I wonder if NASA could conjure up an "interim" system that used two serial stages. An ICPS topped by a Centaur or a four-meter diameter Delta IV upper stage would be able to boost more than 40 tonnes to escape velocity, 17-plus tonnes more than ICPS alone.
Quote from: MP99 on 12/13/2012 03:58 pmI find it unlikely that DCSS's structure can support an 80t payload through the high G's at core stage burnout without at least strengthening the H2 tank substantially.Isn't that what item 3) in the above RFI is about? At least partially?
I find it unlikely that DCSS's structure can support an 80t payload through the high G's at core stage burnout without at least strengthening the H2 tank substantially.
This is the briefing document that went out with the Request for Information (Solicitation Number: NNC13ZMX001L) on fairings & payload adapters listed above.http://prod.nais.nasa.gov/eps/eps_data/154120-OTHER-001-001.docx(pdf also attached)Might help with the discussion.
They are seeking info to see if development of the 8.4m faring option is needed at this time to do larger volume payloads with the Block I iCPS stack...
Quote from: oldAtlas_Eguy on 12/14/2012 02:21 pmThey are seeking info to see if development of the 8.4m faring option is needed at this time to do larger volume payloads with the Block I iCPS stack...I was surprised to see 8.4m + iCPS. Any ideas as to what missions/payloads that combination might be needed for?
A specific payload no. But something that weighs 23mt and is to big to fit in a 5m faring such as possibly the Gateway hardware.
Quote from: oldAtlas_Eguy on 12/14/2012 04:48 pmA specific payload no. But something that weighs 23mt and is to big to fit in a 5m faring such as possibly the Gateway hardware.That thought just crossed my mind too. Bigelow?
There are reports of wind tunnel testing of the Orion variant and the 8.4m cargo variant. But no similar reports for the 5m cargo variant. Is this a case where different parts of NASA are marching to the beats of different drummers?
Quote from: edkyle99 on 12/10/2012 01:16 amI wonder if NASA could conjure up an "interim" system that used two serial stages. An ICPS topped by a Centaur or a four-meter diameter Delta IV upper stage would be able to boost more than 40 tonnes to escape velocity, 17-plus tonnes more than ICPS alone.A 40t payload balanced on top of a long-thin Centaur balanced on top of ICPS. That sounds like it would be a tremendous hammerhead, and I'm having trouble picturing how it would be physically constructed.Twin Delta stages sounds a little less daunting, but even so it sounds like both upper stages would need strengthening.cheers, Martin
Yep, 4 man all LH2 with airlock. I think that's what NASA is hoping for anyway.
Quote from: spectre9 on 12/15/2012 08:25 amYep, 4 man all LH2 with airlock. I think that's what NASA is hoping for anyway.Is Altair what Congress wants?
Quote from: HappyMartian on 12/15/2012 09:46 amQuote from: spectre9 on 12/15/2012 08:25 amYep, 4 man all LH2 with airlock. I think that's what NASA is hoping for anyway.Is Altair what Congress wants? NASA has no program in place to return humans to the lunar surface. President Obama cancelled the program aimed to achieve that goal.If NASA had the authority and funding, it could do lunar landings with Block 1, or with EELVs, or with other rockets. But it isn't happening. - Ed Kyle
the 5m fairing variant is being thought about and even made into PowerPoint slides but hasn't been adopted or base-lined so there is no authorisation for physical tests. The 5m variant is probably nothing more than a cost-cutting thought experiment in case the budget is trimmed more and the 8.4m PLF has to be scrapped.