有的大直径优势才更具决定性。由其是发射那些N年才进行一次的“独苗”深空探测器优势更大。与EELV的 5米直径整流罩相比，Jarvis 的8米的整流罩直径已经能够做很多很多的事了。
只使在继承土星五的发动机遗产上，Jarvis火箭同时使用上F1与J2发动机，也就是说只要Jarvis研制成功，并生存下来，就完全保住了土星五火箭的命脉。日后美国要重新构建土星五级别的火箭将易如反掌。

      总结章，“通勤”型中间运力火箭的研制必须脱离载人登月工程从“战略高度”来独立建设。
      参考土星1B与Jarvis火箭的放弃。美国人在处理土星五火箭的遗产问题上的态度是极为轻率与漫不经心的。如果阿波罗工程的规划者后期的工作作风能够稍微严谨点。象土星期1B火箭那样的现成版重型火箭的放弃将完全是不可想象的事情。
      因为同时的苏联质子火箭就摆在那里。同时期的苏联就能够养活质子火箭，美国为什么就不能够了？！
      而且那时期美国也一样有重型深空探测器要发射，如火星的维京探测器与今天还在飞行的旅行者探测器都是在二十世纪七十年代发射的。为什么有现成运载能力与可靠性更强的的土星1B火箭不使用而要转而使用大力神三系列火箭来发射？！与大力神三系列重型火箭相比，土星1B的优势是全方位的，只使与今天的EELV与阿里安五火箭相比，使用煤油与液氢发动机的土星1B在环保低碳方面也一样不落下风。
      事实上只要当时的美国政府有决心，只使航天飞机工程上马，土星1B也完全能够象质子火箭那样发展成为一种“通勤”重型火箭甚至中间运力型火箭，捆绑大型助推器就行。
       因为土星1B的芯级直径有6米多，整流罩直径也可以做到6米多，而航天飞机的货舱直径只有4米多。这就决定了土星1B在发射“特殊构形”深空探测器与巨型电子侦察卫星上用处很大，很多航天飞机不便发射的“大体积东西”装入土星1B的6米整流罩却极为容易。
      因此，土星1B与Jarvis火箭是典型的“态度性格决定命运”的例子。
      今天美国不得不再次投入巨资重复研制SLS火箭来发射星座载人飞船（或者改进德尔塔四H发射星座载人飞船的地球轨道版），原因就出于当年美国人极端轻视对阿波罗具体工程成果的持续继承发展。
      而前苏联的质子火箭，联盟火箭与联盟飞船东改改，西改改，却一值持续使用到今天。由其是联盟火箭与联盟飞船，只使再持续使用上50年也没大问题，那只不过是一种“通勤空间的土”而已。而同时代的经典环保（那时没有低碳概念，但环保概念却是有的，质子与大力神三都是毒火箭，土星1B却是先进的煤油主芯级与低温上面级火箭）火箭土星1B，却仅仅使用了不足十次就轻率抛弃了。
      如果土星1B能够象质子火箭那样持续生存下来，并持续发射上300多枚，衍生出N多构形，起码后世的人类深空探测器与载人飞船研制史将会发生巨大的改变。至少星座工程重启时美国就不必要研制战神一火箭了，而仅仅这一项也能够节省出30，40亿美元的巨大资金。
       只可惜世上没有后悔药。而这一切才是更值得今天同样在进行载人登月工程前期规划的中国人必须深入反思的。
我们做好了如何“善后养活”中国人自己的载人登月火箭与发动机的一切预案了吗？！或者我们也是否意识到如何持续养活中国人自己的“土星1B与土星五火箭”的重要性了吗？！这一切可都是纳税人的血与汗。

高凉陈君

2012-1-13


阿波罗时代几种不幸夭折的重型火箭回顾

      现在中国开始论证载人登月工程。但载人登月火箭日后的“善后问题”人们关心的却不多。
    今天的中国显然不能够仅仅为单纯登月目标而研制火箭，更要从长远的实际应用基础上，从更大的使用范围空间上来规划载人登月火箭的具体构形。因此从这个角度去反思阿波罗时代土星系列火箭被抛弃的悲剧才更具现实意义。
     一，        土星1B的放弃完全没有必要。

    土星1B 英文数据（http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/saturnib.htm）


