Eyes Turned Skywards

[Bahamut-255]

What, every single time? Why?

It's not like the Service Module or solar panels are coming down in the capsule and being reused.

I can see that Minotaur is an opportunity for ESA to test out a human-ratable reentry TPS system. But what is the reasoning behind requiring every Minotaur launch to burden itself with this?

Is Minotaur intended to fill the niche of returns of samples and the like to Earth for study?

Even so, I'd think early on Minotaur would split into two designs--one with a TPS for reentry for sample returns (and by the way, quietly, as a way of refining the eventual "Minos" or whatever you prefer to call it--and one without, just your basic one-way space bus, to launch the maximum cargo.

I think you've already answered the question. It's the combined ability to return cargo to Earth as well as verifying it's suitability for Manned Flight.

Furthermore, ESAs funding level is somewhat less than NASAs so they can't afford to build multiple craft for varying specific mission profiles. In short, they need the most that they can get for a given input. Hence, as few changes as is possible between an unmanned resupply vessel and a manned spacecraft.

 

[Expat]

Beautiful! Inspiring!

I would love to know the countries who have and will participate in the extra-seat program.

As for the station's effects on Reagan's reelection, I'm going to guess the opposite of Bahamut and speculate on how this might hurt Reagan (just for speculation's sake.)

First, space as an issue isn't likely to sway many voters (especially in Minnesota where no contracts are being won.) Reagan can tie Freedom to the Cold War, but he's already got just about all of those voters. He can use it as evidence of his international cooperation, but he's already got those voters as well.

Excepting social justice, Mondale's campaign was all about how the government spends money. I think if anything Freedom costs him a few votes from the so-called "Reagan Democrats"- blue-collar workers who pride themselves on "common sense."

While Reagan's pitch that this is part of the Cold War and his ability to point to the cost-sharing nature of the project might assuage many of those doubts, I think the fact that (to the guy sitting in Green Bay) this is a hunk of metal in space, not helping me get to work or protecting my border, is going to mean a miniscule swing away from Reagan. Less than 1%. (And don't forget DC; he's never getting all the electoral votes.)

 

[e of pi]

he he, mustache in space...rules!
here my proposal for first group of ESA Astronauts

Group one:
Wubbo Ockels, Netherlands, civilan Physicist.
Ulf Merbold, ,West Germany, civilan Physicist.
Stephen Baxter, Great Britain, civilian engineer, member of British Interplanetary Society
Jean-Loup Chrètien, France, military Pilot.

While I like the notion of launching Stephen Baxter to orbit, I'm not sure he had the required skillsets--unless his life is pretty sginificantly butterflied, which I guess it could be. Anyone else have thoughts on the UK's first astronaut?

Chrètien fit here well, because as Pilot he could fly a CSM, see the Seat Wars here on EtS part I post 17

I recall the seat wars, yes, I created them. However, while France might be looking for pilots with the hopes of having a manned spacecraft someday, recall that NASA has no interest at the moment in letting ESA pilots fly Apollos. They're fine with ESA passengers flying on Apollo, but not actually flying the vehicle. Stile Chrètien seems like a decent pick from France's perspective.

and there is Interkosmos program were Soviet fly guest astronauts to Salut stations
like the east german Sigmund Jähn in 1978 and in OTL Jean-Loup Chrètien in 1982
will ESA participation to Interkosmos or decline the offer, not to anger Ronald Reagan ?

Jahn's flight was mentioned in Post 20 of Part I. Given that Chrètien will be flying to Spacelab by the end of 1980, and may fly again if ESA doesn't already have a second class trained by '81, I'd say he's a bit busy. Why pay Intercosmos to fly astronauts to a station you have had no involvement when you've already got flights to one you've built your own lab for (Spacelab)?

 

[e of pi]

Hmm, NASA, the President, and the international partners are all willing to commit to the biggest Multibody option to launch the core, initial piece of Freedom, without which none of the rest can work, at a time when even the M02 has not been launched nor yet a single prototype even been built for ground static testing?

Here--I guess it might be a mix of things. Part of it is Vulkan panic, part might be a very great confidence that what Boeing draws on paper is sure to fly flawlessly when fleshed out.

Well, recall that Multibody's core is basically just a stretched Saturn 1C--and Saturn 1C's flown a good 20 flights by 1982. So they're willing to trust Boeing that the core will work, which just leaves the question of will the clustering work. Boosters are nothing new, the only difference here is that the boosters and core are roughly identical, so that's also not seen as hugely risky if they trust the basic core--which again is basically just a stretched Saturn 1C. There's more technical details to support those gut feelings, but to be really simplistic, it doesn't feel as risky as relying on a wholly new LV probably should.

I'm sure that the funding must include a few test flights, first of M02, then of solid-boosted versions, finally an all-up H03.

We'll get into the testing and such in a later post, but...yeah, there will be some demo flights.

The only cargo I can envision for the H03, assuming there are no gung-ho plans on the table yet for grandiose manned ventures beyond LEO, would be launching Freedom's core.

The core, and the inner two truss segments. Reread the update. And given how critical those components are, and the fact that R&D and construction costs on them will probably exceed a billion $, adding a couple hundred million to fly a risk-reduction Heavy starts to seem like a good deal.

For that matter, while you do tell us that HSM masses pretty much the full LEO capability of H03, I have to go look that up
--------
Wow, 70 tonnes! I guess there's capacity for a big fairing after all.

Forgot how big Multibody is, didn't you. It's okay, happens to me sometimes.

So--would manned versions of the basic craft still be considered a subtype of "Minotaur," or would that evolution merit a whole new name?

We'll see when we get there, but strategicially Minotaur as a stepping-stone to a manned vehicle has a lot in common with the SpaceX Dragon (though the designs are pretty different in the technical details, they're both leveraging a cargo need as an excuse for developing and testing the critical components of a manned system). I'd be inclined

What, every single time? Why?

It's not like the Service Module or solar panels are coming down in the capsule and being reused.

No, but they're not NASA and don't have NASA's budget, so they're looking harder for ways to save a bit. If refurbishment doesn't work out, they'll just fly them expendably, like NASA's Apollos, but they think it's worth investigating. As for why recover at all, building a separate variant without TPS would cost a fair bit, and somewhat defeat the secondary role of demonstrating for future manned operations, while Minotaur's downmass actually provides a pretty useful capability on its own--in fact, it's perhaps more important than its upmass. Samples, entire experiment racks, station hardware (small stuff, like life support sumps or computer components)...there's a lot that's interesting to have back if something's already headed downhill, and not a lot of room in an Apollo descent module once you account for the crew. NASA doesn't really need maximum upmass from ESA's craft, but having a good 3.5 tons of downmass on every flight is appreciated a lot--again, look at the SpaceX Dragon. On theflight next week, SpaceX-1 is manifested to only carry 500 kg to the station, but it's manifested to carry almost triple that down.

 

[AndyC]

While I like the notion of launching Stephen Baxter to orbit, I'm not sure he had the required skillsets--unless his life is pretty sginificantly butterflied, which I guess it could be. Anyone else have thoughts on the UK's first astronaut?

Squadron Leader Nigel Wood? In OTL was selected as the UK's first astronaut to launch Skynet4A out of STS-61H. Flight cancelled following Challenger.

 

[Athelstane]

I can answer this one!

No, not really. NASA is certainly aware of the possibilities of low orbit infrastructure, but without Shuttle there's no real incentive for developing it (launch costs aren't low enough, or rather expected to be low enough, and in any case they don't have a program that would use it). This is another reason why Freedom ITTL is going more smoothly than IOTL, a large portion of the design space that they explored OTL is simply not considered viable ITTL.

In other words, Freedom starts out of the gate as a strictly low earth orbit research station, full stop. That's certainly more prudent; I was just wondering if the Reagan funding bonanza wouldn't get the MSFC guys too giddy with ambition.

Infrastructure basing would probably better done in dedicated platforms further down the road, and probably not even manned, at least not regularly.

 

[Michel Van]

While I like the notion of launching Stephen Baxter to orbit, I'm not sure he had the required skillsets--unless his life is pretty sginificantly butterflied, which I guess it could be. Anyone else have thoughts on the UK's first astronaut?

let him explane it self

Q:How serious were your early dreams of becoming an astronaut?

