A Return to the Moon by the Apollo 11 50th Anniversary.

In the 1960s my mentor, Garvin vonEschen, at the Ohio State University developed a tripropellant engine using 55% Lithium, 20% Fluorine and 25% Hydrogen by weight.

Nano-scale fluorine ice particles along with nano-scale lithium powder suspended in a hydrogen liquid creates a self-igniting mono-propellant that detonates at room temperature and produces an exhaust speed of 5,224 m/sec at sea level rising to 5,500 m/sec in vacuum, with a propellant density of 0.232 kg/liter.

So, the two stage rocket described previously has 5,779.8 litres of propellant in the second stage and 34,960.9 litres of propellant in the first stage.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...kwell_P333.jpg

The first stage is 39.6 feet long and 7.1 feet in diameter. The second stage is 21.8 ft in diameter and 3.9 feet in diameter.

Quite a compact little ship.

On Sunday, October 20, 2013 7:26:33 PM UTC+13, William Mook wrote:
In the 1960s my mentor, Garvin vonEschen, at the Ohio State University developed a tripropellant engine using 55% Lithium, 20% Fluorine and 25% Hydrogen by weight.



Nano-scale fluorine ice particles along with nano-scale lithium powder suspended in a hydrogen liquid creates a self-igniting mono-propellant that detonates at room temperature and produces an exhaust speed of 5,224 m/sec at sea level rising to 5,500 m/sec in vacuum, with a propellant density of 0..232 kg/liter.



So, the two stage rocket described previously has 5,779.8 litres of propellant in the second stage and 34,960.9 litres of propellant in the first stage.



http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...kwell_P333.jpg



The first stage is 39.6 feet long and 7.1 feet in diameter. The second stage is 21.8 ft in diameter and 3.9 feet in diameter.



Quite a compact little ship.

Breaking the smaller stage into two pieces -

From;

7.75 km/sec - first stage - Sanger style skip return
9.20 km/sec - second stage - direct return

To;

7.75 km/sec - first stage - Sanger style skip return
4.40 km/sec - lunar stage - Lunar Free Return
4.80 km/sec - lunar landing stage - direct return

This reduces the size of the vehicle a little more, since you don't need propellant to land the lunar stage on the lunar surface and bring it back to Earth;

dV u p Wgt inert propellant
7750 0.76612 0.15388 8885.4 710.8 6807.3
4400 0.56172 0.35828 1367.2 109.3 768.0
4800 0.59338 0.32661 489.8 39.1 290.7

160.0 Payload

The 39.1 kg weight of the lunar landing stage carrying 209.7 kg of propellant, is basically a back pack similar to this painting by Robert McCall done back in the 1980s

http://www.projectrho.com/public_htm...ketPack03..jpg

A mechanical counter-pressure suit that is equipped for long-duration and possessing its own thermal protection system.

On Monday, October 21, 2013 9:26:46 AM UTC+13, William Mook wrote:
On Sunday, October 20, 2013 7:26:33 PM UTC+13, William Mook wrote:

In the 1960s my mentor, Garvin vonEschen, at the Ohio State University developed a tripropellant engine using 55% Lithium, 20% Fluorine and 25% Hydrogen by weight.







Nano-scale fluorine ice particles along with nano-scale lithium powder suspended in a hydrogen liquid creates a self-igniting mono-propellant that detonates at room temperature and produces an exhaust speed of 5,224 m/sec at sea level rising to 5,500 m/sec in vacuum, with a propellant density of 0.232 kg/liter.







So, the two stage rocket described previously has 5,779.8 litres of propellant in the second stage and 34,960.9 litres of propellant in the first stage.







http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...kwell_P333.jpg







The first stage is 39.6 feet long and 7.1 feet in diameter. The second stage is 21.8 ft in diameter and 3.9 feet in diameter.







Quite a compact little ship.



Breaking the smaller stage into two pieces -



From;



7.75 km/sec - first stage - Sanger style skip return

9.20 km/sec - second stage - direct return



To;



7.75 km/sec - first stage - Sanger style skip return

4.40 km/sec - lunar stage - Lunar Free Return

4.80 km/sec - lunar landing stage - direct return



This reduces the size of the vehicle a little more, since you don't need propellant to land the lunar stage on the lunar surface and bring it back to Earth;



dV u p Wgt inert propellant

7750 0.76612 0.15388 8885.4 710.8 6807.3

4400 0.56172 0.35828 1367.2 109.3 768.0

4800 0.59338 0.32661 489.8 39.1 290.7



160.0 Payload



The 39.1 kg weight of the lunar landing stage carrying 209.7 kg of propellant, is basically a back pack similar to this painting by Robert McCall done back in the 1980s



http://www.projectrho.com/public_htm...cketPack03.jpg



A mechanical counter-pressure suit that is equipped for long-duration and possessing its own thermal protection system.

The Lockheed Martin X-33 was a delta shaped spacecraft with a linear aerospike engine at the rear that was 69 ft long and 77 ft wide and 12 ft tall.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8oYI1CNaGrc

Stage 1 is 29,341.6 litres in volume. This is about 1/10th the volume of the X-33 and if this form factor is used the stage would be 32.5 ft long and 36.3 ft wingspan and 5.7 ft body height.

Stage 2 has 3,310.5 litres in volume. This implies, using the X-33 form factor, a stage with 15.7 ft length and 17.6 ft wingspan with 2.7 ft body height.

Stage 3 has 1,253.0 litres in volume. A delta wing stage using the X-33 form factor is 11.4 ft long and 12.7 ft wingspan and 2.0 ft body height.


Basic Research and Technologies for Two-Stage-to-Orbit Vehicles: Final Report
edited by Dieter Jacob, Gottfried Sachs, Siegfried Wagner indicates a variety of delta shaped lifting bodies that are nested within one another which have been extensively tested in Darmstadt Germany. An elliptic aerodynamic configuration (ELAC) was shown to be best - which is a variant of the X-33 configuration.

http://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/...ournalCode=jsr

A supine flight position, standing up and facing outward during vertical take off, has a cabin that's 75 inches long, 24 inches wide and 19 inches deep.

http://d1jqu7g1y74ds1.cloudfront.net...llery_201..jpg

On Monday, October 21, 2013 11:14:23 AM UTC+13, William Mook wrote:
On Monday, October 21, 2013 9:26:46 AM UTC+13, William Mook wrote:

On Sunday, October 20, 2013 7:26:33 PM UTC+13, William Mook wrote:



In the 1960s my mentor, Garvin vonEschen, at the Ohio State University developed a tripropellant engine using 55% Lithium, 20% Fluorine and 25% Hydrogen by weight.















Nano-scale fluorine ice particles along with nano-scale lithium powder suspended in a hydrogen liquid creates a self-igniting mono-propellant that detonates at room temperature and produces an exhaust speed of 5,224 m/sec at sea level rising to 5,500 m/sec in vacuum, with a propellant density of 0.232 kg/liter.















So, the two stage rocket described previously has 5,779.8 litres of propellant in the second stage and 34,960.9 litres of propellant in the first stage.















http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...kwell_P333.jpg















The first stage is 39.6 feet long and 7.1 feet in diameter. The second stage is 21.8 ft in diameter and 3.9 feet in diameter.















Quite a compact little ship.







Breaking the smaller stage into two pieces -







From;







7.75 km/sec - first stage - Sanger style skip return



9.20 km/sec - second stage - direct return







To;







7.75 km/sec - first stage - Sanger style skip return



4.40 km/sec - lunar stage - Lunar Free Return



4.80 km/sec - lunar landing stage - direct return







This reduces the size of the vehicle a little more, since you don't need propellant to land the lunar stage on the lunar surface and bring it back to Earth;







dV u p Wgt inert propellant



7750 0.76612 0.15388 8885.4 710.8 6807.3



4400 0.56172 0.35828 1367.2 109.3 768.0



4800 0.59338 0.32661 489.8 39.1 290.7







160.0 Payload







The 39.1 kg weight of the lunar landing stage carrying 209.7 kg of propellant, is basically a back pack similar to this painting by Robert McCall done back in the 1980s







http://www.projectrho.com/public_htm...cketPack03.jpg







A mechanical counter-pressure suit that is equipped for long-duration and possessing its own thermal protection system.



