Altair - Lunar Lander (LSAM) - status

GCNRevenger · 2008-03-25 18:08:48

The larger faring also permits NASA to use a shorter but chubbier EDS stage, which in turn lets the first stage core get longer without making the rocket any taller, so it carries more fuel for more payload.

This is the first I've heard of the drop-tank idea after Lunar orbit insertion being seriously considered. Sounds like a good idea to me.

gaetanomarano · 2008-03-25 18:57:31

This is the first I've heard of the drop-tank idea after Lunar orbit insertion being seriously considered. Sounds like a good idea to me.

it's a LockMart concept proposed last year that I feel too dangerous since the astronauts will know that the lander engines works just a few km. from lunar surface... however, something similar can work but with a different landing profile, with several deorbits down to about 10 km. where the mini-EDS will be jettisoned and a lander's descent burn from this low altitute that allows an easy and safe abort (or more than one engine burning attempts) if something goes wrong... of course, everything will be safer if this smaller descent/ascent stage will have two different engines and tanks

.

gaetanomarano · 2008-03-25 19:09:09

...from 20 March interview with Altair project office deputy manager, Clint Dorris ... Altair project is embracing the [Ares V cargo launch vehicle] 10m shroud for the lander, the primary impact being on structures, we can widen and squat the descent module.

two weeks after my article ... it seems a first attempt to fix the Altair problems evidenced in the points "2.", "3." and "6." of my article

maybe, that doesn't means they have read my article (despite its page has received many important visits...) but (at least) this change evidences that I was right (again)

sadly to read that the max Altair payload (already cutted from 21 mT to 17 mT in two years) has gone down from 17 mT to 14 mT in two weeks...

.

cIclops · 2008-03-26 02:23:34

sadly to read that the max Altair payload (already cutted from 21 mT to 17 mT in two years) has gone down from 17 mT to 14 mT in two weeks...

The difference is probably due to the 3 MT extra mass of the 10m shroud. Upgrades to Ares V are being traded. The main job of Ares V / EDS is to put Altair into TLI. Getting the right balance between Ares V capability and Altair requirements is all part of the work for the next year or more. Also we need to see payload and margin numbers directly from NASA.

(gaetanomarano: once again, please put comments and references about your alternate designs in this topic or they will be removed)

SpaceNut · 2008-03-26 04:40:49

The drop tanks give the advantage of lessening the fuel consumption but when the tanks hit the surface they are then made useless for future reuse. It is a trade off of mass but when trying to build with less being delivered a new approach to the problem may be needed. I will have to check to see what document it was meantioned in for lockmarts....

Dropping the extra tanks for ascent to orbit is a plus and the reuse is better facilitated by doing so.

Is it possible for an unknown as of yet orbital rendezvous to happen to provide the much needed fuel for landing from a seperate docking unit?

As for the 10 meter shroud it was on the development lines for Mars any ways and if it makes for a better moon design why go small. Ya giving up payload to accomplish the larger diameter sort of is a given.

gaetanomarano has done a better job of not spamming and what he thinks is a good idea. Sometimes his opinions and others as well on a subject match it is just that he is documenting them. Just continue to easy up on the spam like writing style as you seem to be making the effort in.

gaetanomarano · 2008-03-26 08:45:20

Also we need to see payload and margin numbers directly from NASA.

I believe that all the latest figures about the Ares-5 and the Altair should be very very very disappointing for those peoples (mainly "blind NASA and ESAS supporters") that have posted LOTS of insults and personal attacks against me in (nearly) all space forums and blogs where I've posted my opinions and critics about the new (big?) "plan"

the early ESAS plan was described as "Apollo on steroids" mainly thanks to a "21 mT cargo" that was aimed to build "lunar outposts" etc. ... but (now) "the plan" is gone down to reality that is made of: oversized and overweighted vehicles, underpowered launchers, poor payload and NO STEROIDS

remember that "14 mT" is the max payload of a CARGO Altair (that's possible since the lunar convoy has no Orion at TLI) while, the max payload of a CREW Altair (after this further payload cut) is UNDER 9 mT (including ascent stage, propellents, rover, exploration hardware, life support, etc.) that is LESS THAN TWO (4.55 mT each) Apollo-LEMs!!!

in other words, this "big (very long and very expensive) plan" will (simply) land on the moon TWO Apollo-LEMs per mission, then, NOT an "Apollo on steroids" but (just) a (slightly larger) Apollo-LEM for a crew of FOUR astronauts!!!

...please put comments and references about your alternate designs...

ok, but you (please) delete the thread's poll that is offensive for the work I do writing my articles

.

cIclops · 2008-03-26 13:27:00

It's a long way to the final design of Altair and Ares V and far too early to say what the cargo payload will be. Upgraded designs for Ares V show that several tons can be added to the payload. There's nothing magical about 21 MT ... maybe more is possible.

