Author Topic: If the Shuttle program gets more missions added?  (Read 8197 times)

Offline Analyst

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3337
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: If the Shuttle program gets more missions added?
« Reply #20 on: 09/27/2009 05:18 PM »
HST did not use FSE during launch, just 3 (AFAIR) normal attach points: keel, port and starboard.

Analyst

Offline Jorge

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6182
  • Liked: 35
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: If the Shuttle program gets more missions added?
« Reply #21 on: 09/27/2009 05:28 PM »
They could build a new space telescope and delivered it to the Hubble location.  Deploy the new and retrieve Hubble.   

There is no way a new telescope could be built in time unless the shuttle is extended past 2015.

LEO is a lousy place for a telescope. HST went there because it was designed to be deployed and serviced by the shuttle, so it had to go to an orbit the shuttle could reach.

Even if, by some miracle, a telescope could be built in time for an extended shuttle program to deploy it, the shuttle program will *not* be around long enough to *service* it.

So why cripple the telescope by putting it in a lousy orbit if you are not going to service it anyway? Launch it on an ELV and send it to an orbit that's better for astronomy.
JRF

Offline Analyst

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3337
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: If the Shuttle program gets more missions added?
« Reply #22 on: 09/27/2009 05:36 PM »
This exactly is the plan with JWST. Sadly there isn't a solid plan in for the other bands of the electromagnetic spectrum (UV-, X- and Gamma-Ray).

Analyst

Offline A_M_Swallow

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8543
  • South coast of England
  • Liked: 362
  • Likes Given: 158
Re: If the Shuttle program gets more missions added?
« Reply #23 on: 09/27/2009 05:46 PM »
The advantage of the Shuttle over unmanned spacecraft is that it has people on board.  Pick mission(s) that need people.  The mission does not have to be ISS based, it could be setting up assets for return to Moon or Mars/Phobos.

Offline Aobrien

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1360
  • Tampa, Florida
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: If the Shuttle program gets more missions added?
« Reply #24 on: 09/27/2009 07:02 PM »
Sorry but I don't see that. The reason for a shuttle extension is not so we can keep using the shuttle. It is so that America has a human launch vehicle and is able to access its own station.
NSF L2=The Ultimate Space Passport

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32492
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 11261
  • Likes Given: 333
Re: If the Shuttle program gets more missions added?
« Reply #25 on: 09/27/2009 07:43 PM »
  Pick mission(s) that need people.  The mission does not have to be ISS based, it could be setting up assets for return to Moon or Mars/Phobos.

Clueless post
a.  The shuttle isn't going to be around for the return to the moon or Mars/Phobos missions
b.  Setting assets doesn't mean a crew is needed.
c. There are no near term missions other than ISS that need a crew

Offline A_M_Swallow

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8543
  • South coast of England
  • Liked: 362
  • Likes Given: 158
Re: If the Shuttle program gets more missions added?
« Reply #26 on: 09/27/2009 11:11 PM »
  Pick mission(s) that need people.  The mission does not have to be ISS based, it could be setting up assets for return to Moon or Mars/Phobos.

incorrect post
a.  The shuttle isn't going to be around for the return to the moon or Mars/Phobos missions
b.  Setting assets doesn't mean a crew is needed.
c. There are no near term missions other than ISS that need a crew

There are pre-proposed Phobos missions that launch during President Obama's second term, 2009 + 7 = 2016
The estimated manned Orion maiden voyage is 2015 so it can easily slip too far.
A Mars Transfer Vehicle (MTV) will weight more than 20 - 25 mT so would require multiple EELV to get to LEO.  A possible design is a Sundancer with extra thick skin and cargo compartment pushed by a refuelled Centaur(s).
The manned Dragon may be available but it does not have a robot arm so it cannot assemble the MTV, too soon for the J-246 so assembly is likely to be performed by the Shuttle.  The Phobos astronaut launch could possibly also be performed by the STS.

Now how is that for a glorious final mission?

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32492
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 11261
  • Likes Given: 333
Re: If the Shuttle program gets more missions added?
« Reply #27 on: 09/28/2009 12:50 AM »

1.  There are pre-proposed Phobos missions that launch during President Obama's second term, 2009 + 7 = 2016

2.  A Mars Transfer Vehicle (MTV) will weight more than 20 - 25 mT so would require multiple EELV to get to LEO.  A possible design is a Sundancer with extra thick skin and cargo compartment pushed by a refuelled Centaur(s).

3.  The manned Dragon may be available but it does not have a robot arm so it cannot assemble the MTV, too soon for the J-246

4,so assembly is likely to be performed by the Shuttle.  The Phobos astronaut launch could possibly also be performed by the STS.

Now how is that for a glorious final mission?

Nothing but unsubstantiated conjecture and scifi.  Not based on reality

1.  7 years is too soon.

2.  Sundancer is not a NASA vehicle and

3.  Who says an RMS is needed?

4.  Shuttle is not going to be involved.




Offline robertross

  • Canadian Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17826
  • Westphal, Nova Scotia
  • Liked: 485
  • Likes Given: 4671
Re: If the Shuttle program gets more missions added?
« Reply #28 on: 09/28/2009 05:22 PM »
Here's an interesting thought, but not sure if it is possible, let alone cost effective: If you fly an unmanned vehicle to Hubble c/w gyros, can it provide the guidance capability accurately enough? I'm thinking it can support Hubble for a few more months or years, and then when the gyros have failed (or something on the telescope) you use the spacecraft to de-orbit Hubble.

Remembering those who made the ultimate sacrifice for our rights & freedoms, and for those injured, visible or otherwise, in that fight.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32492
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 11261
  • Likes Given: 333
Re: If the Shuttle program gets more missions added?
« Reply #29 on: 09/28/2009 05:59 PM »
Here's an interesting thought, but not sure if it is possible, let alone cost effective: If you fly an unmanned vehicle to Hubble c/w gyros, can it provide the guidance capability accurately enough? I'm thinking it can support Hubble for a few more months or years, and then when the gyros have failed (or something on the telescope) you use the spacecraft to de-orbit Hubble.



that was the plan

Offline robertross

  • Canadian Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17826
  • Westphal, Nova Scotia
  • Liked: 485
  • Likes Given: 4671
Re: If the Shuttle program gets more missions added?
« Reply #30 on: 09/28/2009 08:11 PM »
Here's an interesting thought, but not sure if it is possible, let alone cost effective: If you fly an unmanned vehicle to Hubble c/w gyros, can it provide the guidance capability accurately enough? I'm thinking it can support Hubble for a few more months or years, and then when the gyros have failed (or something on the telescope) you use the spacecraft to de-orbit Hubble.


that was the plan

Perfect. Thanks Jim.

See, no need for a servicing mission using shuttle. Cameras, batteries & computers will just have to last. The biggest threat is the gyros, but if the de-orbit spacecraft can provide that capability to extend the science, then I'm fine with that; even 1-2 addtional years is a good thing.
Remembering those who made the ultimate sacrifice for our rights & freedoms, and for those injured, visible or otherwise, in that fight.

Offline Norm Hartnett

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2306
  • Liked: 56
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: If the Shuttle program gets more missions added?
« Reply #31 on: 09/29/2009 02:08 AM »
The prima facie reason for a shuttle extension is to close the gap in US human space flight, insure a dependable and robust resupply capability, and  to provide increased scientific payload up and down mass to support full utilization of the ISS. The SSP does not need another mission this one will be tough enough.

“You can’t take a traditional approach and expect anything but the traditional results, which has been broken budgets and not fielding any flight hardware.” Mike Gold - Apollo, STS, CxP; those that don't learn from history are condemned to repeat it: SLS.

Offline Lee Jay

  • Elite Veteran
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6691
  • Liked: 1000
  • Likes Given: 140
Re: If the Shuttle program gets more missions added?
« Reply #32 on: 09/29/2009 02:32 AM »
Here's an interesting thought, but not sure if it is possible, let alone cost effective: If you fly an unmanned vehicle to Hubble c/w gyros, can it provide the guidance capability accurately enough? I'm thinking it can support Hubble for a few more months or years, and then when the gyros have failed (or something on the telescope) you use the spacecraft to de-orbit Hubble.



that was the plan

How would this work?  How would the attached spacecraft with the gyros provide this information to Hubble's pointing systems?  Or, would it duplicate all of Hubble's pointing systems as well?  Wait, it couldn't duplicate the fine guidance sensors, so how would all of this work together?

Offline A_M_Swallow

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8543
  • South coast of England
  • Liked: 362
  • Likes Given: 158
Re: If the Shuttle program gets more missions added?
« Reply #33 on: 09/29/2009 03:11 AM »
{snip}

2.  Sundancer is not a NASA vehicle and

3.  Who says an RMS is needed?

2. What is and is not used by NASA can change, particularly if designing a new vehicle under very heavy time pressure.

3. Getting two or more cargo payloads to rendezvous and dock with each other is at a very low TRL.

Offline MrTim

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 730
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: If the Shuttle program gets more missions added?
« Reply #34 on: 09/29/2009 03:45 AM »
Aside from the upmass and downmass for supplies, spare parts, and science, I'd like to see the following:

1. More crew rotation via shuttle. We should provide the proper rides on the orbiter that we promised our partners instead of the bait-and-switch now planned.

2. More flight research (like the TPS DTOs we have recently seen). The orbiter is the only man-made winged vehicle to fly at those speeds and altitudes and it is simply idiotic not to be using it for the "Aeronautics" part of NASA's mission.

3. Although I'm not a Bigelow fanboy (something about inflated fabric spacecraft just seems, well, just plain wrong to me...  ;D ), I think it would be a good research project to haul an inflatable module to ISS to test the idea in a manned, long-duration way so they are no longer just theory. Perhaps one flight could haul-up and attach a modified Bigelow module, and one of the final flights could bring it back for thorough inspection and study (assuming the module could be deflated to fit back into an orbiter). Even if the module could not return home, getting it up there and into use would be good.

4. The new docking hardware for Orion could be hauled up on an orbiter, so there would not be a need to have an Orion haul it up later (simplifying the initial Orion ops).

5. Perhaps both certified MPLMs could be configured for permanent ISS usage, with one going up in 2010 for permanent berthing, and the other being used for cargo before being left on the actual final orbiter flight.

6. This is a bit of a stretch, but: because I like to see research done, I'd like to see an orbiter haul an X-38 up in 2015 (ought to be enough time to dust one off and finish it by then, and there are hundreds of billions of "stimulus" dollars floating around that our grand kids are going to pay for... better spent on some lifting body research than on some flash-in-the-pan political payoff project.) If one could not be ready for full-up manned lifeboat use by then, perhaps it could at least be deposited into orbit to test the de-orbit and land portion of the system. (I know, somebody will point to the hazard of a fuelled rocket in the payload bay and the post-Challenger declarations, but I would suggest a near final mission with a volunteer crew... the flight in a post-Columbia environment would still be safer than all the pre-Challenger flights)

Offline Analyst

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3337
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: If the Shuttle program gets more missions added?
« Reply #35 on: 09/29/2009 06:56 AM »
Here's an interesting thought, but not sure if it is possible, let alone cost effective: If you fly an unmanned vehicle to Hubble c/w gyros, can it provide the guidance capability accurately enough? I'm thinking it can support Hubble for a few more months or years, and then when the gyros have failed (or something on the telescope) you use the spacecraft to de-orbit Hubble.


that was the plan

Perfect. Thanks Jim.

See, no need for a servicing mission using shuttle. Cameras, batteries & computers will just have to last. The biggest threat is the gyros, but if the de-orbit spacecraft can provide that capability to extend the science, then I'm fine with that; even 1-2 addtional years is a good thing.

On what facts do you base the claim the gyros will fail first? The last ones worked since 1999, and two were still working in 2009 (plus one (degraded) spare). There is a two and a one gyro mode possible, the first one has been used.

STIS failed after 7 years, ACS after 5, for example.

Analyst

Online Bubbinski

Re: If the Shuttle program gets more missions added?
« Reply #36 on: 09/29/2009 09:40 AM »
Regarding retrieval of HST with the shuttle, would it cost more to launch a dedicated shuttle retrieval flight or to develop the robotic spacecraft to deorbit it?  Is the robotic craft in work now?
I'll even excitedly look forward to "flags and footprints" and suborbital missions. Just fly...somewhere.

Offline Analyst

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3337
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: If the Shuttle program gets more missions added?
« Reply #37 on: 09/29/2009 09:45 AM »
Robotic spacecraft is way cheaper. No need to work on it now, HSTs orbit is stable at least until 2020, probably longer. Shuttle won't be arround by then.

Analyst

Offline robertross

  • Canadian Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17826
  • Westphal, Nova Scotia
  • Liked: 485
  • Likes Given: 4671
Re: If the Shuttle program gets more missions added?
« Reply #38 on: 09/29/2009 06:12 PM »

See, no need for a servicing mission using shuttle. Cameras, batteries & computers will just have to last. The biggest threat is the gyros, but if the de-orbit spacecraft can provide that capability to extend the science, then I'm fine with that; even 1-2 addtional years is a good thing.

On what facts do you base the claim the gyros will fail first? The last ones worked since 1999, and two were still working in 2009 (plus one (degraded) spare). There is a two and a one gyro mode possible, the first one has been used.

STIS failed after 7 years, ACS after 5, for example.

Analyst

I don't think I said that anywhere????  (that the gyros will fail first).

I said they were the biggest threat, and that is from past history. If we started losing 1-2 instruments now, it's still no justification for a new repair mission. If there were a major malfunction, then it's a judgement call.
Remembering those who made the ultimate sacrifice for our rights & freedoms, and for those injured, visible or otherwise, in that fight.

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9640
  • Liked: 373
  • Likes Given: 465
Re: If the Shuttle program gets more missions added?
« Reply #39 on: 09/29/2009 07:08 PM »
I would suggest (and have suggested) that one use of more Shuttle missions to ISS would be to retrieve the Pirs module for the purpose of ground inspection of a Russian module to re-certify the Russian segment for additional lifetime. Also, if Pirs were retrieved, it could serve as a backup to MLM if that module were to fail prior to docking with ISS.

Tags: