Author Topic: Lunar-capable shuttle  (Read 15996 times)

Offline hkultala

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1199
  • Liked: 748
  • Likes Given: 945
Re: Lunar-capable shuttle
« Reply #20 on: 10/24/2017 05:16 pm »

The big wings of the SLS were made to allow ~3000 km crossrange for military missions that do single polar orbit and return to the launch site.
Not quite. This document

https://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/technology/sts-newsref/sts_overview.html

Says it was 1100nm, about 2046Km.
Quote
To provide the abort-once-around capability in polar orbit launches.
Because in fact the ground track is actually a spiral, not a circle.

Whoops, I miscalculated, mostly by not taking into account that Vandenberg is not at the equator.

Offline Archibald

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2611
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 1096
Re: Lunar-capable shuttle
« Reply #21 on: 10/24/2017 05:17 pm »

I am using the STS as a basis for my design since it is the only operational orbital spaceplane to date.

As for getting a shuttle type vehicle lunar capable I was thinking of something along the lines of the shuttle-Saturn concept except with a SLS first stage and boosters for LEO and the external tank for TLI.

For thermal protection the vehicle would use a full belly heat shield that can easily be replaced after each mission greatly reducing the turn around time but it would weight about 20,000lbs

.That is just the few issues I’m working on right now I’m still early in the design process most of it is still in my head.

I would love some help please.


Well, if you really want to send a space shuttle to lunar orbit, you need first to launch it into low Earth orbit - with the empty tank attached to it. The SSME just can't work without the enormous tank.

You could place a small tank on the payload bay, but you would have no payload, and the SSME just would empty the small tank within the blink of an eye.

Then you need to refill the tank.

The tank masses 800 mt, so that would be 7 SLS flights, each with 130 mt. Your small tank in the shuttle payload bay only hols 30 mt instead of 800 mt, so you can see it is not enough. At all.

You need tankers, and transfer of LH2 and liquid oxygen, which isn't easy

Then you need to restart the SSME in space, and they were not build for that.

Once the shuttle in lunar orbit, do whatever mission to the surface.

Then fire the SSME again, get out of lunar orbit, and return to LEO, before a classic landing.

The problem is returning from the Moon. You need to brake the shuttle. You can brake using the atmosphere (and burn like a meteor, because the shuttle wasn't build for that) or brake using the SSMEs (and burn a huge amount of propellants).

That would be how to do it.

Except there are issues everywhere

- the system is grossly inefficient

- SSME can't start again off the launch pad, nor in space

- the shuttle tiles just can't handle lunar return

- so you need to fire the SSMEs to brake again in Earth orbit, at an enormous expense of propellants

At the end of the day, a space plane is not necessary nor good for the Moon.

If you need a reusable system with a big payload to the Moon, just uses Musk BFR / BFS. It is far better.
« Last Edit: 10/24/2017 05:19 pm by Archibald »
Han shot first and Gwynne Shotwell !

Offline Caleb Cattuzzo

  • Member
  • Posts: 67
  • California,USA
  • Liked: 10
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: Lunar-capable shuttle
« Reply #22 on: 10/24/2017 05:30 pm »
Again I would not be using a exact shuttle copy just the design of a delta-wing reuse-able spaceplane the tiles would be replaced by a full belly heat shield,the entire craft would be scaled down a little,crew cabin would be extended,cargo bay reduced(but still enough space for 2 landers minimum),different main engines,probably use the sls as a first stage so they can work together,plus being able to be converted easily to a LEO mission configuration with a ET and SRB’s like the original shuttle and back to lunar config depending on the missions.Yes my primary concern is weight and Delta-V so it will look almost nothing like the shuttle except for it being a reusable spaceplane.
There is no strife,no prejudice,no national conflict in space as yet.Its hazards are hostile to us all.

Offline Patchouli

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
  • Liked: 253
  • Likes Given: 457
Re: Lunar-capable shuttle
« Reply #23 on: 10/25/2017 02:48 am »
I'm sorry to say but there is no way to get the shuttle to low luna orbit. You need about 10 km/s to get to low earth orbit, and another 5.5 km/s to get to LLO and back.


You can use this ∆v calculator to work out how much ∆v the shuttle could have had if you fill the payload bay with propellant.

Some (generous) numbers to start with.

Dry mass of orbiter, ~ 68500kg
Payload ~ 25000kg
ISP of RL10 upper stage engine ~ 470s
Mass of modifications 0kg (I did say generous)

Calculated ∆v =  1.4 km/s not enough to get even half way to geo.



If you replace the 13 tons of OMS propellant with more propellant for the RL-10s might as well as they'd replace the  AJ-10s I get around 2 km/sec delta V though this is still way short of what's needed for TLI.
Just the Apollo CSM had about 2.8 km/s of delta V.

The same propellant load could send a Dream Chaser or Dragon to the Moon.
« Last Edit: 10/25/2017 02:52 am by Patchouli »

Offline Caleb Cattuzzo

  • Member
  • Posts: 67
  • California,USA
  • Liked: 10
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: Lunar-capable shuttle
« Reply #24 on: 10/25/2017 03:23 am »
Thinking about it now after me going back and redesigning my rough draft multiple times i think it will resemble more of the dream chaser but keeping the cargo bay,vertical stabilizer,and delta-wing I've scaled it down a bit bringing the operating weight (with no internal tank and basically the entire intirior redesigned) it comes around to 140,000lbs roughly.Remember I'm still on my rough draft and haven't accounted for alot of things yet.   
There is no strife,no prejudice,no national conflict in space as yet.Its hazards are hostile to us all.

Offline john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10351
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 2431
  • Likes Given: 13606
Re: Lunar-capable shuttle
« Reply #25 on: 10/25/2017 08:07 am »
Whoops, I miscalculated, mostly by not taking into account that Vandenberg is not at the equator.
It's quite a long way from the Equator.

REL don't make a big thing of Skylon's cross range but it's a much cleaner design, with the body based on low supersonic drag shape (Haak?). I think this helped keep the wing design simple. IIRC Shuttle made little or no use of CFD, but Skylon has been extensively modeled, for example by DLR using the LAURA code hypersonic heating.  Cross range is in the 2500-3000 Km range.
MCT ITS BFR SS. The worlds first Methane fueled FFSC engined CFRP SS structure A380 sized aerospaceplane tail sitter capable of Earth & Mars atmospheric flight.First flight to Mars by end of 2022 TBC. T&C apply. Trust nothing. Run your own #s "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" R. Simberg."Competitve" means cheaper ¬cheap SCramjet proposed 1956. First +ve thrust 2004. US R&D spend to date > $10Bn. #deployed designs. Zero.

Offline Caleb Cattuzzo

  • Member
  • Posts: 67
  • California,USA
  • Liked: 10
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: Lunar-capable shuttle
« Reply #26 on: 10/25/2017 02:47 pm »
In theory could a delta wing glider handle a lunar return reentry?I am right now using the orion heat shield as  basis and could it be possible to use Raptor vacuum engines as shuttle mains?I would like to know the specs on it like fuel consumption,force,and size.I already looked around and couldn't find any accurate information on it most numbers I did find were old and out of date. 
There is no strife,no prejudice,no national conflict in space as yet.Its hazards are hostile to us all.

Offline tea monster

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 635
  • Across the Universe
    • My ArtStation Portfolio
  • Liked: 861
  • Likes Given: 182
Re: Lunar-capable shuttle
« Reply #27 on: 10/25/2017 07:39 pm »
Why do you have to send a winged orbital spaceplane to the moon?

Why not use the orbital spaceplane to get up and down and construct your landers so they can get to the moon from the ISS (or the DSG) and have enough fuel to return. That way, you aren't trying to haul a lot of wings and stuff out to Luna, where they aren't going to be able to serve any purpose.

You'd probably be better to have something like what Elon is constructing. The second option is to just use either a Dragon 2 or Starliner to get to the ISS, then transfer to your lunar lander there.

Offline Caleb Cattuzzo

  • Member
  • Posts: 67
  • California,USA
  • Liked: 10
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: Lunar-capable shuttle
« Reply #28 on: 10/25/2017 09:47 pm »
Why do you have to send a winged orbital spaceplane to the moon?

Why not use the orbital spaceplane to get up and down and construct your landers so they can get to the moon from the ISS (or the DSG) and have enough fuel to return. That way, you aren't trying to haul a lot of wings and stuff out to Luna, where they aren't going to be able to serve any purpose.

