Had a thought about a hab module for this venture. You could use the Thales pressurized module for the Cygnus with some modifications.
That painted a mental picture in my mind of someone getting into an internet argument then spending a billion dollars to flyby Mars just to "prove a point." (And, of course, it didn't change anyone's mind. )
Quote from: Zed_Noir on 02/22/2013 10:22 pmHad a thought about a hab module for this venture. You could use the Thales pressurized module for the Cygnus with some modifications. Even simpler: Inflatable airlock mounted in place of the docking ring. It means the crew can EVA without needing to depressurize the cabin. Then, you can store all the extra food, water, air, etc in the trunk and just EVA out to get it occasionally. No hab module needed.
Basically no they're not doing a Venus swingby, but the perihelion almost gets down to Venus orbit.
Didn't the Russians try the inflatable route and find it hazardous.
Space X has a concept for an 'extended trunk' Dragon - Perhaps Space X could be commissioned to build a pressurized habitat/logistics module within that area: docking the main Dragon with it 'nose to tail', so to speak. And on top of that large trunk habitat/logistics module, instead of another Dragon capsule there could be a fair-sized hypergolic propulsion module that also has a set of solar arrays.
How much dv required to inject into that orbit?(IOW how much can FH deliver there)
Mixed launch fleet launch sequence: 1x Falcon Heavy - Earth Departure Stage #1 (LOX/CH4 or LOX/RP1).1x Falcon Heavy with the Long Trunk Habitat/Logistics and hypergolic propulsion module.1x Falcon 9.1 with Dragon Rider Command craft and crew.1x Atlas 552 with Centaur twin engined EDS #2.
with the payload numbers published for FH (53t to LEO,
they will need some kind of upper stage for the TMI in any case.
But with the payload numbers published for FH (53t to LEO, but just 12t to 28° GTO) they will need some kind of upper stage for the TMI in any case.
Any reason why a hatch couldn't be cut and installed through the bottom of the Dragon allowing access to a module in the trunk? The USAF was planning to do that with Gemini/MOL.
Quote from: rklaehn on 02/23/2013 06:42 amwith the payload numbers published for FH (53t to LEO, It's 53 tons inside a 2 ton fairing. You don't need the fairing for a crew mission.
Quote from: rklaehn on 02/23/2013 06:42 amthey will need some kind of upper stage for the TMI in any case.That's the conventional wisdom, yes.
Quote from: rklaehn on 02/23/2013 06:42 am But with the payload numbers published for FH (53t to LEO, but just 12t to 28° GTO) they will need some kind of upper stage for the TMI in any case.Will there be detente with ULA? A Centaur to kick Red Dragon on it's way. About 18mt then (including the empty kick stage).
Not taking into consideration the time & cost to have EVA suit rated for BEO uses. I don't think the ISS EVA suits are rated for BEO.
Quote from: Zed_Noir on 02/23/2013 03:54 amNot taking into consideration the time & cost to have EVA suit rated for BEO uses. I don't think the ISS EVA suits are rated for BEO.In what aspects does BEO vs LEO matter WRT a space suit?
If this is going to work, it has to be one launch. Everything else starts getting in the billions and is much too complex to pull off in such a short time.And no reconfiguration of the spacecraft after TMI. Imagine you are after TMI and something goes wrong with the rotation of the dragon and docking to the service module.........That way, you can abort in case something goes wrong with the reconfiguration, and you increase the TMI throwmass a lot.
I think they will propose to tough it out without any additional living space. But with the payload numbers published for FH (53t to LEO, but just 12t to 28° GTO) they will need some kind of upper stage for the TMI in any case.
I think they will propose to tough it out without any additional living space.
Quote from: rklaehn on 02/23/2013 06:42 amIf this is going to work, it has to be one launch. Everything else starts getting in the billions and is much too complex to pull off in such a short time.And no reconfiguration of the spacecraft after TMI. Imagine you are after TMI and something goes wrong with the rotation of the dragon and docking to the service module.........That way, you can abort in case something goes wrong with the reconfiguration, and you increase the TMI throwmass a lot. Not critisizing, just a question. Would two launches really be that much more complex? You propose rearranging the stack after launch anyway and I agree it would be necessary.
Quote from: rklaehn on 02/23/2013 06:42 amI think they will propose to tough it out without any additional living space. There is a limit to how much you can tough it out. Ten cubic m just is not enough for two people over 500 days, not when all the onboard equipment cuts it to half this.