Credit: NASA American orbital launch vehicle. Improved Saturn I, with uprated first stage and Saturn IVB second stage (common with Saturn V) replacing Saturn IV. Used for earth orbit flight tests of Apollo CSM and LM.
From Stages to Saturn:
In July 1962, when NASA announced its intention to use the lunar orbit rendezvous, the space agency also released details on the two other Saturn vehicles. The three-stage Saturn V was planned for the lunar mission. A corollary decision called for development of an interim vehicle, the Saturn IB, to permit early testing of Apollo-Saturn hardware, such as the manned command and service modules, and the manned lunar excursion module in Earth orbit, as well as the S-IVB stage of the Saturn V. This decision permitted such flight testing a year before the Saturn V would be available. Chrysler's initial contract, completed late in 1962, called for 13 first-stage Saturn IB boosters and 8 Saturn I first-stage boosters.
In most respects, the new S-IB first-stage booster retained the size and shape of its S-I predecessor. The upper area was modified to take the larger-diameter and heavier S-IVB upper stage, and the aerodynamic fins were redesigned for the longer and heavier vehicle. The Saturn IB mounted its eight H-I engines in the same cluster pattern as the Saturn I, although successive improvements raised the total thrust of each engine to 890 000 newtons (200 000 pounds) and then to 912 000 newtons (205 000 pounds). The thrust increase raised the overall performance of the Saturn IB; the performance was further enhanced by cutting some 9000 kilograms of weight from the stage cluster. A more compact fin design accounted for part of the reduction, along with modifications to the propellant tanks, spider beam, and other components and removal of various tubes and brackets no longer required. Additional weight savings accrued from changes in the instrument unit and S-IVB, and the insights gained from the operational flights of Saturn I. Many times, engineers came to realize designs had been too conservative-too heavy or unnecessarily redundant. The production techniques worked out for the Saturn S-I stage were directly applicable to the S-IB, so no major retooling or change in the manufacturing sequence was required. With so few basic changes in the booster configuration, existing checkout and test procedures could also be applied. At Huntsville, appropriate modifications were made to the dynamic test stand to account for the different payload configurations of the Saturn IB and the same static test stand served just as well for the S-IB first stage, although engineers reworked the stand's second test position to accept additional S-IB stages.
LEO Payload: 18,600 kg (41,000 lb) to a 185 km orbit at 28.00 degrees. Development Cost $: 1,002.200 million. Launch Price $: 107.000 million in 1965 dollars in 1967 dollars.
Stage Data - Saturn IB
Stage 1. 1 x Saturn IB. Gross Mass: 448,648 kg (989,099 lb). Empty Mass: 41,594 kg (91,699 lb). Thrust (vac): 8,241.763 kN (1,852,822 lbf). Isp: 296 sec. Burn time: 155 sec. Isp(sl): 262 sec. Diameter: 6.52 m (21.39 ft). Span: 6.52 m (21.39 ft). Length: 24.48 m (80.31 ft). Propellants: Lox/Kerosene. No Engines: 8. Engine: H-1b. Status: Out of Production.
Stage 2. 1 x Saturn IVB (S-IB). Gross Mass: 118,800 kg (261,900 lb). Empty Mass: 12,900 kg (28,400 lb). Thrust (vac): 1,031.600 kN (231,913 lbf). Isp: 421 sec. Burn time: 475 sec. Isp(sl): 200 sec. Diameter: 6.61 m (21.68 ft). Span: 6.61 m (21.68 ft). Length: 17.80 m (58.30 ft). Propellants: Lox/LH2. No Engines: 1. Engine: J-2. Status: Out of Production. Comments: Saturn IB version of S-IVB stage. Due to lower payload payload, 300 kg saving in structure compared to Saturn V version. Due to deletion of restart requirement, 700 kg saving in propulsion system (primarily reduction in helium for restart).
Gross mass: 589,770 kg (1,300,220 lb).
Payload: 18,600 kg (41,000 lb).
Height: 51.00 m (167.00 ft).
Diameter: 6.61 m (21.68 ft).
Thrust: 7,295.10 kN (1,640,004 lbf).
Apogee: 185 km (114 mi).
First Launch: 1966.02.26.
Last Launch: 1975.07.15.
Number: 7 .
VS质子，大力神4火箭。土星1B技术领先性更明显，也是典型的环保火箭，低碳火箭。
     参考同时代的质子火箭，与土星1B运力相差无几，但到今天已经发射了300多枚，持续使用2018甚至2020年才可能退役。摊派到每枚火箭身上的研制费用已经极低了。
而当年如果土星1B不放弃，将会大大减少挑战者爆炸之后美国不得不“死改”大力神4火箭的困局，甚至根本不必要研制大力神四系列火箭。
     更重要的还在于保留了土星1B，其所用的J2低温大型上面级发动机也一样保留了下来，这会为后世实施深空探测保留了最重要的核心基石。而不必要现在又多花几十亿美元重新研制J2X低温发动机。
     二，        基于土星火箭的F1与J2发动机研制的典型中间运力火箭Jarvis火箭构想的放弃。
Jarvis 的英文数据（l http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/saturnib.htm）
Jarvis launch pad on Christmas Island in the mid-Pacific
Credit: Hughes American orbital launch vehicle. Launch vehicle planned for Pacific launch based on Saturn V engines, tooling. Masses, payload estimated.
LEO Payload: 38,000 kg (83,000 lb) to a 185 km orbit at 28.00 degrees. Payload: 13,000 kg (28,000 lb) to a GTO in 1985 dollars. Flyaway Unit Cost $: 260.000 million.
Stage Data - Jarvis
Stage 1. 1 x Jarvis-1. Gross Mass: 950,000 kg (2,090,000 lb). Empty Mass: 60,000 kg (132,000 lb). Thrust (vac): 15,481.260 kN (3,480,326 lbf). Isp: 304 sec. Burn time: 170 sec. Isp(sl): 265 sec. Diameter: 8.38 m (27.49 ft). Span: 8.38 m (27.49 ft). Length: 35.00 m (114.00 ft). Propellants: Lox/Kerosene. No Engines: 2. Engine: F-1. Status: Study 1985.
Stage 2. 1 x Jarvis-2. Gross Mass: 145,000 kg (319,000 lb). Empty Mass: 15,000 kg (33,000 lb). Thrust (vac): 1,031.983 kN (231,999 lbf). Isp: 425 sec. Burn time: 525 sec. Isp(sl): 200 sec. Diameter: 8.38 m (27.49 ft). Span: 8.38 m (27.49 ft). Length: 10.00 m (32.00 ft). Propellants: Lox/LH2. No Engines: 1. Engine: J-2. Status: Study 1985.
Stage 3. 1 x Jarvis-3. Gross Mass: 13,400 kg (29,500 lb). Empty Mass: 2,000 kg (4,400 lb). Thrust (vac): 3.920 kN (881 lbf). Isp: 312 sec. Burn time: 8,100 sec. Isp(sl): 0.0000 sec. Diameter: 5.18 m (16.99 ft). Span: 5.18 m (16.99 ft). Length: 3.00 m (9.80 ft). Propellants: N2O4/MMH. No Engines: 8. Engine: R-4D. Status: Study 1985.
Status: Study 1985.
Gross mass: 1,154,000 kg (2,544,000 lb).
Payload: 38,000 kg (83,000 lb).
Height: 58.00 m (190.00 ft).
Diameter: 8.38 m (27.49 ft).
Thrust: 13,495.20 kN (3,033,842 lbf).
Apogee: 185 km (114 mi).


