About the resupply missions in "The Martian".

werent some no longer needed ICBM repurposed to launch satellites

In article ,
says...

werent some no longer needed ICBM repurposed to launch satellites

You said NASA could use silos in Florida to do this, so you provide the
evidence the silos exist. Links? Papers?

Jeff
--
"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would
magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper
than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in
and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer

On Wednesday, November 11, 2015 at 12:27:49 AM UTC-5, JF Mezei wrote:
On 2015-11-10 18:18, Jeff Findley wrote:

You said NASA could use silos in Florida to do this, so you provide the
evidence the silos exist. Links? Papers?


I asked my buddy Mr Google, and there are silos in Florida:

http://www.panoramio.com/photo/45998468


Doubtful they ever had ICBMs in them though. :-)

very funny....... but one visit there the guide took us past some silos stating this one contains the challenger debris.

upon returning home i googled a aerial photo and the sio locations were clearly visible.

later 9 11 occured and much of the cape was removed from google earth.

in any case theres at least 12 silos there...

Incidently the early ICBMs were liquid fueled, but ready for launch immediately.

source? the sio museum in tucson az....

its a neat place to visit

In article ,
says...

bob haller wrote:

On Wednesday, November 11, 2015 at 12:27:49 AM UTC-5, JF Mezei wrote:
On 2015-11-10 18:18, Jeff Findley wrote:

You said NASA could use silos in Florida to do this, so you provide the
evidence the silos exist. Links? Papers?


I asked my buddy Mr Google, and there are silos in Florida:

http://www.panoramio.com/photo/45998468


Doubtful they ever had ICBMs in them though. :-)


very funny....... but one visit there the guide took us past some silos stating this one contains the challenger debris.


There was a test silo on Cape Canaveral. The only operational missile
silos in Florida were for Nike.

Test launch complexes used for Minuteman I, Minuteman II, Minuteman III,
and Pershing 1A. In other words, small silo with very small payload to
orbit.
http://afspacemuseum.org/ccafs/CX31-32/

From the following wiki pages, it appears that *both* silos were filled
with Challenger debris and sealed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cape_C...tion_Launch_Co
mplex_31
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cape_C...tion_Launch_Co
mplex_32

From the above two pages, "The service tower has since been removed and
silo filled in, although recovered debris from the space shuttle orbiter
Challenger were buried in the silo as well as in the silo at Pad 31."

So, as usual, Bob's memory is quite simply wrong. There have been *NO*
available ICBM silos in Florida since the Challenger disaster in the
late 1980s.



Besides, it would have made for a very small payload capacity...

Minotaur was a series of launchers made from retired Minuteman missiles.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minotaur_(rocket_family)

For example, Minotaur IV had a Payload of 1735 kg to a 185 km, 28.5
degree orbit from Cape Canaveral. That orbit is quite low, so payload
would decrease as orbital altitude increased. By the time you got to a
space shuttle payload, I'm not sure there would be much left, if that
launcher could make it to the higher orbit at all (solids aren't quite
as flexible as liquids when it comes to tweaking what orbit you're going
into).

Also, that payload from Cape Canaveral would appear to be *theoretical*.
From the wiki page, it looks as if all launches were either from
Vandenberg AFB in California or Wallops Island in Virginia, so it's
quite doubtful that there was even an operational Minuteman/Minotaur
launch pad in Florida post-Challenger.



If the information I uncovered wasn't so interesting, I'd be ****ed I
had to do Bob's Googling for him.

Jeff
--
"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would
magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper
than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in
and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer

In article m,
says...

On 2015-11-12 08:50, Fred J. McCall wrote:

It's also important to note that all the ones that had orbital
capability had commercial stages on top (which means they wouldn't fit
in a silo anymore).


OK, so the ICBM idea is dead.

Say one needed to build from scratch a means to deliver O2/N2 and CO2
filters and a bit of food and water to a stranded vehicle. Basic
survival stuff until a bigger rocket can do a rescue.

How small/big a rocket and space tug would be needed ? Is
Soyuz/progress the smallest that can do this ? Or could something
smaller and simpler get such supplies up to orbit ?

Why? We already have Progress, HTV (Japan), Dragon, and Cygnus
available for resupply. Just speed up the processing of whichever one
is going up next and load it with the needed supplies.

Also, in a pinch, some cargo can go up on Soyuz (and soon Crew Dragon or
CST-100).

There is NO NEED to cobble together a launch out of random, completely
unproven, combinations of hardware and software.

Note that even in The Martian (admittedly fiction), the cobbled together
resupply launch completely failed!!!!!

Jeff
--
"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would
magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper
than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in
and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer

"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
...

In article m,
says...

On 2015-11-12 08:50, Fred J. McCall wrote:

It's also important to note that all the ones that had orbital
capability had commercial stages on top (which means they wouldn't fit
in a silo anymore).


OK, so the ICBM idea is dead.

Say one needed to build from scratch a means to deliver O2/N2 and CO2
filters and a bit of food and water to a stranded vehicle. Basic
survival stuff until a bigger rocket can do a rescue.

How small/big a rocket and space tug would be needed ? Is
Soyuz/progress the smallest that can do this ? Or could something
smaller and simpler get such supplies up to orbit ?

Why? We already have Progress, HTV (Japan), Dragon, and Cygnus
available for resupply. Just speed up the processing of whichever one
is going up next and load it with the needed supplies.

Also, in a pinch, some cargo can go up on Soyuz (and soon Crew Dragon or
CST-100).

There is NO NEED to cobble together a launch out of random, completely
unproven, combinations of hardware and software.

Note that even in The Martian (admittedly fiction), the cobbled together
resupply launch completely failed!!!!!

I've seen the movie, waiting to read the book.

But I liked the reason given in the movie. It's one of those small details
often overlooked and in the real world it's often the small details that
bite you.
(Do I believe this small detail would really have occurred, who knows. Not
really important though.)

And yes, it's pretty clear now with ISS, we've got many options. And quite
honestly, while I think SpaceX is correct in taking its time before
reflying, honestly the issue was easily enough corrected that had they
needed to fly sooner, they very could have.

Heck, I've said, before, if it was a true emergency, I'd have risked a
flight in Dragon with a good comfortable chair, perhaps a scuba tank for air
and some food.



Jeff

--
Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/
CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net