Author Topic: What should the Flexible Path include?  (Read 33292 times)

Offline JohnFornaro

  • Not an expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10974
  • Delta-t is an important metric.
  • Planet Eaarth
    • Design / Program Associates
  • Liked: 1257
  • Likes Given: 724
What should the Flexible Path include?
« on: 01/14/2010 01:27 pm »
Over on:

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=19548.msg524842#msg524842

Bernie Roehl posted what I consider to be an excellent summary of how the Flexible path could be implemented.  I include it here:

<<
First launch of Jupiter/Ares:
  * the biggest launch vehicle in the world (by far)
  * the vehicle that will take mankind to the moon, Mars and beyond
  * the dawn of the next space age

First crewed launch of Orion:
  * the rebirth of American human spaceflight
  * the first flight of the spacecraft that will take us out into deep space
  * the beginning of a new era of exploration for all of mankind

First circumlunar flight:
  * returning to the moon for the first time in half a century
  * shake-down flight of the spacecraft that will take us into the solar system

First visit to L2:
  * the farthest out into space that any human being has ever gone
  * going beyond the moon for the first time
  * visiting the staging ground for all future deep-space missions

First L2 base:
  * building humanity's first deep-space outpost
  * the first step in man's expansion into the solar system
  * the gateway to the moon, the asteroids and the planets

First NEO mission:
   * first human visit to an asteroid
   * first trip out into the solar system
   * farthest into space that any human being has ever gone (by far)
   * longest deep-space mission ever
   * preparation for future trips to the moons of Mars
   * learning more about possible future threats to human civilization
   * developing techniques to prevent future disasters

Lunar landing mission:
   * mankind's triumphant return to the moon
   * studying how to live on the moon so we can move on to Mars
   * finding ways of using the moon's resources for future missions

Phobos visit:
   * first mission to Mars
   * first landing on the moon of another world
   * preparation for an eventual human landing on Mars
>>

Comments?
Sometimes I just flat out don't get it.

Offline khallow

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1954
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: What should the Flexible Path include?
« Reply #1 on: 01/14/2010 01:33 pm »
What would be good choices for NEOs to visot? Are these just targets of opportunity, that is, pick a time frame then pick an asteroid that you can reach with your delta v in that time frame? Or are there certain targets that are naturally high value, like say 433 Eros?
Karl Hallowell

Offline ChrisSpaceCH

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 303
  • Bern, Switzerland
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What should the Flexible Path include?
« Reply #2 on: 01/14/2010 01:39 pm »
I'm just wondering if one of my old favorites, a manned Venus orbital flight (with telerobotic exploration) might also fit in there somewhere... Before or after Phobos?

Manned Venus orbital mission:
* first manned flight to Venus
* exploring Earth's twin
* telerobotic exploration of a hostile planet and exotic atmosphere
* studying the causes and effects of catastrophic GHG-induced Climate Change in order to prevent their happening on Earth (included that one to appease / incite the Greenies)
* and maybe: first all-solar-powered spacecraft! (would certainly work better at Venus than Mars... I'm not saying that Orion-Venus would have a solar-electric drive, but SOLAR could certainly be hyped in the media)
« Last Edit: 01/14/2010 01:44 pm by ChrisSpaceCH »

Offline Mark S

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2284
  • Dallas, TX
  • Liked: 396
  • Likes Given: 80
Re: What should the Flexible Path include?
« Reply #3 on: 01/14/2010 02:01 pm »
I would limit Flexible Path missions to destinations within Mars' orbit, for a couple of reasons.  First, that's already a pretty good chunk of the Solar System, it should be able to keep us busy for a few decades.  Second, until people are comfortable with nuclear powered space vehicles, we will be limited to solar arrays for onboard power.  Third, also for lack of nuclear power, we are limited to chemical rockets and their low Isp.  Fourth, we still don't understand the full consequences of long term exposure to deep space radiation, and mitigation thereof.

Also I think the very definition of Flexible Path limits human visitations to very small bodies, and I don't think the Moon will initially fall into that category.  We can use FP to build up our experience and space infrastructure, but Moon (and Mars) will require additional development over and above FP.  Basically, if you need a lander, then it would be off limits.  This leaves fly-bys, orbital missions, Mars' moons, NEO's, and possibly the occasional comet if we are able to react quickly.

