Author Topic: Crew Dragon or Orion to Hubble for CMG Replacement?  (Read 39126 times)

Offline Swedish chef

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 172
  • Sweden
  • Liked: 223
  • Likes Given: 309
Re: Crew Dragon to Hubble for CMG Replacement?
« Reply #20 on: 10/09/2018 03:07 pm »
Scott Manley mentioned an interesting idea, send up a rocket and change the orbit. After that the astronauts on ISS could service the telescope.

Offline Hauerg

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 901
  • Berndorf, Austria
  • Liked: 520
  • Likes Given: 2574
Re: Crew Dragon to Hubble for CMG Replacement?
« Reply #21 on: 10/09/2018 03:10 pm »
WHICH rocket?

Offline speedevil

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4406
  • Fife
  • Liked: 2762
  • Likes Given: 3369
Re: Crew Dragon to Hubble for CMG Replacement?
« Reply #22 on: 10/09/2018 03:20 pm »
WHICH rocket?
A Big one.
Neglecting the other issues, and altitude, because it can be easily neglected, HST is at 28.5 degrees, ISS 51.6.
To change inclination by 28 degrees in LEO needs around 3.7km/s.
If your rocket weighs a couple of tons, you end up (if hypergolic) needing around 40 tons, or with methalox, 25 tons of propellant. (neglecting initial rendevous propellant)

If you use something based off a commercial comsat, with electric propulsion, likely you end up with around 18 tons or so total launch mass.

A side-benefit from this is you've probably come pretty close to developing something to push modules electrically to LOP-G.
« Last Edit: 10/09/2018 03:37 pm by speedevil »

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8144
  • Liked: 6801
  • Likes Given: 2965
Re: Crew Dragon to Hubble for CMG Replacement?
« Reply #23 on: 10/09/2018 04:31 pm »
WHICH rocket?
A Big one.
Neglecting the other issues, and altitude, because it can be easily neglected, HST is at 28.5 degrees, ISS 51.6.
To change inclination by 28 degrees in LEO needs around 3.7km/s.
If your rocket weighs a couple of tons, you end up (if hypergolic) needing around 40 tons, or with methalox, 25 tons of propellant. (neglecting initial rendevous propellant)

If you use something based off a commercial comsat, with electric propulsion, likely you end up with around 18 tons or so total launch mass.

A side-benefit from this is you've probably come pretty close to developing something to push modules electrically to LOP-G.

Either Delta IV Heavy or a fully expended Falcon Heavy should be able to do that, assuming it can rendezvous and burn in less time than a coast to GEO.

Offline whitelancer64

Re: Crew Dragon to Hubble for CMG Replacement?
« Reply #24 on: 10/09/2018 05:07 pm »
I remember that there were two NRO 'Hubble class' telescopes that were 'gifted' to NASA. I've just Googled about them but only get articles with vague sets of details about them. Are one or both of these going to be recycled into space telescopes? Could one of them be a better platform for the WFIRST concept?

Just as a general FYI, the NRO did not donate telescopes, but mirror sets. They are a primary and secondary mirror set and the structure that holds them, and nothing else. They are not complete telescopes.

WFIRST was re-scoped to use one of the NRO mirror sets. The NRO mirrors are twice the diameter of the original WFIRST proposal. that's why it nearly doubled in cost.

There are numerous proposals for the second set, none of which have been accepted yet.
"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 pb2000

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 671
  • Calgary, AB
  • Liked: 759
  • Likes Given: 237
Re: Crew Dragon to Hubble for CMG Replacement?
« Reply #25 on: 10/09/2018 05:31 pm »
If NASA offered a $200m+ bounty, supplied the spare parts and just told any interested parties to call before grappling, then it might work. If NASA actually wanted to be involved... nah.
Launches attended: Worldview-4 (Atlas V 401), Iridium NEXT Flight 1 (Falcon 9 FT), PAZ+Starlink (Falcon 9 FT), Arabsat-6A (Falcon Heavy)
Pilgrimaged to: Boca Chica (09/19 & 01/22)

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: Crew Dragon to Hubble for CMG Replacement?
« Reply #26 on: 10/09/2018 05:54 pm »
No need for a Dragon or crew.  Just a spacecraft bus with rendezvous and docking capability and a separate
non propulsive attitude control system.  The propulsion system used for rendezvous and docking then can be used for reboost.
« Last Edit: 10/09/2018 05:58 pm by Jim »

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: Crew Dragon to Hubble for CMG Replacement?
« Reply #27 on: 10/09/2018 08:00 pm »
No need for a Dragon or crew.  Just a spacecraft bus with rendezvous and docking capability and a separate
non propulsive attitude control system.  The propulsion system used for rendezvous and docking then can be used for reboost.

Yes. Probably best to keep Astronauts out of the picture at this stage of the telescope's career. Jim for the Win. Time to lock the thread? ;)
"Those who can't, Blog".   'Space Cadets' of the World - Let us UNITE!! (crickets chirping)

Offline Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8859
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 10198
  • Likes Given: 11927
Re: Crew Dragon to Hubble for CMG Replacement?
« Reply #28 on: 10/09/2018 08:13 pm »
No need for a Dragon or crew.  Just a spacecraft bus with rendezvous and docking capability and a separate
non propulsive attitude control system.  The propulsion system used for rendezvous and docking then can be used for reboost.

Very elegant idea.

And this looks like an opportunity for one of my favorite spacecraft, the Orbital/Orbital ATK/Northrop Grumman Innovation Systems Cygnus (whew!).

Just put a docking and non-propulsive attitude control system package in a compact module in place of the normal Pressurized Cargo Module (PCM), and let the Service Module (SM) do the work of moving things around.

Maybe DARPA would like to help fund such an effort to see if it could help extend the useful lives of other government assets in space?
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 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: Crew Dragon to Hubble for CMG Replacement?
« Reply #29 on: 10/09/2018 08:21 pm »
Although I did mention the overall idea earlier in the thread; thanks for the specific vehicle idea. Increasing the Cygnus propellant load to give this Hubble life extension at least a couple years would make the cost worth it. I hope they can make the vehicle somehow talk to the Hubble's control system to allow the Cygnus attitude control authority.
"Those who can't, Blog".   'Space Cadets' of the World - Let us UNITE!! (crickets chirping)

Offline Cherokee43v6

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1176
  • Garner, NC
  • Liked: 935
  • Likes Given: 236
Re: Crew Dragon to Hubble for CMG Replacement?
« Reply #30 on: 10/09/2018 08:22 pm »
No need for a Dragon or crew.  Just a spacecraft bus with rendezvous and docking capability and a separate
non propulsive attitude control system.  The propulsion system used for rendezvous and docking then can be used for reboost.

Very elegant idea.


Not to mention that should the disposal option be chosen, that the 'reboost module' could serve in that capacity.
"I didn't open the can of worms...
        ...I just pointed at it and laughed a little too loudly."

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12095
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 18197
  • Likes Given: 12158
Re: Crew Dragon to Hubble for CMG Replacement?
« Reply #31 on: 10/10/2018 06:50 am »
No need for a Dragon or crew.  Just a spacecraft bus with rendezvous and docking capability and a separate
non propulsive attitude control system.  The propulsion system used for rendezvous and docking then can be used for reboost.


You left out a tiny little detail: the need to disable Hubble's own attitude control system to allow the ACS of the docked spacecraft bus to take over. Which means completely changing the way the Hubble computers operate the telescope.

Offline Oersted

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2897
  • Liked: 4098
  • Likes Given: 2773
Re: Crew Dragon to Hubble for CMG Replacement?
« Reply #32 on: 10/10/2018 09:16 am »
Dragon cannot support an EVA. It would require an external airlock module.

Ah, but we'd just need to take a page out of the Soviet playbook and add an inflatable airlock. I'm sure Bigelow can come up with something...

Offline nacnud

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2691
  • Liked: 981
  • Likes Given: 347
Re: Crew Dragon to Hubble for CMG Replacement?
« Reply #33 on: 10/10/2018 11:03 am »
Dragon cannot support an EVA. It would require an external airlock module.

Ah, but we'd just need to take a page out of the Soviet playbook and add an inflatable airlock. I'm sure Bigelow can come up with something...

And some way to get it from the trunk to Dragons docking port.

Offline octavo

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 247
  • Liked: 186
  • Likes Given: 738
Re: Crew Dragon to Hubble for CMG Replacement?
« Reply #34 on: 10/10/2018 12:27 pm »
Dragon cannot support an EVA. It would require an external airlock module.

Ah, but we'd just need to take a page out of the Soviet playbook and add an inflatable airlock. I'm sure Bigelow can come up with something...

And some way to get it from the trunk to Dragons docking port.

*** dons fire-proof suit ***

While we're about it, why not just slap a Raptor US on F9 to increase performance? :p


Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12095
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 18197
  • Likes Given: 12158
Re: Crew Dragon to Hubble for CMG Replacement?
« Reply #35 on: 10/10/2018 12:37 pm »
Dragon cannot support an EVA. It would require an external airlock module.

Ah, but we'd just need to take a page out of the Soviet playbook and add an inflatable airlock. I'm sure Bigelow can come up with something...

And some way to get it from the trunk to Dragons docking port.

*** dons fire-proof suit ***

While we're about it, why not just slap a Raptor US on F9 to increase performance? :p



Now where did I leave my flame-thrower? 8)

Let's just not go down the "Raptor upper stage"-path again. Or we will invoke the wrath of Lar.
« Last Edit: 10/10/2018 12:38 pm by woods170 »

Offline nacnud

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2691
  • Liked: 981
  • Likes Given: 347
Re: Crew Dragon to Hubble for CMG Replacement?
« Reply #36 on: 10/10/2018 01:12 pm »
Dragon cannot support an EVA. It would require an external airlock module.

Ah, but we'd just need to take a page out of the Soviet playbook and add an inflatable airlock. I'm sure Bigelow can come up with something...

And some way to get it from the trunk to Dragons docking port.

*** dons fire-proof suit ***

While we're about it, why not just slap a Raptor US on F9 to increase performance? :p



Now where did I leave my flame-thrower? 8)

Let's just not go down the "Raptor upper stage"-path again. Or we will invoke the wrath of Lar.

Exactly

Offline Bananas_on_Mars

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 552
  • Liked: 448
  • Likes Given: 253
Re: Crew Dragon to Hubble for CMG Replacement?
« Reply #37 on: 10/10/2018 01:37 pm »
Ok, what's so special about hubble that we can't simply build a replacement? Not with all new and super fancy stuff like the want with WFIRST, but with the technology level Hubble has now? Hubble has been launched 30 years ago, upgraded the last time almost 10 years ago.
Why isn't it possible to build something based on a commercial spacecraft bus, for let's say 500 mio. $ that's new and shiny and has the same capabilities of 30-10 year old hardware?

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10586
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 4548
  • Likes Given: 13523
Re: Crew Dragon to Hubble for CMG Replacement?
« Reply #38 on: 10/10/2018 01:41 pm »
Ok, what's so special about hubble that we can't simply build a replacement? Not with all new and super fancy stuff like the want with WFIRST, but with the technology level Hubble has now? Hubble has been launched 30 years ago, upgraded the last time almost 10 years ago.
Why isn't it possible to build something based on a commercial spacecraft bus, for let's say 500 mio. $ that's new and shiny and has the same capabilities of 30-10 year old hardware?
Sure, we'll just manage the program along the lines of the Webb Space Telescope...
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: Crew Dragon to Hubble for CMG Replacement?
« Reply #39 on: 10/10/2018 01:43 pm »
No need for a Dragon or crew.  Just a spacecraft bus with rendezvous and docking capability and a separate
non propulsive attitude control system.  The propulsion system used for rendezvous and docking then can be used for reboost.


You left out a tiny little detail: the need to disable Hubble's own attitude control system to allow the ACS of the docked spacecraft bus to take over. Which means completely changing the way the Hubble computers operate the telescope.
Update the firmware.
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

Tags:
 

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