Author Topic: Orion Hardware Processing (Read 210192 times)

woods170 · « **Reply #220 on:** 03/25/2011 11:04 am »

Quote from: Jorge on 03/22/2011 11:22 am

Quote from: Galactic Penguin SST on 03/22/2011 06:51 am
Didn't Jorge said that this was the plan about one or two years ago, but now the ISS team are looking for a direct LIDS-CBM adapter, and move the two PMAs to Node 3 as end storage places?

That's correct. ATLAS is no longer the plan.

Makes me wonder: is LM aware of this?

kirghizstan · « **Reply #221 on:** 03/25/2011 11:19 am »

HuffPo had an article about it too. A horrible article at that.

Jorge · « **Reply #222 on:** 03/25/2011 01:20 pm »

Quote from: woods170 on 03/25/2011 11:04 am

Quote from: Jorge on 03/22/2011 11:22 am
Quote from: Galactic Penguin SST on 03/22/2011 06:51 am
Didn't Jorge said that this was the plan about one or two years ago, but now the ISS team are looking for a direct LIDS-CBM adapter, and move the two PMAs to Node 3 as end storage places?

That's correct. ATLAS is no longer the plan.

Makes me wonder: is LM aware of this?

Yes.

Space Pete · « **Reply #223 on:** 03/26/2011 10:46 pm »

Quote from: woods170 on 03/25/2011 11:04 am

Quote from: Jorge on 03/22/2011 11:22 am
Quote from: Galactic Penguin SST on 03/22/2011 06:51 am
Didn't Jorge said that this was the plan about one or two years ago, but now the ISS team are looking for a direct LIDS-CBM adapter, and move the two PMAs to Node 3 as end storage places?

That's correct. ATLAS is no longer the plan.

Makes me wonder: is LM aware of this?

Just to clear this up, ATLAS is no longer the plan, and it seems likely that PMA-3 will be brought down on STS-135 - meaning that they won't be used in future.

The current plan is to either launch two CDAs (Common Docking Adapters), which would convert the Node 2 Forward and Zenith CBMs to IDSS (International Docking System Standard) ports, or launch Node 4/DHS (Docking Hub System), which would be pre-integrated with at least two IDSS ports.

sdsds · « **Reply #224 on:** 03/31/2011 03:22 am »

From the March 30, 2011 Statement of Douglas Cooke, Associate Administrator for the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate, before the Committee on Science, Space and Technology Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics U.S. House of Representatives.

* "Our review of the Orion contract indicates that the MPCV is within scope of the Orion contract."

* "The Orion beyond-LEO version (known internally as “block 2”) has been selected as the MPCV Reference Vehicle Design."

* "[Orion] will have the capacity for over 21 days of active mission duration."

* "NASA is confident that the robust design of the current Orion is such that integration with the SLS will not be a significant challenge."

rsnellenberger · « **Reply #225 on:** 03/31/2011 08:43 pm »

Quote from: Space Pete on 03/26/2011 10:46 pm

Just to clear this up, ATLAS is no longer the plan, and it seems likely that PMA-3 will be brought down on STS-135 - meaning that they won't be used in future.

Just out of curiosity, what are the trade-offs between bringing PMA-3 down on the shuttle vs "simply" jettisoning it as they did the early ammonia servicer? It doesn't appear to have any heavy components (or light tanks) that might survive re-entry. Surface area to volume also appear to favor it dropping out of the station orbit fairly quickly...

or is this just a case of them having the downmass and trunnions to spare -- so why not bring it down?

Space Pete · « **Reply #226 on:** 03/31/2011 11:45 pm »

Quote from: rsnellenberger on 03/31/2011 08:43 pm

Quote from: Space Pete on 03/26/2011 10:46 pm
Just to clear this up, ATLAS is no longer the plan, and it seems likely that PMA-3 will be brought down on STS-135 - meaning that they won't be used in future.

Just out of curiosity, what are the trade-offs between bringing PMA-3 down on the shuttle vs "simply" jettisoning it as they did the early ammonia servicer? It doesn't appear to have any heavy components (or light tanks) that might survive re-entry. Surface area to volume also appear to favor it dropping out of the station orbit fairly quickly...

or is this just a case of them having the downmass and trunnions to spare -- so why not bring it down?

The main problem with jettisoning it is *how* to jettison it. It is much too large and has too much mass to be jettisoned by an EVA crewmember. It doesn't appear that it will fit on either HTV or Dragon. So bringing it down on STS-135 will likely be the only way to get it off station.

Ronsmytheiii · « **Reply #227 on:** 04/18/2011 05:27 am »

Seems that Lockheed intends to use flight hardware to do structural testing"

Quote

In addition, Lacefield said the program expects to lower costs and reduce the MPCV’s development schedule through “proto-flight testing,” in which some of the capsule’s technologies are demonstrated on flight vehicles rather than test articles.

