A non-wanky space WI

Archibald

Banned
A bit of fun with the ATV (Automated Transfer Vehicle, currently docked to the ISS)
Some manned spacecrafts/ ATV hybrids.

- Hermes
- Falcon X "CXV"
- Apollo CM
- CEV
- Klipper
MannedATVs.jpg
 

Thande

Donor
A bit of fun with the ATV (Automated Transfer Vehicle, currently docked to the ISS)
Some manned spacecrafts/ ATV hybrids.

- Hermes
- Falcon X "CXV"
- Apollo CM
- CEV
- Klipper
[]

Crazy but ubercool :D

Looking at the Apollo one, I hadn't realised the ATV was that big...

The Kliper one looks vaguely plausible; couldn't the ATV substitute for the Parom in that regard?
 

Archibald

Banned
The ATV is a big thing you know. Around 4.5 m diameter, 10 m long, 20 metric tons.
I tried to respect respective diameters of the spacecrafts.

Consider the ATV more as pressurised module than a tug.
A kind of very small space station!




Btw this could make, too, an interesting alt-history.

http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/rombus.htm

http://www.astronautix.com/craft/proelena.htm

Rombus was a Big single-engine rocket, with external / expendable tanks (otherwise Single-stage-to-orbit is not feasible, even today).

So tanks are jettisoned on the way to low-earth orbit.
If you replace them while in Earth orbit by fully-fueled tanks (carried by others Rombus) this thing can fire its rocket engine again and carry heavy loads to the moon.
 

Thande

Donor
The ATV is a big thing you know. Around 4.5 m diameter, 10 m long, 20 metric tons.
I tried to respect respective diameters of the spacecrafts.

Consider the ATV more as pressurised module than a tug.
A kind of very small space station!
Well, the Chinese are rumoured to be planning to build a space station mostly out of the orbital modules from their Shenzhous (which are much smaller than the ATV). So if the ATV had a hatch at each end (as I believe has been considered for a variant that would dock to the ISS and allow a Soyuz to dock to the back) then couldn't you build up a space station out of ATV units?

Maybe with a couple of six-way connector things to allow it to branch, as with Mir.


Archibald said:
Btw this could make, too, an interesting alt-history.

http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/rombus.htm

http://www.astronautix.com/craft/proelena.htm

Rombus was a Big single-engine rocket, with external / expendable tanks (otherwise Single-stage-to-orbit is not feasible, even today).

So tanks are jettisoned on the way to low-earth orbit.
If you replace them while in Earth orbit by fully-fueled tanks (carried by others Rombus) this thing can fire its rocket engine again and carry heavy loads to the moon.
In-space refuelling? Interesting. I've seen that concept before but it usually involves a space station.
 

Archibald

Banned
Well, the Chinese are rumoured to be planning to build a space station mostly out of the orbital modules from their Shenzhous (which are much smaller than the ATV). So if the ATV had a hatch at each end (as I believe has been considered for a variant that would dock to the ISS and allow a Soyuz to dock to the back) then couldn't you build up a space station out of ATV units?

Maybe with a couple of six-way connector things to allow it to branch, as with Mir.

And you can use the MTFF (Man Tended Free Flyer) as basis
http://www.astronautix.com/craft/colrmtff.htm

The result would look similar to this (maybe) http://www.astronautix.com/craft/briation.htm

In space refueling sounds a bit difficult (pumping low-density, explosive hydrogen is not an esay task even on earth...)
Using fully-fueled tanks sounds easier.
Trouble with hydrogen in space is, as a deep cryogenic fuel it tend to boil quickly, leaving two alternatives
- venting and losing fuel
- explosion.
This didn't prevented studies of reusable Space Tugs in the 70's and the 80's, refueled by a station.
 
