Author Topic: Orion to ISS without SLS proposal due today?  (Read 11102 times)

Offline hkultala

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 570
  • Liked: 136
  • Likes Given: 67
Re: Orion to ISS without SLS proposal due today?
« Reply #20 on: 05/30/2017 03:08 PM »
The last values published for the DIVH with upgrades is 28,370kg to LEO. It could take a fully fueled Orion to orbit and then let its SM do the orbital maneuvering to dock with ISS. The configuration used on EFT-1 no longer exists.

As far as F9 the current "Block 3" has the 22,500kg to orbit as max expendable capability. But we do not know just how much more than that the Block 5 is capable of. My estimate is 25,000+kg to LEO.

The 22800 kg number in SpaceX web page is for the version of F9 they are SELLING launches for. (block 5)
Not the one they are currently FLYING. (block 3).
« Last Edit: 05/30/2017 03:08 PM by hkultala »

Offline oldAtlas_Eguy

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2920
  • Florida
  • Liked: 1244
  • Likes Given: 85
Re: Orion to ISS without SLS proposal due today?
« Reply #21 on: 05/30/2017 04:03 PM »
The last values published for the DIVH with upgrades is 28,370kg to LEO. It could take a fully fueled Orion to orbit and then let its SM do the orbital maneuvering to dock with ISS. The configuration used on EFT-1 no longer exists.

As far as F9 the current "Block 3" has the 22,500kg to orbit as max expendable capability. But we do not know just how much more than that the Block 5 is capable of. My estimate is 25,000+kg to LEO.

The 22800 kg number in SpaceX web page is for the version of F9 they are SELLING launches for. (block 5)
Not the one they are currently FLYING. (block 3).
Even though the thrust levels have been updated on the F9 page to show Block 5 capabilities the payload amounts have not changed from the earlier page that showed just the Block 3 thrust levels.
Block 5 is the M1DFT+++ thrust levels
Block 3 is the M1DFT++ thrust levels

The page was updated to 22,800kg to LEO almost 2 years ago. The FH page max LEO payload was updated when the thrust levels were updated ~6 months ago from 58mt to 64mt. The F9 page payload values were not updated when the thrust levels were updated. So we do not know if the payload values are still the max or not, Indications from the update of the max LEO for FH suggests that there is more capability than what is posted.

Online envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2323
  • Liked: 1008
  • Likes Given: 675
Re: Orion to ISS without SLS proposal due today?
« Reply #22 on: 05/30/2017 04:11 PM »
The last values published for the DIVH with upgrades is 28,370kg to LEO. It could take a fully fueled Orion to orbit and then let its SM do the orbital maneuvering to dock with ISS. The configuration used on EFT-1 no longer exists.

As far as F9 the current "Block 3" has the 22,500kg to orbit as max expendable capability. But we do not know just how much more than that the Block 5 is capable of. My estimate is 25,000+kg to LEO.

The 22800 kg number in SpaceX web page is for the version of F9 they are SELLING launches for. (block 5)
Not the one they are currently FLYING. (block 3).
Even though the thrust levels have been updated on the F9 page to show Block 5 capabilities the payload amounts have not changed from the earlier page that showed just the Block 3 thrust levels.
Block 5 is the M1DFT+++ thrust levels
Block 3 is the M1DFT++ thrust levels

The page was updated to 22,800kg to LEO almost 2 years ago. The FH page max LEO payload was updated when the thrust levels were updated ~6 months ago from 58mt to 64mt. The F9 page payload values were not updated when the thrust levels were updated. So we do not know if the payload values are still the max or not, Indications from the update of the max LEO for FH suggests that there is more capability than what is posted.

SpaceX changed it from 13t directly to 23t, but did so after announcing the thrust upgrades for block 5. So it's not clear where the current vehicle fits in.

F9 is probably capable enough to lift a partly-fueled Orion in either case, however.

Offline Zed_Noir

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2148
  • Canada
  • Liked: 270
  • Likes Given: 417
Re: Orion to ISS without SLS proposal due today?
« Reply #23 on: 05/31/2017 01:29 AM »
Will the Orion riding up hill with either a F9 or a FH become the OrionX?  ;D

Online RobW

  • Member
  • Posts: 18
  • Melbourne, Australia
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 38
Re: Orion to ISS without SLS proposal due today?
« Reply #24 on: 05/31/2017 05:26 AM »
Will the Orion riding up hill with either a F9 or a FH become the OrionX?  ;D
Or the Ex-Orion?  :o

Ba-dum-TISH :)

But, the only way an Orion is going to fly on *anything* other than a certain senate-specified, shuttle-derived launcher is if someone can convince Mr Shelby and the guys at Marshall that doing so is good for said SLS. Orion is most of the most of the justification for SLS - SLS can launch Orion into 'Deep Spaaaaaaace' :) Even showing that something else could throw Orion into LEO weakens that argument, so I don't see Shelby et al buying it.
Science fiction writer, spaceflight blogger, and unrepentant technological optimist.

Offline Brovane

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1009
  • United States
  • Liked: 465
  • Likes Given: 958
Re: Orion to ISS without SLS proposal due today?
« Reply #25 on: 05/31/2017 06:40 PM »
Will the Orion riding up hill with either a F9 or a FH become the OrionX?  ;D
Or the Ex-Orion?  :o

Ba-dum-TISH :)

But, the only way an Orion is going to fly on *anything* other than a certain senate-specified, shuttle-derived launcher is if someone can convince Mr Shelby and the guys at Marshall that doing so is good for said SLS. Orion is most of the most of the justification for SLS - SLS can launch Orion into 'Deep Spaaaaaaace' :) Even showing that something else could throw Orion into LEO weakens that argument, so I don't see Shelby et al buying it.

Shelby might buy into launching Orion with a Vulcan/ACES? 
"Look at that! If anybody ever said, "you'll be sitting in a spacecraft naked with a 134-pound backpack on your knees charging it", I'd have said "Aw, get serious". - John Young - Apollo-16

Offline oldAtlas_Eguy

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2920
  • Florida
  • Liked: 1244
  • Likes Given: 85
Re: Orion to ISS without SLS proposal due today?
« Reply #26 on: 05/31/2017 07:06 PM »
Some of the problem is this: Requirements revisions.

Orion was first to be a cis-Lunar operations vehicle.

But then it was upgrade to be a Mars transport vehicle.

But now in use it is back to being a cis-Lunar vehicle but still built to Mars transport specs.

This has made it too heavy: added radiation shielding for months and years of operation to and from Mars, much more redundancy and backups than needed for a 2 week trip, and other items that also add to its weight needed for a Mars trip but not for a cis-Lunar trip.

Offline Dante80

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 876
  • Athens : Greece
  • Liked: 776
  • Likes Given: 494
Re: Orion to ISS without SLS proposal due today?
« Reply #27 on: 05/31/2017 07:56 PM »
On the other hand, being very overbuilt for the Moon is not such a bad thing...more shielding, backups and redundancy are always nice to have.


Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7086
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 2644
  • Likes Given: 782
Re: Orion to ISS without SLS proposal due today?
« Reply #28 on: 06/01/2017 06:37 AM »
On the other hand, being very overbuilt for the Moon is not such a bad thing...more shielding, backups and redundancy are always nice to have.
The level of backups and redundancy is the same for both Lunar and Mars missions. So is the shielding.

Orion is NOT a Mars Transport Vehicle. En route to Mars the crew will live in a habitation vehicle, which is not the same as Orion. The crew will use Orion as their primary transport vehicle only during launch to LEO and subsequent Trans-Mars Injection and during Trans-Earth injection and re-entry on Earth. Everywhere in-between Orion is just along for the ride.

