On Thu, 28 Jul 2011 11:12:48 -0700 (PDT), Matt Wiser
wrote:


Basically stick the MPCV onto a ATV cargo module that then serves as a
equipment-service module and crew living area:
http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n1107...ope/index.html

I think this is a good idea, except that NASA would "need" to structure
the mission such that complete failure of the ATV would not leave the
Orion, excuse me MPCV, crew stranded.

Concur with the idea. And it means an equipment/hab module is
available sooner for BEO operations. And if that involves ESA
astronauts flying on these missions, so be it.

The first BEO mission, though, will in all likelihood, be a repeat of
Apollo 8.

Note again, that Pat's description is not the same as ESA's proposal.
ESA only wants to marry Orion/MPCV with the ATV's service module. The
pressurized MPLM-like module is not included. There is no way to get
from the MPCV to the pressurized module even if it were, without
cutting a hatch through the heat shield like Gemini 1, and that starts
making the whole idea more expensive than just using Lockheed's
service module (and since the MPCV contract includes the service
module, we're probably not going to save any money by splitting it
between Lockheed and EADS anyway, once contract termination fees and
renegotiation kicks in.)

Much easier to launch an MPLM-like vessel along with the MPCV the same
way the LM and Docking Module were carried by Apollo/Saturn. That's
something we should seriously be negotiating with Europe or Japan to
provide for the first BEO missions.

This works perfectly fine for Dragon on Falcon-Heavy as well.

Brian