A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Space Shuttle
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

NASA Drops Requirement For Methane Engine From CEV



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 13th 06, 04:14 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.station
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default NASA Drops Requirement For Methane Engine From CEV

In some respects I not suprize to see it happen. Though the
requirement was a little much for a lunar craft. Bit suprized they
dropped the requirement for unpressurized payload deliverly to ISS, but
it didn't say anything about deleting the ablity for pressurized
payload delivery.


http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/new...s/CEV01126.xml

NASA Drops Requirement For Methane Engine From CEV
By Frank Morring
01/12/2006 08:38:34 AM

Congressional pressure to avoid a gap in U.S. human space access is
behind a NASA push to accelerate the first piloted flight of the
planned Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV).

While President Bush originally wanted an operation CEV by 2014, the
final RFP for the shuttle replacement called for a first flight with
crew "as close to 2010 as possible, but no later than 2012, without
compromising safety." The new document also drops requirements for a
LOX/methane engine on the CEV service module as a placeholder for
future extraction of the fuel from the atmosphere of Mars, and for
delivery of unpressurized cargo to the International Space Station,
although nothing would prevent the winning team from proposing them,
according to a program spokesman at Johnson Space Center.

Officially a "call for improvements" to the original CEV bids, the
long-awaited document specifies for the first time that the vehicle
will be "an improved, blunt-body crew capsule shape" as called for in
the exploration architecture released last fall (Aviation Week & Space
Technology, Sept. 26, 2005). Final CEV dimensions remain in flux, the
program spokesman says.

Teams led by Northrop Grumman and Lockheed Martin are finalists for the
job of building the CEV, which will run through 2019. The contract will
fall into three parts - a cost-plus award fee element through
"approximately 2013" that will cover design, development, test and
evaluation (DDT&E) though first flight of the initial two CEV blocks;
an indefinite quantity indefinite delivery contract for full-scale CEV
production, and a sustaining engineering element that will include "any
additional DDT&E necessary to complete development of the Block 2 Lunar
variant."

Just my $0.02

Space Cadet

derwetzelsDASHspacecadetATyahooDOTcom


Moon Society - St. Louis Chapter

http://www.moonsociety.org/chapters/stlouis/

There is only one (maybe 2) basic core reasons for humans to go
beyond LEO, That is for the establishment of space settlements or a
space based civilization. Everything else are details.

Gary Gray 11/9/2005

  #2  
Old January 13th 06, 04:44 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.station
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default NASA Drops Requirement For Methane Engine From CEV

This is just the first cut, we can watch as the program started with
good ideas shrinks to just a LEO manned and unmanned craft.

all the rest will be lost... no moon, no mars... no nothing...

  #3  
Old January 13th 06, 05:28 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.station
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default NASA Drops Requirement For Methane Engine From CEV



Bob Haller wrote:

This is just the first cut, we can watch as the program started with
good ideas shrinks to just a LEO manned and unmanned craft.

all the rest will be lost... no moon, no mars... no nothing...


Oh God, I'm so relieved. Since the moon and mars will be ultimately
lost, we don't have to worry about them colliding with the Earth
anymore, and thus there is no need for us to go there at all to divert
them into safer orbits. We'll save a bundle of money, and all our space
assets and resources can then be directed to asteroids on near term
collision courses with the Earth.

Civilization is saved! Cudos all around.

Who needs nothing anyways.

http/'cosmic.lifeform.org


  #4  
Old January 13th 06, 11:48 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.station
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default NASA Drops Requirement For Methane Engine From CEV

Oh God, I'm so relieved. Since the moon and mars will be ultimately
lost, we don't have to worry about them colliding with the Earth
anymore, and thus there is no need for us to go there at all to divert
them into safer orbits. We'll save a bundle of money, and all our space

assets and resources can then be directed to asteroids on near term
collision courses with the Earth.

so you think its good that the beancounters have begun picking the low
hanging fruit? maybe you didnt understand? first they cut the obvious,
before you know it the new shuttle replacement program will be little
other than a ISS taxi service. the moon mars plan will be delayed
indefinetely...

ultimately the US space program is going to go no where but maybe
round and round.

  #5  
Old January 13th 06, 03:14 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.station
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default NASA Drops Requirement For Methane Engine From CEV



Bob Haller wrote:

Oh God, I'm so relieved. Since the moon and mars will be ultimately
lost, we don't have to worry about them colliding with the Earth
anymore, and thus there is no need for us to go there at all to divert
them into safer orbits. We'll save a bundle of money, and all our space

assets and resources can then be directed to asteroids on near term
collision courses with the Earth.

so you think its good that the beancounters have begun picking the low
hanging fruit? maybe you didnt understand? first they cut the obvious,
before you know it the new shuttle replacement program will be little
other than a ISS taxi service. the moon mars plan will be delayed
indefinetely...


Good, it's a joke. We need to kill it RIGHT NOW.

ultimately the US space program is going to go no where but maybe
round and round.


I hate to be the one to have to lay it out for you, but the Earth
revolves around the sun, the moon revolves around the Earth,
Mars revolves around the sun, asteroids revolve around the sun
the moons of Mars revolve around Mars, even the sun revolves
around the center of the galaxy. The galaxy is rotating.

Everything is going round and round. It's the collisions
that we are worried about. As far as I know, the moon
and Mars are not going to collide with the earth any time soon.

Yes, building an SRB powered CEV to go to the ISS
is PRETTY ****ING DUMB! Thank George Bush
and Michael Griffin for that little piece of intelligence.

We need methane powered engines almost as much as
we need a national debt of 10 trillion dollars.

http://cosmic.lifeform.org


  #6  
Old January 13th 06, 08:52 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.station
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default NASA Drops Requirement For Methane Engine From CEV


"Bob Haller" wrote in message
ups.com...
Oh God, I'm so relieved. Since the moon and mars will be ultimately
lost, we don't have to worry about them colliding with the Earth
anymore, and thus there is no need for us to go there at all to divert
them into safer orbits. We'll save a bundle of money, and all our space

assets and resources can then be directed to asteroids on near term
collision courses with the Earth.

so you think its good that the beancounters have begun picking the low
hanging fruit? maybe you didnt understand? first they cut the obvious,
before you know it the new shuttle replacement program will be little
other than a ISS taxi service. the moon mars plan will be delayed
indefinetely...

ultimately the US space program is going to go no where but maybe
round and round.


Going nowhere? We are going to Pluto in a few days. Is that far enough out
there for ya?

George


  #7  
Old January 13th 06, 09:43 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.station
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default NASA Drops Requirement For Methane Engine From CEV

George man wise we arent going anywhere but ISS. futhermore I doubt we
ever will

in say next 30 years....

  #8  
Old January 13th 06, 10:05 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.station
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default NASA Drops Requirement For Methane Engine From CEV

About the methane engines.

If CEV is to participate in a mars mission, it will be only as a tag
along to a real ship. It might be used to crash land astronauts on the
surface, but it won't be able to take off. The capsule won't have
engines. So outfitting it with methane engines is pointless. Outfutting
the real mars expediation ship/station as well as designing the ship
that takes off from mars to get back to the expedition ship/station with
methane engines makes a lot of sense since those are the ones that will
want to be refueled from mars produced fuel.

So, until NASA begins work on the real mars expedition ship as well as
the real mars landing ship that can take off again, the methane engines
aren't needed.

Since NASA has realised the mistake of prematurely retiring Shuttle, it
needs the CEV up and running ASAP to service the station. And that means
cancelling anything that doesn't exist yet. They only have 4 years go
go from an idea to a production vehicle. A whole lot of neat features
will be dropped for the sake of getting CEV out in time.

And consider how much fuel you will need to lift from mars to refuel the
expedition ship for a return to earth. We're not talking about the type
of payload a LEM type of vehicle could lift from mars. So you're either
going to need of small cargo rockets to lift fuel up intomartian orbits
one bit at a time, or one hunking big rocket like a delta 4 that has
enough uplift capacity to lifte the fuel needed to get back to earth.


You might be able to produce enough fuel on mars to get a LEM type
vehicle to lift off from mars and rejoin the big expedition ship. But it
doesn't seem realistic to me that you could have a rocket big enough to
not only lift off from mars, but also carry all the mars=produced fuel
needed to get back to earth in the big expedition ship.

Perhaps Bush thinks that Mars is just a week further away than the Moon
and figures you could stick 6 people in a CEV and the modern equivalent
of a LEM to do a Mars camping trip just by aiming the CEV at mars
instead of the Moon.

Oh, I also notice the requirement has now dropped to 4 people to get to
the moon. Apollo had 3.

In the end, NASA will end up with nothing more than a glorified Soyuz to
get to the station and no serious cargo uplift to/from the station. Has
NASA begun work on automated guidance and automated docking yet ?
  #9  
Old January 14th 06, 06:44 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.station
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default NASA Drops Requirement For Methane Engine From CEV


"Bob Haller" wrote in message
oups.com...
George man wise we arent going anywhere but ISS. futhermore I doubt we
ever will

in say next 30 years....


Certainly, if people like you were in charge, I could believe that.

George


  #10  
Old January 14th 06, 06:49 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.station
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default NASA Drops Requirement For Methane Engine From CEV

On 12 Jan 2006 19:44:03 -0800, "Bob Haller" wrote:

This is just the first cut, we can watch as the program started with
good ideas shrinks to just a LEO manned and unmanned craft.

all the rest will be lost... no moon, no mars... no nothing...


Like what happened when the Shuttle was propsed as the building block
for a Moon/Mars architecture that was never built?

Possibly.

But nothing is carved in stone. The Congress that decided that there
was no point in more flights to the Moon once we'd beat the Russians
is not the Congress we have today. If successive adminstration remain
committed to the VSE, then we will get back to the Moon and on to
Mars.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide Steven S. Pietrobon Space Shuttle 1 March 2nd 05 05:35 PM
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide Steven S. Pietrobon Space Shuttle 0 February 4th 05 05:21 AM
Scrapping Scram sanman Policy 28 November 7th 04 07:24 PM
The Apollo Moon Hoax FAQ v4.1 November 2003 Nathan Jones Misc 20 November 11th 03 08:33 PM
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide Steven S. Pietrobon Space Shuttle 0 September 12th 03 01:37 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.