In space refueling sounds a bit difficult (pumping low-density, explosive hydrogen is not an esay task even on earth...)
Using fully-fueled tanks sounds easier.
Trouble with hydrogen in space is, as a deep cryogenic fuel it tend to boil quickly, leaving two alternatives
- venting and losing fuel
- explosion.
This didn't prevented studies of reusable Space Tugs in the 70's and the 80's, refueled by a station.

the soviet made fist fuel pumping on Progress->Salyut Station
but that is room temperatur Fuel NTO/UDMH

for deep cryogenic fuel is better to replace within the tanks
 
Last edited:

Archibald

Banned
Michel do you understand how was supposed to work the "reusable Tug" NASA was to use in the 70's ? Was it refueled by pumping hydrogen or by replacing tanks ?
I understand the space station was supposed to refueled it, but I can't imagine how...
 
most of Space Tug study were like that:
-it use its fuel until is empty and it become space junk
-if its empty the Space shuttle collect it, bring back to earth an refuel and it launch again.
-replace the empty fuel tank with full fuel tanks at space station

for refuel by pumping hydrogen and LOX
the empty fuel tank has only Helium and rest of Propellants in gas form
mutch lower pressure as full tank
so if we connect a Full tank at empty the Propellants flow in lower pressure tank
until we have balance of presure means 2 half full tanks

until now
i dont see a pumpsystem for deep cryogenic Propellants


another is refuel with artificial gravity

methode one
full Tank dock on top of empty tank connect with cabel to conterweight (Space Station or Fuel farm)
and start to rotating, the Centrifugal force is like artificial gravity and Propellants flow from top to down.

Methode two
full Tank dock on top of almost empty tank
the engine start up, using acceleration by thrusting the ship
and Propellants flow from top to down.

the two last work perfect for deep cryogenic Propellants
 

Archibald

Banned
with out structural improvement
2700 kg in 200x1000 km orbit

with structural improvement
4720 kg in 200x200 km orbit

why that?
Ariane 1 was design to launch only 1780 kg in to 200 x 36000 km orbit
later for Ariane 4 this structural improvement was made.

Note On Ariane 5 study in beginn 1980s
a Ariane 4 first stage and 4 Liquid fuel Booster
so in total 9-8 Viking engnie
second stage a big LOX/LH2 stage H45 with HM 60 engine
third stage a H10 (from Ariane 4) or small N2O4/UDMH stage.

to Capsule
in 1980 was Proposal "SOLARIS"
(Station Orbitale Laboratoire Automatique de Rendezvous et d'Interventions Spatiales)
from Center National d`Etudes Spatiales - Toulouse france

put a Orbital Platform "Modul de servis"
on that later is dockt a Labo Modul based Space Lab tech.
to servis that it use automatic Space Craft MINOS
a Space Capsul with servis module the small N2O4/UDMH stage of Ariane 5
total weight 12000 kg in Low orbit with 2300 kg cargo
later MINOS had to carry 3 Astronaut into orbit.
1981%20solaris%2002.jpg


from SOLARIS SYSTEM survide only as MTFF for Hermes shuttle
more on MTFF Hermes and end of it
http://www.astronautix.com/craft/hermes.htm
in french
http://www.capcomespace.net/dossiers/espace_europeen/hermes/index.htm



Didn't see the message yesterday! The Solaris and Eureka were the unmanned, early platforms.

Capcom' has interesting stuff on early Ariane V rockets.
 

Archibald

Banned
To date we haven't speak much of the Soviet reaction to all these plans.

I haven't thought very much about them, aside Chelomei. The guy was as controversial as Korolev or Oustinov (well, its a soviet after all) but at least he made some interesting hardware.
Sadly after Kroutchev was ousted of power, Chelomei projects were killed by its nemesis, Ustinov. Brejnev and Ustinov tended to push Mishine (Korolev successor) projects just to piss of Chelomei.

I think the easier way to reverse that is to oust Brejnev and replace him by Kossyguin. This would be the end of Ustinov influence, and maybe Chelomei would rise again ?

Not very aware of how soviet leadership worked. But Chelomei had lot of interesting projects.

It all depends of US programs. Don't know if USSR can afford the huge UR-700 rockets instead of the N-1. After all they did Energia from a clean sheet of paper.
If they chose to develop the UR-700, they can land on the moon with this thing http://www.astronautix.com/craft/lek.htm

Or having their own Skylab, the OS-1 http://www.astronautix.com/craft/os1lunar.htm

If they chose to stuck with the UR-500 proton, there's the TKS and Saliout or almaz stations. Can't see Saliut survive if Chelomei rise to the head of soviet space hierarchy...

If the USA decide to build Pathfinder, DynaSoar, a Lifting body or the Shuttle (in short, a spaceplane) Soviet answer could be the MAKS shuttle
http://www.astronautix.com/craft/makbiter.htm
 
the Chelomei' UR-700 is percect for this TL
http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/ur700.htm

build from parts of UR-500 aka Proton rocket :D
http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/pron8k82.htm

the unly problem was RD-270 engine and its combustion instability problems
http://www.astronautix.com/engines/rd270.htm

replace one RD-270 with 4 x RD-253 from Proton rocket
we got 6x40=24 RD-253 engine (like R-7 Rocket for Soyuz)

the UR-700 had several chance to get USSR Major booster
until 1964 Vladimir Nikolayevich Chelomei his main patron. was Khrushchev
(because Khrushchev son work in Chelomei OKB-52 plant)

but with the ouster of Khrushchev, Chelomei lost his main patron.
and support of military and the Central Committee of the USSR.
because he had show alot disrespect to wards Dmitri Fedorovich Ustinov,
Chairman of the Military-Industrial Commission.
1964 after Brezhnev takeover,
Ustinov became Secretary to the Central Committee of the Communist Party for Defence and Space.
and Ustinov hate Khrushchev and Chelomei deeply
in power he channcel alot programs of Chelomei OKB-52 or turn them in hand of Mishin OKB-1

then after the dead of Korolev in january 1966, was the question who replace him ?
Valentin Petrovich Glushko or Vladimir Nikolayevich Chelomei ?
Brezhnev neede almost 5 months to declare Vasili Pavlovich Mishin to replace Korolev as Head of OKB-1
(Mishin Problem Solving : drink heavily vodka until koma comes...)

after fiasco of N-1 Chelomei made strong protest against the "Rotten Rocket"
and way things run in USSR Moonrace, incompetents of Mishin and Brezhnev, Ustinov polical faliure
called to replace N-1 by UR-700 ( a little diplomatic way had help more)

as N-1 finally chanceld (and Mishin also fired) in 1974
with planning new program, the UR-700 came as Booster for Manned Mars Mission
but again Ustinov...

in end Energia came 20 years to late...

so how to chance this ?
-Khrushchev stay in power
-Ustinov never become Secretary to the Central Committee
-or Chelomei was more diplomatic with Dmitri Fedorovich Ustinov and Brezhnev
-Vasili Pavlovich Mishin never become head of OKB-1
-Chelomei OKB-52 replace Korolev OKB-1 after dead of Korolev
-Valentin Petrovich Glushko replace Korolev in may 1967 and give order to build UR-700
 
Last edited:

Archibald

Banned
-Chelomei OKB-52 replace Korolev OKB-1 after dead of Korolev
-Valentin Petrovich Glushko replace Korolev in may 1967 and give order to build UR-700

Glushko and Chelomei team and plot to kill the N-1 because they both hate it, and agree that better engines / propellants are needed.
 

Archibald

Banned
Please, go ahead.

This is a nonwank because, although there would be more and cheaper launches than OTL (and more people in space) the lack of the shuttle's cargo capacity would obviate some of the triumphs we've had in OTL (probably the Hubble Space Telescope...)

Bump. I'm slowly developing the Titan III/ Big G idea.
I've altered the book "the space shuttle decision" so it become "the Big Gemini decision".
POD is august 1971.

btw, note on the Hubble telescope. http://www.astronautix.com/graphics/m/morlhubb.jpg

This a 1965 concept : a MORL station launched by a Saturn IB (thus 18 tons) with a 120 inch (3 m) telescope.
It was manned :)
I think Hubble could be cure of its myopia without the Shuttle :
maybe Big G + robotic arm + MMU astronauts could do the job...

