-
Plum Brook prepped for EM-1 Orion Service Module testing
by
Chris Bergin
on 20 Jun, 2015 13:48
-
-
#1
by
rayleighscatter
on 20 Jun, 2015 16:56
-
Was the ESA given the whole OMS pod, or just the engine from it?
-
#2
by
Chris Bergin
on 20 Jun, 2015 19:16
-
Was the ESA given the whole OMS pod, or just the engine from it?
Probably all the hardware (engine and tanks). They won't need the TPS on it.
-
#3
by
Endeavour_01
on 20 Jun, 2015 23:27
-
Another excellent article Chris!
NASA has now confirmed it has provided ESA one of the OMS pods from the Shuttle era, which sports an engine that had previously flew on 19 space shuttle missions and performed 89 burns.
It will be really cool to see an OMS engine in space again. I am curious what this means for the future of the Orion SM. If I read the article correctly work has been terminated on new OMS engines and there are only 4 pods left. What are the plans for the SM once the supply of OMS pods has been depleted?
-
#4
by
Rocket Science
on 21 Jun, 2015 00:28
-
Thanks for the update on Orion Chris!
With all the other noise going on it seems to get unfortunately forgotten. The ship needs a actual mission sooner rather than later...
-
#5
by
redliox
on 21 Jun, 2015 06:39
-
Surprised to hear about a whole shuttle pod being given. It seems NASA was being more literal than expected about reusing space shuttle technology; good for a short fix. And, obviously, letting ESA look over the whole system the Orion's future engine is tied to would help them accommodate their ATV knowledge with older STS setups.
Although not 100% perfect for this topic, I can't help but wonder will NASA eventually build totally new engines for both Orion and SLS? There are only so many STS leftovers in storage after all, and the supply for SSME is just enough for 4 or 5 SLSs for example. Again not specific to Orion alone, but I just wonder about the need for fresh engines eventually.
-
#6
by
jtrame
on 21 Jun, 2015 13:17
-
Surprised to hear about a whole shuttle pod being given. It seems NASA was being more literal than expected about reusing space shuttle technology; good for a short fix. And, obviously, letting ESA look over the whole system the Orion's future engine is tied to would help them accommodate their ATV knowledge with older STS setups.
Although not 100% perfect for this topic, I can't help but wonder will NASA eventually build totally new engines for both Orion and SLS? There are only so many STS leftovers in storage after all, and the supply for SSME is just enough for 4 or 5 SLSs for example. Again not specific to Orion alone, but I just wonder about the need for fresh engines eventually.
Chris' June 12 article reports Aerojet-Rocketdyne has received an order for several additional RS-25's (six according to to Aviation Week & Space Technology).
-
#7
by
Ronpur50
on 22 Jun, 2015 13:13
-
Great article! I can't wait to see the SM arrive for testing. So, the former OMS engine will only be used for an abort? And not for any propulsion during the flight? I have read several times about it's abort function, but I am unclear on what, if any, function it has beyond that.
-
#8
by
newpylong
on 22 Jun, 2015 14:47
-
The OMS main engine will be used for injection burns just the Apollo SM SPS. One improvement is the SM auxiliary thrusters if fired together will be able to provide a backup capability to the main engine.
Once they run out of OMS they will seek to acquire a new but similar engine. The original LM SM was to have a slightly upgraded version.
-
#9
by
Nibb31
on 22 Jun, 2015 16:49
-
The OMS main engine will be used for injection burns just the Apollo SM SPS. One improvement is the SM auxiliary thrusters if fired together will be able to provide a backup capability to the main engine.
Didn't Apollo's quad RCS system provide the same function?
Orion has a main propulsion system, an auxiliary propulsion as backup, and the RCS as a backup for the backup, but all of those engines are fed by the same tanks connected in series.
What is the point of all that redundancy in the engines, when there isn't the same redundancy on the tankage and propellant lines? If one tank has a problem, then all those engines are dead. And in the end, if the RCS system fails, you won't be able to orient the spacecraft to do any sort of burn, so why add the extra weight of the Auxiliary thruster system?
-
#10
by
redliox
on 22 Jun, 2015 19:02
-
Once they run out of OMS they will seek to acquire a new but similar engine. The original LM SM was to have a slightly upgraded version.
I asked the same earlier, but now that I think about it frankly they need to design a whole new SM when the opportunity arises. I say that because, when I did calculations for Mars missions using Orion, the Orion's SM is too weak to offer much assist. The 1.4 km/s it provides in delta-v is just sufficient for Cislunar missions, but hardly enough to tackle a one-way trip to Mars not to mention the six+ months to get there would heavily tax its life support.
Orion could perform a lunar mission or shuttling service to Martian craft, but until they beef up the SM considerably I know the talk of "Orion taking us to Mars" is spoken by somebody with fingers crossed behind their back.
-
#11
by
Endeavour_01
on 22 Jun, 2015 23:24
-
I asked the same earlier, but now that I think about it frankly they need to design a whole new SM when the opportunity arises. I say that because, when I did calculations for Mars missions using Orion, the Orion's SM is too weak to offer much assist. The 1.4 km/s it provides in delta-v is just sufficient for Cislunar missions, but hardly enough to tackle a one-way trip to Mars not to mention the six+ months to get there would heavily tax its life support.
Orion could perform a lunar mission or shuttling service to Martian craft, but until they beef up the SM considerably I know the talk of "Orion taking us to Mars" is spoken by somebody with fingers crossed behind their back.
The Orion SM engine isn't going to be the main engine propelling a Mars craft. There will be some kind of Earth Departure Stage (chemical or SEP) that will accomplish that. One really good thing the SM engine could do is slow Orion down for Earth re-entry. Being able to reduce the re-entry velocity by 1.4 km/s will really help out the heat shield.
-
#12
by
the_other_Doug
on 23 Jun, 2015 01:35
-
How much delta-V do you need from that propulsion system to rendezvous, coming back from Mars, with a platform at, say, L2 or a high lunar orbit?
You'd be talking about maneuvering the Orion/SM and the transit hab (or that part of it you'd like to refurbish and re-use) to a stable platform where samples can be processed (planetary quarantine and all that), where the transit hab can be replenished, refurbished, and generally fixed up, etc.
You'd need enough delta-V left to drop the Orion back towards Earth from your high platform when you're ready to come all the way home, of course. But this way, the only piece of the entire returning transit stack you lose is the Orion SM.
I can imagine that you might shed some disposable pieces of mass before you started maneuvering to get to your high platform, though. Something like storage modules that are empty of consumables but are now full of trash -- those might be disposed of into trajectories that will let them burn up harmlessly, or maybe even impact the Moon. Just waste disposal, at that point. That's why I say that you would only have to maneuver the part of your transit hab that you'll want to re-use.
-
#13
by
Steven Pietrobon
on 23 Jun, 2015 05:00
-
-
#14
by
A_M_Swallow
on 23 Jun, 2015 06:34
-
How much delta-V do you need from that propulsion system to rendezvous, coming back from Mars, with a platform at, say, L2 or a high lunar orbit?
You'd be talking about maneuvering the Orion/SM and the transit hab (or that part of it you'd like to refurbish and re-use) to a stable platform where samples can be processed (planetary quarantine and all that), where the transit hab can be replenished, refurbished, and generally fixed up, etc.
You'd need enough delta-V left to drop the Orion back towards Earth from your high platform when you're ready to come all the way home, of course. But this way, the only piece of the entire returning transit stack you lose is the Orion SM.
{snip}
If the Orion has returned to a lunar/high Earth orbit platform it can be refuelled.
-
#15
by
Nibb31
on 23 Jun, 2015 07:25
-
Does the Orion have refuelling capability?
-
#16
by
woods170
on 23 Jun, 2015 09:26
-
Does the Orion have refuelling capability?
You mean in-space refueling capability? The answer to that question is NO.
-
#17
by
A_M_Swallow
on 23 Jun, 2015 09:28
-
Does the Orion have refuelling capability?
You mean in-space refueling capability? The answer to that question is NO.
That is the current situation. Orion has something like 20 years to gain it.
-
#18
by
Chris Bergin
on 23 Jun, 2015 21:02
-
Thanks Chaps. Also very cool that a certain astro mentioned it
-
#19
by
woods170
on 24 Jun, 2015 10:04
-
Does the Orion have refuelling capability?
You mean in-space refueling capability? The answer to that question is NO.
That is the current situation. Orion has something like 20 years to gain it.
Correct, but the original question was asked within the frame-of-reference of the current design of Orion.
