-
Orion for Hubble Service Mission?
by
Danderman
on 09 Sep, 2013 14:56
-
Although Jim will tell us that there is no money for such a mission, and that Hubble will be killed off shortly, such programmatic issues are often transitory, so let's look at this.
The unique top level requirements for a Hubble Servicing Mission are:
Achieve rendezvous (and now docking) with HST.
Support EVA
Transport necessarily ORUs.
Support orbit boost, if required.
What I don't know is if Delta IV Heavy would allow launch of Orion to the 600 km orbit. Probably, since the delta-V for HST missions is similar to ISS missions from Florida.
Also, I am assuming that Orion would only support a "batteries and gyros" mission, and not swap of major instruments.
-
#1
by
Jim
on 09 Sep, 2013 15:23
-
Also, I am assuming that Orion would only support a "batteries and gyros" mission, and not swap of major instruments.
Where are the "batteries and gyros" going to be carried?
How are EVA's going to performed without an airlock or EMU support from the Orion?
Gyros and reboost can be done with an unmanned vehicle.
-
#2
by
Robotbeat
on 09 Sep, 2013 15:30
-
How much is this worth NASA? $200-$400 million? I say, put it up for bid to commercial crew and commercial satellite folks, let them put up or shut up. They can propose either a manned or unmanned mission to fix it.
-
#3
by
newpylong
on 09 Sep, 2013 15:49
-
Surely the Asteroid Rendezvous (if it ever happens) won't have any airlock? Wouldn't they just purge the atmosphere in the CSM? The very notional videos have them climbing out the main hatch in EMUs.
Also, I am assuming that Orion would only support a "batteries and gyros" mission, and not swap of major instruments.
Where are the "batteries and gyros" going to be carried?
How are EVA's going to performed without an airlock or EMU support from the Orion?
Gyros and reboost can be done with an unmanned vehicle.
-
#4
by
IRobot
on 09 Sep, 2013 16:25
-
How is Orion supposed to grab Hubble. I know there is a passive SCM on Hubble, but how would Orion dock with it? If it use the docking port, no EVA could be performed, or could it?
Dragon's trunk is much better for this. Also Dragon can carry much larger payloads that would not fit through a hatch.
Anyway, the commercial option was debated 1 year ago:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=28805.0
-
#5
by
Robotbeat
on 09 Sep, 2013 16:33
-
How is Orion supposed to grab Hubble. I know there is a passive SCM on Hubble, but how would Orion dock with it? If it use the docking port, no EVA could be performed, or could it?
Dragon's trunk is much better for this. Also Dragon can carry much larger payloads that would not fit through a hatch.
Anyway, the commercial option was debated 1 year ago:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=28805.0
EVAs would be through Orion's hatch, not the docking port. Same for Dragon, I would imagine (if any are done). Orion can also potentially carry cargo in its service module, I've seen several references to it (of course, pre-ATV business).
-
#6
by
Nomadd
on 09 Sep, 2013 16:45
-
Those SMs were a real bear with the shuttle doing the job. It doesn't seem too likely a capsule is going to handle one. Maybe, if Hubble is still in great shape when it starts getting a little low, a reboost could be done, but even that would probably be done by a robotic craft.
Gyros and reboost can be done with an unmanned vehicle.
As much trouble as they had getting one of those last sets of gyros in, I don't think there's any way they try it with a robot.
-
#7
by
Robotbeat
on 09 Sep, 2013 16:51
-
What about a capsule with an arm? How would that be different from Shuttle? (this is a real question, not rhetorical)
And supposing part of that answer is "airlock," suppose you brought a small airlock along with, docked to the end of the capsule? (With another port on the other side to dock with Hubble)
-
#8
by
JasonAW3
on 09 Sep, 2013 17:04
-
It seems to me that if you were to stretch the length and widden the current Orion service module to ratios approximating that of the old Apollo service module, while you would have to add fuel and oxidizer to the overall rig, there should be a significant amount of volume available for additional payload in one or two of the opposing quarter bays. (Sorry, forgot to meantion deviding the XXL Service Module into quarter bays)
Two Quarter Bays should be enough volume to handle the increased fuel and consumable loads, while the other two bays would contain 1 robot arm each and the replacement equipment needed for the mission. Two robot arms, yes. One to hold the telescope and the other to hold the astronaut, equipment platform etc. (Yes, I know that they can tie off to the telescope itself, but you need a 'cherry picker' to bring them the gear that is needed for servicing).
A four person crew should be sufficent for the task, and the SLS seems to have enough payload to orbit capibility to be able to handle such a mission.
Jason
-
#9
by
Robotbeat
on 09 Sep, 2013 17:09
-
But it's a repair job, not exploration. Why not have the private sector bid on it?
-
#10
by
Jim
on 09 Sep, 2013 17:13
-
As much trouble as they had getting one of those last sets of gyros in, I don't think there's any way they try it with a robot.
don't need to install the gyros, the robotic spacecraft stays attached and provides the control.
-
#11
by
Danderman
on 09 Sep, 2013 17:17
-
What about a capsule with an arm? How would that be different from Shuttle? (this is a real question, not rhetorical)
And supposing part of that answer is "airlock," suppose you brought a small airlock along with, docked to the end of the capsule? (With another port on the other side to dock with Hubble)
No airlock required. Orion's command module has airlock capability.
The mission does not require an arm, Orion can dock with the existing docking adapter at HST.
-
#12
by
Jim
on 09 Sep, 2013 17:18
-
It seems to me that if you were to stretch the length and widden the current Orion service module
That is not on the table
-
#13
by
Danderman
on 09 Sep, 2013 17:20
-
It seems to me that if you were to stretch the length and widden the current Orion service module to ratios approximating that of the old Apollo service module, while you would have to add fuel and oxidizer to the overall rig, there should be a significant amount of volume available for additional payload in one or two of the opposing quarter bays. (Sorry, forgot to meantion deviding the XXL Service Module into quarter bays)
Two Quarter Bays should be enough volume to handle the increased fuel and consumable loads, while the other two bays would contain 1 robot arm each and the replacement equipment needed for the mission. Two robot arms, yes. One to hold the telescope and the other to hold the astronaut, equipment platform etc. (Yes, I know that they can tie off to the telescope itself, but you need a 'cherry picker' to bring them the gear that is needed for servicing).
A four person crew should be sufficent for the task, and the SLS seems to have enough payload to orbit capibility to be able to handle such a mission.
Jason
This mission would not be feasible if it required modifications to the Orion service module.
-
#14
by
Danderman
on 09 Sep, 2013 17:22
-
Where are the "batteries and gyros" going to be carried?
These won't fit inside the Orion command module?
-
#15
by
Jim
on 09 Sep, 2013 17:26
-
No airlock required. Orion's command module has airlock capability.
No, it doesn't. It is only can support decompress for contingencies.
-
#16
by
Jim
on 09 Sep, 2013 17:27
-
Where are the "batteries and gyros" going to be carried?
These won't fit inside the Orion command module?
No, those aren't gyros and especially not the astronaut.
-
#17
by
Jim
on 09 Sep, 2013 17:28
-
The mission does not require an arm, Orion can dock with the existing docking adapter at HST.
The arm is not for capture but to support the spacewalkers
-
#18
by
newpylong
on 09 Sep, 2013 17:57
-
http://www.universetoday.com/88434/human-mission-to-an-asteroid-the-orion-mpcv/Per Lockheed:
Logistically, the Orion MPCV could even support doing an EVA from the hatch on the capsule.
“We have a hatch that is big enough that an astronaut in a space suit can get out,” Hopkins said, “and the internal systems in the spacecraft are designed to tolerate the cabin being depressurized. We don’t rely on air circulation to carry the heat away from the electronics – they have their own cold plates to take the heat away. The knobs are designed to be manipulated with spacesuit gloves on, not just bare hands. A lot of those features just worked out to be pretty applicable to the asteroid mission because it was designed for a similar set of mission requirements.”
-
#19
by
Jim
on 09 Sep, 2013 18:15
-
marketing words