I think I'll put it on a blog one day
 
Bump. I'm slowly developing the Titan III/ Big G idea.
I've altered the book "the space shuttle decision" so it become "the Big Gemini decision".
POD is august 1971.

btw, note on the Hubble telescope. http://www.astronautix.com/graphics/m/morlhubb.jpg

This a 1965 concept : a MORL station launched by a Saturn IB (thus 18 tons) with a 120 inch (3 m) telescope.
It was manned :)
I think Hubble could be cure of its myopia without the Shuttle :
maybe Big G + robotic arm + MMU astronauts could do the job...

I think I'll put it on a blog one day
Archibald, cool stuff as always... :)
 
that is a Boeing study for MORL telescope
A SYSTEM STUDY OF A MANNED ORBITAL TELESOOPE
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19660017399_1966017399.pdf
is 20 MB big
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19660017557_1966017557.pdf
is 14 mb big

note on docking
Boeing gave several mode of operation
-Dock with MORL
-conneckt with umbilical tether. Electrical power and environmental control are supplied by the MORL
-The telescope is placed in orbit near the laboratory and is operated in a separatedposition at all times.

last one is better for telescope because MORL vibrates durnig operation.

note on MORL
planned als Smal Space Station for Low orbit and GEO ! (launch by a Saturn V)
there were plans for MORL as Interplanetary Flyby or even as Mission module for Mars mission.

MORL.jpeg
 

Archibald

Banned
I've found the NASA server recently thanks to one your previous post here, Michel. :)
Giga tons of interesting Pdf there, particularly on Farquar and its Lagrange libration point hobby.

I don't post this alt history here (at least for the moment) because I think I'll never finish to write it. Blogs are more flexible than forum for corrections

More precisions on Hubble servicing missions. Ok, there's no shuttle to do the job. But Big Gemini can do it, in a diffrent way...

Quite simple! Hubble successor, the James Webb IR telescope, is rumoured to have a docking collar for Orion.
So why not Hubble after all ?

Hubble have a docking collar, Big Gemini is send to the same orbit, and dock with the telescope.
Big Gemini, as the TKS, docked by its rear end, in fact by its expendable service module.
So a "Hubble Servicing Cargo Module" or HSCM is specially build for the mission.
BUT
The Shuttle has serviced Hubble five or six times in 20 years. Shall we need five or six HSCM ?
No!
Because the first servicing mission let the HSCM dock to Hubble for the rest of its useful life !

Thus, if the HSCM has a useful life of 15 or 20 years, you can reasonnably put costly hardware on it, such as a robotic arm very similar to the Shuttle. That what we did for Mir and the ISS no ?

In short : as Big Gemini as no payload bay, let a surrogate payload bay hanged to Hubble!

voila!
 
In short : as Big Gemini as no payload bay, let a surrogate payload bay hanged to Hubble!

wat about this

Big G with only 2 men crew (like Gemini B)
the passenger comparment section is used as smal payload bay with doors

wat about the reuse of Big G Reentry Vehicle ?
is land on runway by parasail so no damage by seawater
 

Archibald

Banned
wat about this

Big G with only 2 men crew (like Gemini B)
the passenger comparment section is used as smal payload bay with doors

Brilliant! You solved the problem I had for the location of the robotic arm :D
I'll keep a four men-crew, considering that Big G could carry as much as 9 to 12 astronauts.


wat about the reuse of Big G Reentry Vehicle ?
is land on runway by parasail so no damage by seawater



already done :p

To me it's simply unavoidable after Shuttle cancellation "look! Big G is also reusable, and it also land on the ground!
Don't regret the Shuttle too much!"

I even though about using airbags : they were invented in the mid-60's, according to Wikipedia (errhm.. dubious then...)

I've remembered PMN-1 "space options open to Pdt nixon" and one of them offered Big G+ Space station in 1980, for 2.5 billion only!

Its a game of give and take : do you want a shuttle to nowhere, or a smaller ferry to an existing station ?
 
Bump!

And also, I came across the book LEO On The Cheap which is free, online and discusses, well, what its title might imply. Might be useful for this thread and others where different space flight strategies are wanted...
 
Top