The Lockheed Martin X-33 was a delta shaped spacecraft with a linear aerospike engine at the rear that was 69 ft long and 77 ft wide and 12 ft tall.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8oYI1CNaGrc



Stage 1 is 29,341.6 litres in volume. This is about 1/10th the volume of the X-33 and if this form factor is used the stage would be 32.5 ft long and 36.3 ft wingspan and 5.7 ft body height.



Stage 2 has 3,310.5 litres in volume. This implies, using the X-33 form factor, a stage with 15.7 ft length and 17.6 ft wingspan with 2.7 ft body height.



Stage 3 has 1,253.0 litres in volume. A delta wing stage using the X-33 form factor is 11.4 ft long and 12.7 ft wingspan and 2.0 ft body height.





Basic Research and Technologies for Two-Stage-to-Orbit Vehicles: Final Report

edited by Dieter Jacob, Gottfried Sachs, Siegfried Wagner indicates a variety of delta shaped lifting bodies that are nested within one another which have been extensively tested in Darmstadt Germany. An elliptic aerodynamic configuration (ELAC) was shown to be best - which is a variant of the X-33 configuration.



http://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/...ournalCode=jsr



A supine flight position, standing up and facing outward during vertical take off, has a cabin that's 75 inches long, 24 inches wide and 19 inches deep.



http://d1jqu7g1y74ds1.cloudfront.net...allery_201.jpg

Total inert weight of this revised design is 860 kg. At $23,500 per kg the fly away cost of each copy is $20.21 million. There are of course supply chain issues, which are typically 5x unit cost to build the first three. So $101.5 million would build a fleet of three which would deliver three flights to the moon every two weeks. 78 flights to the moon per year. With 150 flights over the life of the equipment this is a six year life span for the equipment.

The product could be built in India by the same folks who built a lunar orbiter, and launcher, for less than the cost of a single solid fuel strap on for a delta rocket. These folks are sending payloads to Mars and soft landers on the moon.

http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-e...cle5254175.ece

This program could be implemented, including development of the high performing MEMS rocket arrays and a pilot/passenger training center, for less than $100 million.

The return on investment would attract folks like J.R.D. Tata, the man who filled the gap in world steel production and auto production as the USA abandoned US Steel and US Auto industry.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/...nyid-12934.cms

Commercial flights to the moon would consist of three simultaneous launches of two paying customers and one fleet commander. The two paying customers pay enough so that the enterprise makes $3 million profit for each of the two flights. This earns $156 million profit per year. Sufficient for the Indian suppliers to expand their capacity, building larger more capable systems.

These are used to build larger hotter rockets, and develop a global wireless hotspot. From the global wireless services over $1 trillion per year is earned. More than doubling India's income. Also, providing massive amounts of dollars to develop ever bigger and hotter rockets with more capable payloads. Here India is ready to build power beaming satellites and capture the world's energy markets by beaming energy from space with solar pumped lasers. This permits the capture of over $3 trillion per year in revenue, and funds the development of laser propulsion systems. With this technology India can then start mining and manufacturing in space and begin the wholesale movement of populations off world. At that point they move solar power satellites close to the sun, and beam trillions of watts of energy to power the development of entire worlds, as well as the movement of laser light sails between the stars.

Humanity will then be space faring.


haha - the USA could have followed this path in 1940s when proposed by vonBraun following world war two. We would have attained global economic dominance by 1980 and visited the stars by 2000. If the USA would have continued down this path in the 1960s instead of engaging Vietnam, we would have attained economic dominance in the world by 2000 and visited the stars by 2020. Of course the USA did none of these things. Human population would never have exceeded 4.5 billion on Earth in the first instance. Human numbers would never have been more than 5.5 billion in the second instance.

If India were permitted to develop this technology today they would grow to dominate world affairs by 2040 and reach the stars by 2050. Human numbers would peak at 8.0 billions and fall rapidly after that.