Finally, I don't think we should plan any manned missions to the L1/L2 points just for the purpose of checking them off our list.  Sure, if we're going to set up a station or man-tended depot, but not just to fly out there, take a few pictures of some empty space, then come back with basically nothing.  That would indeed be a "mission to nowhere", and leave NASA open to more criticism than usual for "wasting taxpayers' money".

Mark S.

Offline khallow

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1954
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: What should the Flexible Path include?
« Reply #4 on: 01/14/2010 02:15 pm »

Second, until people are comfortable with nuclear powered space vehicles, we will be limited to solar arrays for onboard power.  Third, also for lack of nuclear power, we are limited to chemical rockets and their low Isp.

There's also SEP, solar electric propulsion. It's not a clearly superior system, but it has advantages that make it an interesting and useful rival to chemical propulsion.
Karl Hallowell

Offline JohnFornaro

  • Not an expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10974
  • Delta-t is an important metric.
  • Planet Eaarth
    • Design / Program Associates
  • Liked: 1257
  • Likes Given: 724
Re: What should the Flexible Path include?
« Reply #5 on: 01/14/2010 06:11 pm »
Chuck wrote about the suggestion of Ceres as a possible Flexible Path destination:

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=19548.msg524939#msg524939
Sometimes I just flat out don't get it.

Offline dad2059

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 198
    • Dad2059's Webzine of Science-Fiction, Science Fact and Esoterica
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: What should the Flexible Path include?
« Reply #6 on: 01/14/2010 06:41 pm »
I'm just wondering if one of my old favorites, a manned Venus orbital flight (with telerobotic exploration) might also fit in there somewhere... Before or after Phobos?

Manned Venus orbital mission:
* first manned flight to Venus
* exploring Earth's twin
* telerobotic exploration of a hostile planet and exotic atmosphere
* studying the causes and effects of catastrophic GHG-induced Climate Change in order to prevent their happening on Earth (included that one to appease / incite the Greenies)
* and maybe: first all-solar-powered spacecraft! (would certainly work better at Venus than Mars... I'm not saying that Orion-Venus would have a solar-electric drive, but SOLAR could certainly be hyped in the media)

IMO, I would suggest that this be a near-term "flagship" mission, say around 2025-2029 time-frame after a NEO mission(s).

Especially if we're stuck with solar power exclusively for a while.
NASA needs some good ol' fashioned 'singularity tech'

Offline kraisee

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10560
  • Liked: 807
  • Likes Given: 40
Re: What should the Flexible Path include?
« Reply #7 on: 01/14/2010 06:55 pm »
What would be good choices for NEOs to visot? Are these just targets of opportunity, that is, pick a time frame then pick an asteroid that you can reach with your delta v in that time frame? Or are there certain targets that are naturally high value, like say 433 Eros?

NEO missions are definitely "targets of opportunity".   There is a whole list, with some of the best opportunities occurring roughly once every 18 months or so (on average).

There are some targets closer to home than others, and those are probably what we're after for the early missions, but as the capabilities are proven we will be able to venture further and further away, with Phobos being a sensible mid- to long-term 'goal' in this particular exploration effort.

Ross.
« Last Edit: 01/14/2010 07:00 pm by kraisee »
"The meek shall inherit the Earth -- the rest of us will go to the stars"
-Robert A. Heinlein

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39271
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: What should the Flexible Path include?
« Reply #8 on: 01/14/2010 06:58 pm »
What is the delta-V to Ceres orbit from EML2? ESL2? I understand it is out of the plane of most of the planets, so couldn't a lunar flyby considerably lower the necessary delta-v? What about Venus or Earth or even Mars gravity assists?