A:
Well, as a kid, yes, I wanted to. When I got older, no; I couldn't compete with all the athletic types. But when the Juno mission was advertised – the one Helen Sharman flew – I applied. I actually qualified in many of the criteria, except I had no foreign language. But for that I might have made a later cut. Now I've got to know NASA and I've found it's just a big government bureaucracy, much like any other. I don't think I'd enjoy much being a NASA employee!

But if I had the chance I'd go. You can forget the G-contorted faces beloved of our childhood; the Space Shuttle is about as demanding a ride as a roller coaster. But I'd much rather go someplace away from Earth. The astronauts tell me that after three months or so in Earth orbit you want to go somewhere. But it's all part of the appeal for me of working on books like Voyage, Titan and Moonseed. I work very intently on the scenes set on the Moon and Mars – how it would feel, what would you see; it's (almost) as good as being there.

Source of Baxter quote

 

[Expat]

Amateur question: it looks iffy to me to have the Apollo ports that close to the solar panels. Won't they have to traverse them to dock? Or is this SOP and nothing to worry about?

 

[Bahamut-255]

Squadron Leader Nigel Wood? In OTL was selected as the UK's first astronaut to launch Skynet4A out of STS-61H. Flight cancelled following Challenger.

And he never did get into Space as a result. Maybe here, he's in with a real chance.

In other words, Freedom starts out of the gate as a strictly low earth orbit research station, full stop. That's certainly more prudent; I was just wondering if the Reagan funding bonanza wouldn't get the MSFC guys too giddy with ambition.

Infrastructure basing would probably better done in dedicated platforms further down the road, and probably not even manned, at least not regularly.

It's possible that they try to get more. But, they know they gotta wait until they have the time and manpower to achieve it. And that looks most likely to occur in the 1990s. Exactly when the funding levels begin to drop off a cliff, if previous posts are accurate. That's going to be quite the hangover.

 

[Bahamut-255]

Amateur question: it looks iffy to me to have the Apollo ports that close to the solar panels. Won't they have to traverse them to dock? Or is this SOP and nothing to worry about?

They most likely just appear to be quite close to the Solar Panels. I'm certain there's a good distance set between the Solar Panels and Apollo Spacecraft - I'd guess at least a good 8-10m which should provide the necessary space for manoeuvring.

 

[Athelstane]

It's possible that they try to get more. But, they know they gotta wait until they have the time and manpower to achieve it. And that looks most likely to occur in the 1990s. Exactly when the funding levels begin to drop off a cliff, if previous posts are accurate. That's going to be quite the hangover.

Fortunately, they'll have Freedom built by that point, with the main expense in manned flight being shuttling astronauts and supplies to and from the station.

It would, however, put the kibosh on any NASA ambitions for the Moon, NEO, let alone Mars or Venus. But that would leave them no worse off than they were in OTL - indeed, somewhat better off. Even if H03 production lines get terminated (along with SDI).

Which leaves the Russian program. They were hard pressed to keep Mir in operation, and were in no easy position to put up Mir II. Without ISS, they would have been hard pressed to maintain a permanent presence in LEO.

 

[Bahamut-255]

Which leaves the Russian program. They were hard pressed to keep Mir in operation, and were in no easy position to put up Mir II. Without ISS, they would have been hard pressed to maintain a permanent presence in LEO.

I know. That's the big problem I have for my own TL. Simply keeping OTL Mir up was an immense challenge for them. Here, with a much larger Mir, it's only going to be much harder for them - if not next to impossible.

 

[e of pi]

Squadron Leader Nigel Wood? In OTL was selected as the UK's first astronaut to launch Skynet4A out of STS-61H. Flight cancelled following Challenger.

And he never did get into Space as a result. Maybe here, he's in with a real chance.

Sounds good for the Uk's first. Baxter is an interesting suggestion, I'll keep him in mind for the future--the language restriction, though, isn't likely to entirely go away.

It's possible that they try to get more. But, they know they gotta wait until they have the time and manpower to achieve it. And that looks most likely to occur in the 1990s. Exactly when the funding levels begin to drop off a cliff, if previous posts are accurate. That's going to be quite the hangover.

Dunno where we gave the impression that they'd "fall off a cliff" in the 90s. If we did, it was given in error. The heady year-over-year increases seen during the mid-80s won't continue, but neither will it be dropping overly much--after all, until 1992 we've got George Bush, Sr, and then there's...well, that would be telling.

