Why should NASA focus on landing hundreds of people on Mars or colonizing space? NASA is the Lewis and Clark expedition, the initial explorers. The idea that we shouldn't go anywhere in space unless we can colonize it at the same time is incorrect in my view. Let the private sector worry about colonization and let NASA focus on actually reaching the location for the first time.
Quote from: Endeavour_01 on 05/16/2017 07:44 pmWhy should NASA focus on landing hundreds of people on Mars or colonizing space? NASA is the Lewis and Clark expedition, the initial explorers. The idea that we shouldn't go anywhere in space unless we can colonize it at the same time is incorrect in my view. Let the private sector worry about colonization and let NASA focus on actually reaching the location for the first time.I agree with everything you said vis-a-vis the cislunar station idea -- in fact, if I had my way, NASA would focus all of their efforts on orbital stations and give up on the idea of planetary bases for the forseeable future.
But then I'm an advocate of the O'Neill "cities in space" idea -- I find the idea of going right back down another gravity well after spending eons getting out of this one to be ludcrous. Planets are where you put your mining and resource-gathering robots; space stations are the things you build for people to live in.
I do take issue with the notion that NASA is the "Lewis and Clark" of space exploration, however. Notionally, that should (IMO) be their remit, but in reality NASA has never been that organization, either spiritually or as a matter of organizational purpose.
The Cis lunar base has nothing to do with going to Mars it just gives Orion somewhere to go. NASA is lost its main mission is to keep various legacy Rocket development centres populated with people. The fact there is a outcome of this process is almost irrelevant. Imagine a trip to Mars lasting 2-3 years and u don't Evan land, its sad, sort of pathetic. No vision, Evan the things we are building have no obvious purpose other than getting a few people to Mars orbit or lunar orbit so we can say we have been there. The absolute truth is SX and to a lesser extent BO are the only people with a vision for space and are making strides to make it happen. NASA will continue with this waste of time until its cancelled and the congress will look for some other nonsense to keep the jobs in their states.
The chart about how they'd handle Lunar operations got my attention chiefly. It appear that the station would indeed be used as a gateway, or likewise a way-point, for the Orion and would-be-Lunar Lander. More specifically they clearly show the lander traveling all the way from DRO/NRO to the lunar surface. It appears that the ascent stage would return to the station, so possibly half-a-lander could be reused.
Quote from: redliox on 08/15/2017 07:50 pmThe chart about how they'd handle Lunar operations got my attention chiefly. It appear that the station would indeed be used as a gateway, or likewise a way-point, for the Orion and would-be-Lunar Lander. More specifically they clearly show the lander traveling all the way from DRO/NRO to the lunar surface. It appears that the ascent stage would return to the station, so possibly half-a-lander could be reused.I wonder if you could just bring a new descent stage with you for the next mission? Who knows how it'd berth to the ascent stage, but at least the DSG notionally has a Canadarm.Just a moment... whats that half-cut out Cargo SLS image? Enhance! Is that... my public-side SLS cargo render?
Quote from: redliox on 08/15/2017 07:50 pmThe chart about how they'd handle Lunar operations got my attention chiefly. It appear that the station would indeed be used as a gateway, or likewise a way-point, for the Orion and would-be-Lunar Lander. More specifically they clearly show the lander traveling all the way from DRO/NRO to the lunar surface. It appears that the ascent stage would return to the station, so possibly half-a-lander could be reused.I wonder if you could just bring a new descent stage with you for the next mission? Who knows how it'd berth to the ascent stage, but at least the DSG notionally has a Canadarm.
A good podcast on what LM are doing on DSG. Habitat module will be very basic relying on Orion for bathroom and kitchen facilities. This is primary to keep costs down, future modules could add these features along with ECLSS.http://spirit.as.utexas.edu/~fiso/archivelist.htm30August
Quote from: TrevorMonty on 08/31/2017 09:58 amA good podcast on what LM are doing on DSG. Habitat module will be very basic relying on Orion for bathroom and kitchen facilities. This is primary to keep costs down, future modules could add these features along with ECLSS.http://spirit.as.utexas.edu/~fiso/archivelist.htm30AugustThanks for the post. The LM concept is highlighting several issues with using MPLM modules for the gateway - the lack of volume - using the ECLSS on Orion is cost-effective but one of the objectives for the Cis-lunar facility was to develop and validate a closed-loop or near-closed loop ECLSS. LM states in the brief that it is designed to evolve as time/funding permits - but gives no timeline for such evolution (slide 13). In addition, LM is proposing their own logistics module as a co-manifest option, competing with ATK-Orbital for logistics.
Without an airlock the visit time will be significantly shortened. I do not see any plans for airlocks for the DSG?
Quote from: BrightLight on 08/31/2017 02:47 pmQuote from: TrevorMonty on 08/31/2017 09:58 amA good podcast on what LM are doing on DSG. Habitat module will be very basic relying on Orion for bathroom and kitchen facilities. This is primary to keep costs down, future modules could add these features along with ECLSS.http://spirit.as.utexas.edu/~fiso/archivelist.htm30AugustThanks for the post. The LM concept is highlighting several issues with using MPLM modules for the gateway - the lack of volume - using the ECLSS on Orion is cost-effective but one of the objectives for the Cis-lunar facility was to develop and validate a closed-loop or near-closed loop ECLSS. LM states in the brief that it is designed to evolve as time/funding permits - but gives no timeline for such evolution (slide 13). In addition, LM is proposing their own logistics module as a co-manifest option, competing with ATK-Orbital for logistics.This type of version of DSG would limit visit times at the DSG to about 7 days. The current mission length support for an Orion is 14 days (hopefully I am wrong and it is longer). The other 7 days is eaten by the trip to and from Earth in order to get to the DSG. So the visit times for missions to the DSG would be the max ECLSS allowed time for the Orion minus the trip time ~7 days. A vist of one to two weeks, even three weeks is not long enough for any significant work (scientific or infrastructure building) to occur. It would support at best an EVA if the DSG had an airlock. Without an airlock the visit time will be significantly shortened. I do not see any plans for airlocks for the DSG?
Quote from: oldAtlas_Eguy on 08/31/2017 04:04 pmWithout an airlock the visit time will be significantly shortened. I do not see any plans for airlocks for the DSG?Why would the lack of an airlock shorten the visit? Would it be possible to use Orion's crew module as an airlock?
Quote from: Proponent on 08/31/2017 04:18 pmQuote from: oldAtlas_Eguy on 08/31/2017 04:04 pmWithout an airlock the visit time will be significantly shortened. I do not see any plans for airlocks for the DSG?Why would the lack of an airlock shorten the visit? Would it be possible to use Orion's crew module as an airlock?Airlock would be 4th trip/module, logistic module being 3rd trip. With logistic module Orion should be able to support crew for 30 days. Not presented anyway but using a Cygnus as logistic module delivered by commercial LV would allow airlock to be brought forward to 3rd mission.
I don't think DSG has been officially funded yet or approved by current Administration.
Quote from: TrevorMonty on 09/01/2017 06:20 pmI don't think DSG has been officially funded yet or approved by current Administration.According to NASA its being covered under NEXT-Step and ARM contracts for now.