Interesting Space Politics Thread

Mike Griffin is blaming Lockheed Martin for all the complaints about
Ares.

http://www.spacepolitics.com/2008/02...lame-lockheed/

http://www.transterrestrial.com/arch..._on_the_1.html

"Rand Simberg" wrote in message
...
Mike Griffin is blaming Lockheed Martin for all the complaints about
Ares.

http://www.spacepolitics.com/2008/02...lame-lockheed/

http://www.transterrestrial.com/arch..._on_the_1.html

Gotta blame someone, right? I'm still hopeful that the next administration
will decide that Ares is the wrong way to go when the US has two flying EELV
programs and several launch startups with new vehicles in the works.

Jeff
--
A clever person solves a problem.
A wise person avoids it. -- Einstein

On Feb 9, 8:39 am, "Jeff Findley" wrote:
"Rand Simberg" wrote in message

...

Mike Griffin is blaming Lockheed Martin for all the complaints about
Ares.

http://www.spacepolitics.com/2008/02...lame-lockheed/

http://www.transterrestrial.com/arch..._on_the_1.html

Gotta blame someone, right? I'm still hopeful that the next administration
will decide that Ares is the wrong way to go when the US has two flying EELV
programs and several launch startups with new vehicles in the works.

Jeff
--
A clever person solves a problem.
A wise person avoids it. -- Einstein

An honest person soon discovers that he/she was snookered and
dumbfounded past the point of no return. It takes a village of
government and faith-based idiots and morons to screw everything up.

China offers CATS, as well as cats. So, what's the big ass
insurmountable problem with getting lots of nifty stuff as efficiently
parked interactively into the moon's L1 oasis zone?
.. - Brad Guth

On Sat, 9 Feb 2008 11:39:44 -0500, "Jeff Findley"
wrote:

Gotta blame someone, right? I'm still hopeful that the next administration
will decide that Ares is the wrong way to go when the US has two flying EELV
programs and several launch startups with new vehicles in the works.

Or at least switch to Jupiter/DIRECT.

Brian

"Brian Thorn" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 9 Feb 2008 11:39:44 -0500, "Jeff Findley"
wrote:

Gotta blame someone, right? I'm still hopeful that the next
administration
will decide that Ares is the wrong way to go when the US has two flying
EELV
programs and several launch startups with new vehicles in the works.

Or at least switch to Jupiter/DIRECT.

I'd not prefer that solution. NASA would tweak that design so much that it
will end up far different than the shuttle components it's supposed to be
based upon.

Jeff
--
A clever person solves a problem.
A wise person avoids it. -- Einstein

On Feb 10, 11:34*am, "Jeff Findley"
wrote:
"Brian Thorn" wrote in message

...

On Sat, 9 Feb 2008 11:39:44 -0500, "Jeff Findley"
wrote:

Gotta blame someone, right? *I'm still hopeful that the next
administration
will decide that Ares is the wrong way to go when the US has two flying
EELV
programs and several launch startups with new vehicles in the works.

Or at least switch to Jupiter/DIRECT.

I'd not prefer that solution. *NASA would tweak that design so much that it
will end up far different than the shuttle components it's supposed to be
based upon.

Jeff
--
A clever person solves a problem.
A wise person avoids it. -- Einstein

Why in the world should NASA involve itself in the launch business at
all?
NASA should involve itself exclusively in space operations from this
point forward IMO.
To do this a relative failure - the Shuttle Orbiter can be made into a
resounding success story for NASA.

The Orbiter is a magnificent spacecraft once in space. In addition to
its payload bay and arm, it has wings that can be used for aerobraking
to LEO or LMO. The Orion is virtually just "spam-in-a-can with far
less capability for space operations of any kind beyond transporting
astronauts. The Orbiter can catch and service sattelites and carry
large payloads among many other activities.
Using the Orbiters we have, with relatively minor modifications and
additions, we can establish a self sufficient(in terms of propellant)
Earth - Mars transportation system using solar based ISRU at Phobos
and/or Deimos.

A sketch of how this can be done:
1. Replace the OMS thrusters with LOX - methane rocket engines fed
from tanks in the payload bay After the ET is dropped, these thrusters
can fire to greatly increase payload to orbit. If a way to drop the
SSME's could be worked out, the payload could increase further.
Otherwise remove the SSME's by EVA and anything else reasonable to
lighten the load.
2. Add a solar concentrator based system for extended power supply
via highly efficient triple junction PV and use the same large
concentrator mirrors as solar furnaces for ISRU and 100% recycling of
consumables. In addition these mirrors can provide solar thermal and
electric propulsion and high baud communication. The mirrors must be
able to retract into the payload bay and be redeployed.
3. Launch two of these modified Orbiters. Receive additional
propellant, perhaps from the other Shuttle on orbit and use the
methane O2 rockets(restartable in space of course) to move to a highly
elliptical Earth orbit and then to a Mars bound trajectory. Rely on
solar thermal for emergency return from Mars to reduce propellant that
must be carried to Mars.
4. Tether the two Orbiters together to provide spin for "artificial
gravity" during the trip.
5. Seperate, stow mirrors and aerobrake first to a highly elliptical
and then to LMO and Phobos/Deimos rendesvous.
6. Use solar furnace to process regolith for propellant and store it.
7. Return to Earth by first acheiving HEMO and then a final thrust
for Earth bound trajectory.
8. Aerobrake at Earth to HEEO with perhaps some help from the rocket
engines with enough propellant to return with additional equipment
that could include a lander.
9. Lather, Rinse, Repeat.

Or we could do what we always do: develop sytem, operate it a while -
throw it away or put in museum.

Now I know this is heresy and is absolutely impossible, etc.
I also know however that if the space community saw this as the only
way forward it would somehow magically become possible..

Steve Mickler
Solar Thermal/Electric Propulsion
First STEP
.

On Feb 18, 2:30 pm, wrote:
On Feb 18, 1:25 pm, wrote:

The Orbiter is a magnificent spacecraft once in space.

Only in LOE.

In addition to
its payload bay and arm, it has wings that can be used for aerobraking
to LEO or LMO.

Incorrect. It is only viable for entry. There is no way to recovery
from the thermal loads quick enough after encounter.

The Orion is virtually just "spam-in-a-can with far
less capability for space operations of any kind beyond transporting
astronauts. The Orbiter can catch and service sattelites

Not needed.

and carry large payloads among many other activities.

ELV's can do this and ELV's can put them in higher energy orbits

Using the Orbiters we have, with relatively minor modifications and
additions, we can establish a self sufficient(in terms of propellant)
Earth - Mars transportation system using solar based ISRU at Phobos
and/or Deimos.

Horsehockey

A sketch of how this can be done:
1. Replace the OMS thrusters with LOX - methane rocket engines fed
from tanks in the payload bay After the ET is dropped, these thrusters
can fire to greatly increase payload to orbit.

Where is the payload when the LOX - methane tanks are taking up
payload bay volume

If a way to drop the
SSME's could be worked out, the payload could increase further.

No, the mods to do this would have substantial weight and decrease
mass to orbit. The SSME's wouldn't be jettisoned until the ET is.
This would only save some OMS prop and the little savings would be
more than offset by the weight increase from the mods

2. Add a solar concentrator based system for extended power supply
via highly efficient triple junction PV and use the same large
concentrator mirrors as solar furnaces for ISRU and 100% recycling of
consumables. In addition these mirrors can provide solar thermal and
electric propulsion and high baud communication. The mirrors must be
able to retract into the payload bay and be redeployed.

Again, where is the room for the payload with all this extra hardware
and the LOX - methane tanks. You are also forgetting the larger
radiators that would be required

3. Launch two of these modified Orbiters. Receive additional
propellant, perhaps from the other Shuttle on orbit and use the
methane O2 rockets(restartable in space of course) to move to a highly
elliptical Earth orbit and then to a Mars bound trajectory.

The orbiter couldn't carry enough prop in the payload bay to get it to
the moon much less Mars. Also the orbiter systems are for LEO and not
deep space

Rely on solar thermal for emergency return from Mars to reduce propellant that
must be carried.

Huh?

4. Tether the two Orbiters together to provide spin for "artificial
gravity" during the trip.

Not viable. No tether points. And all your additional equipment was
for non spinning

5. Seperate, stow mirrors and aerobrake first to a highly elliptical
and then to LMO and Phobos/Deimos rendesvous.

Aero capture has not been done befor

6. Use solar furnace to process regolith for propellant and store it.

Where? Payload bay is full of other equipment

7. Return to Earth by first acheiving HEMO and then a final thrust
for Earth bound trajectory.

Not enough thrust.

8. Aerobrake at Earth to HEO with perhaps some help from the rocket
engines with enough propellant to return with additional equipment
that could include a lander.

9. Throw this concept away and try something that is viable

This is completely undoable