|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Military Space Plane = Space life boat?
It sounds like the general thrust of the stuff discussed on here a
couple months back, it could be a neat "on call" rescue launcher! |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Military Space Plane = Space life boat?
On Nov 20, 10:27*pm, "David E. Powell"
wrote: It sounds like the general thrust of the stuff discussed on here a couple months back, it could be a neat "on call" rescue launcher! I thought that was what soyuz was for. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Military Space Plane = Space life boat?
On Nov 20, 10:10*pm, Frogwatch wrote:
On Nov 20, 10:27*pm, "David E. Powell" wrote: It sounds like the general thrust of the stuff discussed on here a couple months back, it could be a neat "on call" rescue launcher! I thought that was what soyuz was for. Yes, but wouldn;t a modern lifeboat be preferable to a 50 year old design? We need to upgrade at some point, why not now? The shuttle is fork-tender - its a new era in US space travel and relying on that rickety old Soviet ball in an emergency doesn't mesh with fielding a brand new generation of heavy lift vehicle for the push towards a moon base and ultimately the jump to Mars. Time to upgrade. v/r Gordon |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Military Space Plane = Space life boat?
Note this article from November 12, 2002:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/2453603.stm Quote: "The US space agency (Nasa) is to accelerate the development of a replacement for the space shuttle and produce a "lifeboat" for the International Space Station (ISS)." This is not a new idea. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Military Space Plane = Space life boat?
No, I simply cannot understand why the military has been allowed to design
this. Surely if it is of any use as in this thread, someone, somewhere should have twigged it earlier, and seen the potential. Is it a case of left hand not knowing what right hand is up to on a grand scale, or is the space plane either rubbish, or designed for something more sinister? How many crew does it have, and also how safe is it given the current criteria of nasa future vehicles? Brian -- Brian Gaff - Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff' in the display name may be lost. Blind user, so no pictures please! wrote in message ... Note this article from November 12, 2002: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/2453603.stm Quote: "The US space agency (Nasa) is to accelerate the development of a replacement for the space shuttle and produce a "lifeboat" for the International Space Station (ISS)." This is not a new idea. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Military Space Plane = Space life boat?
On Nov 21, 4:40*am, "Brian Gaff" wrote:
No, I simply cannot understand why the military has been allowed to design this. Surely if it is of any use as in this thread, someone, somewhere should have *twigged it earlier, and *seen the potential. Is it a case of left hand not knowing what right hand is up to on a grand scale, or is the space plane either rubbish, or designed for something more sinister? How many crew does it have, and also how safe is it given the current criteria of nasa *future vehicles? Brian -- Brian Gaff - Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff' in the display name may be lost. Blind user, so no pictures wrote in message ... Note this article from *November 12, 2002: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/2453603.stm Quote: "The US space agency (Nasa) is to accelerate the development of a replacement for the space shuttle and produce a "lifeboat" for the International Space Station (ISS)." This is not a new idea. Is there not a Soyuz hanging on the ISS? http://news.softpedia.com/news/ISS-C...9-106707.shtml |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Military Space Plane = Space life boat?
"Jack Linthicum" wrote in message ... On Nov 21, 4:40 am, "Brian Gaff" wrote: Is there not a Soyuz hanging on the ISS? http://news.softpedia.com/news/ISS-C...9-106707.shtml Actually that article is out of date. Since there are now 6 crew on the ISS, there are always at least 2 Soyuz spacecraft docked at the ISS standing by for "lifeboat" duty. They work fine and must be a far cheaper, simpler, and safer solution than any new "spaceplane" design could possibly be. Vaughn |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Military Space Plane = Space life boat?
Yes, but wouldn;t a modern lifeboat be preferable to a 50 year old design? �We need to upgrade at some point, why not now? �The shuttle is fork-tender - its a new era in US space travel and relying on that rickety old Soviet ball in an emergency doesn't mesh with fielding a brand new generation of heavy lift vehicle for the push towards a moon base and ultimately the jump to Mars. �Time to upgrade. v/r Gordon Ahh dont you realize the push too moon mars isnt affordable given the realties of our times....... heck nasa wasted how many billion on a poor conception, bad idea launcher that probaby had its first and last launch, which was just for show anyway? while all along we had delta and atlas heavy expendables and we could of been flying our new crew vehicle by now.......... shuttle program is winding down with no affordable replacement, and ISS is scheduled to end in 2015. lets face facts US man in space days are cming to a close |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Military Space Plane = Space life boat?
On Nov 21, 7:50�am, "vaughn"
wrote: "Jack Linthicum" wrote in message ... On Nov 21, 4:40 am, "Brian Gaff" wrote: Is there not a Soyuz hanging on the ISS? http://news.softpedia.com/news/ISS-C...-Soyuz-039-Lif... Actually that article is out of date. �Since there are now 6 crew on the ISS, there are always at least 2 Soyuz spacecraft docked at the ISS standing by for "lifeboat" duty. �They work fine and must be a far cheaper, simpler, and safer solution than any new "spaceplane" design could possibly be. Vaughn MOOSE, although sounding wierd, should be standard equiptement on all human LEO flights. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Military Space Plane = Space life boat?
On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 07:50:36 -0500, "vaughn"
wrote: Actually that article is out of date. Since there are now 6 crew on the ISS, Oddly enough, due to Soyuz and Shuttle scheduling irregularities, ISS is down to 2 crew in December. there are always at least 2 Soyuz spacecraft docked at the ISS standing by for "lifeboat" duty. They work fine and must be a far cheaper, simpler, and safer solution than any new "spaceplane" design could possibly be. There are advantages to the original X-38 CRV idea, though. For starters, it would have been delivered to ISS as Shuttle cargo, and therefore would not have fired its engines until it was needed. This gave X-38 an orbital shelf-life of 2-3 years, compared to 6 months for Soyuz. X-38 also would have offered a Shuttle-like gentle ride to the ground, instead of Soyuz's high-g, retro-rocket landing, and that would have been important in the CRV's most likely role: evacuation of a sick or injured crewmember. Brian |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Military Space Plane vs. Ares 1...which could be operational first? | Jonathan | History | 54 | November 24th 09 02:58 AM |
Military Space Plane vs. Ares 1...which could be operational first? | Jeff Findley | Space Shuttle | 1 | November 20th 09 05:46 PM |
...Military Space Plane (X-37b) to Launch February 26 | jonathan[_3_] | Policy | 39 | December 21st 08 03:43 AM |
...Military Space Plane (X-37b) to Launch February 26 | jonathan[_3_] | History | 37 | December 21st 08 03:43 AM |