      事实上这种基于F1与J2发动机的中间运力火箭只要研制成功，只使航天飞机照样飞行，但日后国际空间站的建设也一样会与今天极大不同。
     关键就在于Jarvis火箭的LEO运力有38吨，在发射重型空间站舱段平台上具有极大的优势。
     同样，今天美国研制韦伯望远镜时也会容易得多。因为这种火箭使用R4D常温上面级时其GTO运力就已经达13吨，已经超过阿里安五火箭；如果改为使用半人马座低温上面级，GTO运力提升为17吨也不是什么难事。
      更重要还在于Jarvis中间运力火箭的芯级直径有8米之大，整流罩直径也一样有8米之巨。这将非常有利于韦伯望远镜之类特殊构形空间飞行器的研制，只使不使用拆叠镜片设计，韦伯望远镜的观测镜面直径也能够做到6米水平，这将能够大大降低韦伯望远镜的研制难度。
     事实上Jarvis的研制构想也是提出于二十世纪八十年代，韦伯望远镜的预研构思也是从那个时代开始。如果Jarvis火箭能够同时上马研制，现在韦伯望远镜早已经可以发射升空了。
     Jarvis这样的LEO运力只有38吨，GTO运力只有13吨的中间运力型完全是可以轻松养活的。仅仅是NASA的特殊构形深空探测器与NRO的巨型电子侦察卫星，就完全能够养Jarvis火箭。
      与EELV，阿里安五相比，Jarvis的运力优势倒是其次，而其所具有的大直径优势才更具决定性。由其是发射那些N年才进行一次的“独苗”深空探测器优势更大。与EELV的 5米直径整流罩相比，Jarvis 的8米的整流罩直径已经能够做很多很多的事了。
只使在继承土星五的发动机遗产上，Jarvis火箭同时使用上F1与J2发动机，也就是说只要Jarvis研制成功，并生存下来，就完全保住了土星五火箭的命脉。日后美国要重新构建土星五级别的火箭将易如反掌。