They most likely just appear to be quite close to the Solar Panels. I'm certain there's a good distance set between the Solar Panels and Apollo Spacecraft - I'd guess at least a good 8-10m which should provide the necessary space for manoeuvring.

See this top view. With the panels rotated to vertical (they're not quite even in that image), there's a good 12m clearance.

Which leaves the Russian program. They were hard pressed to keep Mir in operation, and were in no easy position to put up Mir II. Without ISS, they would have been hard pressed to maintain a permanent presence in LEO.

I know. That's the big problem I have for my own TL. Simply keeping OTL Mir up was an immense challenge for them. Here, with a much larger Mir, it's only going to be much harder for them - if not next to impossible.

Ah, yes. We have....plans for the Russians. TTL's Mir is definitely going to require a lot more in the way of upkeep for them, and as you note, they could barely afford Mir OTL. At least ITTL they're not trying to replace it immediately, but still, there's definitely going to be rather severe budget issues.

 

[Workable Goblin]

It's possible that they try to get more. But, they know they gotta wait until they have the time and manpower to achieve it. And that looks most likely to occur in the 1990s. Exactly when the funding levels begin to drop off a cliff, if previous posts are accurate. That's going to be quite the hangover.

Less drop off of a cliff, more slowly sink in real terms (possibly). Look at the OTL budget numbers, for instance; sure, there was a peak in the early '90s, but that's because of Endeavour. If you remove that, the budget was quite stable in real terms, although slowly dropping.

 

[Expat]

See this top view. With the panels rotated to vertical (they're not quite even in that image), there's a good 12m clearance.

I was showing this to a friend who made this illustration to address his concern. His comment:

Eh I'm still not so sure. I've added back in the missing panels and drawn in the docking funnel, along with a visualization of the funnel NASA actually used during docking. Cutting it pretty close on the outer panels, imo. Maybe it's not a big deal but I just want to make sure that they're thinking of possible docking paths as a cone and not a cylinder.

 

[Athelstane]

Hello gents,

Will there be an update soon on robotic exploration at this stage?

 

[Workable Goblin]

Hello gents,

Will there be an update soon on robotic exploration at this stage?

I hope so, because I wrote an awful lot of robot posts and they have to be posted eventually

Seriously, though, after next week's interlude post (which is all sorts of awesome, by the way), you'll be getting back-to-back posts on Mars, followed by a steady (though hardly every week) diet of robots until Part II ends.

 

[e of pi]

I was showing this to a friend who made this illustration to address his concern. His comment:

Eh I'm still not so sure. I've added back in the missing panels and drawn in the docking funnel, along with a visualization of the funnel NASA actually used during docking. Cutting it pretty close on the outer panels, imo. Maybe it's not a big deal but I just want to make sure that they're thinking of possible docking paths as a cone and not a cylinder.

The image that's based off of was specifically intended to show all the components, so the solar arrays weren't totally vertical--I didn't want to have to take the time to boot up my modeling software and grab another just to show the room available. However, if you insist. The leftmost side view shows the panels something like they were in that top view--rotated a bit, so they show better from several angles. The second shows them fully vertical, and the rightmost is the zenith view in that situation with docking funnels superimposed. As you can see, the clearance is there in this configuration. The solar rotary joints that they're rotating around are also marked for clarity. Better?

Hello gents,

Will there be an update soon on robotic exploration at this stage?

Post 3 gives a rough outline, Post 5 focuses on the Voyagers through their respective Jupiter encounters, and there's another 10 posts and maybe around 20k words on various other unmanned exploration topics in the buffer waiting their turn (many of which cover things mentioned in Post 3's outline in more detail). So that's a long way of saying, "Yes, Athelstane, there's going to be some updates on unmanned exploration."

EDIT: Ninja'd!

 

[Puget Sound]

Will the Industrial Space Facility be launched in TTL?

 

[Expat]

Better?

The lengths you go to reassure your readers are impressive and thorough, thank you!

He also wants to know (I keep telling him to just get an account!) if we'll see other orbital scopes earlier: x-ray, IR, gamma and especially gravitational radiation.