I have seen pork-chop plots of the delta-V requirements of a visit to Ceres, but never anything that takes advantage of gravity assists (or from a Lagrange point).
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline ChrisSpaceCH

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 303
  • Bern, Switzerland
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What should the Flexible Path include?
« Reply #9 on: 01/14/2010 07:30 pm »
Nobody likes Venus? :(

Offline Lambda-4

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 145
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What should the Flexible Path include?
« Reply #10 on: 01/14/2010 07:36 pm »
Nobody likes Venus? :(

As a flyby add-on on a opposition class Mars orbital mission, yes. As a target of its own for a manned space mission, no, not worth it.
« Last Edit: 01/14/2010 07:36 pm by Lambda-4 »

Offline Namechange User

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7301
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What should the Flexible Path include?
« Reply #11 on: 01/14/2010 07:55 pm »
Anyone else have a problem with it being at least 15 years before we actually go anywhere?

I like the idea of flexible path but with the understanding we go somewhere quick and often.  My fear is empty points in space and just meandering around the solar system will not sustain any real support unless it happens much quicker and with more frequency than landing someplace. 
Enjoying viewing the forum a little better now by filtering certain users.

Offline ChrisSpaceCH

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 303
  • Bern, Switzerland
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What should the Flexible Path include?
« Reply #12 on: 01/14/2010 07:58 pm »
Nobody likes Venus? :(

As a flyby add-on on a opposition class Mars orbital mission, yes. As a target of its own for a manned space mission, no, not worth it.

I beg to differ. Venus is much less well explored than Mars, which gives us potentially more knowledge gain from an equal-length telerobotic mission that would be possible at Mars.

Plus, if we are seriously contemplating settling the Solar System with humans one day, we really should explore Venus' upper atmosphere (50 km above ground) in detail. The one place (other than Earth) where you could go outside in shirtsleeves without a thermally insulated pressure suit (you'd still need a breathing mask, ofc)

Offline ChrisSpaceCH

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 303
  • Bern, Switzerland
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What should the Flexible Path include?
« Reply #13 on: 01/14/2010 08:02 pm »
Anyone else have a problem with it being at least 15 years before we actually go anywhere?

I like the idea of flexible path but with the understanding we go somewhere quick and often.  My fear is empty points in space and just meandering around the solar system will not sustain any real support unless it happens much quicker and with more frequency than landing someplace. 

Would I like it to go faster? Definately. But nothing happening for 15 years? No, I don't agree. We should still get:
- 10 more years of ISS, with some time (finally!) to do some real work once the construction is over
- new launch vehicle (hopefully DIRECT or something close)
- new spacecraft (Orion)
- hopefully some cool unmanned stuff
« Last Edit: 01/14/2010 08:03 pm by ChrisSpaceCH »

Offline robertross

  • Canadian Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17939
  • Westphal, Nova Scotia
  • Liked: 659
  • Likes Given: 7692
Re: What should the Flexible Path include?
« Reply #14 on: 01/14/2010 08:08 pm »
Nobody likes Venus? :(

As a flyby add-on on a opposition class Mars orbital mission, yes. As a target of its own for a manned space mission, no, not worth it.

I beg to differ. Venus is much less well explored than Mars, which gives us potentially more knowledge gain from an equal-length telerobotic mission that would be possible at Mars.

Plus, if we are seriously contemplating settling the Solar System with humans one day, we really should explore Venus' upper atmosphere (50 km above ground) in detail. The one place (other than Earth) where you could go outside in shirtsleeves without a thermally insulated pressure suit (you'd still need a breathing mask, ofc)

You're kidding, right?

Maybe for daredevil explorers who want to try stuff like that, but you don't get all that much from exploration, even science, from skimming the atmosphere. If that was a mission, its intent would be for surface goals, goals that cannot be met even in 50 years.

Gathering atmospheric & surface samples from teleoperated robots (to reduce mission risk), would be the limits for the most part. Add a communications relay satellite on top of that, and that would be a mission.

Offline ChrisSpaceCH

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 303
  • Bern, Switzerland
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What should the Flexible Path include?
« Reply #15 on: 01/14/2010 08:12 pm »
Gathering atmospheric & surface samples from teleoperated robots (to reduce mission risk), would be the limits for the most part. Add a communications relay satellite on top of that, and that would be a mission.

Yes, this is what I meant. The astronauts stay in Venus orbit, controlling the teleoperated robots on the surface and the robotic blimps in the atmosphere.

