Excalibur Almaz

[Danderman]

Is there any information available regarding the heat shield composition on the RRVs?  I've searched all the sites that I could find with Almaz information but couldn't find an answer.  If these are ablative then the heat shields are presumably part of a removable structure?

I believe that the heat shield is removable, but I also think that the heat shield can be repaired between flights without removal.

[pm1823]

Is there any information available regarding the heat shield composition on the RRVs?  I've searched all the sites that I could find with Almaz information but couldn't find an answer.  If these are ablative then the heat shields are presumably part of a removable structure?

Tried this?
http://www.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=3015&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=15

[Capt. David]

Unfortunately this still looks more like smoke and mirrors than a serious effort.

While the names on the letterhead are impressive there are no signs that there is metal being bent, circuits being pressed, or actual developmental work being done. The contracts with all these companies is interesting but appear to be no more than memorandum of understanding and not serious cash being laid out.

This maybe prepostioning for possible crewed commercial contracts but without some real photos of real new hardware I am skeptical.

Norm,

Your skepticism is not based on a lack of information, but rather "your" lack of information. Real information on the progress is available on the Internet.

David L. Rickman

[fauxpaw]

Is there any information available regarding the heat shield composition on the RRVs?  I've searched all the sites that I could find with Almaz information but couldn't find an answer.  If these are ablative then the heat shields are presumably part of a removable structure?

Tried this?
http://www.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=3015&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=15

Thank you, that was very informative.  In his comments David states that the heatshield is attached to the capsule structure using mechanical fasteners and gap fillers, and that the heatshield refurbishment process can be performed up to ten times per capsule.  From the photos it appears that the shield becomes an integral part of the capsule after attachment, and is consequently refurbished in place - is that correct?
 

[Capt. David]

Quote from http://excaliburalmaz.com/SP1/spacecraft-history.php

"The RRVs went through nine flight tests, with two RRVs flown to orbit several times, demonstrating their reusability."

When these flights were performed and under which designation?

That's actually a misstatement which seems to be self perpetuating. One capsule (009A) flew three times, but only twice in space. The other "flight" was sub-orbital during the second "Dual Flight Test". Just under one minute in flight the Proton Carrier Rocket had an engine malfunction and the "Launch Escape System" on this (the upper) capsule carried it away from danger to a flawless landing.

There was one more Almaz capsule that flew twice, and this is the one displayed at MAKS 2009. This capsule flew as the RRV on the first TKS (Kosmos 929) and as Kosmos 998 during the third "Dual Flight Test". This capsule was later used for sea-landing and rescue training exercises.

David L. Rickman

[pm1823]

Well, it's simple - TPS have two layers, inner can take about 10 descent with refurbishment of outer. But who can forbid you to change inner layer and fly this VA again.

[Capt. David]

Is there any information available regarding the heat shield composition on the RRVs?  I've searched all the sites that I could find with Almaz information but couldn't find an answer.  If these are ablative then the heat shields are presumably part of a removable structure?

Tried this?
http://www.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=3015&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=15

Thank you, that was very informative.  In his comments David states that the heatshield is attached to the capsule structure using mechanical fasteners and gap fillers, and that the heatshield refurbishment process can be performed up to ten times per capsule.  From the photos it appears that the shield becomes an integral part of the capsule after attachment, and is consequently refurbished in place - is that correct?
 

That is correct. The entire pressure section of the capsule was made to be reusable as a whole. One change though ... It is now estimated that the capsules can be refurbished from 50 to 100 times.

David L. Rickman

[Capt. David]

I read one of the above-mentioned articles, but didnīt quite understand one thing: do they plan to launch only a spacecraft or a spacecraft and a station?

Just the RRV with Service Modules at first. EA did purchase two Almaz stations, but no plans to fly them "anytime in the near future" (as Art Dula put it).

David L. Rickman

[Danderman]

Your skepticism is not based on a lack of information, but rather "your" lack of information. Real information on the progress is available on the Internet.

It would be great if you could post some sources showing actual progress on the capsule business plan, rather than historical data.

[Capt. David]

Your skepticism is not based on a lack of information, but rather "your" lack of information. Real information on the progress is available on the Internet.

It would be great if you could post some sources showing actual progress on the capsule business plan, rather than historical data.

