Excalibur Almaz

[Capt. David]

Anyone who is familiar with Almaz information posted on this forum probably knows that I have been a fan of the Almaz technology and Excalibur Almaz. But, there has been an issue with Art Dula and Excalibur Almaz which is troubling...

Art Dula purchased four of the Almaz capsules. One of these was the most historic capsule, having flown in Earth orbit twice and was the top capsule launched in an aborted mission. A failure of the Proton carrier rocket triggered the Launch Escape System which pulled this capsule away from the failing Proton. So, technically it flew three times but only twice in space. Never the less, in my opinion three launches make this the most historic Almaz artifact. And this is where I have the problem:

This capsule was purchased by Excalibur Almaz, who then gutted it and permanently coated the exterior... then went on to sell this capsule in an auction.

Add to that, in the Excalibur Almaz PDF file posted earlier EA states that there were 9/9 successful reentries and landings of these capsules. That's true, but also seems a bit misleading. There were two capsules which did not have successful landings. They both lost power, made ballistic entries, and were destroyed upon impact. So, shouldn't that be 9 out of 11 successful reentries and landings???

Whatever Excalibur Almaz is or is not, I cannot help but feel a certain lack of respect for what this capsule represented, and a certain personal "disgust" with this action.

Just my two cents worth.

David L. Rickman

[RanulfC]

Note that launching Almaz on Stratolaunch would still require use of Launch Escape System hardware, specifically capable of taking the capsule from ground zero to an altitude where the parachute could deploy. Probably even when the aircraft is in motion on the ground, or immediately after takeoff.

Actually not, similarly to any proposed "manned" StratoLaunch vehicle, (mini-DC, etc) there's no hard and fast "requirement" for launch escape ON the carrier aircraft. (And it obviously can't afford the mass anyway)

Unlike any rocket launch vehicle the StratoLaunch carrier AC has obvious "intact abort" throughout its portion of the fight. Hence less, (actually none since once in the air the "manned" vehicle can be abort released at any point thereafter) requirement for LES.

Randy

[Jim]

Whatever Excalibur Almaz is or is not, I cannot help but feel a certain lack of respect for what this capsule represented,

Represent what?  That is was an insignificant dead end project twice over?

[Danderman]

Note that launching Almaz on Stratolaunch would still require use of Launch Escape System hardware, specifically capable of taking the capsule from ground zero to an altitude where the parachute could deploy. Probably even when the aircraft is in motion on the ground, or immediately after takeoff.

Actually not, similarly to any proposed "manned" StratoLaunch vehicle, (mini-DC, etc) there's no hard and fast "requirement" for launch escape ON the carrier aircraft. (And it obviously can't afford the mass anyway)

Unlike any rocket launch vehicle the StratoLaunch carrier AC has obvious "intact abort" throughout its portion of the fight. Hence less, (actually none since once in the air the "manned" vehicle can be abort released at any point thereafter) requirement for LES.

Randy

Well, that is a different point of view.

I would assume that an Almaz capsule would require a launch escape system for the takeoff portion of the mission, but if not, assuming that paying passengers would not require the LES until later in the mission, then all the LES would have to do is pull the Almaz away from the aircraft in case of disaster. Unfortunately, I believe that the stock retrorocket motor installed on Almaz is pointed in the wrong direction to serve that function.

[Jim]

Well, that is a different point of view.

I would assume that an Almaz capsule would require a launch escape system for the takeoff portion of the mission,

It's not a point of view, it is just not feasible to have one, since they don't work horizontally.

[RanulfC]

Well, that is a different point of view.

I would assume that an Almaz capsule would require a launch escape system for the takeoff portion of the mission, but if not, assuming that paying passengers would not require the LES until later in the mission, then all the LES would have to do is pull the Almaz away from the aircraft in case of disaster. Unfortunately, I believe that the stock retrorocket motor installed on Almaz is pointed in the wrong direction to serve that function.

It's not a point of view, it is just not feasible to have one, since they don't work horizontally.

Danderman: Not a different PoV as noted the "take-off" portion of the flight has positive intact abort all the way to dropping the LV for launch. At which point the capsule can simply detach from the LV if it fails. Doing so from, say the runway would be painful and pretty useless

Jim: A "well-designed" LES could do so IF you wanted that capability but I don't see any "need" given the intact abort capabilty.

All: Disasters CAN happen on take off even with a very "reliable" aircraft as has been re-proven recently. But we don't insist on (and can't "economically" do so even so) "escapes" systems for cargo and passenger on aircraft because they have, for the most part a very robust "intact abort" system built-in.

Launch Escape Systems are based on the fact that most launch vehicles do not in fact have that capabilty so for "safety" it is prudent to put a system on the manned capsule to remove it from the launch vehicle WHEN (not if) such an event occurs. As in air travel the "customer" should be aware that they are sharing the "risk" with the flight crew if something goes wrong and from a purely economic standpoint having the ability to "flee" a runway/takeoff disaster isn't going to be a viable option.

Randy

[Capt. David]

Whatever Excalibur Almaz is or is not, I cannot help but feel a certain lack of respect for what this capsule represented,

Represent what?  That is was an insignificant dead end project twice over?

My sincere apologies, Jim. I should have been clearer.

This particular Almaz capsule was the first spacecraft to orbit the Earth on two separate occasions, and the first spacecraft to use a Launch Escape System during the failure of its' carrier rocket.

There are a few sources of information about the Almaz system I would encourage you to read. The first is Asif Siddiqi's, "The Almaz Space Station Complex: A History. 1964-1992". It is a two part article published in the Journal of the British Interplanetary Society. Parts 1 and 2 can be found in Vol 54, № 11/12, November/December 2001.

The second is Dr. Jamie Floyd's, "Assessment of the Almaz Capsule for Space Station Assured Crew Return (ACRV), published by McDonnell Douglas Aerospace (MDC 97W5151), in January, 1997. It is a report about the feasibility of using the Almaz capsule as an emergency "life-boat" for the ISS, and contains a wealth of technical information about the structure and construction of the Almaz capsule and its' components. A great deal of this information was then republished in the third part of a three part article in Novosti Kosmonavtiki.

Titled "The Other Ship",  this three part article, written by Igor Afanasyev, can be found in issues №9- 2002, №11- 2002, and № 5- 2003, of Novosti kosmonavtiki. This article focuses on the TKS component of the Almaz Orbital Piloted Station, with part three heavily dedicated to the Almaz Reusable Capsule.

I have all three sources in PDF format and would be happy to forward them to you.

Mt Finest Regards,

David L. Rickman

[Archibald]

Since this is a pretty dead thread these days, I thought I would pose the question of feasibility of launch of Almaz capsules on Stratolaunch.

That's one hell on an idea, actually. Isn't the VA capsule reusable, btw ?

[Baranquilla]

Stratolaunch Will probably launch around 6000 kg I read. So weightwise I think it's possible if they don't take the full 1500 kg of cargo. This is just some Wikipedia info.

[Danderman]

I am not really excited about flying people on a capsule hanging off an airplane without some form of quick emergency egress, or getting away quickly from the solid fuel booster.

Of course, that could just be me.

[Blackstar]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-isle-of-man-31813697

Isle of Man space tourism blow as capsule departs island

The departure of a Russian space station from the Isle of Man signifies the "end of Manx space tourism," according to a government minister.

Space exploration and tourism company Excalibur Almaz imported two capsules in 2011 and planned to use them for space holidays costing £100m.

The company was unavailable to comment on where the 11m (36ft) long space station, built in the 1980s, is going.

[Moe Grills]

 Hope they send it back to Russia. Probably the best thing that can be done with it.
Cynical cynical  cynical.

[Lars-J]

According to Parabolicarc.com, this enterprise appears to have shut its doors: http://www.parabolicarc.com/2015/03/11/line-excalibur-almaz/

One of the company’s two space stations and its remaining return capsule has been seen heading for the Isle of Man’s port on the back of a truck. The company’s phone number has been disconnected. And the company hasn’t put out a press release since July 2012.

[Blackstar]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/shooting-for-the-moon-time-called-on-isle-of-man-space-race-10101750.html

"The company is “still in business and still on the Isle of Man,” he insisted. Refusing to divulge where the equipment is being taken, saying it is “a confidential business matter”. Mr Dula said: “There is a capsule on the Isle of Man, there is a space station on the Isle of Man and they are staying there. I was in communication yesterday with the transport museum in Jurby because we try to keep our equipment so that the public can see it. We think these are good educational exhibits… but they are not just museum exhibits, they are actual spacecraft.”

While “there aren’t any facilities on the Isle of Man for working on this equipment,” the company had gone there because “we got a very nice deal on rent from the Isle of Man government”.

But the lease ran out, which is why the equipment has been moved from the hangar at Jurby Airfield, he explained. There are no launch facilities on the Isle of Man either, which means that the company had never intended to launch missions from there anyway, Mr Dula said."

[Lars-J]

A quote from the article:

Just three years ago, at a space tourism conference at the Royal Aeronautical Society in London, Mr Dula announced plans to sell tickets to the Moon for £100m each. “This is scientific fact, not fiction,” he claimed, detailing his plans to use a refitted former Soviet space station and re-entry capsule for what would be a six-month trip.

[A_M_Swallow]

The company does not appear to have any customers so how long it can continue is a relevant question.

[Moe Grills]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/shooting-for-the-moon-time-called-on-isle-of-man-space-race-10101750.html

"The company is “still in business and still on the Isle of Man,” he insisted.

In business? With a disconnected telephone, no website updates worth spit, and no serious offers of money coming in. Mr. Dula is either deluding himself or trying to delude others. A brave face is not necessarily a trustworthy one.

But the lease ran out, which is why the equipment has been moved from the hangar at Jurby Airfield, he explained. There are no launch facilities on the Isle of Man either, which means that the company had never intended to launch missions from there anyway, Mr Dula said."
[/quote]
To launch where? With what kind of booster? And with what available funds to pay for it?
Those who've rejected offers to provide funds, launch facilities, and available booster rockets to Mr. Dula are clearly no fools. What does that say about Mr. Dula?