You'd probably be better to have something like what Elon is constructing. The second option is to just use either a Dragon 2 or Starliner to get to the ISS, then transfer to your lunar lander there.

The plan is to have it be at the most LLO capable its main mission will be construction of orbital stations between LEO and LLO and be able to come home and land on a runway hence the wings.It will never land on the moon it simply can't but it will have the ability to launch single use landers from its cargo bay and recover them but that is not its sole purpose.The main problem I see with capsule designs is that there size and reusability is down right terrible (Dragon is a exception in the size category) carrying wings to the moon and back yes is very costly but is worth it in the long run for having quick turnaround times and specific landing sites removing the need for large search and recovery teams when it can begin the turnaround process within a few hours after a mission.I like to believe we should learn from the shuttle and expand its range and learn from the mistakes it was after all the first of her kind and since only the X-37 has improved upon the 30 years of experience we gained from the program (I know the buran existed but never had a manned flight) I feel like we have just touched the surface with space planes and that a lunar capable spaceplane like I am proposing is not as crazy as it sounds.But it will probably only be a very distant cousin of the STS in terms of design.


Remember everyone thought the apollo and shuttle programs were impossible too.       
« Last Edit: 10/25/2017 09:50 pm by Caleb Cattuzzo »
There is no strife,no prejudice,no national conflict in space as yet.Its hazards are hostile to us all.

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13463
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 11864
  • Likes Given: 11086
Re: Lunar-capable shuttle
« Reply #29 on: 10/25/2017 10:05 pm »
Remember everyone thought the apollo and shuttle programs were impossible too.       
No, they didn't.

Also, please do your homework first, and work on your punctuation, spelling, capitalization, and so forth. People will take you slightly more seriously.
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline MATTBLAK

  • Elite Veteran & 'J.A.F.A'
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5362
  • 'Space Cadets' Let us; UNITE!! (crickets chirping)
  • New Zealand
  • Liked: 2239
  • Likes Given: 3883
Re: Lunar-capable shuttle
« Reply #30 on: 10/25/2017 10:43 pm »
One of the best hopes for a Lunar surface return involving the Shuttle was probably this General Dynamics concept from the 1990s. Fully fueled Lander and capsule launched in Shuttle cargo bay with the crew. A day or so later a 'wide-body' Centaur would be launched on a Titan IV. The Shuttle would rendezvous with the stage and mate the Lander to the stage and the craft would depart for the Moon for a direct landing and later a direct ascent back to Earth.

http://www.nss.org/settlement/moon/ELA.html
« Last Edit: 10/25/2017 11:02 pm by MATTBLAK »
"Those who can't, Blog".   'Space Cadets' of the World - Let us UNITE!! (crickets chirping)

Offline Caleb Cattuzzo

  • Member
  • Posts: 67
  • California,USA
  • Liked: 10
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: Lunar-capable shuttle
« Reply #31 on: 10/26/2017 12:36 am »
I ment the goals in the time before they were announced.Talking about landing on the moon in the 1940’s was science fiction as was a spaceplane back then too.Yes I know my grammar isn’t amazing right now mostly in part due to my LCD on my phone being cracked and I can’t type certain letters leaving me at the mercy of auto correct.

I think it’s possible with enough modifications a spaceplane can make Lunar trips.Right now I’m going through the shuttle schematics from tail to cockpit removing outdated and heavy equipment and also some structural redesign so far I’m only half way through the wings and almost to the cargo bay and so far the weight drop is looking promising if my stats on the raptor engine are right.Again if anyone has solid numbers on the Raptor engine I would love to see them.I only found some on Wikipedia and the article has no source verifying it’s accuracy.
« Last Edit: 10/26/2017 12:37 am by Caleb Cattuzzo »
There is no strife,no prejudice,no national conflict in space as yet.Its hazards are hostile to us all.

Offline SweetWater

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 130
  • Wisconsin, USA
  • Liked: 140
  • Likes Given: 119
Re: Lunar-capable shuttle
« Reply #32 on: 10/26/2017 01:01 am »
I ment the goals in the time before they were announced.Talking about landing on the moon in the 1940’s was science fiction as was a spaceplane back then too.Yes I know my grammar isn’t amazing right now mostly in part due to my LCD on my phone being cracked and I can’t type certain letters leaving me at the mercy of auto correct.

I think it’s possible with enough modifications a spaceplane can make Lunar trips.Right now I’m going through the shuttle schematics from tail to cockpit removing outdated and heavy equipment and also some structural redesign so far I’m only half way through the wings and almost to the cargo bay and so far the weight drop is looking promising if my stats on the raptor engine are right.Again if anyone has solid numbers on the Raptor engine I would love to see them.I only found some on Wikipedia and the article has no source verifying it’s accuracy.

There is an argument to be made for using spaceplanes to and from LEO - mostly crossrange and a slightly more benign re-entry profile compared to capsules. The advantages of spaceplanes over capsules are fairly limited, but a case can be made for their use in certain situations.

The same is not true for travel between the Earth's surface and LLO. It doesn't matter how much weight you cut or how you reinforce the heat shield, any wings on a spaceplane big enough to matter will incur an enormous weight to be carried to the moon and back, and a spaceplane's heat shield is a huge area that is exposed to micrometeorite and space debris and at risk of constituent damage.

It makes no sense to take a spaceplane to the moon. None. It doesn't matter what materials you use, what engines you use, what propellants you use.

Offline MATTBLAK

  • Elite Veteran & 'J.A.F.A'
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5362
  • 'Space Cadets' Let us; UNITE!! (crickets chirping)
  • New Zealand
  • Liked: 2239
  • Likes Given: 3883
Re: Lunar-capable shuttle
« Reply #33 on: 10/26/2017 02:56 am »
In the deep vacuum of space - wings or a lifting body profile are basically dead weight. Only at Earth, Mars, Titan or Venus atmospheric entry would wings or a lifting body be of any use.
"Those who can't, Blog".   'Space Cadets' of the World - Let us UNITE!! (crickets chirping)

Online Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8862
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 10199
  • Likes Given: 11934
Re: Lunar-capable shuttle
« Reply #34 on: 10/26/2017 03:36 am »
The plan is to have it be at the most LLO capable its main mission will be construction of orbital stations between LEO and LLO and be able to come home and land on a runway hence the wings.

There have been people telling you that winged vehicles are impractical beyond LEO, but you don't seem to listen to any of them. That defeats the purpose of creating a topic of discussion if you're not benefiting from the "wisdom of the crowd".

Also, did you see what the moderator wrote? Long-term members of NSF always listen to moderators - which is how they stay as long-term members...  ;)

Quote
It will never land on the moon it simply can't but it will have the ability to launch single use landers from its cargo bay and recover them but that is not its sole purpose.

That would be called a "mothership". And if you have such a vehicle, then why not leave it in LLO instead of hauling it back and forth? That is a waste of fuel, which is a precious commodity in space. Plus you have to haul the landers back and forth to the Moon too, and land them back on Earth. Never heard of reusable vehicles?

Quote
I like to believe we should learn from the shuttle and expand its range and learn from the mistakes it was after all the first of her kind and since only the X-37 has improved upon the 30 years of experience we gained from the program

You're not learning anything if you're changing a Low Earth Orbit vehicle into one that travels to the Moon and back. Too many things are different.

Quote
Remember everyone thought the apollo and shuttle programs were impossible too.     

You keep trying to justify your ideas by dissing real things or things being done by real aerospace companies. FYI, that's not a good strategy.
If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

Offline Caleb Cattuzzo

  • Member
  • Posts: 67
  • California,USA
  • Liked: 10
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: Lunar-capable shuttle
« Reply #35 on: 10/26/2017 04:13 am »
I started this thread so that i could have some help getting numbers and help on designing a THEORETICAL spacecraft.I really don't care if someone thinks its inefficient (by the way I apologize to any admins I don't usually look at usernames before I respond and I like to speak my mind) instead after answering questions I ask I keep getting fed the same answer "It's not efficient" over and over even when I ask:What the raptor's stats are? or Will adding a 20,000lb heat shield effect the shuttles aerodynamics and in what way?But all I get is the same answer over and over I know It won't make it off the drawing board so humor me will you?I am thanks in part to some constructive criticism on this thread doing a complete overhaul on my rough design thanks to new information and I greatly appreciate it.But when I ask a question it would be nice not to get spammed with the answer to a different question over and over.I'm mainly doing this design for my enjoyment and I find it really fun to run into a problem and fix it not stop and give up because it isn't the perfect solution.Anyway I'm not mad at anyone I know you were thinking logically and trying to help and I appreciate that but I'm not worried about efficiency if I had my way NASA would be given a blank check but I know that's not going to happen just like my design will never see the light of day I just want to finish it and indulge my curiosity.Isn't that what space travel all about?Indulging our curiosity.Anyway that's my take now can we please get back to some science :)     
There is no strife,no prejudice,no national conflict in space as yet.Its hazards are hostile to us all.

