Brainstorm -- Uses for a small 'construction shack' in 28deg LEO

Last week's discussion went off on its own directions but not the ones I had
hoped.

Suppose the 'safe haven' were built to handle post-Hubble human missions
from a Soyuz pad in Kourou.

What sort of commercial opportunities does this enable?

What sort of orbit-to-orbit space assembly tasks could such a 'construction
shack' enable?

What sort of features therefore should be included on any 'safe haven' built
mainly for Hubble
BUT with the more likely scenario that it would be exploited AFTER the
successful shuttle-based
Hubble repair, when it had become 'space surplus'?

--------

MSNBC - How a 'safe haven' could help save Hubble
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6671864/
Updated: 6:59 p.m. ET Dec. 7, 2004

An "out-of-the-box" plan to put a new space habitat in orbit could be a
leading contender for saving the Hubble Space
Telescope, private-sector analysts say in a proposal being prepared for
NASA. The habitat could be used as an emergency safe haven during the Hubble
servicing mission, and then could serve as a base for wider commercial and
exploratory space travel.

"Jim Oberg" skrev i en meddelelse
...

Suppose the 'safe haven' were built to handle post-Hubble human missions
from a Soyuz pad in Kourou.

What sort of commercial opportunities does this enable?

What sort of orbit-to-orbit space assembly tasks could such a
'construction shack' enable?

I suppose it depends much on how it could be expanded. Imagine we learn
how to use raw metal, such as spent upper stages, to build space station
modules from. A possible method could be to melt the metal in a rotating,
egg-shaped crucible, perhaps using a parabolic concentrator of sunlight.
Open a hole at the end of the egg, where the axis of rotation passes
through. Then we would have a beam of metal vapour. Let this beam
illuminate, say, an inflated mold. By this method we might build pressure
vessels that would dwarf Skylab. Perhaps even going as far as making a dry
dock. So we start by launching something akin to a Mir core module by
Proton (from a low latitude launch site), and then the Proton upper stage is
retained and later fed to the crucible to expand the station, with perhaps
the upper stage of the Sojus or similar launcher that sent the first crew to
the station added.
Of course a simpler way to expand the station beyond a single core module
might be to use the upper stage directly - once the residual propellant had
been thoroughly baked out. Sort of as if Skylab had been made from the S-4B
stage *after* launch.
Then satellites could be made that are too heavy or voluminous to be
launched by any single launcher. Perhaps parts of the satellites, such as
parabolic antennas, could be made with the same technique, or trusses made
by reshaping the metal of the upper stage of the launcher that put the rest
of the satellite there. I understand that beam builders, units which can
build beams from sheet metal, have already been demonstrated long ago.
Certainly such a capability will be necessary if we want to industrialize
space, such as by dr. O'Neill's idea. If such a facility can be built and
operated profitably, it will be one of these small steps that are so
necessary since we cannot expect Big Government to up and build space
colonies in one big program.

Jon Lennart Beck.

On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 22:13:58 GMT, in a place far, far away, "Jim
Oberg" made the phosphor on my monitor
glow in such a way as to indicate that:


Last week's discussion went off on its own directions but not the ones I had
hoped.

That's Usenet...

Well, the smart thing for NASA to do is to ONLY launch the Safe
Haven/construction shack if a Shuttle that was servicing HST suffered
some sort of distress that required a 2nd Shuttle to be launched on a
rescue mission. I would guess that maybe only one in a 100 Shuttles
would require rescue, so it would be more effective to keep the Safe
Haven on the ground until it was needed. Come to think of it, a Safe
Haven that could be launched on a contingency basis would be useful for
*any* Shuttle mission, even those that go to ISS.

On the other hand, to answer your question about using the Safe Haven
after a Shuttle mission, I don't know if any of the Architecture
studies being conducted by Code T (Exploration) are featuring Earth
Orbit rendezvous in any manner that could benefit from a construction
shack. Most seem to use robotic assembly.

Well, the smart thing for NASA to do is to ONLY launch the Safe
Haven/construction shack if a Shuttle that was servicing HST suffered
some sort of distress that required a 2nd Shuttle to be launched on a
rescue mission.

One snafu: You probably want to be sure a safe haven actually works
before you need to use it.

-- Neil

"Neil Halelamien" wrote in message
ups.com...
Well, the smart thing for NASA to do is to ONLY launch the Safe
Haven/construction shack if a Shuttle that was servicing HST suffered
some sort of distress that required a 2nd Shuttle to be launched on a
rescue mission.

One snafu: You probably want to be sure a safe haven actually works
before you need to use it.

And you'd want to make sure that there was no "launch accident" when trying
to launch the safe haven.

Jeff
--
Remove icky phrase from email address to get a valid address.

"Jim Oberg" wrote in message
...

Suppose the 'safe haven' were built to handle post-Hubble human missions
from a Soyuz pad in Kourou.

What sort of commercial opportunities does this enable?

For the

Clearly it would give the Russians a tourist destination that was completely
independant of ISS. Perhaps the Chinese would be interested in using this
in some way.

What sort of orbit-to-orbit space assembly tasks could such a
'construction
shack' enable?

You could use it for anything you're not allowed to do at ISS. For example,
any experiments or activities that would disrupt the zero gravity
environment of ISS. I think orbital assembly is one of those sorts of
activities.

You'd be able to use it as an assembly point for just about anything. CEV
testing and assembly spring to mind as something NASA might want to do at a
location other than ISS. Unfortunately by the time CEV is to be tested,
your safe haven may be getting rather old.

What sort of features therefore should be included on any 'safe haven'
built
mainly for Hubble
BUT with the more likely scenario that it would be exploited AFTER the
successful shuttle-based
Hubble repair, when it had become 'space surplus'?

Airlock for EVA (to support the orbital assembly role).

Larger solar panels than absolutely necessary for use as a safe haven.

Regenerative O2 supply, but only if it is to be permanently manned.

Built in reboost and refueling capabilities.

Rendezvous and docking hardware to support resupply from unmanned vehicles
(e.g. Progress, ATV, HTV).

Ability to resupply with O2, N2, H2O as needed.

Equipment should be replaceable in orbit.

Jeff
--
Remove icky phrase from email address to get a valid address.