For example, “on the first flight vehicle we will actually do a lot of vibration and loads testing before we deliver it to be flight-tested,” he said, adding that such an approach could shave a year off of Orion’s development timeline.

“What we’ve tried to do is become more affordable and streamline the program so that we can accomplish it in a shorter time period and at much lower cost,” he said. The program is on track to conduct a flight test of Orion by summer 2013, he noted.

A pretty good idea, and one that is not totally unprecedented as STA-099 did vibration and load testing before being converted to a flight orbiter, but this time the hardware will be flight hardware before hand.

http://www.spacenews.com/civil/110415-budget-change-scope-orion.html

Robotbeat · « **Reply #228 on:** 04/22/2011 09:16 pm »

Quote from: Ronsmytheiii on 04/22/2011 09:04 pm

Quote from: Robotbeat on 04/22/2011 08:52 pm
I like the idea of a common vehicle that can be used for exploring an asteroid or as a pressurized rover or for servicing. Then again, the requirements are so very different that it probably doesn't make a heck of a lot of sense. Still looks awesome, though!!!

I wouldn't say that, the biggest difference between an asteroid and the moon is the gravity well, and that is solved with the Mobility Chassis. Only thing that the SEV would need for an asteroid would be thrusters but even then not that many if Orion is close by.

Also notice the design has changed to have a clam shell that covers the suitports rather than open like the LER.

The clamshell is a good idea, I think. Protects against dust.

It would be interesting if you could swap mission-modules, so you could have an asteroid mission module, a rover mission module, or even a lander mission module (or possibly both. ATHLETE seems like a good fit for this concept, IMO.

rdale · « **Reply #229 on:** 04/30/2011 05:23 pm »

The Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) is the first crew transport
vehicle to be developed by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) in the last thirty years. The CEV is currently being developed to transport the crew safely from the Earth to the Moon and back again. This year, the vehicle focused on building the Orion Flight Test 1 (OFT1) vehicle to be launched in 2013. The development of the Orion Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLS) System, focused on the components which are on OFT1 which includes pressure control and active thermal control systems, is progressing through the design stage into manufacturing. Additional development work was done to keep the remaining component progressing towards implementation. This paper covers the Orion ECLS development from April 2010 to April 2011.

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20100039642_2010042886.pdf

Ronsmytheiii · « **Reply #230 on:** 05/04/2011 02:27 pm »

Downix · « **Reply #231 on:** 05/04/2011 02:38 pm »

Watching the video it just struck me, the EDS from the clip used in this video is from the old Ares V video, but when comparing it's width to Orion, it's only 8.4m wide.

Ronsmytheiii · « **Reply #232 on:** 05/04/2011 02:55 pm »

Quote from: Downix on 05/04/2011 02:38 pm

Watching the video it just struck me, the EDS from the clip used in this video is from the old Ares V video, but when comparing it's width to Orion, it's only 8.4m wide.

At one time the U/S for Ares V was going to be 8.4, but was later increased to 10 m. Of course the funny thing is that they managed to sneak in an Ares I u/s, but I wouldn't read into things too much as the video is about the Spacecraft and most video material existing is from Constellation. Here's a piece about the O&C highbay:

Ronsmytheiii · « **Reply #233 on:** 05/04/2011 10:31 pm »

Some images of the medium fidelity model:

http://twitpic.com/photos/Orioncrewmodule

Jason1701 · « **Reply #234 on:** 05/05/2011 01:25 am »

I think that's a Cygnus in the very back there! Also, that picture shows the behind-the-panel part of Dragon that was off limits when it was being displayed in DC.

TexasRED · « **Reply #235 on:** 05/05/2011 01:42 am »

Quote from: Jason1701 on 05/05/2011 01:25 am

I think that's a Cygnus in the very back there! Also, that picture shows the behind-the-panel part of Dragon that was off limits when it was being displayed in DC.

Yeah it is, happens to be the only pic I took of stuff with my cellphone. I couldn't get out there when everything was all setup.

robertross · « **Reply #236 on:** 05/05/2011 02:38 am »

Quote from: TexasRED on 05/05/2011 01:42 am

Quote from: Jason1701 on 05/05/2011 01:25 am
I think that's a Cygnus in the very back there! Also, that picture shows the behind-the-panel part of Dragon that was off limits when it was being displayed in DC.

Yeah it is, happens to be the only pic I took of stuff with my cellphone. I couldn't get out there when everything was all setup.

Appreciate the pic, thanks!

renclod · « **Reply #237 on:** 05/09/2011 08:31 pm »

from MPCV and Orion pages on fb

Jason1701 · « **Reply #238 on:** 05/25/2011 02:09 am »

Is that the GTA or some other mockup?

mr. mark · « **Reply #239 on:** 05/25/2011 02:20 am »

It would be cool if they kept the exterior black. Spacex has the Dragon. This could be the Black Bee, Black Widow, Black Scorpion ect. I know NASA is too by the book to do that. The Black Scorpion Capsule has a nice ring to it.