View Single Post
  #7  
Old August 23rd 19, 04:10 PM posted to sci.space.policy
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 687
Default NASA confirms mission to Jupiter?s moon Europa to explore its icy oceans

On Friday, August 23, 2019 at 4:15:21 AM UTC-7, Jeff Findley wrote:
In article ,
says...
A Falcon Heavy with an added solid kick stage could do the job, but it
would take longer to get there and require flybys. A Delta IV Heavy
with a solid kick stage could do it as well, but I'm not sure ULA could
produce anymore Delta IV Heavies.


Or wait until SpaceX/NASA perfects in-space refueling and refuel a Falcon 9
upper stage or two.
Sure it'll take time and development, but I'd bet would still be cheaper and
faster than SLS!


That'd certainly do it. Then you wouldn't even need a Falcon Heavy for
this mission, since the payload is so light to begin with. Just several
Falcon 9 propellant flights to refill the upper stage(es) with the
payload on top. And in the end it would still cost a lot less than an
SLS flight.

I wouldn't bet on that happening though, since SpaceX is interested in
refueling for Starship, not Falcon. And Congress wouldn't fund this
until SLS is dead and buried, which I don't anticipate happening anytime
soon. IMHO, as long as Shelby is still Senator, SLS will be funded.

Here is a great article on the politics of on-orbit refueling, in case
you missed it (sorry about the word wrap).

The SLS rocket may have curbed development of on-orbit refueling for a
decade "Boeing became furious and tried to get me fired."
ERIC BERGER - 8/1/2019, 10:42 AM
https://arstechnica.com/science/2019...ist-says-that-
boeing-squelched-work-on-propellant-depots/

Note the quotes from the Tweets of George Sowers. I saw those Tweets in
real time and I knew there would be an Ars Technica article on them the
next day. No way would George Sowers have ever said anything like that
publicly when he was working for ULA when he "was leading the advanced
programs group at United Launch Alliance".

The above is the reason that in orbit refueling has been an uphill
battle to get funded. It also explains why ULA talked about reusable
ACES upper stages, but never actually explained how you'd refuel them.

Jeff

--
All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone.
These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends,
employer, or any organization that I am a member of.




Too bad, orbital refueling looks promising:

"A startup company that plans to develop tankers for refueling satellites has
completed a key test of its technology on the International Space Station.

Orbit Fab announced June 18 it completed tests of an experiment called Furphy on
the ISS, demonstrating the ability to transfer water between two satellite
testbeds. At the end of the tests, the water was transferred into the station’s
own water supply, the first time a private payload supplied the station with
water in that manner.

“The Furphy mission has allowed us to test the viability of refueling satellites
in orbit,” Jeremy Schiel, cofounder and chief marketing officer of Orbit Fab,
said in a statement. The tests, he said, were intended to measure the
effectiveness of the company’s propellant transfer technology in microgravity
and its ability to handle issues like sloshing."

See:

https://spacenews.com/orbit-fab-demo...nology-on-iss/