Offline Dante80

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 876
  • Athens : Greece
  • Liked: 776
  • Likes Given: 494
Re: Orion to ISS without SLS proposal due today?
« Reply #29 on: 06/01/2017 07:06 AM »
On the other hand, being very overbuilt for the Moon is not such a bad thing...more shielding, backups and redundancy are always nice to have.
The level of backups and redundancy is the same for both Lunar and Mars missions. So is the shielding.

Orion is NOT a Mars Transport Vehicle. En route to Mars the crew will live in a habitation vehicle, which is not the same as Orion. The crew will use Orion as their primary transport vehicle only during launch to LEO and subsequent Trans-Mars Injection and during Trans-Earth injection and re-entry on Earth. Everywhere in-between Orion is just along for the ride.

I don't think that anyone said that Orion was intended as a Mars Transport Vehicle. Neither was it ever intended to be.

Offline Nibb31

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 168
  • France
  • Liked: 79
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: Orion to ISS without SLS proposal due today?
« Reply #30 on: 06/01/2017 08:10 AM »
Orion is the dinghy of a Mars transfer vehicle. Framing Orion as part of a "Journey to Mars" is like spending 20 years designing the row boat to use to get to the Pinta, Niņa, and Santa Maria.

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7086
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 2644
  • Likes Given: 782
Re: Orion to ISS without SLS proposal due today?
« Reply #31 on: 06/01/2017 08:50 AM »
The level of backups and redundancy is the same for both Lunar and Mars missions. So is the shielding.

Orion is NOT a Mars Transport Vehicle. En route to Mars the crew will live in a habitation vehicle, which is not the same as Orion. The crew will use Orion as their primary transport vehicle only during launch to LEO and subsequent Trans-Mars Injection and during Trans-Earth injection and re-entry on Earth. Everywhere in-between Orion is just along for the ride.

I don't think that anyone said that Orion was intended as a Mars Transport Vehicle. Neither was it ever intended to be.

Just a handfull of posts above this was:
Some of the problem is this: Requirements revisions.

Orion was first to be a cis-Lunar operations vehicle.

But then it was upgrade to be a Mars transport vehicle.

But now in use it is back to being a cis-Lunar vehicle but still built to Mars transport specs.


This has made it too heavy: added radiation shielding for months and years of operation to and from Mars, much more redundancy and backups than needed for a 2 week trip, and other items that also add to its weight needed for a Mars trip but not for a cis-Lunar trip.
So yeah, someone here in fact did say Orion was a Mars Transport vehicle.
Your original post, about the over-built Orion was directly under that one.
« Last Edit: 06/01/2017 08:52 AM by woods170 »

Offline Dante80

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 876
  • Athens : Greece
  • Liked: 776
  • Likes Given: 494
Re: Orion to ISS without SLS proposal due today?
« Reply #32 on: 06/01/2017 10:19 AM »
Point taken (although I don't think that oldAtlas_Eguy was suggesting it would do what you said), let me re-phrase.

My argument was that having a BLEO general purpose vehicle be overbuilt (from the safety standpoint), is not necessarily such a bad thing. It simply is as safe as you can make it.

And with some capabilities that commercial vehicles don't have, and cannot have (without a serious additional development program that does not even exist anyway).

 


« Last Edit: 06/01/2017 10:21 AM by Dante80 »

Offline UltraViolet9

  • Member
  • Posts: 17
  • Undisclosed
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Orion to ISS without SLS proposal due today?
« Reply #33 on: 06/01/2017 02:01 PM »
Some of the problem is this: Requirements revisions.

Orion was first to be a cis-Lunar operations vehicle.

But then it was upgrade to be a Mars transport vehicle.

But now in use it is back to being a cis-Lunar vehicle but still built to Mars transport specs.

I'd add the time Orion was scaled back to ISS crew return/rescue vehicle at the start of Bolden's tenure.

Quote
This has made it too heavy: added radiation shielding for months and years of operation to and from Mars,

I don't think there's much, if any, dedicated radiation shielding for the crew on Orion.  According to slide 3 in this presentation, Orion had 216kg of crew shielding in 2006, but that amount went to and is still zero as of last year.  They appear to be relying entirely on reconfiguring stowed items to create an SPE shelter (slides 4-6) and on personal vests to protect against SPEs (slide 8 ).  I can't find references to polyethylene or other Orion shielding for GCRs.

http://wrmiss.org/workshops/twentyfirst/Gaza.pdf

Similarly, the electronics are hardened against radiation, but there does not appear to be much shielding.  See slide 9.

These measures -- reconfiguring stowed cargo, personal vests, and rad-hardened electronics -- could be applied to any capsule.  Not sure what the Orion capsule itself brings to the table regarding radiation shielding/protection.

« Last Edit: 06/01/2017 02:01 PM by UltraViolet9 »

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7086
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 2644
  • Likes Given: 782
Re: Orion to ISS without SLS proposal due today?
« Reply #34 on: 06/01/2017 05:12 PM »
Some of the problem is this: Requirements revisions.

Orion was first to be a cis-Lunar operations vehicle.

But then it was upgrade to be a Mars transport vehicle.

But now in use it is back to being a cis-Lunar vehicle but still built to Mars transport specs.

I'd add the time Orion was scaled back to ISS crew return/rescue vehicle at the start of Bolden's tenure.

Quote
This has made it too heavy: added radiation shielding for months and years of operation to and from Mars,

I don't think there's much, if any, dedicated radiation shielding for the crew on Orion.  According to slide 3 in this presentation, Orion had 216kg of crew shielding in 2006, but that amount went to and is still zero as of last year.  They appear to be relying entirely on reconfiguring stowed items to create an SPE shelter (slides 4-6) and on personal vests to protect against SPEs (slide 8 ).  I can't find references to polyethylene or other Orion shielding for GCRs.

http://wrmiss.org/workshops/twentyfirst/Gaza.pdf

Similarly, the electronics are hardened against radiation, but there does not appear to be much shielding.  See slide 9.

These measures -- reconfiguring stowed cargo, personal vests, and rad-hardened electronics -- could be applied to any capsule.  Not sure what the Orion capsule itself brings to the table regarding radiation shielding/protection.


Substantial shielding on Orion is not required. The crews will only be inside Orion for relatively short amounts of time (days in stead of months or years). But the habitation modules of Cislunar outposts and Mars transfer vehicles will have substantial shielding. Because those will be home to the crews for months, if not years.

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7086
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 2644
  • Likes Given: 782
Re: Orion to ISS without SLS proposal due today?
« Reply #35 on: 06/01/2017 05:13 PM »
Orion is the dinghy of a Mars transfer vehicle. Framing Orion as part of a "Journey to Mars" is like spending 20 years designing the row boat to use to get to the Pinta, Niņa, and Santa Maria.
This. And that is why I'm highly skeptical of any plans by NASA to have the actual Mars Transfer Vehicles ready by 2030. If those go the Orion way, they should be designing them right now. But they aren't. They are all stuck in the R&D phase.

Offline ncb1397

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 686
  • Liked: 317
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Orion to ISS without SLS proposal due today?
« Reply #36 on: 06/02/2017 08:19 PM »
On the other hand, being very overbuilt for the Moon is not such a bad thing...more shielding, backups and redundancy are always nice to have.
The level of backups and redundancy is the same for both Lunar and Mars missions. So is the shielding.

Orion is NOT a Mars Transport Vehicle. En route to Mars the crew will live in a habitation vehicle, which is not the same as Orion. The crew will use Orion as their primary transport vehicle only during launch to LEO and subsequent Trans-Mars Injection and during Trans-Earth injection and re-entry on Earth. Everywhere in-between Orion is just along for the ride.