      总结章，“通勤”型中间运力火箭的研制必须脱离载人登月工程从“战略高度”来独立建设。
      参考土星1B与Jarvis火箭的放弃。美国人在处理土星五火箭的遗产问题上的态度是极为轻率与漫不经心的。如果阿波罗工程的规划者后期的工作作风能够稍微严谨点。象土星期1B火箭那样的现成版重型火箭的放弃将完全是不可想象的事情。
      因为同时的苏联质子火箭就摆在那里。同时期的苏联就能够养活质子火箭，美国为什么就不能够了？！
      而且那时期美国也一样有重型深空探测器要发射，如火星的维京探测器与今天还在飞行的旅行者探测器都是在二十世纪七十年代发射的。为什么有现成运载能力与可靠性更强的的土星1B火箭不使用而要转而使用大力神三系列火箭来发射？！与大力神三系列重型火箭相比，土星1B的优势是全方位的，只使与今天的EELV与阿里安五火箭相比，使用煤油与液氢发动机的土星1B在环保低碳方面也一样不落下风。
      事实上只要当时的美国政府有决心，只使航天飞机工程上马，土星1B也完全能够象质子火箭那样发展成为一种“通勤”重型火箭甚至中间运力型火箭，捆绑大型助推器就行。
       因为土星1B的芯级直径有6米多，整流罩直径也可以做到6米多，而航天飞机的货舱直径只有4米多。这就决定了土星1B在发射“特殊构形”深空探测器与巨型电子侦察卫星上用处很大，很多航天飞机不便发射的“大体积东西”装入土星1B的6米整流罩却极为容易。
      因此，土星1B与Jarvis火箭是典型的“态度性格决定命运”的例子。
      今天美国不得不再次投入巨资重复研制SLS火箭来发射星座载人飞船（或者改进德尔塔四H发射星座载人飞船的地球轨道版），原因就出于当年美国人极端轻视对阿波罗具体工程成果的持续继承发展。
      而前苏联的质子火箭，联盟火箭与联盟飞船东改改，西改改，却一值持续使用到今天。由其是联盟火箭与联盟飞船，只使再持续使用上50年也没大问题，那只不过是一种“通勤空间的土”而已。而同时代的经典环保（那时没有低碳概念，但环保概念却是有的，质子与大力神三都是毒火箭，土星1B却是先进的煤油主芯级与低温上面级火箭）火箭土星1B，却仅仅使用了不足十次就轻率抛弃了。
      如果土星1B能够象质子火箭那样持续生存下来，并持续发射上300多枚，衍生出N多构形，起码后世的人类深空探测器与载人飞船研制史将会发生巨大的改变。至少星座工程重启时美国就不必要研制战神一火箭了，而仅仅这一项也能够节省出30，40亿美元的巨大资金。
       只可惜世上没有后悔药。而这一切才是更值得今天同样在进行载人登月工程前期规划的中国人必须深入反思的。
我们做好了如何“善后养活”中国人自己的载人登月火箭与发动机的一切预案了吗？！或者我们也是否意识到如何持续养活中国人自己的“土星1B与土星五火箭”的重要性了吗？！这一切可都是纳税人的血与汗。

高凉陈君

2012-1-13