Payloads - Part I
Now that the launch vehicle of choice has been decided, it's capabilities determined. It's now time to work on what it's being built for. Payload.
OTL ESA had established itself as the leading Commercial Launch Service Provider in the 1990s with the Ariane 4 - which enjoyed a 97.4% success rating in its 116-launch history. IIRC only the Soyuz LV and STS enjoyed a better success rate and amore than 100-launch lifespan.
Now TTL LV and OTL Araine 4 have one thing in common, flexible payload range - though it's rather a lot higher in my case. So it, too, can be used for a wide range of missions.
Obviously, Commercial Launch Services are something that I wish to continue - let's face it, they'd have to be inexcusably retarded to not want in on that market - which generally means GTO orbits IIRC. I intend to accomplish that by way of a LOX/LH2 upper stage built by - my current favourites - France, using 2-4 HM7-type engines, depending on the size of the upper stage. This, IMHO seems completely reasonable since by the point they come into play, they are effectively clear of the atmosphere, so it's high Isp that would dominate, not high T/M ratios.
One additional advantage that TTL ESA would have over OTL ESA is the general lack of Hypergolic Propellant usage. So that should prevent the costs from shooting up as environmental regulations come into force in earnest IMHO.
Unmanned scientific missions are another possibility. Earth Orbit, Moon, Mars, the Asteroid Belt, Venus, Interplanetary Space. All should be more than doable using the proposed tech.
Next, we have the ISS - or whatever it will be ITTL - where ESA has one extra ace. Solaris, the Manned Spacecraft. Now adapting it to operate as an unmanned resupply craft - just as Progress was adapted from Soyuz both OTL and TTL - would seem to be the most likely means of achieving that goal. Though this would raise issues of sending larger goods and supplies, which would have to be done by someone else - on the other hand, putting too many eggs into the ESA Basket would turn this into ASB, so something does have to give somewhere. Given the scope and issues available there, I'll work on it in a separate post - where Space Station setups and scenarios will be covered in greater detail - this would be the initial evaluation.
I'm entering the more troubled waters here. So updates could well slow down for a while.
Now that the launch vehicle of choice has been decided, it's capabilities determined. It's now time to work on what it's being built for. Payload.
OTL ESA had established itself as the leading Commercial Launch Service Provider in the 1990s with the Ariane 4 - which enjoyed a 97.4% success rating in its 116-launch history. IIRC only the Soyuz LV and STS enjoyed a better success rate and amore than 100-launch lifespan.
Now TTL LV and OTL Araine 4 have one thing in common, flexible payload range - though it's rather a lot higher in my case. So it, too, can be used for a wide range of missions.
Obviously, Commercial Launch Services are something that I wish to continue - let's face it, they'd have to be inexcusably retarded to not want in on that market - which generally means GTO orbits IIRC. I intend to accomplish that by way of a LOX/LH2 upper stage built by - my current favourites - France, using 2-4 HM7-type engines, depending on the size of the upper stage. This, IMHO seems completely reasonable since by the point they come into play, they are effectively clear of the atmosphere, so it's high Isp that would dominate, not high T/M ratios.
One additional advantage that TTL ESA would have over OTL ESA is the general lack of Hypergolic Propellant usage. So that should prevent the costs from shooting up as environmental regulations come into force in earnest IMHO.
Unmanned scientific missions are another possibility. Earth Orbit, Moon, Mars, the Asteroid Belt, Venus, Interplanetary Space. All should be more than doable using the proposed tech.
Next, we have the ISS - or whatever it will be ITTL - where ESA has one extra ace. Solaris, the Manned Spacecraft. Now adapting it to operate as an unmanned resupply craft - just as Progress was adapted from Soyuz both OTL and TTL - would seem to be the most likely means of achieving that goal. Though this would raise issues of sending larger goods and supplies, which would have to be done by someone else - on the other hand, putting too many eggs into the ESA Basket would turn this into ASB, so something does have to give somewhere. Given the scope and issues available there, I'll work on it in a separate post - where Space Station setups and scenarios will be covered in greater detail - this would be the initial evaluation.
I'm entering the more troubled waters here. So updates could well slow down for a while.