OPSEK Question

[JazzFan]

Russia announced this week about decommissioning the ISS at 2020 when the latest approve extension is over.  Whatever happened to Russia's OPSEK concept?

[Danderman]

With the extension of ISS from 2015 to 2020, it doesn't make much sense to try to build a new station on what will be old modules by 2020.

And, the Russians aren't planning to sink ISS, they are simply saying that if ISS is not extended, 2020 would be its end date. Everyone expects ISS to continue beyond then.

[hop]

Russia announced this week about decommissioning the ISS at 2020 when the latest approve extension is over.

As far as I can tell, they made no such announcement. The current news stories seem to be based on an interview where Vitaly Davydov described what will happen if no additional extension is made.

If there is a formal announcement that an extension is ruled out, please feel free to provide it.

Whatever happened to Russia's OPSEK concept?

Power point, and still nominally planned for "after ISS" whenever that might be ? That's what http://www.russianspaceweb.com/opsek.html suggests.

[fregate]

[fregate]

[Dmitry_V_home]

Early variants:

[Danderman]

Any idea as to which module would carry girodines?

[fregate]

IAC 2012 Moscow, Aug 2012
Open Architecture of the New Generation Russian Space Station report from TsNIIMash
АРХИТЕКТУРА ЭВОЛЮЦИОНИРУЮЩИХ ПО НАЗНАЧЕНИЮ ОРБИТАЛЬНЫХ ОБИТАЕМЫХ ОБЪЕКТОВ КАК СИСТЕМЫ ОСВОЕНИЯ КОСМОСА
Карабаджак Г.Ф., Сапрыкин О.А.   

[manboy]

IAC 2012 Moscow, Aug 2012
Open Architecture of the New Generation Russian Space Station report from TsNIIMash
АРХИТЕКТУРА ЭВОЛЮЦИОНИРУЮЩИХ ПО НАЗНАЧЕНИЮ ОРБИТАЛЬНЫХ ОБИТАЕМЫХ ОБЪЕКТОВ КАК СИСТЕМЫ ОСВОЕНИЯ КОСМОСА
Карабаджак Г.Ф., Сапрыкин О.А.   

Here's some slightly higher res pictures of the slides.
I found them here. http://users.livejournal.com/___lin___/224994.html

Космические станции будущего
Space stations of the future

[Danderman]

The good news is that more MLM and the Energy modules are delayed, the "fresher" they would be when OPSEK is separated from ISS.

The reality, however, is that after a few years, I don't think that an FGB class module would be suitable as the basis of a new space station.

NASA was ready to throw away Priroda and Spektr when they were just a few years old.

[manboy]

NASA was ready to throw away Priroda and Spektr when they were just a few years old.

That's a misleading statement. Russia's ISS models were behind schedule and their was concern that Russia was diverting its limited resources to support Mir. Not to mention Roscosmos' carelessness made Spektr unusable.

[Danderman]

I just noticed a small problem with this design for OPSEK.

First off, anyone looking at the image should consider that the MLM is to the left, so the frame of reference is not the standard view of the Russian segment of ISS. The Energy modules docked with the Node module are here shown horizontally, compared with the view we normally see.

The ball shaped object is based on the design of the proposed Commercial Space Station, which is a 3.3 meter diameter Node, with a 2.2 meter corridor.  At the far end of the Node is an airlock hatch, so this design does not use the Node module as a multiple docking adapter, but rather as an airlock.

Anyway, the problem is that there aren't a lot of available docking ports for visiting vehicles. The 2nd FGB class module below the Node has a docking port, and the Node has an available converted hybrid port, but the MLM, unfortunately, has a male hybrid adapter at its zenith port.  This limits visiting vehicles to one crew ship and one cargo ship at a time, which means that crew handovers cannot occur unless the cargo ship is separated.

I suspect that if anyone did serious planning for OPSEK that the first requirement would be to figure out a way to put some sort of converter node on top of the MLM to allow for a cone adapter for visiting vehicles. Or, change out the probe for a cone prior to separation from ISS. The fact that this has not been considered yet, or depicted in graphics, tells me that no one is really serious about OPSEK, at least not to the point of working out the concept of operations.

[Nicolas PILLET]

The 2nd FGB class module below the Node has a docking port, and the Node has an available converted hybrid port

I don't see any "2d FGB-class module on this picture. I see MLM, UM, NEM-1, NEM-2, airlock and a third NEM-class module. This module seems to have a spherical part with six docking ports. One of them connects it to UM, so the five other ports are available. On the picture, one of them is occupied by a PTK NP, the other four are free.

[Danderman]

The 2nd FGB class module below the Node has a docking port, and the Node has an available converted hybrid port

I don't see any "2d FGB-class module on this picture. I see MLM, UM, NEM-1, NEM-2, airlock and a third NEM-class module. This module seems to have a spherical part with six docking ports. One of them connects it to UM, so the five other ports are available. On the picture, one of them is occupied by a PTK NP, the other four are free.

You are correct, the third NEM class module was what I was referring to. It appears that there will be no more FGB class modules.

The NEM class module indeed has a node in place of solar arrays. However, because only the "bottom" docking port is along the center of gravity, nothing can directly dock with the lateral ports. The practice is for modules to dock with the nadir port, and then use some sort of arm to translate to the lateral ports.

However, visiting vehicles do not perform this maneuver, and are restricted to ports that are aligned with the center of gravity, or close to it.

If a vehicle tried to dock with a port not aligned to the center of gravity, bad things would happen.

[Nicolas PILLET]

If a vehicle tried to dock with a port not aligned to the center of gravity, bad things would happen.

They did this very often with Mir... Even the ISS was not symetric during the assembly of ITS.

http://www.kosmonavtika.com/vaisseaux/mir/missions/mireo05/photos/mireo05-20.jpg

[Danderman]

If a vehicle tried to dock with a port not aligned to the center of gravity, bad things would happen.

They did this very often with Mir... Even the ISS was not symetric during the assembly of ITS.

http://www.kosmonavtika.com/vaisseaux/mir/missions/mireo05/photos/mireo05-20.jpg

Not at all.

There were no dockings with Mir with ports that were not aligned with the station center of gravity, or at least with a port that was close to the c/g. The photo above represents the Kristall module after it had used an arm to translate to a radial port.

Even the Shuttle dockings with Kristall were with a port that aligned with 2 20 ton modules at the end of the base block.

In other words, docking operations require that there be significant mass behind the port so that it does not simply "bounce away". Among other issues, having significant mass behind the port provides for off-nominal situations where one of the parameters of the docking operation are mis-aligned. If the docking port is supported by truly massive structures, it won't move much at all, but if the docking port is not aligned correctly and not supported by mass in all directions, the momentum from a misaligned docking attempt will move the docking port where there is not much mass.




 

[B. Hendrickx]

The Kommersant newspaper is reporting today that Roskosmos is considering to begin assembly of an all-Russian space station in 2017 using elements originally intended for the Russian segment of the ISS.

http://www.kommersant.ru/doc/2612375

The station would initially consist of the Node Module, the MLM Multipurpose Laboratory and the OKA-T free-flyer. That configuration should be finished by 2019. In 2020-2024 the station may be expanded with a  power platform and an inflatable module. The latter modules will first be tested in Earth orbit before their later use in the piloted lunar programme (testing the technology for that programme is seen as an important objective of the station).

The station will be placed into a 64.8° inclination orbit to provide better remote sensing coverage of Russia (similar plans also circulated for Mir and Mir-2). Another reason given for the higher inclination is that it will make manned launches to the station from Vostochnyy safer because they will primarily fly over land rather than over the Pacific Ocean for launches into 51.6° orbits. The higher inclination will also make it possible for cargo ships to reach the station from Plesetsk. Clearly, Russia is looking at completely abandoning Baikonur for man-related launches in the not too distant future. It looks like the Soyuz pad at Vostochnyy will now also be used for piloted missions. The article does not mention the new-generation piloted vehicle (PTK NP). Judging from the recently announced tender for the Vostochnyy-based Angara, it may be a very long time before manned versions of the PTK NP begin flying from Vostochnyy.

The newspaper says that despite the assembly of the new station, Russia will continue to honour its ISS commitments until 2020. A decision on extending Russian participation in the ISS until 2024 will be made before the end of this year. Although not mentioned in the article, it would seem that if Russia commits to building its own space station in the coming years, it is unlikely to continue participation in the ISS beyond 2020.

[Danderman]

Pure fantasy.

Russia will not have a capability in 3 years to launch heavy modules to a 64 degree inclination, nor will crewed spacecraft will be ready for launch in 2017.

If Russia wants to waste OKA-T by launching it first to a 64 degree inclination, fine, but OKA-T was designed to fly to 51 degrees, which means that it would have to be redesigned to lose mass under this new scheme.

[Prober]

Pure fantasy.

Russia will not have a capability in 3 years to launch heavy modules to a 64 degree inclination, nor will crewed spacecraft will be ready for launch in 2017.

If Russia wants to waste OKA-T by launching it first to a 64 degree inclination, fine, but OKA-T was designed to fly to 51 degrees, which means that it would have to be redesigned to lose mass under this new scheme.

Who says it will be at that location?

[B. Hendrickx]

Interfax quotes a source within the Russian Space Agency as saying that today's report in Kommersant is wrong and that Russia is not planning to assemble its own space station between 2017 and 2019.

http://www.interfax.ru/russia/407557