|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
SpaceX announces plan to fly two space tourists around moon
JF Mezei wrote:
On 2017-03-02 22:31, Jeff Findley wrote: SLS/Orion still looks like a "launcher to nowhere". Given the current plans, even assuming there is a 2nd Trump term, it doesn't look like SLS/Orion will be doing much of anything before President Trump is out of office. SAD! My understanding is that SLS engine contract is , at this point, only R&D to see how much it would cost to build new SSME engines more efficiently. We've discussed this before. Your understanding is WRONG. Do you have short term memory issues? Eventually, NASA has to get budget confirmation so it can place an order for those engines. Not so much. The CURRENT contract does everything but actually buy engines. It funds redesign, production line, and engine qualification hardware for $1.16 billion. In other words, it does everything but actually deliver engines to NASA. There is an option line ON THIS CONTRACT that allows NASA to buy six engines at the end for $340 million. If such funding isn't likely to happen and is more likely to trigger the end of SLS, NASA is then more likely to stay under the radar and continue its development without ordeing new engines and launch the 2 or 3 flighst from the leftover SSME engines before the programme is canned when NASA asks for funding for production engines for a rocket to nowehere. You think spending $1.16 billion to restart engine production and then not buying any engines is 'under the radar'? I'd call it 'waste'. There are enough engines for the first four SLS flights. -- "Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong." -- Thomas Jefferson |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
SpaceX announces plan to fly two space tourists around moon
On Thu, 2 Mar 2017 12:16:11 -0500, "Greg \(Strider\) Moore"
wrote: .... The pieces are in place for a purely commercial venture with no NASA involvement. Techonlogically, yes. The problem has been getting private finiancing for manned ventures. The risks are so great that no one wants to touch it. The government is the only entity with enough money that can live with the risk. So even if the ISS is succeeded by a private station serviced by Dragon and/or Starliner, there would proably be government funding. It might be through an arrangement similar to the commercial crew and cargo prgrams, but that's probably where the money would come from. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
SpaceX announces plan to fly two space tourists around moon
Michael Gallagher wrote:
On Thu, 2 Mar 2017 12:16:11 -0500, "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" wrote: .... The pieces are in place for a purely commercial venture with no NASA involvement. Techonlogically, yes. The problem has been getting private finiancing for manned ventures. The risks are so great that no one wants to touch it. The government is the only entity with enough money that can live with the risk. Oh, bull****. NASA is the most risk-averse organization there is. So even if the ISS is succeeded by a private station serviced by Dragon and/or Starliner, there would proably be government funding. It might be through an arrangement similar to the commercial crew and cargo prgrams, but that's probably where the money would come from. Poppycock. This is like saying that only the government can afford to climb the Matterhorn. -- "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar territory." --G. Behn |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
SpaceX announces plan to fly two space tourists around moon
http://rocketbelt.nl/pogos/nasa-lunar-transport
A rocket belt powered by hypergolic fuels has a 3.3 km/sec exhaust velocity in vacuum. To land on the moon from low lunar orbit requires 1.69 km/sec delta vee. To land on the moon and return to lunar orbit, requires 3.4 km/sec delta vee, with a small amount of spare capacity. This requires 64.31% of the take off weight of a rocket be propellant. With a structure fraction of 9.50% this leaves 26.19% of the take off mass as payload. An A7L spacesuit has a mass of 91 kg when configured for 6.5 hours of lunar surface operations. Near term biosuits using MEMS based hardware are likely to mass 35 kg and provide for 12.5 hours of surface operations. https://www.nasa.gov/pdf/617047main_..._spacesuit.pdf With an 85 kg astronaut, this implies a total payload weight of 120 kg. Dividing this by 0.2619 obtains the weight of the rocket belt required to take an astronaut to the surface of the moon and back. 458.2 kg - take off weight on low lunar orbit. 183.1 kg - landing burn propellant (143 litres) - 10 spherical tanks 12 inches in diameter (half nitric acid, half hydrazine) 109.9 kg - take off burn propellant (85.9 litres) - 6 spherical tanks 12 inches in diameter (half nitric acid, half hydrazine) 45.2 kg - structure - including 8 kg in the form of 0.5 kg spherical tanks. Four columns of four tanks - two columns on each side of the astronaut. 120.0 kg - astronaut & biosuit So, with 916.4 kg - in a rocket pack - the astronauts can go to the moon and return to lunar orbit - and even recover the rocket packs for reuse. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/remem...n-william-mook https://www.linkedin.com/in/williamm...tivity/shares/ With more advanced systems - using more energetic fuels - and improved spacesuits - much more can be achieved. However, this will certainly make a splash! |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
SpaceX announces plan to fly two space tourists around moon
On Sunday, March 26, 2017 at 4:44:42 PM UTC+13, William Mook wrote:
http://rocketbelt.nl/pogos/nasa-lunar-transport A rocket belt powered by hypergolic fuels has a 3.3 km/sec exhaust velocity in vacuum. To land on the moon from low lunar orbit requires 1.69 km/sec delta vee. To land on the moon and return to lunar orbit, requires 3.4 km/sec delta vee, with a small amount of spare capacity. This requires 64.31% of the take off weight of a rocket be propellant. With a structure fraction of 9.50% this leaves 26.19% of the take off mass as payload. An A7L spacesuit has a mass of 91 kg when configured for 6.5 hours of lunar surface operations. Near term biosuits using MEMS based hardware are likely to mass 35 kg and provide for 12.5 hours of surface operations. https://www.nasa.gov/pdf/617047main_..._spacesuit.pdf With an 85 kg astronaut, this implies a total payload weight of 120 kg. Dividing this by 0.2619 obtains the weight of the rocket belt required to take an astronaut to the surface of the moon and back. 458.2 kg - take off weight on low lunar orbit. 183.1 kg - landing burn propellant (143 litres) - 10 spherical tanks 12 inches in diameter (half nitric acid, half hydrazine) 109.9 kg - take off burn propellant (85.9 litres) - 6 spherical tanks 12 inches in diameter (half nitric acid, half hydrazine) 45.2 kg - structure - including 8 kg in the form of 0.5 kg spherical tanks. Four columns of four tanks - two columns on each side of the astronaut. 120.0 kg - astronaut & biosuit So, with 916.4 kg - in a rocket pack - the astronauts can go to the moon and return to lunar orbit - and even recover the rocket packs for reuse. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/remem...n-william-mook https://www.linkedin.com/in/williamm...tivity/shares/ With more advanced systems - using more energetic fuels - and improved spacesuits - much more can be achieved. However, this will certainly make a splash! At 3.4 km/sec (10,840 fps) we have a range for a ballistic trajectory of 1,111 km (600 nautical miles), flown in 8 minutes. So, a rocket belt, attached to a light weight space suit, equipped to land on Earth, would permit testing of a rocket belt prior to its use in a moon trip. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Space Engineers Plan Possible Moon Base at the Moon's South Pole: On the Ice! | Double-A | Misc | 0 | January 2nd 07 12:46 PM |
NASA Announces Plan To Launch $700 Million Into Space | [email protected] | History | 10 | June 5th 06 05:59 AM |
NASA Announces Plan To Launch $700 Million Into Space | [email protected] | Policy | 1 | May 7th 06 12:34 PM |
Northrop Grumman Announces CEV Plan | Ed Kyle | Policy | 2 | October 15th 05 04:03 PM |
SpaceX announces details on Falcon V | Joe Strout | Policy | 32 | January 29th 04 02:48 AM |