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13463
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 11864
  • Likes Given: 11086
Re: Lunar-capable shuttle
« Reply #36 on: 10/26/2017 04:36 am »
Stop ranting. And DO look at the tags of people posting.

It will also be helpful not to whine about the kind of feedback you get. Metadiscussion is boring.

Remember everyone thought the apollo and shuttle programs were impossible too.     

You keep trying to justify your ideas by dissing real things or things being done by real aerospace companies. FYI, that's not a good strategy.

Exactly
« Last Edit: 10/26/2017 04:37 am by Lar »
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline Caleb Cattuzzo

  • Member
  • Posts: 67
  • California,USA
  • Liked: 10
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: Lunar-capable shuttle
« Reply #37 on: 10/26/2017 05:02 am »
Stop ranting. And DO look at the tags of people posting.

It will also be helpful not to whine about the kind of feedback you get. Metadiscussion is boring.

Remember everyone thought the apollo and shuttle programs were impossible too.     

You keep trying to justify your ideas by dissing real things or things being done by real aerospace companies. FYI, that's not a good strategy.

Exactly

Sorry I just wanted some help on some numbers.
« Last Edit: 10/26/2017 05:03 am by Caleb Cattuzzo »
There is no strife,no prejudice,no national conflict in space as yet.Its hazards are hostile to us all.

Online Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8862
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 10199
  • Likes Given: 11934
Re: Lunar-capable shuttle
« Reply #38 on: 10/26/2017 05:29 am »
I started this thread so that i could have some help getting numbers and help on designing a THEORETICAL spacecraft.

You did not say that up front.

Quote
...instead after answering questions I ask I keep getting fed the same answer "It's not efficient" over and over even when I ask:What the raptor's stats are? or Will adding a 20,000lb heat shield effect the shuttles aerodynamics and in what way?

You are asking NSF members to do a lot of work for you, and many kindly have. I see information, links, and even documents that they have provided.

But since you are not paying them for their work, you will get what THEY want to give you.

Quote
But when I ask a question it would be nice not to get spammed with the answer to a different question over and over.

Hmm. There are many possible answers to that...
If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

Offline Caleb Cattuzzo

  • Member
  • Posts: 67
  • California,USA
  • Liked: 10
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: Lunar-capable shuttle
« Reply #39 on: 10/26/2017 06:06 am »
I started this thread so that i could have some help getting numbers and help on designing a THEORETICAL spacecraft.

You did not say that up front.

Quote
...instead after answering questions I ask I keep getting fed the same answer "It's not efficient" over and over even when I ask:What the raptor's stats are? or Will adding a 20,000lb heat shield effect the shuttles aerodynamics and in what way?

You are asking NSF members to do a lot of work for you, and many kindly have. I see information, links, and even documents that they have provided.

But since you are not paying them for their work, you will get what THEY want to give you.

Quote
But when I ask a question it would be nice not to get spammed with the answer to a different question over and over.

Hmm. There are many possible answers to that...

True on all counts i admit I have handled this thread badly to say the least.I apologize since this is the first time I am able to interact with people who have a passion for space exploration like my own.Lets just say I'm not used to this and I hope that admins would keep the post open I like to think my idea is a interesting one (although not the most likely to see a launch pad) but I came into this thread overconfident,rushed,and down right frustrated at my progress.Now don't get me wrong I'm not some spoiled brat who gets what he wants by yelling.But I did make a lot (ok most of my comments) off the hip and spontaneous causing them to now looking back make me sound like a a**hole.I majorly appreciate all the feedback and in a few weeks I would like your opinions on my schematic drawings I'm currently working on for this project.

Plus-Thanks to the admins for putting up with me and my stupid comments :)
« Last Edit: 10/26/2017 06:07 am by Caleb Cattuzzo »
There is no strife,no prejudice,no national conflict in space as yet.Its hazards are hostile to us all.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1