-
#280
by
Raj2014
on 10 May, 2015 15:59
-
What is wrong with just using Bigelow's inflatable habitats? It offers free space inside, multiple protection, comes in different sizes and it is compact when traveling to orbit then inflates afterwards.
The big problem with a system based purely on inflatable modules is that it will have to go out fully supplied. It can't be that compact for launch when its full of equipment, food, etc.
They can send cargo on a separate launch vehicle, if it is not that expensive. SpaceX or another aerospace company can send it. Why not use the same materials used on the inflatable modules on other types of deep space habitats?
Also introduce a rotating habitable centrifuge, like the one designed for the Nautilus-X.
-
#281
by
BrightLight
on 10 May, 2015 18:27
-
This is a posting for the response to questions about the FY 12 to 14 budget, it is 6 months old.
http://www.governmentattic.org/13docs/NASA-QFR_2011-2013.pdf:
Responses to Questions for the Record (QFR) provided to Congress by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) , 2011-2012
Request date: 15-June-2014
Released date: 23-July-2014
Posted date: 17-November-2014
Source of document: HQ FOIA Public Liaison Officer
NASA Headquarters Mail Stop 5 - L19, 30 0 E Street SW
Washington, DC 20546
5. For NASA's first manned mission beyond low Earth orbit, agency officials have stated that lunar fly-bys, asteroid missions, and missions to a LaGrange Point are under consideration. What steps is NASA taking to develop a habitation module and/or a service module to sustain the crew on a long-duration mission? What is the next hardware development that NASA is planning beyond SLS and MPCV?ANSWER: The Deep Space Habitation project was started in the Advanced Exploration Systems (AES) Program in FY 2012. This project is developing system requirements and concepts for habitats, and demonstrating habitat mockups in ground-based tests. In parallel, the AES Program, in partnership with the Game Changing Development (GCD) program under Space Technology, is developing technologies for highly-reliable, next generation life support systems, radiation monitoring and protection, advanced space power systems, fire safety, logistics reduction, and autonomous mission operations that will be incorporated into a habitat mockup around 2015 for integrated testing.
The AES Program is also pursuing a commercial partnership to demonstrate an inflatable module on the ISS. ISS is being used to look at life support systems as well as many components of the new systems.
Note that the "next" is italicized - it is planned that a habitat will be the next project to be funded after Orion and SLS.
-
#282
by
Raj2014
on 10 May, 2015 18:42
-
This is a posting for the response to questions about the FY 12 to 14 budget, it is 6 months old.
http://www.governmentattic.org/13docs/NASA-QFR_2011-2013.pdf:
Responses to Questions for the Record (QFR) provided to Congress by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) , 2011-2012
Request date: 15-June-2014
Released date: 23-July-2014
Posted date: 17-November-2014
Source of document: HQ FOIA Public Liaison Officer
NASA Headquarters Mail Stop 5 - L19, 30 0 E Street SW
Washington, DC 20546
5. For NASA's first manned mission beyond low Earth orbit, agency officials have stated that lunar fly-bys, asteroid missions, and missions to a LaGrange Point are under consideration. What steps is NASA taking to develop a habitation module and/or a service module to sustain the crew on a long-duration mission? What is the next hardware development that NASA is planning beyond SLS and MPCV?
ANSWER: The Deep Space Habitation project was started in the Advanced Exploration Systems (AES) Program in FY 2012. This project is developing system requirements and concepts for habitats, and demonstrating habitat mockups in ground-based tests. In parallel, the AES Program, in partnership with the Game Changing Development (GCD) program under Space Technology, is developing technologies for highly-reliable, next generation life support systems, radiation monitoring and protection, advanced space power systems, fire safety, logistics reduction, and autonomous mission operations that will be incorporated into a habitat mockup around 2015 for integrated testing.
The AES Program is also pursuing a commercial partnership to demonstrate an inflatable module on the ISS. ISS is being used to look at life support systems as well as many components of the new systems.
Note that the "next" is italicized - it is planned that a habitat will be the next project to be funded after Orion and SLS.
Where it says " it is planned that a habitat will be the next project to be funded after Orion and SLS", is that after Orion EM-1, Orion EM-2 and SLS Block 1, SLS Block 1B?
-
#283
by
BrightLight
on 10 May, 2015 18:50
-
This is a posting for the response to questions about the FY 12 to 14 budget, it is 6 months old.
http://www.governmentattic.org/13docs/NASA-QFR_2011-2013.pdf:
Responses to Questions for the Record (QFR) provided to Congress by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) , 2011-2012
Request date: 15-June-2014
Released date: 23-July-2014
Posted date: 17-November-2014
Source of document: HQ FOIA Public Liaison Officer
NASA Headquarters Mail Stop 5 - L19, 30 0 E Street SW
Washington, DC 20546
5. For NASA's first manned mission beyond low Earth orbit, agency officials have stated that lunar fly-bys, asteroid missions, and missions to a LaGrange Point are under consideration. What steps is NASA taking to develop a habitation module and/or a service module to sustain the crew on a long-duration mission? What is the next hardware development that NASA is planning beyond SLS and MPCV?
ANSWER: The Deep Space Habitation project was started in the Advanced Exploration Systems (AES) Program in FY 2012. This project is developing system requirements and concepts for habitats, and demonstrating habitat mockups in ground-based tests. In parallel, the AES Program, in partnership with the Game Changing Development (GCD) program under Space Technology, is developing technologies for highly-reliable, next generation life support systems, radiation monitoring and protection, advanced space power systems, fire safety, logistics reduction, and autonomous mission operations that will be incorporated into a habitat mockup around 2015 for integrated testing.
The AES Program is also pursuing a commercial partnership to demonstrate an inflatable module on the ISS. ISS is being used to look at life support systems as well as many components of the new systems.
Note that the "next" is italicized - it is planned that a habitat will be the next project to be funded after Orion and SLS.
Where it says " it is planned that a habitat will be the next project to be funded after Orion and SLS", is that after Orion EM-1, Orion EM-2 and SLS Block 1, SLS Block 1B?
Good question, I don't know - the Habitat will be part of the hardware development after the SLS is
? at a a final stage (1B?) and Orion is in production (?).
-
#284
by
Falcon H
on 11 May, 2015 00:11
-
So will is a ISS or SLS derived module still on the table, or will the deep space habitat be commercial?
Has the Exploration Augmentation Module been replaced by NextSTEP, or are the two programs running in parallel?
Thank you in advance
-
#285
by
TrevorMonty
on 11 May, 2015 01:03
-
So will is a ISS or SLS derived module still on the table, or will the deep space habitat be commercial?
Has the Exploration Augmentation Module been replaced by NextSTEP, or are the two programs running in parallel?
Thank you in advance
NASA are still deciding, but they have requested proposals from industry, Boeing, Orbital (Cygnus) and LM (Jupiter/Exoliner).
Most of debate on this thread has be whether large SLS derived module is better than smaller modular approach of the commercial options.
-
#286
by
BrightLight
on 11 May, 2015 03:14
-
So will is a ISS or SLS derived module still on the table, or will the deep space habitat be commercial?
Has the Exploration Augmentation Module been replaced by NextSTEP, or are the two programs running in parallel?
Thank you in advance
The favored NASA approach is for the SLS derived module (MSFC). That being said, the commercial offerings are apparently being evaluated as an alternative to the SLS "big" module.
-
#287
by
rayleighscatter
on 11 May, 2015 04:08
-
It occurs to me to, would a SLS-derived module have to come from the actual SLS production? Or could it be openly bid out to anyone? As in, would it actually have to be built from an SLS segment or could it be custom built to the same dimensions and such replacing that same segment on the stack.
It's late, and I'm not sure if I'm clearly stating this....
-
#288
by
Coastal Ron
on 11 May, 2015 04:32
-
It occurs to me to, would a SLS-derived module have to come from the actual SLS production? Or could it be openly bid out to anyone? As in, would it actually have to be built from an SLS segment or could it be custom built to the same dimensions and such replacing that same segment on the stack.
It depends on how the requirement is put together. NASA could, for reasons they would have to justify, say that a DSH must be made on the same production line as the SLS stages are. I don't know if the tooling can handle that, but let's ignore that for now. If the tooling could, NASA could probably justify it somehow depending on who was pushing for it.
However normally there would be a requirement that wouldn't be so prescriptive as to what tooling was to be used. It may turn out that the SLS tooling is the best to use due to the transportation limitations for a structure that big, or at least the Michoud facility. But if the bidding was open to all qualified bidders it could be possible that someone else would build it somewhere else.
But this is assuming that NASA mandates an aluminum enclosed DSH. I think it's likely they would leave the requirements open to inflatable solutions too, especially since aluminum enclosures beyond Earth's radiation protection have secondary radiation effects that can be harmful to human tissue, and inflatables are thought to provide far better radiation protection.
So yes, it may not have to be something built on SLS tooling.
-
#289
by
newpylong
on 11 May, 2015 11:03
-
It would use SLS tooling - there would be no point otherwise and Boeing has repeatedly said it would.
-
#290
by
newpylong
on 11 May, 2015 11:06
-
So will is a ISS or SLS derived module still on the table, or will the deep space habitat be commercial?
Has the Exploration Augmentation Module been replaced by NextSTEP, or are the two programs running in parallel?
Thank you in advance
3 parallel studies.
-
#291
by
BrightLight
on 11 May, 2015 19:06
-
In support of the commercial habitats, MMod and radiation shielding will be needed for proposals like the ATK-Orbital modified Cygnus concept. An SBIR was funded for Paragon to develop inflatable shrouds. from Parabolic Arc:
http://www.parabolicarc.com/2015/05/11/paragon/#more-55245“Successful development results in a low risk, low mass, shroud solution that can be applied to nearly any mission and is especially useful in support of soft or hard sided habitation modules or propellant tanks, including cryogens, to protect them from the thermal and MMOD environments of space,”
I think this will help the commercial habitat concepts but will add additional complexity when compared to the NASA single module approach.
-
#292
by
Coastal Ron
on 12 May, 2015 04:23
-
Where it says " it is planned that a habitat will be the next project to be funded after Orion and SLS", is that after Orion EM-1, Orion EM-2 and SLS Block 1, SLS Block 1B?
EM-1 & 2 are development/test missions, not operational ones. If EM-1 & 2 are successful then the SLS and Orion should be deemed operational, so it should be assumed that this would come after EM-2.
-
#293
by
woods170
on 12 May, 2015 10:24
-
Where it says " it is planned that a habitat will be the next project to be funded after Orion and SLS", is that after Orion EM-1, Orion EM-2 and SLS Block 1, SLS Block 1B?
EM-1 & 2 are development/test missions, not operational ones. If EM-1 & 2 are successful then the SLS and Orion should be deemed operational, so it should be assumed that this would come after EM-2.
STS was declared operational after STS-4. That stance changed radically when they took a good hard look after Challenger. By the time it was all said and done for STS it was clear that none of the 135 STS missions were ever routine. IMO the same will apply to SLS and Orion. There will never be enough missions to ever consider the pair to be operational. All flights will be, up to a certain level, development/test missions.
-
#294
by
PahTo
on 12 May, 2015 16:08
-
IMO the same will apply to SLS and Orion. There will never be enough missions to ever consider the pair to be operational. All flights will be, up to a certain level, development/test missions.
I agree, but would add the same can be said of Mercury (either Redstone or Atlas), Gemini, and Apollo (either Saturn 1B or Saturn 5).
-
#295
by
BrightLight
on 12 May, 2015 16:30
-
IMO the same will apply to SLS and Orion. There will never be enough missions to ever consider the pair to be operational. All flights will be, up to a certain level, development/test missions.
I agree, but would add the same can be said of Mercury (either Redstone or Atlas), Gemini, and Apollo (either Saturn 1B or Saturn 5).
This is certainly related to the post and is very interesting and relevant but it is becoming OT. This is a very good question though - when does Orion and SLS become operational? and what does operational mean?
-
#296
by
PahTo
on 12 May, 2015 17:39
-
Thanks BrightLight--agreed and funny you should say that. I was going to edit and say:
More on-topic--was Skylab considered "operational"? Note it was based upon S-IVB (using an LV stage concept for hab). Given the issues with launch and making Skylab even habitable, one could say there is no way it was ever "operational" and always "experimental" despite hosting three "expeditions". Of course, one would hope the lessons learned then would be applied to any similar development effort for a "stage-based hab" now...
-
#297
by
BrightLight
on 12 May, 2015 20:18
-
Thanks BrightLight--agreed and funny you should say that. I was going to edit and say:
More on-topic--was Skylab considered "operational"? Note it was based upon S-IVB (using an LV stage concept for hab). Given the issues with launch and making Skylab even habitable, one could say there is no way it was ever "operational" and always "experimental" despite hosting three "expeditions". Of course, one would hope the lessons learned then would be applied to any similar development effort for a "stage-based hab" now...
The Skylab II concept shown on fiso:
http://spirit.as.utexas.edu/~fiso/telecon/Griffin_3-27-13/Griffin_3-27-13.pdfis clearly a direct analog to the Apollo/Saturn Skylab. The mockup and simulation work performed at MSFC on the SLS derived habitats shows a "lesson learned" approach towards an operational habitation components of either/or EML or Mars applications basing it on the Skylab missions - including the three 60 day deployments. One improvement is the idea of producing the hab units as evolveable towards manned planetary systems as described in:
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20140012883.pdf
-
#298
by
redliox
on 13 May, 2015 09:55
-
Definitely growing more fond of a DSP concept.
I see in one of the Skylab II concepts the idea of two SLS-tank modules together - that ought to be more than sufficient for room on a 21st century space station!
Unless NASA decides to bold adopt aerocapture, odds are astronauts will be venturing to Mars in something drawn from the DSH plans braked into orbit either chemically or EP. Considering the SLS will be needed for a decade or two it makes sense to develop architecture drawn from it, not just sized to fit a cargo bay like the shuttle era. I'd like to see more work put in that direction.
-
#299
by
PahTo
on 13 May, 2015 14:20
-
One key advantage to a 5 meter hab concept is that it/they/elements could be launched on a variety of LVs. Options and choices are a good thing...
? at a a final stage (1B?) and Orion is in production (?).