(poll deleted)

RedStreak · 2008-03-26 15:07:09

Bear in mind gaeto the only meritable cargo will come from the cargo lander, not the crewed vehicle. The best I imagine a crew vehicle could leave behind would be a modest inflatable dome. Most likely the crew vehicles would bring smaller equiptment, likely replacement parts or even change-outs akin to how the Hubble periodically was changed.

cIclops · 2008-03-26 15:14:03

Lander Configuration 711-A shows over 4 MT of cargo with 4 crew to the Outpost. Nice inflatable dome

RedStreak · 2008-03-26 15:18:18

Lander Configuration 711-A shows over 4 MT of cargo with 4 crew to the Outpost. Nice inflatable dome

Can you get a pic of that to see?

cIclops · 2008-03-26 15:28:46

Your wish is my command.

That's the ILC Dover Lunar Habitat structure - it weighs about 500 kg - of course it may need a few extras for use on the Moon

Habitat Specifications

The habitat (and airlock) system consist of a tubular inflatable structure, an insulation blanket, a guy wire package, power and lighting systems with outlets, two quartz resistance heaters, a pressurization system, and a protective floor. The integrated sensors track pressure, temperature, CO2, smoke and power consumption. The system can be packed in a small volume and weighs approximately 1000lbs. The small, packed volume makes for efficient transport which not only reduces the size of launch vehicles for NASA, but its transportability supports the NSF charter by allowing large structures to be transported to remote sights on small aircraft such as twin-Otters or helicopters. The habitat can be erected by 4 people in under an hour, and can be packed and redeployed many times.

gaetanomarano · 2008-03-26 21:10:35

...inflatable dome...

first of all, the crew lander max payload was only 3.4 mT when the total mass landed was evaluated around 17 mT

after the cut to 14 mT total, this extra-payload is NOT reduced in proportion (then, down to 2.8 mT) but reduced to (nearly) ZERO (or just one mT) since, also in the 3 mT-resized Altair, you ALWAYS need to land the (already too small) ascent stage/crew cabin/ life support

second, if you use this (very small) payload for an inflatable module, yo can't land a rover, enough exploration hardware, etc.

third, assuming you can land (both) inflatable module and science hardware, you can't use none of them for months since the life support for a long stay of a crew of four has a weight of (at least) 0.5 mT per week

then, your choice for the extra payload is: "inflatable module" OR "science hardware" OR "long stay life support" NOT two or three of them

sorry, but, the ONLY solution is a bigger Ares-5 (as I always said everywhere in latest two years)

.

cIclops · 2008-03-27 01:36:08

first of all, the crew lander max payload was only 3.4 mT when the total mass landed was evaluated around 17 mT

The 3.4 MT cargo payload is for the sortie mission, for Outpost missions it is 4.2 MT (excluding a lander reserve of 2.6 MT).

gaetanomarano · 2008-03-27 06:43:04

The 3.4 MT cargo payload is for the sortie mission, for Outpost missions it is 4.2 MT

both reduced to one-two mT after the 3 mT global weight cut

.

cIclops · 2008-04-09 08:43:21

Contract for Engine Technology Development - 8 Apr 2008

CLEVELAND -- NASA has awarded a contract to Aerojet-General Corporation of Sacramento, Calif., to design, develop, fabricate, test and evaluate a workhorse rocket engine using liquid oxygen and liquid methane as propellants.
Aerojet will work for 21 months from the effective date of the contract to complete an evaluation of the rocket engine assembly, a 5,500 pound constant-thrust, pressure-fed rocket engine.
This cost-plus-fixed-fee contract is valued at approximately $6.9 million. The Exploration Technology Development Program at NASA's Headquarters in Washington is providing the funding. The contract's period of performance begins April 8, 2008.
The objective of this work is to sufficiently increase the maturity of this technology to establish the feasibility of using a liquid oxygen and liquid methane main engine for the ascent stage of the Altair lunar lander. After visiting the lunar outpost, the crew will lift off from the surface of the moon in Altair's ascent stage and rendezvous with the Orion crew vehicle in lunar orbit for the return trip to Earth.

RedStreak · 2008-04-09 10:45:37

This will definetely be the one piece of technology that will prove extremely applicable for future Mars missions, as well as more convienient for Lunar ISRU because of Methane's similar liquid range to oxygen.

SpaceNut · 2008-04-09 13:22:41

I find it intersting that another company is trying to design methane engines as there are already 3 other sizes which have been fired already.

