Risky Speculations, (New Uses of modified existing abilities).

Void · 2024-01-22 08:47:32

I appreciate your participation in this (th).

I am interested in what you present. Making a cup of coffee.

While it is possible that this could lead to methods to fully land a Moon creation onto the Earth, my bigger interest is in getting the device to aerobrake to a convenience to later get it to geostationary orbit, or LEO. Both are of interest.

It might also be a cycling shield that could reduce exposure to the radiation of the Van Allen Belts. (A ship could park inside of it). Of course the same radiation shielding method might be used in many places in space, not just the Van Llen Belts.

Hi Calliban, I appreciate your materials already.

I am interested in Ceramics Overkill. If these things could be launched off of the Moon, and converted to space station materials, and power station materials, then we want a distribution of materials that the Moon has to offer. So for solar cells, later our heat shield can be perhaps somewhat compatible. So, you just make it extra thick so that it does not all burn off. You may be able to stack many of these together, like paper cups to make a thicker shield, and may be able to join two such collections together end to end to make an envelope that a ship traveling to and from the Moon might ride in.

So, then my engine bell and then you want to find a way to 3D print the heat shield materials to the outside of the shell.

As I see it a robotic factory method on the Moon could mass produce these things. Much of them sent to aerobrake to a lower Earth orbit than the Moon would be converted to useful machines. But certain parts such as turbo pumps for instance would be recycled back to the Moon to be incorporated into new shells.

Done

Last edited by Void (2024-01-22 09:02:05)

Calliban · 2024-01-22 08:52:34

The regolith within the mare of the moon, contains a high percentage of ilmenite - FeTiO3.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilmenite

This is magnetic so can be extracted from bulk regolith using an electromagnet. It can be reduced to a mixture of metallic iron and TiO2 by passing hot hydrogen gas through finely crushed material at temperatures exceeding 800°C. The metallic iron can then be removed by magnet, leaving behind the TiO2. Titanium dioxide is a refractory that can be sintered into heat shield tile. It has a high melting point (1843°C) and is chemically non-reactive due to the high electropositivity of the Ti4+ ion. In addition to heat shields, it could be used to make linings for metal smelting kilns and chemical reactors.

Void · 2024-01-22 08:59:26

Callibans notions of materials, and the 3D texture method of (th) and the advice of Dr. Johnson may well apply.

Done.

Void · 2024-01-22 09:10:19

So, an interior of the shell of extra foam metal fuel.
Then over than a pressure retaining engine bell of great strength of the materials.
Then a Ceramic covering to serve as heat Sheild materials.

Overkill is allowed as long as the thing is not too heavy to be launched off of the Moon.

So, if you overkill on the ceramic heat shield material, you are carrying desired materials including Oxygen.

That Oxygen could be extracted from the remnant heat shield materials and use for such purposes as refilling a ship to go to the Moon.

I would suggest that a mechanical type catapult method might be used to give a little bit of the lift the device would need to get to orbit of the Moon.

Your efforts are valued Calliban and (th), and of course Dr. Johnson.

Done

Last edited by Void (2024-01-22 09:11:33)

Void · 2024-01-22 09:46:42

I have previously though to steer the device by having distributed Oxidizer injectors around the perimeter of the upper portions of the bell.

Now I am thinking that the outer edge of the bell could have ruffles, so that it might have 3, 4, 5, 6....Legs.

Flaps might be in the spaces between the legs that could also steer the device by modifying the leakage characteristics of the gasses flowing out of the bells edges.

Done

RobertDyck · 2024-01-22 16:35:55

Void: You said SpaceX Dragon does not have capacity to go to the Moon. But it's a lot closer than you realize. Dragon was originally the bid from SpaceX for the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) under the lunar exploration program of President George W. Bush. It compares against Lockheed-Martin's Orion, and Boeing's Starliner. It was eventually built for LEO, but was originally proposed for the Moon. Dragon heat shield is PICA-X. NASA announced PICA in 1970 as an upgrade to the Apollo Command Module for Mars. An unmanned mission used PICA in 1995, known as PICA-95. Both PICA-95 and PICA-X are lighter than the original, but able to handle heat of return from Mars. Apollo used AVCOAT to return from the Moon. It worked with a reasonable safety margin for the Moon, but returning from Mars would hit Earth's atmosphere at higher speed. My point is the heat shield is fine for a Lunar mission.

Life support for Dragon is rates for 10 days with a crew of 4. Apply had life support for 14 days for a crew of 3. But a Lunar mission takes 3 days to reach Lunar orbit, then 3 days back. Apollo has more to support a single astronaut in Lunar orbit while the other 2 were on the surface. But with Dragon, all 4 crew will land on the Lunar surface. Better computers allow the Dragon to remain in Lunar orbit uninhabited, on autopilot.

What Dragon needs is upgraded radio, and a trunk with propellant tanks and engines with sufficient ∆V for Trans-Earth Injection (TLI).

Question: can Dragon's abort system operate with the trunk filled with that much mass? Dragon 2 has a trunk with fins to stabilize flight during boost off the launch vehicle. Then it ejects the trunk, the capsule separates. As soon as the trunk is gone, the capsule flips over heat-shield first. It's designed to do that for normal atmospheric entry. Then parachutes deploy. Dragon 2 is rated to carry 800kg unpressurized cargo in the trunk. I think propellant tanks, propellant, and engines for TLI will mass more than that. So Dragon for the Moon may have to be modified to abort without the trunk. That would require an active guidance system to keep it pointy end up during thrust. It's definitely possible, Boeing Start does that. But it would be new for SpaceX.

RobertDyck · 2024-01-22 16:47:06

In post #6 I posted a reminder of my idea of a Lunar architecture using Dragon, two Falcon Heavies, and a reusable Lunar Module. That also included a Mars Direct habitat landed on the Moon as an instant Moon base.

Launching a Mars Direct hab to the Moon would require substantial lift capability. Mars Direct in 1990 proposed using the Area launch vehicle. It could be done with Starship/Superheavy cargo version. That would require either expending Starship after TLI, or a custom upper stage for TLI. However, throwing a bone to Old Space, it could be launched by SLS block 1B Cargo version. That would give politicians who supported SLS some justification.

Void · 2024-01-22 22:21:07

Well, thanks Robert. I fully support the Starship effort, but wonder if the Falcon Series hardware should be considered as well.

The logic of retiring Falcon 9's was that all effort could be on the Starship. It may or may not turn out to be the correct plan.

For what it is worth, my two cents are that the Moon is likely to only need a smaller period of import of hardware. Starships could go one way to the Moon with Hardware, or may come back to Earth after leaving hardware. But with the advent of developed humanoid and other robotics, I think that relatively soon the Moon could become an exporter of goods.

The Crew Dragon if upgraded might be a good thing to use. Falcon Heavy may still have a place for it.

And as I have said before, I think a look should be done at the possibility that Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy 2nd stages might be able to fire 1 or more times to do some work. They are already highly propelled, maybe even orbital.

I would look at the possibility that an aerodynamic Starship could escort some Falcon Hardware to and perhaps around the Moon for some purpose. Starship could escort crewed or uncrewed efforts of that sort, but not land on the Moon, this may reduce the loading of the device per propellants or extend it's reach if full propellants are applied.

They say that the Merlin Engines Coke up, but the ones on the 2nd stage are now throw aways. Can they burn more than 2 times?

This is not to detract from your promotion of Mars Direct per Falcon Heavy.

I think that any method that can overcome impediments can rightfully be considered.

Done

Last edited by Void (2024-01-22 22:32:52)

RobertDyck · 2024-01-23 01:57:59

Falcon Heavy shares an upper stage with Falcon 9. It uses cold nitrogen thrusters for attitude control. These thrusters can provide ullage thrust, which means trust forward just enough to get propellant to settle in the bottom of the main tanks. That's so turbo-pump suction intakes have something to suck. Falcon upper stage is capable of multiple restarts. This allows complex orbital manoeuvres when inserting a satellite into high Earth orbit, including geostationary orbit. Second stage is capable as as many restarts as the mission requires, until propellant is expended.

RobertDyck · 2024-01-23 02:02:03

SLS Block 1B fairing has 8.4m outside diameter. Space Shuttle ET had 8.4m diameter. Ares launch vehicle was based on Shuttle ET, so was designed for 8.4m as well. Mars Direct was designed to launch on Ares, so it has 8.4m diameter. A Mars Direct habitat would have an aerodynamic cone on top, which would be expended as a fairing. And an actual fairing around the lower deck.

The lower deck would be rocket engines to land on the surface of the Moon (or Mars), propellant tanks to feed those landing engines. RCS thrusters to manoeuvre during transit to the Moon (or Mars), propellant tanks to feed those RCS thrusters. Landing legs. An airlock and staircase outside. Staircase inside leading to the upper deck. Life support equipment, which I envision as based on equipment currently on ISS. Solar panels that would be deployed in space during transit to the Moon (or Mars), but retracted for landing. Those solar panels would be removed from storage by astronauts and deployed on the surface by hand. Batteries to store power at night; Mars has the same day/night cycle as Earth. Would this be deployed on the Moon south pole, where solar panels could get sunlight continuously for the Moon's rotation? And finally a storage compartment for the rover. I envision a pressurized rover the size of an SUV that can carry all 4 astronauts. A vehicle door would open down to act as a ramp for the rover to get out. Once the rover is outside, it won't come back in. The storage compartment will be the size of a single-car garage, and will be usable pressurized space once the vehicle is out. That storage compartment will also hold an inflatable greenhouse and surface science instruments. Again, once they're deployed outside, they stay outside.

Note: taking into account thickness of hull including whipple shield for micrometeoroids, thermal insulation, and pressure hull, the upper deck alone has as much floor area as a 60-foot class A motorhome with slide-outs. Most class A motorhomes are 40 or 42 feet; a 60-foot has two sections with an accordion joint. I'm saying a single deck is big! Important to say because the lower deck is just a single-car garage, stairway, and solid equipment. The inflatable greenhouse will be as wide as a double car garage and twice as long.

I envision something like the Mars Direct habitat depicted in the year 2000 movie titled "Mission to Mars". I don't know what the equipment in the foreground is supposed to be. Note the red soil, and sandbags on the habitat roof. (Ok, I'm cheating. Stealing stills from a big-budget movie. They look gorgeous!)

13%2BAbandoned%2BMartian%2Bbase%2B-%2BMission%2Bto%2BMars%2Bmovie%2Bimage.jpg

Void · 2024-01-23 09:43:43

Thanks Robert.

Your information about Falcon 9 2nd Stage is interesting, and also the second post about Mars Direct as well.

The Moon is an afterthought, it seems, to me, as per the interests of SpaceX.

Of course LEO is more important than either at this point as you need that before you could get to the Moon or Mars, leaving Falcon Heavy as a possible deviation from that notion.
T
I think that the capability to do Lunar Starship has its value that or Blue Origins machine. That value is to fill in for what SLS cannot do.

In filling NASA's Moon order, it make some good sense. A Moon base, to get things started. That may answer the question "Can water be fetched from shadowed craters? Doing 10 LEO launches of Starships to facilitate 1 Lunar visit, is a way to do things, but it is burdensome. It seems less likely that Methane can be made on the Moon. Oxygen is likely to be a resource created early on the Moon.

Methane is hard to store, relative to RP-1 I believe. Hydrogen is even harder to store.

After all the hardware for a main base is delivered, then, I expect that that base could be focused on Science and experiments in resource creation on the Moon. So, at that point Lunar Starship might be a bit of overkill, presuming that much that is needed on the Moon can come from Lunar materials.

So, I wonder about using Falcon 9 heritage machines to do activities on the Moon.

For instance landing robots on to other parts of the Moon for research.
Possibly exchanging a small number of crew for the Lunar base once a year or so?

If Oxygen to refill a lander were possible to get from the Moon either from water or rocks, then it might make sense to bring a RP-1 fuel to the Moon rather than Methane.

But I don't know how adaptable the 2nd stage could be to become a landing device or assent vehicle.

Over time, I expect that the Moon will send lots of materials by some means, Oxygen or hardware. I don't know how that is to be accomplished, but I think it is a desire. I did try to suggest a Moon Shell thing, but I am not confident that it is a practical method. Perhaps Mass Drivers, or even some rocket method.

Thanks for your posting.

Done

Last edited by Void (2024-01-23 09:59:07)

Void · 2024-01-30 11:42:26

I am neither for or against the materials in this video, but it is of interest to me.

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Ut … ORM=WRVORC
Quote:

Break it! SpaceX Crew Dragon to the Moon instead of NASA's "gigantic" rocket...
YouTube15 views41 minutes ago
View page
ALPHA TECH
ALPHA TECH

My notion is that once Starship achieves the ability to go to LEO, with propellants, then a parallel program could be implemented that might be assistive to existing "Pork Money" efforts. I do not mock the "Pork Money" at least it allows the USA to have a space program.

The focus has been on Lunar Ice. Not a bad plan, but that is only in some places in the Moon.

Boil Of would be a concern if you have propellant depots in LEO, in orbit of the Moon, or if on the Moon. But perhaps easiest on the Moon. So, if you could make an Oxygen depot "On The Moon" local resources would probably make it possible to prevent Oxygen boil off.

If you could put a RP-1 Depot in Lunar Orbit, that fluid is not going to have much problem with boil off.

So ships using Merlin Engines could refill fuel in Lunar Orbit, and also Refill Oxygen on the surface of the Moon.

Dragon itself, I believe uses something else. I am a little vague on that.

But then this system allows you to have bases that can make Oxygen from rocks on the Moon, in many locations.

Falcon 9 2nd stages could be refilled in LEO by Starship. Maybe this would require 1 or two tankers?

These 2nd stages could be stacked in orbit. A serial string of 2 or 3? I don't know how good they would be for landers, but anyway, As I have said a depot of fuel in Lunar orbit or geostationary orbit might work well with RP-1.

And electric rockets could be used to move such depots to the needed places, with efficiency.

But I am not against Lunar Starship at all. It would be great for setting up bases where you could extract Oxygen either from ice or rocks.

Some landers could simply bring a robot to a location and may or may not launch samples to orbit to be picked up.

But I do not think that we should scrap Orion or SLS at this time and maybe never.

Done

Last edited by Void (2024-01-30 11:57:13)

Void · 2024-01-30 12:05:53

I have had another thought about all of this.

If you do not have access to polar water on the Moon, you must get is some other way.

RP-1, I understand is just a higher grade of Jet Fuel. It is Hydrocarbons then.

Shipping water to the Moon means that for the most part you are shipping Oxygen to the Moon. But Oxygen can be gotten from the rocks on the Moon.

Shipping Hydrocarbons is just that Hydrogen and Carbon. Carbon is hard to come by on the Moon.

So, then ship hydrocarbons to the Moon, and burn them in Lunar Oxygen. Get some water and some CO2. Extract the water and purify it. Work with the CO2 to create useful things with its Carbon.

As I have said, if you ship water then you are mostly shipping Oxygen which is a waste.

If you ship Hydrogen, then you need massive dry mass to keep it from boiling off. I think RP-1 would be easy to ship and to keep from boiling off, and it could be stored as rocket fuel on the Moon to either be used as rocket fuel, or to extract water from the Moon.

Done

Last edited by Void (2024-01-30 12:10:28)

Calliban · 2024-01-30 16:12:13

I wonder if the Merlin engines could burn propane or butane, assuming we are shipping fuel from Earth? Propane is a saturated liquid at 300K with a vapour pressure of about 10 bar(a). It would be easier to store in space than liquid methane, but isn't too different in terms of density and specific heat. So it may be a better choice for in space use if you are shipping propellant from Earth.

If propellant is being manufactured from CO2 and H2, propane synthesis is slightly more complex than methane synthesis, but not by much. We could use a ruthenium or technetium catalyst to promote dehydrogenation, which will form simple alkenes like ethylene. Small amounts of oxygen will form free radicals that promote addition reactions, converting a mixture of ethylene and methane into longer chain alkanes. You would end up with a mixture of methane, ethane, propane and progressively smaller amounts of heavier alkanes. The propane has a higher critical temperature and higher boiling point than methane and ethane. Removing it from the reactor can be accomplished by increasing pressure to 10 bar at 300K, at which point the propane becomes liquid, but the ethylene and methane remain gases. The propane is removed and the other two gases are returned to the reactor. This ensures a high selectivity for propane, which is removed before heavier alkenes can accumulate.

Last edited by Calliban (2024-01-30 16:22:23)

Void · 2024-01-30 17:37:36

I am at most here to learn on this one and confess ignorance. But.....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX_Merlin
Quotes:

Propellant LOX / RP-1
Cycle Gas-generator

Quote:

The injector at the heart of Merlin is of the pintle type that was first used in the Apollo Lunar Module landing engine (LMDE).

So, that is interesting.

Don't know much more than that.

Done

Last edited by Void (2024-01-30 17:39:32)

Void · 2024-02-17 12:19:44

I am not vouching for this video, just having a look: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYTzUKM5tA8
Quote:

SpaceX Crew Dragon heading to the Moon Rather than NASA unsuccessful rocket
Elon Musk ERA
7.94K subscribers

I guess I want to think about it.

The SpaceX lander would be Methane fueled,
The Blue Origin lander would be Hydrogen fueled.
I am tempted to ask if some sort of lander derived from the Falcon 9 and Heavy Family would make sense for some situations.

I think that it may be easier to set up to extract Oxygen from rocks on the Moon than water, but time will tell.
I might like to think about a depot in orbit of the Moon that would have the RP-1 fuel, and that you would fill on Oxygen on the Moon for a return trip and then fill fuel in orbit of the Moon, to return to Earth.

The number of times you can fire without cleaning the engines would matter: https://space.stackexchange.com/questio … con-handle

So, I am over my head in this. But I think it also might be good to be able to simply land a cargo dragon on the Moon, for cargo deliveries, and also perhaps to put a robot into a remote location to do some science.

The Starship is supposed to be stretched, and may eventually be able to lift 200 tons I have read. But I don't know when it would become human rated.

It seems to me that a combination of Starship, Dragon, Falcon 9/Heavy 2nd state, and Orion might be able to do a lot of what NASA wants.

Maybe Falcon hardware could push Orion to the space station after NASA got Orion to LEO?

I am ignorant of course.

I do like the idea of using an electric propulsion to station fuel in proximity to the Moon and to be able to manufacture Oxygen on the Moon.

But this topic is for amateur thinking and that I what I can produce.

Done

Last edited by Void (2024-02-17 12:46:28)

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#26 2024-01-22 08:47:32

Re: Risky Speculations, (New Uses of modified existing abilities).

#27 2024-01-22 08:52:34

Re: Risky Speculations, (New Uses of modified existing abilities).

#28 2024-01-22 08:59:26

Re: Risky Speculations, (New Uses of modified existing abilities).

#29 2024-01-22 09:10:19

Re: Risky Speculations, (New Uses of modified existing abilities).

#30 2024-01-22 09:46:42

Re: Risky Speculations, (New Uses of modified existing abilities).

#31 2024-01-22 16:35:55

Re: Risky Speculations, (New Uses of modified existing abilities).

#32 2024-01-22 16:47:06

Re: Risky Speculations, (New Uses of modified existing abilities).

#33 2024-01-22 22:21:07

Re: Risky Speculations, (New Uses of modified existing abilities).

#34 2024-01-23 01:57:59

Re: Risky Speculations, (New Uses of modified existing abilities).

#35 2024-01-23 02:02:03

Re: Risky Speculations, (New Uses of modified existing abilities).

#36 2024-01-23 09:43:43

Re: Risky Speculations, (New Uses of modified existing abilities).

#37 2024-01-30 11:42:26

Re: Risky Speculations, (New Uses of modified existing abilities).

#38 2024-01-30 12:05:53

Re: Risky Speculations, (New Uses of modified existing abilities).

#39 2024-01-30 16:12:13

Re: Risky Speculations, (New Uses of modified existing abilities).

#40 2024-01-30 17:37:36

Re: Risky Speculations, (New Uses of modified existing abilities).

#41 2024-02-17 12:19:44

Re: Risky Speculations, (New Uses of modified existing abilities).

Board footer