|
Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions. If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name. |
|
|||||||
| Science and Technology "Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known." - Carl Sagan. |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
|
#196 |
|
Admiral
Location: Kentucky
|
Re: SpaceX is a go for April 30th: 1st commercial launch to space stat
|
|
|
|
|
|
#197 |
|
Fleet Captain
|
Re: SpaceX is a go for April 30th: 1st commercial launch to space stat
http://www.russianspaceweb.com/soyuz1_lv.html#khsi2 http://cosmoquest.org/forum/showthre...s-After-Launch |
|
|
|
|
|
#198 |
|
Admiral
Location: Kentucky
|
Re: SpaceX is a go for April 30th: 1st commercial launch to space stat
There's one interesting capsule configuration that I've never seen proposed, which is to flip and Apollo, CST-100, or Dragon style capsule upside down. That one little flip brings on a bunch of interesting improvements, although the seating needs to re-orient for different flight phases. With the capsule upside-down on the stack, it allows jettisonable solid abort motors or permanent liquids to occupy the area under the inverted cone, aiming mostly downwards instead of outwards. That eliminates most of the cosine losses of most current abort-rocket configurations. During an abort, the capsule is already oriented with the heat-shield facing forward, so the capsule doesn't need to do a 180-degree flip prior to either a re-entry or a low-altitude drogue chute deployment. At allows the capsule to be launched already docked to another module (similar to the Soyuz orbital module) and yet still be on top of the stack for an abort. This allows the capsule to be pre-mated to wildly different types of modules (such as ISS multiple docking adapters, spacelab modules, etc) without worrying about the stress loads added to the capsule, becaus the capsule isn't under the weight of anything above it. This means the abort system doesn't have to be redesigned, upgraded, and requalified by increases to the size of the attached modules (as would be the case with enlarging a Soyuz orbital module). It also means the capsule isn't sandwiched between a service module and a mated habitable module like the Soyuz is, requiring both to be jettisoned prior to re-entry. This naturally brings about some other spiffy benefits. Since the stack would have the capsule's heat-shield at one end and a service module engine bell at the other end, docking would have to be done sideways, with a three or four-way docking adapter laid out like a T or + joint. When docking, the pilots would be staring straight out at the side-facing docking adapter through the front Apollo-style windows. The crew could also observe from any attached orbital module. Since the docking occurs sideways, impact shock can be aborbed in bending loads on the entire stack, instead of linearly with the stress concentrated on the crew capsule, which currently is the squashed bug in between a heavy service module and a space station. In this configuration, another craft can come attach to the first craft's unused docking port, and several could chain together this way. A capsule could undock and leave a fully functioning docking adapter, habitable crew module, and a service module attached to the ISS. In the case of something like the Dragon's abort system, where SpaceX also plants to use it for a rocket landing, you could even land the capsule upside-down, avoiding the cosine losses and allowing the pilot a downward view. It would put the landing legs on the opposite end from the heat shield and make their deployment much simpler. It also means the crew could just drop out of the bottom of the craft through its docking hatch instead of climbing out and sliding down or going out a now unnecessary side-hatch. (They could enter on the pad via the side-docking adapter.) For a parachute water landing, the capsule would splash down on the heat shield like normal, and the crew would come out the top. There are many advantages, but the seats would probably need to re-orient for different flight phases, and that might not be highly space efficient. |
|
|
|
|
|
#199 |
|
Fleet Captain
|
Re: SpaceX is a go for April 30th: 1st commercial launch to space stat
|
|
|
|
|
|
#200 | |
|
Vice Admiral
Location: I'm at WKRP
|
Re: SpaceX is a go for April 30th: 1st commercial launch to space stat
As for the russians, I'll beleive they've actually decided to build a new design when it launches. They're almost as bad as NASA for creating Powerpoint presentations.
__________________
Baby, you and me were never meant to be, just maybe think of me once in a while... |
|
|
|
|
|
#201 |
|
Captain
|
Re: SpaceX is a go for April 30th: 1st commercial launch to space stat
__________________
Gradatim Ferociter |
|
|
|
|
#202 |
|
Fleet Captain
|
Re: SpaceX is a go for April 30th: 1st commercial launch to space stat
The Russians keep promising another Energiya try www.interfax.com/newsinf.asp?pg=3&id=355341 www.nasawatch.com/archives/2012/08/energia-20---ru.html New sat plant http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Ru...Plant_999.html More on the NewSoyuz LV http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2012/...er-soyuz-2-1v/ The Russians are getting a lot of flak from their recent space failures though http://cosmoquest.org/forum/showthre...ion-satellites And another Briz has failed. |
|
|
|
|
|
#203 |
|
Captain
|
Re: SpaceX is a go for April 30th: 1st commercial launch to space stat
__________________
Gradatim Ferociter |
|
|
|
|
#204 |
|
Vice Admiral
Location: I'm at WKRP
|
Re: SpaceX is a go for April 30th: 1st commercial launch to space stat
__________________
Baby, you and me were never meant to be, just maybe think of me once in a while... |
|
|
|
|
#205 |
|
Rear Admiral
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
|
Re: SpaceX is a go for April 30th: 1st commercial launch to space stat
__________________
He hoped and prayed that there wasn’t an afterlife. Then he realized there was a contradiction involved here and merely hoped that there wasn’t an afterlife. |
|
|
|
|
|
#206 |
|
Vice Admiral
Location: I'm at WKRP
|
Re: SpaceX is a go for April 30th: 1st commercial launch to space stat
__________________
Baby, you and me were never meant to be, just maybe think of me once in a while... |
|
|
|
|
#207 |
|
Fleet Captain
|
Re: SpaceX is a go for April 30th: 1st commercial launch to space stat
|
|
|
|
|
|
#208 |
|
Vice Admiral
Location: I'm at WKRP
|
Re: SpaceX is a go for April 30th: 1st commercial launch to space stat
__________________
Baby, you and me were never meant to be, just maybe think of me once in a while... |
|
|
|
|
#209 |
|
Commodore
|
Re: SpaceX is a go for April 30th: 1st commercial launch to space stat
![]() NASA/SpaceX conference for CRS-1 In here, Gwynne Shotwell denies my earlier speculations that SpaceX might be doing science or exploration flights on its own. I hope advances in their efficiency and hardware proves her wrong. ![]() CRS-1 press kit (PDF) With real cargo on board the cargo manifest seems long. Although it's pretty light – 400 kg only. The heavy stuff will be the next time. And Europe has two small payloads up and two small payloads in this one.
__________________
R.I.P. Admiral James T. Kirk (2233-2267, 1969, 2267, 1930, 2267-2268, 1968, 2268-2269, Serpeidon Middle Ages, 2269, 2237, 2269-2286, 1986, 2286-2293, 2371) Last edited by YellowSubmarine; October 7 2012 at 11:01 AM. |
|
|
|
|
#210 |
|
Vice Admiral
Location: I'm at WKRP
|
Re: SpaceX is a go for April 30th: 1st commercial launch to space stat
__________________
Baby, you and me were never meant to be, just maybe think of me once in a while... |
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:08 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.


