This older article release is about a methane engine in developement that would be ideal for Mars use.

http://www.xcor.com/press-releases/2007 … sting.html

Mojave, CA. January 16, 2007 – Today XCOR Aerospace announced a series of successful test firings of its new 7,500 pound thrust rocket engine. The tests were conducted as part of a $3.3 million subcontract XCOR has with Alliant Techsystems (NYSE: ATK). The tests support NASA’s advanced development program to obtain liquid methane rocket engine technology for future space applications. Six short-duration test fires have been completed.
The engine, designated 5M15, uses liquid methane and liquid oxygen as propellants. XCOR and ATK are developing the initial workhorse version of the 7,500 lbf LOX/methane engine for NASA. This regeneratively-cooled version of the rocket engine will also be built and tested in 2007 as part of the contract.

LIQUID OXYGEN LIQUID METHANE LUNAR ASCENT MAIN ENGINE TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT

This engine will be pressure-fed with an inlet pressure of approximately 325 psia and will have fixed vacuum thrust of 6,000 lbf and a vacuum specific impulse equal or greater than 355 seconds. The design should be amiable to scaling +/- 1500 lbf to account for the immaturity of the current lunar lander design. During nominal operations the engine will be capable of performing up to two engine starts with total burn duration of 450 seconds. To meet the abort function, the design of the development engine(s) shall be capable of 90 percent thrust in approximately 500 milliseconds.

Best part of all is that the contractors are still working on mars related hardware still. It was back in May of 2007 that the 7,500 lb Alliant Techsystems/XCOR engine was test fired and now we have another in Northrop Grumman Demonstrates New Rocket Engine Design Using Oxygen and Methane Propellants

successfully hot-fire tested a radically new type of rocket engine specifically designed to use oxygen and methane propellants that range from all-gas to all-liquid at the inlet to the thruster. More than 50 separate tests demonstrated high performance, operating stability and ample design margin of this 100 lbf-thrust rocket, designated the TR408.

The successful tests validate the robust capabilities and high performance of the integrated engine design. "The demonstration test results are impressive considering the broad range of conditions and operational modes tested. The engine far exceeded performance requirements and is on track to deliver a steady-state specific impulse of 340 seconds," stated Mark Trinidad, Northrop Grumman's program manager for the TR408. The TR408 is a simple design that uses only two propellant valves, no moving parts other than valves, and contains a built-in spark igniter to initiate combustion of injected propellants. The reaction control engine operates under short pulse and steady-state modes.
This engine is unique in its capability to fully vaporize both the oxidizer (liquid oxygen) and fuel (liquid methane) by passing these propellants through cooling passages located in the thrust chamber wall before injecting them into the chamber for combustion. If gaseous instead of cryogenic liquid propellants are fed to the engine, the gases still provide cooling and will enter the injector at a higher temperature. A design that ensures gas-gas injection results in consistent performance and combustion stability. Previous rocket engine designs using propellant to cool the chamber do not vaporize any of the propellant or may only vaporize one of the propellants, typically the fuel.

cIclops · 2008-04-11 02:52:35

Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne Awarded NASA Contract Extension to Advance Lunar Lander Engine Technology

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla., April 10 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne, a United Technologies Corp. NYSE: UTX company, has been awarded a contract extension by NASA to continue development of the Common Extensible Cryogenic Engine (CECE). The CECE is advancing technology readiness to support future lunar lander development.
"Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne is pleased that NASA has continued development of the CECE," said Graham Webb, general manager, Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne Florida & Mississippi operations. "We look forward to competing to power the first lunar landing of the 21st Century."
The CECE development contract, which was originally awarded in June 2005, extends through March 2009. During this next phase of the program, Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne will design, manufacture and test a new, enhanced injector to support stable combustion at very low thrust.
"In tests to date, the CECE has made significant progress to meet the mission," said Victor Giuliano, Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne CECE program manager. "Test highlights included the CECE demonstrating repeated throttling operability from 100 percent of its 13,800 pounds of thrust down to as low as 9.5 percent of full power. Additionally, the engine has demonstrated throttle acceleration and deceleration transient capabilities. The next phase of testing will focus on combustion stability at the lower thrust range."
A throttling range from full power down to 10-25 percent is believed to be sufficient for human-rated spacecraft landing on the moon. Deep throttling, or a wide variation of thrust, enables a vehicle to maintain adequate thrust during in-space travel, yet have a controlled descent at its final destination. Fast-reaction throttling transients will be necessary to smoothly descend to the lunar surface.

NASA are moving ahead on Altair engine technology, with more contracts for both descent and ascent engine work.

cIclops · 2008-04-19 06:13:24

From Lander Propulsion Overview (PDF 4MB) - 14 Nov 2007

A little out of date but it has dimensions and also this section on storage of L02 and LCH4:

Design
- L02 and Methane are loaded subcooled and allowed to absorb heat leak and warm over the LEO loiter, transit, and 210 day surface stay
• Thermal modeling has been performed by GRC and MSFC to validate this approach
- Both models show heat leaks that result in zero boil-off for the outpost mission
- Sortie Mission capability for zero boil-off also exists

gaetanomarano · 2008-04-19 11:46:39

my article and comments here are not about my "alternate ideas" but about analysis and critics regarding the NASA design of the Altair, so (both) the article and comments, are absolutely ON-topic ...or... now, I can't even post my opinions?
Your opinions were not posted here, you posted a link to your personal pages - this is self promotion and off topic for the status of Altair. Your offending message and my response have been removed.

there was nothing offending in my post and I don't need to post my links here since (from my blog's log) this forum adds just a few visits per month to my blog (compared with hundreds per week that come from other sites) so your discrimination ONLY of my links (but NOT of other 100% commercial sites like NSF, etc.) is unjust and a nonsense, since, censor me, doesn't allow the Altair to be good or the Ares-1 to fly (...not even "Direct" to succeed...)

I think time is arrived for me to stop posting here... goodbye

.

RedStreak · 2008-04-19 11:52:04

I think time is arrived for me to stop posting here... goodbye

JoshNH4H · 2008-04-19 11:52:55

byby gaetano.

Rxke · 2008-04-19 12:17:33

You'll be missed.... not

GCNRevenger · 2008-04-19 12:33:38

Telling: despite all the flak he's received, he only stops when he's not allowed to grandstand and advertise his website.

cIclops · 2008-04-24 05:58:19

Lunar Ascent and Rendezvous Trajectory Design (PDF) - 1 Feb 2008

The lunar ascent profile, shown in Figure 1, begins with a 100-meter vertical rise phase, which lasts approximately 10 seconds. The vertical rise is followed by a Single Axis Rotation (SAR) maneuver. The SAR logic calculates a single-axis time optimal rotation from the initial attitude to the final attitude, given a final attitude command (yaw, pitch, and roll) and limits on angular velocity and angular acceleration (5.0 deg/sec and 15.0 deg/sec² were used, respectively). The exact length of this maneuver varies from case to case, but, given these limits, it is generally on the order of 10 seconds. The SAR is followed by a Powered Explicit Guidance (PEG) phase that delivers the vehicle to the desired orbit.

Lots of numbers and details about the ascent trajectory.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#126 2008-03-25 18:08:48

Re: Altair - Lunar Lander (LSAM) - status

#127 2008-03-25 18:57:31

Re: Altair - Lunar Lander (LSAM) - status

#128 2008-03-25 19:09:09

Re: Altair - Lunar Lander (LSAM) - status

#129 2008-03-26 02:23:34

Re: Altair - Lunar Lander (LSAM) - status

#130 2008-03-26 04:40:49

Re: Altair - Lunar Lander (LSAM) - status

#131 2008-03-26 08:45:20

Re: Altair - Lunar Lander (LSAM) - status

#132 2008-03-26 13:27:00

Re: Altair - Lunar Lander (LSAM) - status

#133 2008-03-26 15:07:09

Re: Altair - Lunar Lander (LSAM) - status

#134 2008-03-26 15:14:03

Re: Altair - Lunar Lander (LSAM) - status

#135 2008-03-26 15:18:18

Re: Altair - Lunar Lander (LSAM) - status

#136 2008-03-26 15:28:46

Re: Altair - Lunar Lander (LSAM) - status

#137 2008-03-26 21:10:35

Re: Altair - Lunar Lander (LSAM) - status

#138 2008-03-27 01:36:08

Re: Altair - Lunar Lander (LSAM) - status

#139 2008-03-27 06:43:04

Re: Altair - Lunar Lander (LSAM) - status

#140 2008-04-09 08:43:21

Re: Altair - Lunar Lander (LSAM) - status

#141 2008-04-09 10:45:37

Re: Altair - Lunar Lander (LSAM) - status

#142 2008-04-09 13:22:41

Re: Altair - Lunar Lander (LSAM) - status

#143 2008-04-11 02:52:35

Re: Altair - Lunar Lander (LSAM) - status

#144 2008-04-19 06:13:24

Re: Altair - Lunar Lander (LSAM) - status

#145 2008-04-19 11:46:39

Re: Altair - Lunar Lander (LSAM) - status

#146 2008-04-19 11:52:04

Re: Altair - Lunar Lander (LSAM) - status

#147 2008-04-19 11:52:55

Re: Altair - Lunar Lander (LSAM) - status

#148 2008-04-19 12:17:33

Re: Altair - Lunar Lander (LSAM) - status

#149 2008-04-19 12:33:38

Re: Altair - Lunar Lander (LSAM) - status

#150 2008-04-24 05:58:19

Re: Altair - Lunar Lander (LSAM) - status

Board footer