Author Topic: Some CEV / SRB Launcher Images  (Read 26144 times)

Offline Stardust9906

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1265
  • Durham, UK
  • Liked: 23
  • Likes Given: 988
RE: Some CEV / SRB Launcher Images
« Reply #20 on: 09/08/2005 01:36 PM »
Quote
Avron - 8/9/2005  3:37 AM

Quote
Stardust9906 - 7/9/2005  7:40 PM


I think the point of using SDLVs is to keep the development costs down, by using as much of what is already available as possible with some modifications.  

I am totally in line with the whole SDLV using existing facilities with minimal changes.. I was just considering other options for the CEV that looks like a SRB with a bit more attitude..:)

Fair enough. :) I just feel that it would be quicker and cheaper to modify the existing pads rather than develop a whole new launch facility.

Online Chris Bergin

RE: Some CEV / SRB Launcher Images
« Reply #21 on: 09/08/2005 02:13 PM »
I think the plan is to use the two pads in tandem for the two types of launcher. Before the end of the STS missions, one pad (A or B) will start the changes to the SRB/CEV. At the end of STS ops, SDLV works off the other pad. I think the really big ones, such as the Longfellow and or Magnum would be from the Cape on a pad down there. Just a guess from the documents out already.

Offline gladiator1332

  • Mike Majeski
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2430
  • Fort Myers, FL
  • Liked: 4
  • Likes Given: 5
RE: Some CEV / SRB Launcher Images
« Reply #22 on: 09/09/2005 02:39 AM »
I have some new images to add as well. This is sort of a WIP...in the latest release of the SRB Launcher, there are now several types, including the noral 4 seg and 2nd stage. But new to the add on is the 4 seg 3 stage....and the ultimate SRB Launcher. 5 seg 3 stage!
With this super SRB Launcher you can launch the CEV to lunar orbit. Ohters have done it, but so far I have been unsuccessful. It takes a lot of fine tuning on the ascent so you just have enough fuel in the 3rd stage to make a low parking orbit and then the TLI burn. The add ons creator said he did all of this and the LOI burn with the 3rd stage. That takes some skill!

Now I really don't think NASA would go for a manned 3 stage SRB Launcher, however, it may have some use for cargo. However, we can easily do an Apollo 8 style mission with the SRB Launcher, without the need for the inline. The SRB Launcher would launch the Exploration stage to orbit, and then the CEV would follow on another SRB Launcher, dock to the stage like Gemini/Agena and then its Apollo 8 from there on out.


Offline realtime

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 574
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 13
RE: Some CEV / SRB Launcher Images
« Reply #23 on: 09/11/2005 02:14 AM »
Thought someone should say it: "Nice work."  

Amazing what can be done with the venerable and versatile SRB.


Offline kraisee

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10483
  • Liked: 415
  • Likes Given: 19
RE: Some CEV / SRB Launcher Images
« Reply #24 on: 09/11/2005 06:07 PM »
I'd like to ask about one detail on these pictures which has raised my curiosity.

I was under the impression that the second stage of 'The Stick' would be a 5m wide stage, with an EELV-style 'generic' fairing attachment to attach a CEV which was likely to also be 5m wide itself.

These depictions seem to have a CEV much wider that the liquid stage.

So I'm wondering if the stage is significantly narrower, or if the CEV is significantly wider?

I don't know the dimensions being used in these images, but I'd like to understand what is different from my current understanding.

Thx,

Ross.
"The meek shall inherit the Earth -- the rest of us will go to the stars"
-Robert A. Heinlein

Offline simcosmos

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 484
  • Portugal
    • SIMCOSMOS
  • Liked: 4
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: Some CEV / SRB Launcher Images
« Reply #25 on: 09/12/2005 10:11 AM »
Quote
kraisee - 11/9/2005  7:07 PM

I'd like to ask about one detail on these pictures which has raised my curiosity.

I was under the impression that the second stage of 'The Stick' would be a 5m wide stage, with an EELV-style 'generic' fairing attachment to attach a CEV which was likely to also be 5m wide itself.

These depictions seem to have a CEV much wider that the liquid stage.

So I'm wondering if the stage is significantly narrower, or if the CEV is significantly wider?

I don't know the dimensions being used in these images, but I'd like to understand what is different from my current understanding.

Thx,

Ross.

Hello,

I do not wish to be accused again of spamming these forums :( To keep it short: I'm the author of the SRB launcher Orbiter addon (Biconic is from other fellow orbinaut) and the files are still heavy work in progress (this includes all 3D model's dimensions, shapes and details, the textures and their mapping, numbers used on the configuration files, mission plans and test flights, etc, etc)

Ross, if you wish to have more precise details about the second stage diameter (yes, it will be wider in one possible next version) or any other related information, please email me.

To end, just for reference, 4 related development links…
SRB launcher: http://orbit.m6.net/v2/read.asp?id=25364
(older thread): http://orbit.m6.net/v2/read.asp?id=24520
Biconic CEV: http://orbit.m6.net/v2/read.asp?id=26235
110MT SDLV: http://orbit.m6.net/v2/read.asp?id=26421

And one temporary image saved from my site's LivePics page / feature:
(to where I transmit live Orbiter flight or development sessions)


António

my pics @ flickr

Offline Space101

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 305
  • Leeds, England
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: Some CEV / SRB Launcher Images
« Reply #26 on: 09/12/2005 01:26 PM »
>I do not wish to be accused again of spamming these forums<

Then STOP mentioning it in every post! Get over it :)
Let's go and explore space.

Offline simcosmos

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 484
  • Portugal
    • SIMCOSMOS
  • Liked: 4
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: Some CEV / SRB Launcher Images
« Reply #27 on: 09/12/2005 01:55 PM »
Quote
Space101 - 12/9/2005  2:26 PM

>I do not wish to be accused again of spamming these forums<

Then STOP mentioning it in every post! Get over it :)

Space101, you are perhaps correct and I apologize: just mentioned it because the nature of my previous post was exactly equal to my first post here. That mention was perhaps unnecessary, again I apologize: it is just me trying to avoid confusions and misunderstoods, not creating them. I do NOT plan to go back to that issue. :)

Back to topic: in my current SRB launcher addon implementation the upper SRB stages (3rd stage is for now a little creative liberty) have a diameter of around 4.6m. The planned diameter should be something more like 5.1m and that is the approximate diameter of the payload adapter available in the current versions that are online.

For later versions I plan to delete that adapter and enlarge the stage as well start correcting / adding other details (like wrote above: dimensions, shapes, etc). The CEV capsule design that I'm building has 5m diameter and it is based on Apollo shape. Work in progress. Further details are in the links available on the previous post / by email.

Best regards,

António
my pics @ flickr

Online Chris Bergin

RE: Some CEV / SRB Launcher Images
« Reply #28 on: 09/12/2005 03:17 PM »
Actually, it's my fault....you're proving to be a useful poster...welcome to the site :)

Offline simcosmos

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 484
  • Portugal
    • SIMCOSMOS
  • Liked: 4
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: Some CEV / SRB Launcher Images
« Reply #29 on: 09/12/2005 04:28 PM »
Quote
Chris Bergin - 12/9/2005  4:17 PM

Actually, it's my fault....you're proving to be a useful poster...welcome to the site :)

Hi again,

Thanks Chris for the welcome (what is past is past) :)

--------------------------------------------------------------
Global picture is made of several smaller ones...
--------------------------------------------------------------

Let us just talk about space exploration. The only "detail" (in the lack of better English word) is that, at least on my personal case, space exploration and Orbiter space simulator are very interconnected subjects. I hope you all do not be upset if in my possible future contributions here I continue to mix what we know from real life data (official or just hypothetical) with what we can simulate in Orbiter.

On my humble opinion, this interactive process helps to have a better global picture of what is going on (see the above dev threads).

Taking the example of the SRB launcher, and although its current simulation is very, very crude (for example when regarding to the not yet implemented thrust curve profile for the SRB), it is possible, with the available data, to have a feeling about the launcher planned possibilities (and future / not planned ones?). With the space sim is also possible to simulate historical / current and future space hardware and missions... Imagine: the last STS mission was simulated by many orbinauts, from launch to landing, in real time!



----------------------------------------------------------
Back to the SRB launcher and another example:
----------------------------------------------------------

Playing with the current numbers, and again forgetting a little about the non-implemented SRB thrust profile (I'm using average SRB thrust values for now), it seems that one SRB launcher variant using…

5 segment SRB + 100tons 2nd stage (J-2S) + 50tons 3rd stage (J-2S)

… can be used to do Moon flyby missions or to deliver cargo / orbital modules or small landers to the Moon, as long as the payload has a mass, say… of around 15tons or so (this based in one quick and clumsy flight test)

This is interesting because, another funny supposition, it would perhaps be possible to start some interesting manned / unmanned Moon exploration scenarios with the SRB launcher, without having to wait for the heavy lifter.

Of course these are mere suppositions and, once more, the current rocket simulation is a very crude one (I would need to program c++ and build a dll if wanting to better play with the available data… look at the SDHLV dev. thread) but it is at least funny, to take the "stick" and try numbers / ideas by using notepad, one generic dll (controlled by a simple INI file edited on notepad) and... given that Orbiter’s physical engine is very accurate for something simulating the Solar System and running in home computers :)


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regarding the previous images, posted by gladiator1332, and CEV
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

They are the result of a development integration with a Biconic CEV concept, by Francisdrake, another Orbiter developer. As you can see the SRB launcher still has lots of work ahead, both in visual aspects and regarding numbers… I'm making a kind of waiting compass for the 60 days study… Then will have much more solid data to work with… Perhaps about what engines will really be used by the second stage (J-2S?, 4xRL85? hummm need info about these... SSME? / modified SSME?), and all kind of numbers, etc, etc

Meanwhile, and despite having lots of fun with the Biconic concept, I'm playing with an Apollo style capsule CEV (some early pics available on the, now outdated, pdf distributed with v1.0) and gathering all kinds of stuff to make a future version of the addon (including also the heavy lifter)… Providing real life gives me time for all that and I do not get distracted with other virtual issues and toys.

Ok, long enough post for now!

cya,
António
my pics @ flickr

Offline SRBseparama

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 274
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: Some CEV / SRB Launcher Images
« Reply #30 on: 09/14/2005 04:18 AM »
So the Magnum would be for the moon and the Longfellow for Mars?

Offline simcosmos

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 484
  • Portugal
    • SIMCOSMOS
  • Liked: 4
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: Some CEV / SRB Launcher Images
« Reply #31 on: 09/14/2005 09:56 AM »
Quote
SRBseparama - 14/9/2005  5:18 AM

So the Magnum would be for the moon and the Longfellow for Mars?

Hello,

Maybe this discussion would be better on the SDLV forum section. Anyway, for what I understood, Magnum and Longfellow are just the name for two vehicles with the same payload capability but using different engines, etc configurations (SSME vs RS-68…). Please someone correct if I'm wrong.


I'm a little confused about several aspects. Those confusions will only be dissipated when we all know more precise news from NASA.

From what I read in the latest times, it seems that NASA might be preparing to completely stop using the 4 segment SRB once the Space Shuttle is retired. This in favour of the exclusive use of the 5 segment SRB for the new launchers (both SRB launcher and SDHLV), if not from start, as soon as possible… Again this is just a supposition.

Translating the hypothesis to the heavy lifter this means that we may be more or less "sure" about many of its components:
- longer ET (around 8m to 10m more?),
- powered by 4 x SSME (named Magnum?; if using 4 x RS-68 it is called Longfellow?, these names may not be the definitive ones)
- 2 x 5 segment SRB
- and a payload fairing with dimensions around the +/- 40m x 10m (35m x 9m in many references)

The major question mark is about the second stage: maybe there will be two different second stages (powered by J-2S? another kind of engine? just one engine? multiple?).

It seems that NASA is aiming for a LEO payload of 125tons (instead of the 110 of early news) and that the heavy lifter may be taller than 111m… However it may not be too much taller, given the VAB doors… I would say (rough estimative) that the maximum height would be… say… 121m.

Looking at the 3D model I made for the heavy lifter (based on released pictures, please see above) I ended up with a total height of +/- 109m (using 5 segment SRB and 4xSSME powered ET having around 56m height + 40mx10m fairing... this gives 109m-56m-40m=13m for interstage + second stage).  All these numbers seem to suggest that the second stage may have more length / fuel / performance than what was initially being considered (that bigger second stage also seen in some other pictures).

So, forgetting dubious names, that's why I'm thinking about the possibility of that heavy launcher to be equipped with two different kinds of second stages… One more for LEO, another for Moon missions… That "Moon second stage" would also be used for Mars missions… Please have in mind that there is the possibility of NASA considering LEO assembly for such missions instead directly sending stuff to red planet.

Of course that my point of view is very limited… If only I could have more free time I would do another crude Orbiter implementation (this time for the heavy lifter) and "test" a few stuff around…


Summing up: I have the impression (possibly very wrong one) that the heavy lifter will have at least a choice between two different upper stages, both having the same diameter, but different lengths (perhaps 8m to 10m difference, making the Moon stage to have the double of the lenght of the LEO stage) and possibly different engine setup, all that depending of the type of mission being planned.

However, this is just me talking to the air… I'm no engineer :)
(looking forward for more details about the 60 day study…)

António
my pics @ flickr

Offline publiusr

  • Elite Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1540
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 2
RE: Some CEV / SRB Launcher Images
« Reply #32 on: 09/14/2005 05:50 PM »
You do good work. I am glad just plain big rocketry has at last gotten some respect and not this aerospike/Space elevator/hypersonic crud NASA and others became distracted with. SLI was a horrible waste of money as a make-work program.

Now if I can get the Ayn Rand worshippers to quit calling that ME 163 Komet (dropped out from under a spindly learjet contraption) a "Spaceship (One)."

Offline Bruce H

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 175
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: Some CEV / SRB Launcher Images
« Reply #33 on: 09/15/2005 02:20 AM »
You have a good understanding. I'm impressed!

Offline simcosmos

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 484
  • Portugal
    • SIMCOSMOS
  • Liked: 4
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: Some CEV / SRB Launcher Images
« Reply #34 on: 09/15/2005 10:14 AM »
Hello,

Accordingly with some latest news it seems that there could be some more updated info about the SRB launcher and the heavy lifter:

http://www.space.com/news/050914_nasa_cev_update.html

(SRB launcher: 4 seg. SRB + 2nd stg (SSME), capsule = +/-5.5m diameter)
(SDHLV: 5 x SSME)

The 4 seg. SRB is a logical step for LEO and, if not using the SRB launcher for more demanding missions (such as heavier payloads or even interplanetary probes / cargo delivery to the Moon), it is the best choice. However, using the SSME (for upper stages), although is also logical, of course, and although it is a good and powerful engine, seems to me a little too much complicated and "less cheap" piece of hardware considering long term exploration and that, unless something changes, they will not be reusable... (talking here of upper stages... the SSME for the ET will always burn on ET's reentry). Perhaps the key is to lower the costs by producing more SSME (given that seems they will be the base for the engines of the powered ET and for upper stages?)

Hummm this also means that the SSME (the one(s) in upper stage(s)) will have to be "capable" of being re-started multiple times(?)

Anyway, it seems that we are finally closing in of a date where we will know more precise and interesting details about all this "stuff": all this blablablablablablablabla will then be more precise (I hope) ;)

António

Edits: a few minor additions
my pics @ flickr

Offline kraisee

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10483
  • Liked: 415
  • Likes Given: 19
RE: Some CEV / SRB Launcher Images
« Reply #35 on: 09/18/2005 08:23 PM »
Quote
simcosmos - 14/9/2005  5:56 AM

Quote
SRBseparama - 14/9/2005  5:18 AM

So the Magnum would be for the moon and the Longfellow for Mars?

Hello,

Maybe this discussion would be better on the SDLV forum section. Anyway, for what I understood, Magnum and Longfellow are just the name for two vehicles with the same payload capability but using different engines, etc configurations (SSME vs RS-68…). Please someone correct if I'm wrong.

The Magnum name originated with a design which came out back in the mid 1980's, around the same time as Shuttle-C.   It was the in-line alternative of that time, the only version I've ever seen from that time included Liquid Flyback Boosters powered by multiple SSME's too.

Today though, it appears that Magnum has been redefined a little, hence the confusion.

Chris posted this image elsewhere on this forum which defines the current differences between the 'new' Magnum and LongFellow:

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/forums/get-attachment.asp?attachmentid=803">


Quote
I'm a little confused about several aspects. Those confusions will only be dissipated when we all know more precise news from NASA.

From what I read in the latest times, it seems that NASA might be preparing to completely stop using the 4 segment SRB once the Space Shuttle is retired. This in favour of the exclusive use of the 5 segment SRB for the new launchers (both SRB launcher and SDHLV), if not from start, as soon as possible… Again this is just a supposition.

The 5-segment SRB has only ever been test-fired once, so there isn't a lot of real-world data on it.   It also has not yet been man-rated - a very costly process.   The 4-seg version is already man-rated and could be flown unchanged right now for no extra development cost.

The SDLV though is planned to use the 5-segment versions from the get-go.   The development time will be much longer for the SDLV than for the CEV LV, and won't need to ever be man-rated, so 5-segments can be used there far cheaper.

I would expect that once the 5-segs have flown successfully a few times, then they will be man-rated without time pressures and then CEV LV will be 'upgraded' to 5-seg.


Quote
Translating the hypothesis to the heavy lifter this means that we may be more or less "sure" about many of its components:
- longer ET (around 8m to 10m more?),
- powered by 4 x SSME (named Magnum?; if using 4 x RS-68 it is called Longfellow?, these names may not be the definitive ones)
- 2 x 5 segment SRB
- and a payload fairing with dimensions around the +/- 40m x 10m (35m x 9m in many references)

The major question mark is about the second stage: maybe there will be two different second stages (powered by J-2S? another kind of engine? just one engine? multiple?).

It seems that NASA is aiming for a LEO payload of 125tons (instead of the 110 of early news) and that the heavy lifter may be taller than 111m… However it may not be too much taller, given the VAB doors… I would say (rough estimative) that the maximum height would be… say… 121m.


The gap from the top of the MLP Deck to the top of the highbay door is 124.6m.   Say that 0.6m is your clearance, then the rocket can be 124m tall.

- 2 x 5 segment SRB
- 10m stretch to the main ET is what I'm hearing
- Engine choice is still to be decided:
  RS-68 has more thrust and is cheaper ($8m each), SSME is more efficient and has higher impulse but is over twice the price ($20m).   There are pro's and con's for each, and the choice will be made on cost/performance for the specific detailed vehicle configuration they need - which still has not been finalized yet.   I know SSME offered significant extra perfomance for Magnum, but with the additional capacity of the second stage on Longfellow, the higher thrust of RS-68 might get an advantage early on in the flight.   I'll run some numbers and get back to you.
- Payload fairing seems decided: 9m x 35m body, plus aero cone ~7m tall.

Stage 2  - I think I may have figured out what's going on there.   I think that by using SSME instead of J2-S the performance advantage may help to account for the 110MT to 125MT upgrade.   You'll need about 70MT of fuel onboard the 2nd stage after LEO insertion to use as propellant to get 125MT (inc. the fuel) plus 25MT CEV to lunar orbit.

I am hearing that there will probably be a mini-stage developed, basically similar to the OMS Pods.

The ET/SRB combo can put 100+ tons into LEO without any upper stage.   You do need some sort of OMS pod for circularizing the orbit at apogee though.   That vehicle configuration could fly a lot sooner and cheaper than the full one and might be great for completing the ISS.   Later, when the upper stage is finished and fully validated, it can be used to upgrade the whole system AND provide the Earth Departure Stage (EDS) for lunar missions at the same time.


Quote
Looking at the 3D model I made for the heavy lifter (based on released pictures, please see above) I ended up with a total height of +/- 109m (using 5 segment SRB and 4xSSME powered ET having around 56m height + 40mx10m fairing... this gives 109m-56m-40m=13m for interstage + second stage).  All these numbers seem to suggest that the second stage may have more length / fuel / performance than what was initially being considered (that bigger second stage also seen in some other pictures).

So, forgetting dubious names, that's why I'm thinking about the possibility of that heavy launcher to be equipped with two different kinds of second stages… One more for LEO, another for Moon missions… That "Moon second stage" would also be used for Mars missions… Please have in mind that there is the possibility of NASA considering LEO assembly for such missions instead directly sending stuff to red planet.

Of course that my point of view is very limited… If only I could have more free time I would do another crude Orbiter implementation (this time for the heavy lifter) and "test" a few stuff around…

Summing up: I have the impression (possibly very wrong one) that the heavy lifter will have at least a choice between two different upper stages, both having the same diameter, but different lengths (perhaps 8m to 10m difference, making the Moon stage to have the double of the lenght of the LEO stage) and possibly different engine setup, all that depending of the type of mission being planned.

However, this is just me talking to the air… I'm no engineer :)
(looking forward for more details about the 60 day study…)

António

I think you're basically right.

However, I can see a logical progression of development for both the CEV launcher and the SDLV, starting with a smaller variant and upgrading to the full specifications.   I think that's sensible and economical too.

I'll try running more numbers as soon as I can and confirm some of this.
"The meek shall inherit the Earth -- the rest of us will go to the stars"
-Robert A. Heinlein

Offline Flightstar

  • Lurking around OPF High Bay 2
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1870
  • KSC, Florida
  • Liked: 11
  • Likes Given: 5
RE: Some CEV / SRB Launcher Images
« Reply #36 on: 09/19/2005 03:31 AM »
Impressive that you noted the Magnum came into the minds of the powers that be around the time of the Shuttle C. Even I had forgetten that.

Offline James Lowe1

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 847
  • New York City
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: Some CEV / SRB Launcher Images
« Reply #37 on: 09/19/2005 11:57 AM »
Quote
kraisee - 18/9/2005  3:23 PM


- 2 x 5 segment SRB
- 10m stretch to the main ET is what I'm hearing


That is correct. I believe they are sticking to that plan. They even thought of a six-seg SRB years ago.

Offline publiusr

  • Elite Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1540
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 2
RE: Some CEV / SRB Launcher Images
« Reply #38 on: 09/21/2005 10:03 PM »
Write your congressmen folks. Cowing is being a jerk over at NASAWATCH because his precious little life science crowd takes a hit so we can finally invest in LVs--as Congress may hit Moon-Mars.

Offline kraisee

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10483
  • Liked: 415
  • Likes Given: 19
RE: Some CEV / SRB Launcher Images
« Reply #39 on: 09/25/2005 09:39 AM »
Quote
Flightstar - 18/9/2005  11:31 PM

Impressive that you noted the Magnum came into the minds of the powers that be around the time of the Shuttle C. Even I had forgetten that.

Possibly even more so because at that time I was about 8 years old...

;)
"The meek shall inherit the Earth -- the rest of us will go to the stars"
-Robert A. Heinlein

Tags: