I didn't want to clutter up the "Block 0 vs. RP-1" topic so I've created a new one. Here's a link to the other topic:http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=24553.0And here's a link to the original NSF article:http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2011/03/sls-studies-focusing-sd-hlv-versus-rp-1-f-1-engines/Basically, I'd like to hear about potential *realistic* applications of just this LV. It has 70mT capacity. If we assume this will be the only LV developed, what sort of missions can NASA perform with it?
I'd like to hear about potential *realistic* applications of just this LV. It has 70mT capacity. If we assume this will be the only LV developed, what sort of missions can NASA perform with it?
Exactly how much payload can a Block 0-launched DIVHUS send to EML1/2/Escape? What about ULA's Common Centaur, with which it plans to replace the Delta IV 4m and 5m upper stages? Will it be ready by 2016, and what could it send to EML1/2/Escape?
What can be done without other propulsive stages? Sure, you can launch a house into LEO.What about with some form of propulsion that gets the mission out of LEO? Then the limits on what you can do without rendezvous in LEO are dependent on the efficiency of the LEO-departure propulsion.If you allow rendezvous of multiple payloads in LEO then there's really not much of a limit, is there?
Quote from: 2552 on 03/24/2011 08:16 pmExactly how much payload can a Block 0-launched DIVHUS send to EML1/2/Escape? What about ULA's Common Centaur, with which it plans to replace the Delta IV 4m and 5m upper stages? Will it be ready by 2016, and what could it send to EML1/2/Escape?About 35mT. The CC would be ready, but it would not grant much of a performance boost. It's main advantage is cost to operate.
Quote from: Downix on 03/24/2011 08:19 pmQuote from: 2552 on 03/24/2011 08:16 pmExactly how much payload can a Block 0-launched DIVHUS send to EML1/2/Escape? What about ULA's Common Centaur, with which it plans to replace the Delta IV 4m and 5m upper stages? Will it be ready by 2016, and what could it send to EML1/2/Escape?About 35mT. The CC would be ready, but it would not grant much of a performance boost. It's main advantage is cost to operate.Wow, that's a lot more than I thought it did. I had thought a roughly Orion mass payload was about the limit. That also answers my question of how the manned Venus flyby you suggested would be done. Orion + Bigelow inflatable hab, right?
Quote from: 2552 on 03/24/2011 08:35 pmQuote from: Downix on 03/24/2011 08:19 pmQuote from: 2552 on 03/24/2011 08:16 pmExactly how much payload can a Block 0-launched DIVHUS send to EML1/2/Escape? What about ULA's Common Centaur, with which it plans to replace the Delta IV 4m and 5m upper stages? Will it be ready by 2016, and what could it send to EML1/2/Escape?About 35mT. The CC would be ready, but it would not grant much of a performance boost. It's main advantage is cost to operate.Wow, that's a lot more than I thought it did. I had thought a roughly Orion mass payload was about the limit. That also answers my question of how the manned Venus flyby you suggested would be done. Orion + Bigelow inflatable hab, right?You got it, something on the order of a Genesis module. Something people forget is often times low-power transfer orbits. Slight maneuvering and you can push the amount for EDS up, at a cost of time. To be exact, the amount I calculated was 34,593kg. To do it required no less than 14 burns, and the total time in orbit was a week. It also used a narrow window, of which the next one won't open up for another 3 years, which used the moon to help slingshot it to Venus where it did a flyby and returned back to earth.
Quote from: Downix on 03/24/2011 08:19 pmQuote from: 2552 on 03/24/2011 08:16 pmExactly how much payload can a Block 0-launched DIVHUS send to EML1/2/Escape?About 35mT.Wow, that's a lot more than I thought it did.
Quote from: 2552 on 03/24/2011 08:16 pmExactly how much payload can a Block 0-launched DIVHUS send to EML1/2/Escape?About 35mT.
Exactly how much payload can a Block 0-launched DIVHUS send to EML1/2/Escape?
Quote from: 2552 on 03/24/2011 08:35 pmQuote from: Downix on 03/24/2011 08:19 pmQuote from: 2552 on 03/24/2011 08:16 pmExactly how much payload can a Block 0-launched DIVHUS send to EML1/2/Escape?About 35mT.Wow, that's a lot more than I thought it did.That's higher than my estimate as well. I wonder if Downix assumed you were willing to stretch the DIVHUS to optimize it for the 70mT capability? I estimated a standard DIVHUS already in LEO with a full propellant load could send a payload of 23.28mT through a 3175m/s trans-lunar injection burn. That payload doesn't include the 3.35mT spent stage, but it does have to include the payload attach fitting, etc. That's assuming a specific impulse of 460s.If you stretched the stage but kept the same propellant mass fraction (which would be "easy"), it would deliver a payload of 30.27mT. If you magically added just propellant without adding any dry mass, it would deliver 39.11mT. So 35mT is probably a realistic assessment for a practicable stretch.
Quote from: Downix on 03/24/2011 08:46 pmQuote from: 2552 on 03/24/2011 08:35 pmQuote from: Downix on 03/24/2011 08:19 pmQuote from: 2552 on 03/24/2011 08:16 pmExactly how much payload can a Block 0-launched DIVHUS send to EML1/2/Escape? What about ULA's Common Centaur, with which it plans to replace the Delta IV 4m and 5m upper stages? Will it be ready by 2016, and what could it send to EML1/2/Escape?About 35mT. The CC would be ready, but it would not grant much of a performance boost. It's main advantage is cost to operate.Wow, that's a lot more than I thought it did. I had thought a roughly Orion mass payload was about the limit. That also answers my question of how the manned Venus flyby you suggested would be done. Orion + Bigelow inflatable hab, right?You got it, something on the order of a Genesis module. Something people forget is often times low-power transfer orbits. Slight maneuvering and you can push the amount for EDS up, at a cost of time. To be exact, the amount I calculated was 34,593kg. To do it required no less than 14 burns, and the total time in orbit was a week. It also used a narrow window, of which the next one won't open up for another 3 years, which used the moon to help slingshot it to Venus where it did a flyby and returned back to earth.Can you explain this Venus flyby a little bit more? Which trajectories, timeline, etc. Just read trough the Venus flyby idea of the apollo applications program. A shame that we are at the same point as 40 years ago... ;-)
1. Combined Crew + Cargo runs to ISS, filling the same role as Shuttle.Manned Lunar Orbit exploration in single launch Mars mission assembly2. Complete Satellite Constellation deliveryLarge Telescope lift3. ISS growth4. Lagrange space stationdeep space probesManned NEO Asteroid missionsManned Venus mission in single launch (a la Apollo Applications)
Quote from: sdsds on 03/24/2011 08:09 pmthe limits on what you can do without rendezvous in LEO are dependent on the efficiency of the LEO-departure propulsion.There have to be practical limits on potential missions. One would be a single launch mission. This would be your without rendevous scenario. What would be possible with that apart from ISS crew/resupply?
the limits on what you can do without rendezvous in LEO are dependent on the efficiency of the LEO-departure propulsion.
Now cynics claim a little of the cash has gone astrayBut that's not the point my friendsWhen the money keeps rolling out you don't keep booksYou can tell you've done well by the happy grateful looksAccountants only slow things down, figures get in the wayNever been a lady loved as much as Eva Peron
Quote from: Downix on 03/24/2011 07:56 pm1. Combined Crew + Cargo runs to ISS, filling the same role as Shuttle.1. Goes against Columbia commission
1. Combined Crew + Cargo runs to ISS, filling the same role as Shuttle.
the problem with just visiting EML1/2 is that they are just points in space. to the lay person it would be probably less interesting than visiting ISS because at least that is a location they can understand.
the problem with just visiting EML1/2 is that they are just points in space. to the lay person it would be probably less interesting than visiting ISS because at least that is a location they can understand. that
Quote from: Downix on 03/24/2011 07:56 pm1. Combined Crew + Cargo runs to ISS, filling the same role as Shuttle.Manned Lunar Orbit exploration in single launch Mars mission assembly2. Complete Satellite Constellation deliveryLarge Telescope lift3. ISS growth4. Lagrange space stationdeep space probesManned NEO Asteroid missionsManned Venus mission in single launch (a la Apollo Applications)1. Goes against Columbia commission2. Not feasible and too much risk 3. the ISS can not support much more expansion4. for what reasonThe rest are covered with " with what money?"
Quote from: Jim on 03/25/2011 01:01 amQuote from: Downix on 03/24/2011 07:56 pm1. Combined Crew + Cargo runs to ISS, filling the same role as Shuttle.1. Goes against Columbia commissionAgainst the letter, perhaps, but probably not against the spirit (at least according to the CAIB staffers I've discussed this with). As long as the spacecraft can safely abort independent of the cargo, the *intent* of the CAIB recommendation is met. It's really no different than Apollo, where the CSM with crew could abort off the Saturn V independently from the "cargo" (LM).