Offline robertross

  • Canadian Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17939
  • Westphal, Nova Scotia
  • Liked: 659
  • Likes Given: 7692
Re: What should the Flexible Path include?
« Reply #16 on: 01/14/2010 08:16 pm »
Anyone else have a problem with it being at least 15 years before we actually go anywhere?

I like the idea of flexible path but with the understanding we go somewhere quick and often.  My fear is empty points in space and just meandering around the solar system will not sustain any real support unless it happens much quicker and with more frequency than landing someplace. 

Yes, and that was a valid concern/fear during the Augustine Commission's announcement on this front. You need to set fixed and real goals, ones that draw inspiration from the public. It's one of the reasons I believe having a target like Mars is so important.

1) Flyby
2) Phobos-Grunt landing
3) Eventual Mars landing

In there, before, during, and after, you have other destinations like NEOs, the moon, maybe even a Venus fly-by concurrently on the return leg of a Phobos-grunt mission.

And I still think having the moon as a 'fallback' position is important in case funds dwindle, perhaps due to change of policies or political leadership. We can assume a 'tightening of the reigns' in the projects' lifetime, and we should be prepared for it, as should the architecture. This is where commercial entities could step in, much like ISS re-supply.

Important goals (partial):

1) Common docking port type.
2) Multiple docking ports.
3) Emergency re-supply from various entities, depending on launch availability.
4) Rescue mission support in Lunar orbit, both from a launch vehicle standpoint launched from Earth, and a ascent module from the lunar surface. This could be 1-2 person for injuries as a minimum, to full evac capability due to solar storms.

Offline robertross

  • Canadian Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17939
  • Westphal, Nova Scotia
  • Liked: 659
  • Likes Given: 7692
Re: What should the Flexible Path include?
« Reply #17 on: 01/14/2010 08:17 pm »
Gathering atmospheric & surface samples from teleoperated robots (to reduce mission risk), would be the limits for the most part. Add a communications relay satellite on top of that, and that would be a mission.

Yes, this is what I meant. The astronauts stay in Venus orbit, controlling the teleoperated robots on the surface and the robotic blimps in the atmosphere.

Cool.  :)

Offline robertross

  • Canadian Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17939
  • Westphal, Nova Scotia
  • Liked: 659
  • Likes Given: 7692
Re: What should the Flexible Path include?
« Reply #18 on: 01/14/2010 08:24 pm »
Another thought we should all ponder:

If Obama is to announce an international effort to return to the moon, what will be the goals? Flags & footprints barely cut it after the first 2-3 landings.

I'm wondering if this could have an energy-related goal? Solar panels or reflective mirrors on the surface, beaming back to Earth?

As to human-related effects, like partial-g effects over long term, since we lost the capability of a large centrifuge on the ISS? Or maybe non-human effects, like plant growth or clean room/sterile environments? Knowledge for a future Mars landing? (My personal thought/preference).

Or maybe just to advance ourselves, and to set a goal to bring our economies back from the brink, with a goal with 'feel-good' moments.

Offline Lambda-4

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 145
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What should the Flexible Path include?
« Reply #19 on: 01/14/2010 09:00 pm »
Gathering atmospheric & surface samples from teleoperated robots (to reduce mission risk), would be the limits for the most part. Add a communications relay satellite on top of that, and that would be a mission.

Yes, this is what I meant. The astronauts stay in Venus orbit, controlling the teleoperated robots on the surface and the robotic blimps in the atmosphere.

Sorry, but that is just not worth it. Teleoperated robots is a nice gadget that people chip in these days to justify orbital missions of Mars, Venus and some even the Moon - but it just doesn't work out. You still need your science team on Earth behind you working out the next steps. For the MERs there is a reason why the team has several dozens of engineers and scientists still engaged in the project. One person alone might make very small decisions more quickly with a teleoperated rover and apply procedures like taking samples and doing analysis of them more quickly, but these are the exact things that semi-autonomous robotics are going to provide for us in the next 20 years anyway.

Considering the expected lifespan of a surface robotic mission on Venus (even with today's technology) an add-on flyby to a Mars orbital mission with some teleoperating for 1-2 days maybe makes sense, but not an orbital mission of its own. Such a mission would cost many billions of dollars, enough to send 10-20 robotic missions to Venus.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0