Hi Dave,

I'm trying to locate a very good article that was previously posted on the International Space University Isle of Man web site. It revealed that one of the capsules is located at the university for the purpose of letting students get involved in the redevelopment of some of the components. If the link is no longer posted I'll find my printout and scan it.

Most of the information I have comes from intense online searches, following link after link and not just going to the "standard" sources or the first page of Google hits.

In Feb. of last year I posted news that Qwaltec was developing the Flight Training Plan for EA:

http://www.qwaltec.com/customers.htm

I recently discovered that Jonathan B. Clark M.D. M.P.H. is a medical advisor for EA:

http://www.wylelabs.com/content/global/documents/AsMA%202007%20Commercial%20Space%20Workshop.pdf

The point I'm making (for the benefit of Norm) is that before casually suggesting someone is being deceptive (i.e. smoke and mirrors) you should at least attempt a real search.

That being said, as I get more information I'll be sure to post it.

Best Regards,

David L. Rickman

[fauxpaw]

Is there any information available regarding the heat shield composition on the RRVs?  I've searched all the sites that I could find with Almaz information but couldn't find an answer.  If these are ablative then the heat shields are presumably part of a removable structure?

Tried this?
http://www.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=3015&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=15

Thank you, that was very informative.  In his comments David states that the heatshield is attached to the capsule structure using mechanical fasteners and gap fillers, and that the heatshield refurbishment process can be performed up to ten times per capsule.  From the photos it appears that the shield becomes an integral part of the capsule after attachment, and is consequently refurbished in place - is that correct?
 

That is correct. The entire pressure section of the capsule was made to be reusable as a whole. One change though ... It is now estimated that the capsules can be refurbished from 50 to 100 times.

David L. Rickman

Thanks for this.  And just to clarify (sorry if I appear to be beating a dead horse) - would the 50 to 100 refurbishments all take place with the original heatshield installed on the pressure vessel (i.e., the heatshield is never replaced for the life of the capsule)?

[Capt. David]

Is there any information available regarding the heat shield composition on the RRVs?  I've searched all the sites that I could find with Almaz information but couldn't find an answer.  If these are ablative then the heat shields are presumably part of a removable structure?

Tried this?
http://www.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=3015&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=15

Thank you, that was very informative.  In his comments David states that the heatshield is attached to the capsule structure using mechanical fasteners and gap fillers, and that the heatshield refurbishment process can be performed up to ten times per capsule.  From the photos it appears that the shield becomes an integral part of the capsule after attachment, and is consequently refurbished in place - is that correct?
 

That is correct. The entire pressure section of the capsule was made to be reusable as a whole. One change though ... It is now estimated that the capsules can be refurbished from 50 to 100 times.

David L. Rickman

Thanks for this.  And just to clarify (sorry if I appear to be beating a dead horse) - would the 50 to 100 refurbishments all take place with the original heatshield installed on the pressure vessel (i.e., the heatshield is never replaced for the life of the capsule)?

No problem. I greatly enjoy discussing the details of Chelomei's creations.

Yes, all refurbishments would be with the same heatshield and capsule. I can only assume at this point that either further analysis with today's technology, or an improved process or material produced the greater numbers.

The outer layer of the ablative heatshield is composed of stacked glass fabric impregnated under pressure with phenolic resin, over a layer of organic foam which is lighter but has similar thermal diffusion qualities. Areas of heavy structural load and shield penetration are reinforced with fully dense phenolic resin/glass.

During reentry pyrolysis of the resin in the outer layer reduces the heat sensed by about 30%. This pyrolysis also degrades the resin by about 20 mm which is replaced during refurbication. The refurbication process itself is proprietary information belonging to NPO Mash.

David L. Rickman

[tonyq]

Excalibur Almaz will be displaying one of their flown Soviet era capsules in the Isle of Man (where the company is head quartered, and also where I live) later this month. It is the one which was at MAKS 2009 recently.

Public viewings will be possible on 20th/26th/27th September.
See this inital link - hopefully more comprehensive details will follow.

http://www.manxradio.com/newsread.aspx?id=38498

Two ex-cosmonauts will be in attendance, with a display of spacesuits etc. (don't know who they are yet).

If any UK based forum members are interested in visting the Isle of Man to attend this unusual opportunity, please PM me for travel guidance.

