http://www.google.com/images?q=jarvis+launch+vehicle&rls=com.microsoft%3Aen-us&hl=en&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&ei=dnoOUtfwIKWw2gWShIGYBA&ved=0CCUQsAQ

The Saturns weer not that well made, and much is to obsolete to use now (1960’s electronics?!!) though the engines weer good, adn making new hulls are easy, so folks have based designs for big boosters on them before (like the Jarvis booster [http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/jarvis.htm] named after the companies astrounaut Gregory Jarvis who died no the Challenger [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregory_Jarvis].).

You need to remember little of the $30B to develop a booster is nessisary for the booster. Hence why commercially developed boosters cost about 1/4th as much. But of course voter support comes from the “waste” spread aronud the country. Otherwise losing all US space capabilities dosen’t really niterest the public much.

We actually do not have the blue prints for the Saturn launch vehicles.

Each part that was contracted out was individually hand made. In many cases if something didn’t fit right things were changed on the fly with just and engineers approval and sign off. No records were kept or made.

A fuel pump on one rocket might not fit the next rocket.

Since its one launch every 4 years in the present plan than a 1/4 or the NASA budget is reasonable for NASA.