Anyone thinking of resurrecting the Saturn V should consider that:
- Saturn V is now 50 years old technology, we've moved on a lot since then and remaking it would mean essentially reinventing it with current materials and technology. It wouldn't be Saturn anymore.
Correct, but it would have Saturn's basic layout, which is known to work well.
Of course, technology really
hasn't advanced that far in the 34 years since the last Saturn flew. Rocket engines are marginally better, and materials are a little lighter. So you'd have an uprated Saturn clone.
But since we're speaking of Saturn, one of the things that made the Saturn family so appealing was its room for growth. Go to astronautix and look at all the stretched-stage and solid or liquid rocket boosted upgrades that were put on the drawing board for the Saturn V. Saturn IB would have been replaced with a "Saturn II" or something similar.
I see no real means for building a bigger Ares I or Ares V. They look like dead-end designs to me. This big and no bigger. As it is Ares I had already proven to be too optimistic, and they have no way to boost the payload. They're loading it down with shock absorbers and other useles junk.
Sending up two rockets makes sense, it's actually the most sensible approach because EOR is way better than LOR if you want to send some real mass downrange. It has its issues but it was used with Gemini so it's not new ground by a loooong way.
For some, high-mass, missions, yes, multiple launches make sense. But only if you have a launch vehicle reliable enough to not get scrubbed five times every time you try to launch it (ahem...Space Shuttle).
Saturn V launched in bad weather, and even took a lightning strike. Yes, it was a bad idea to launch in a thunderstorm, but at least we found out the vehicle was tough. New launch rules were written after Apollo 12, but imagine if there was a second vehicle waiting in orbit with its LH2 venting away. How bad would the "go fever" be?