Tony Quine

PS - I've no involvement in this event, other than as a member of the public. Just want to help anyone who might be interested to get here.

[William Barton]

Disputes upthread notwithstanding, I would be thrilled to see Excalibur Almaz fly. I don't have a dog in this race, but my section of the Great Library of Pseudobiblia in Emerald City contains an unwritten novel called "Almaz on the Moon," in which Glushko and Korolev wind up shunted aside and Chelomei emerges as the "Soviet Von Braun." US readers weren't much interested in this sort of tale 20 years ago, so the proposal wound up in the morgue along with a companion novel called "Empire," about Richard Nixon's 1961-1969 presidency. I did use some of the underlying concepts for a short story called "Harvest Moon," published in Asimov's a few years back (waste not, want not).

So assuming for the sake of discussion that Excalibur Almaz and VASIMR turn out to be viable, what kind of power source would you need to include to make missions to NEOs (and maybe Phobos) viable? I'm assuming you'd need at least some kind of chemical EDS to get the crewed vehicle through the Van Allens quickly enough.

[William Barton]

Here's another question, if anyone's interested. Assuming EA can actually get Almaz TKS (with VA capsule attached) aloft, could it pay a visit to ISS? I assume all that's really necessary is to mount to proper side of a Russian docking adapter to the stern.

[Danderman]

I am afraid to say that at their asking price of $35 million a seat, I don't think we are going to see many Almaz Excalibur flights. IF people were willing to pay that much to fly in orbit, then as many Soyuzes as needed could be produced that would allow people not just to fly in orbit but to visit ISS.

[Ben the Space Brit]

Okay, a speculative question here:

Could the Almaz be used as a lunar lander? I'm thinking of a vertical descent, using the main compartment of the vehicle as the airlock/EVA staging area and then using the upper return capsule as the ascent module.  Rendezvous with a pre-placed orbiting Soyuz/Earth Return Stage and transfer over for Earth return.

The interior of the vehicle would need lots of modifications, of course - most notably fitting the descent engines, landing struts and descent navigational sensors.

It would be enormously complex and expensive but could it be done?

[whitewatcher]

Could the Almaz be used as a lunar lander? I'm thinking of a vertical descent, using the main compartment of the vehicle as the airlock/EVA staging area and then using the upper return capsule as the ascent module.  Rendezvous with a pre-placed orbiting Soyuz/Earth Return Stage and transfer over for Earth return.

The interior of the vehicle would need lots of modifications, of course - most notably fitting the descent engines, landing struts and descent navigational sensors.

It would be enormously complex and expensive but could it be done?

You need a significantly higher thrust per mass ratio, meaning: bigger engine. You usually lower the periselene of your 100km LLO to 10-15 km above surface. The remaining vehicle mass must be able to hover, so the thrust must be mass times the gravity factor of the moon (roughly 1.7 m/sē).

You need very different thrust leves, so you need two engines or you must have a throttleable engine.

The fuel tanks must be significantly larger because your delta-v is higher. In LEO, a 7mT Soyuz has 800kg of fuel (11%) whereas a lunar lander has far more than 50% fuel mass.

I think one can build a an Almaz-derives lander but it needs A LOT of engineering work. Better to build a new lunar lander from scratch.

[Capt. David]

I am afraid to say that at their asking price of $35 million a seat, I don't think we are going to see many Almaz Excalibur flights. IF people were willing to pay that much to fly in orbit, then as many Soyuzes as needed could be produced that would allow people not just to fly in orbit but to visit ISS.

I suspect that is why only one of the four capsules (the one displayed at MAKS 2009) will be fitted for "tourist" use.

David L. Rickman

[Capt. David]

Here's another question, if anyone's interested. Assuming EA can actually get Almaz TKS (with VA capsule attached) aloft, could it pay a visit to ISS? I assume all that's really necessary is to mount to proper side of a Russian docking adapter to the stern.

Dave Anderman is correct that flying these to the ISS would not be cost effective since this is what the Soyuz can already do cheaper.

Art Dula has stated that according to their research these typically would be for private research for people (or entities) who don't want or need to dock with the ISS. This also removes many restriction placed on vehicles intending to dock with the ISS.

David L. Rickman