Well, Orion has 84 man-days of life support. With a 6 km/s TMI burn, you can get to Mars in 80 days in 2035 as Musk pointed out at IAC. Burning almost all of the service module propellant and a SLS Block II would be right about there. Only question mark is if you can boost the life support system enough for a 2 person crew without adding much weight and what do you do when you get there? I presume you would carry a small lander with you or aerobrake into orbit to be picked up by robotic infrastructure pre-staged in orbit. So, with the right launch vehicle and infrastructure on Mars, it is possible.

Offline llanitedave

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2080
  • Nevada Desert
  • Liked: 1262
  • Likes Given: 1460
Re: Orion to ISS without SLS proposal due today?
« Reply #37 on: 06/05/2017 07:25 PM »
What does Orion to the ISS give us that Dragon 2 and CST 100 don't?
"I've just abducted an alien -- now what?"

Offline whitelancer64

Re: Orion to ISS without SLS proposal due today?
« Reply #38 on: 06/05/2017 07:54 PM »
On the other hand, being very overbuilt for the Moon is not such a bad thing...more shielding, backups and redundancy are always nice to have.
The level of backups and redundancy is the same for both Lunar and Mars missions. So is the shielding.

Orion is NOT a Mars Transport Vehicle. En route to Mars the crew will live in a habitation vehicle, which is not the same as Orion. The crew will use Orion as their primary transport vehicle only during launch to LEO and subsequent Trans-Mars Injection and during Trans-Earth injection and re-entry on Earth. Everywhere in-between Orion is just along for the ride.

Well, Orion has 84 man-days of life support. With a 6 km/s TMI burn, you can get to Mars in 80 days in 2035 as Musk pointed out at IAC. Burning almost all of the service module propellant and a SLS Block II would be right about there. Only question mark is if you can boost the life support system enough for a 2 person crew without adding much weight and what do you do when you get there? I presume you would carry a small lander with you or aerobrake into orbit to be picked up by robotic infrastructure pre-staged in orbit. So, with the right launch vehicle and infrastructure on Mars, it is possible.

Yeah, the issue then becomes deceleration at Mars.
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Offline Mark S

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2104
  • Dallas, TX
  • Liked: 143
  • Likes Given: 33
Re: Orion to ISS without SLS proposal due today?
« Reply #39 on: 06/05/2017 08:09 PM »
What does Orion to the ISS give us that Dragon 2 and CST 100 don't?

It fulfills the section of the NASA Authorization Act of 2010 that requires MPCV be able to go to ISS?

Quote
Section 2:

(9)   While   commercial   transportation   systems   have   the   
promise  to  contribute  valuable  services,  it  is  in  the  United 
States  national  interest  to  maintain  a  government  operated 
space  transportation  system  for  crew  and  cargo  delivery  to 
space.

and

Quote
Sec 302
(c) MINIMUM CAPABILITY REQUIREMENTS
(1)  IN   GENERAL
The  Space  Launch  System  developed 
pursuant  to  subsection  (b)  shall  be  designed  to  have,  at  a 
minimum, the following:
(A)  The  initial  capability  of  the  core  elements,  without 
an  upper  stage,  of  lifting  payloads  weighing  between  70 
tons  and  100  tons  into  low-Earth  orbit  in  preparation  for 
transit for missions beyond low-Earth orbit.
(B)  The  capability  to  carry  an  integrated  upper  Earth 
departure  stage  bringing  the  total  lift  capability  of  the 
Space Launch System to 130 tons or more.
(C) The capability to lift the multipurpose crew vehicle.
(D)  The  capability  to  serve  as  a  backup  system  for 
supplying  and  supporting  ISS  cargo  requirements  or  crew 
delivery   requirements   not   otherwise   met   by   available   
commercial or partner-supplied vehicles.


You may disagree with the policy, but the requirement is there, and it has not been superseded by subsequent legislation.


Tags: