Post central for information on CEV - iformation station for the spacecraft

Rxke · 2004-02-05 13:38:28

Lockheed-Martin's [http://www.ast.lmco.com/cev/gallery.html]view

(Seen some of those before, though...)

Ad Astra · 2004-02-05 15:12:30

Just a rehash of their OSP stuff, without any elaboration about how they plan to put it on the moon. I don't think Lockheed's "lifting capsule" is going to be light enough to be used in the CEV system, and they'll have to return to their hemispherical capsule design.

RobS · 2004-02-05 15:20:02

Pictures of the Orbital Spaceplane, renamed as the CEV, I think. I like them, but I'm not sure they represent anything likely to happen.

-- RobS

Rxke · 2004-02-05 15:21:58

yeah, right! I think they just got jealous of the rival and dusted off their old plans... Sheesh...

Ad Astra · 2004-02-05 19:19:31

If CEV and the moon-Mars intiative are to work, we need to have more contractors proposing designs so we can avoid getting stuck in all the old paradigms. Northrop-Grumman is still left; they designed and built the LEM in the 60's (as Grumman.) Orbital Sciences is no slouch, either--their ideas are what launched the original OSP idea.

More competition equals better designs, better prices, and better science.

John Creighton · 2004-02-06 08:23:44

From the pictures the crew part of the CEV looks small compared to the shuttle. Is there enough space in there for a mission to mars?

RobS · 2004-02-06 13:42:07

No, it was way too small for Mars. But the Boeing capsule was too small as well. Their diagrams stuck a transhab (an inflatable habitat) onto the Mars vehicle to provide housing. The CEV presumably would be to return the crew safely to Earth. The rest of the vehicle would either burn up in the atmosphere or would fly off into space. Maybe if there was enough fuel it could be slowed into a high earth orbit.

Ad Astra · 2004-02-08 21:43:04

Here is the tentative [http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/news/c … v02044.xml]plan for developing the CEV. Frankly, I'm confused why we'd need a separate prototype and Block I unmanned CEV. The prototype isn't necessary when the Block I could be flown to test all the CEV systems. Good word, NASA. Re-inventing Apollo shouldn't be this difficult. It took Apollo 2, 3, 4, and 6 to man-rate the capsule and test its systems, plus several Little Joe II launches to test the abort rockets. Six years of testing is excessive.

On the plus side, NASA will make a decision in 2008-9 whether to develop an SDV.

Rxke · 2004-02-08 23:22:57

from the article:

NASA plans to decide whether it will need a new Saturn V-class heavy-lift rocket to boost the CEV in 2008-2009. Such a rocket could be derived from the space shuttle's launch stack, according to NASA.

RobS · 2004-02-09 08:23:55

We don't know what "Block 1" and "Block 2" means. I suppose Block 1 is the version that flies to ISS and Block 2, to the moon. It may be a Block 3 would be needed for Mars; it would need to accommodate astronauts for six months instead of weeks (assuming it is used in the lunar surface as well).

-- RobS

Bill White · 2004-02-09 08:46:39

We don't know what "Block 1" and "Block 2" means. I suppose Block 1 is the version that flies to ISS and Block 2, to the moon. It may be a Block 3 would be needed for Mars; it would need to accommodate astronauts for six months instead of weeks (assuming it is used in the lunar surface as well).
-- RobS

The AviationNow article says this:

The CEV will be produced three development blocks: prototype test vehicles, an unmanned Block 1 configuration, and a manned Block II version. Formulation concept studies will take place in FY '04, with preliminary design in FY '05 and FY '06, according to NASA.
* * *
The first prototype flight of the CEV will take place in 2008, with an unmanned Block 1 demo flight in 2011, and a Block II demo flight in 2013. The CEV is to be carrying humans to low-Earth orbit by 2014, and is scheduled to take astronauts on a return to the moon no later than 2020

First human flight to LEO in 2014.

Rxke · 2004-02-09 09:04:59

First human flight to LEO in 2014.

Sigh... All that talk about the older generation that left with all the (Apollo) knowledge must be true, then...

10 years for a country that's supposed to be on top of the manned space-flight ladder, technology-wise? Sad news indeed....

clark · 2004-02-09 09:05:20

Well, I question the source of the information as to the development plan for the CEV. Where is their information originating from? I looked through the NASA budget, and I didn't see anything related to this, so I'm just wondering (did I miss it?).

Bill White · 2004-02-09 09:29:31

Well, I question the source of the information as to the development plan for the CEV. Where is their information originating from? I looked through the NASA budget, and I didn't see anything related to this, so I'm just wondering (did I miss it?).

I hope you are right and Aviation Week is wrong.

Their scenario, however, does fit with the idea that CEV development is really being done to purchase additional Delta IV launches to spread the cost between NASA and DoD. Flying uncrewed prototype CEV in 2008 - 2011 adds launches without spending much on CEV development before the STS cancellation money starts flowing.

I have NO problem with buying Delta IV for NASA so the Air Force gets a cost break. Seems like a good idea.

Yet if CEV development runs late, come January 2009 the new President will have an increasingly aged shuttle with no new system expected for another 4 to 6 years. If bi-partisan support for space exploration fails to materialize, then in 2009 either the whole thing collapses or the next President will need to ask Congress for even more funding.

A "welcome to the White House" present.

clark · 2004-02-09 09:32:16

Ahhh... that's much better...

Here is a link to something that will soothe what ails you.

[http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/55584main_visio … hi-res.pdf]The Vision for Space Exploration - Feb. 2004 (PDF)

If you take the time, turn your attention to pages 3 and 4 of the PDF. Great big timeline for space exploration is indicated here. All in pretty colors.

What you will notice is that a 'decision for Human missions' is identified for the CEV development program as early as 2009, then in 2011, then in 2013.

It also states, on page 9, that starting in 2011, NASA will launch the first in a new series of human precursor missions to Mars!

Go to page 15 of the PDF for more info on the CEV and a possible SDV later (they keep mentioning the Shuttle infrastructure)

I still have yet to find any mention of this "Block I, Block II" CEV development...

Ad Astra · 2004-02-10 22:11:00

[=http://www.e4engineering.com/item.asp?id=51184&type=news]Analysis of Boeing Crew Exploration System

A few interesting points in the article, like the open-cockpit lander and how they rejected fuel cells after Apollo 13. I'm a bit wary about an open cockpit lander, and I'd like to give the crew some added layer of protection.

Earlier in this thread, somebody commented that Boeing's Mars vehicle used chemical propulsion, whereas I speculated that it was an NTR. Apparently, the Feb. 2 issue of Aviation Week also believes that the vehcile is an NTR.

infocat13 · 2004-02-24 20:59:37

I would like to add the url for the nasa slep conference

[http://www.slepsummit.com/]http://www.slepsummit.com/

look at the "strategy" url page 18 the shuttle folks are shuttle-C dreaming as well.

[http://www.slepsummit.com/IIStrategy.pdf]http://www.slepsummit.com/IIStrategy.pdf

early shuttle-C studies showed that this would be an expensive proposition you would be keeping the shuttle infrastruture and work force BUT they assumed the shuttle it self would be flying as well.and what off the ssme?can we do the atlas and delta heavy lift and pay for cev and shuttle c at the same time after the shuttle is retired?
of cousre these early shuttle -C studies included in there infrastruture the vehicle assembly buildings ect these will need refurbishment you would think even without the shuttle-C ?

Lars_J · 2004-02-26 09:54:13

Lockheed Martin CEV update:

LM has posted some new images to their [http://www.ast.lmco.com/cev/gallery.html]CEV gallery, and it looks like they have abandoned their lifting body/spaceplane for a capsule design: (newer images on top, older design in bottom)

- [http://www.ast.lmco.com/cev/images/news … EV_low.jpg]CEV size comparison with Shuttle
- [http://www.ast.lmco.com/cev/images/news … ng_low.jpg]CEV docking with ISS
- [http://www.ast.lmco.com/cev/images/news … rofile.jpg]CEV mission profile

I suppose they got some sense knocked into them - If the CEV is intended to go beyond LEO, a lifting body or spaceplane makes no sense.

Ad Astra · 2004-02-27 17:30:17

[=http://www.washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20040227-105754-2873r.htm]Article about future heavy-lift rockets

Yes, NASA is studying shuttle-derived heavy lifters, with a decision to come soon. Among the possible options are unmanned orbiters, five-segment solids, and an SSME pod that will splash down in the ocean.

Ad Astra · 2004-03-01 16:38:42

http://www.washingtontimes.com/upi-brea … 6r.htm]The developing roadmap to space

Bill White · 2004-03-01 16:54:28

[http://www.washingtontimes.com/upi-brea … -7936r.htm]The developing roadmap to space

Is this article based on [http://www1.nasa.gov/pdf/55583main_visi … ration.pdf]this NASA document?

Edit: - spacedaily links a new pdf dated March 2nd

Later I will compare [http://www.spacedaily.com/news/nasa-pla … 1-2004.pdf]this document with the one cited above.

From the 2nd document (page 5 of the pdf)

2008 - 1st CEV test flight (atmospheric drop test?)
2011 - 1st unmanned CEV launch
2014 - 1st crewed CEV flight
2015 to 2020 - 1st return to the Moon

Also designations of "Block 1" and "Block 2" are found on various diagrams. Don;t know yet what those may be.

Bill White · 2004-03-30 17:06:55

Quick and dirty CEV - stick an X-38 on an EELV. Less than $500 million in development costs and away we go.

Add an Orbital Recovery style manuevering unit for last mile guidance to dock at small transfer station deployed at 28 degrees. This station is 1 TRansHab and 1 service module and a multi-port docking module.

Design and launch a large lunar exploration vessel that is intended to remain in LEO after launch. It docks at the small transfer station to allow crew transfer between X-38 and the exploration vessel.

Go explore, then return to the transfer station for landing in the X-38. The exploration vessel remains in LEO for future use.

Use CEV money to design a re-useable vessel to travel from LEO to where-ever and use a disposable X-38 on a EELV to lift 6 crew to LEO.

= = =

Add a Euro-style "dump box" to recover the Orbital Recovery style manuevering unit for refurbuishment and re-use. Perhaps the X-38 could be refurbished as well.

A SeaLaunch Zenit can lift an X-38 as well, for travel to a space hotel. We don;t even need the larger upper stage Zenit, the smaller cheaper Zenit 2 can carry X-38 mated to an [http://www.skyrocket.de/space/index_fra … ss-ors.htm]Orbital Recovery module for last mile guidance.

clark · 2004-03-31 15:06:47

SDV looks to be a dead end street...

[http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGA6DY4VHSD.html]http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGA6DY4VHSD.html

Lockheed Martin Announces Layoffs at NASA Production Plant in New Orleans
The Associated Press
Published: Mar 31, 2004

NEW ORLEANS (AP) - Lockheed Martin cut 65 jobs at a NASA plant Wednesday, two months after President Bush announced a plan to abandon the space shuttle program by the end of the decade.
The Michoud Assembly Facility in New Orleans, which employs about 1,500 workers, produces external fuel tanks used to get shuttles into orbit.
Lockheed Martin said the fuel tanks will become obsolete under Bush's plan to scrap the shuttle program in favor of building a space station on the moon and sending astronauts to Mars.

Bill White · 2004-03-31 15:22:40

SDV looks to be a dead end street...
[http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGA6DY4VHSD.html]http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGA6DY4VHSD.html
Lockheed Martin Announces Layoffs at NASA Production Plant in New Orleans
The Associated Press
Published: Mar 31, 2004
NEW ORLEANS (AP) - Lockheed Martin cut 65 jobs at a NASA plant Wednesday, two months after President Bush announced a plan to abandon the space shuttle program by the end of the decade.
The Michoud Assembly Facility in New Orleans, which employs about 1,500 workers, produces external fuel tanks used to get shuttles into orbit.
Lockheed Martin said the fuel tanks will become obsolete under Bush's plan to scrap the shuttle program in favor of building a space station on the moon and sending astronauts to Mars.

Or is Lockmart sending a message. . .

What does the entire press release say? Was it worded to scare the heck out of the shuttle work force in Florida?

Can you say electoral votes?

= = =

Shuttle derived might be a dandy platform in the LA Senate race.

clark · 2004-03-31 15:33:17

Take a look at this pdf file guys:

[http://rasc.larc.nasa.gov/rasc_new/foru … ration.pdf]http://rasc.larc.nasa.gov/rasc_new/foru … ration.pdf

Interesting info related to possible CEV lunar architecture... shouldn't be missed if you follow this stuff.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#76 2004-02-05 13:38:28

Re: Post central for information on CEV - iformation station for the spacecraft

#77 2004-02-05 15:12:30

Re: Post central for information on CEV - iformation station for the spacecraft

#78 2004-02-05 15:20:02

Re: Post central for information on CEV - iformation station for the spacecraft

#79 2004-02-05 15:21:58

Re: Post central for information on CEV - iformation station for the spacecraft

#80 2004-02-05 19:19:31

Re: Post central for information on CEV - iformation station for the spacecraft

#81 2004-02-06 08:23:44

Re: Post central for information on CEV - iformation station for the spacecraft

#82 2004-02-06 13:42:07

Re: Post central for information on CEV - iformation station for the spacecraft

#83 2004-02-08 21:43:04

Re: Post central for information on CEV - iformation station for the spacecraft

#84 2004-02-08 23:22:57

Re: Post central for information on CEV - iformation station for the spacecraft

#85 2004-02-09 08:23:55

Re: Post central for information on CEV - iformation station for the spacecraft

#86 2004-02-09 08:46:39

Re: Post central for information on CEV - iformation station for the spacecraft

#87 2004-02-09 09:04:59

Re: Post central for information on CEV - iformation station for the spacecraft

#88 2004-02-09 09:05:20

Re: Post central for information on CEV - iformation station for the spacecraft

#89 2004-02-09 09:29:31

Re: Post central for information on CEV - iformation station for the spacecraft

#90 2004-02-09 09:32:16

Re: Post central for information on CEV - iformation station for the spacecraft

#91 2004-02-10 22:11:00

Re: Post central for information on CEV - iformation station for the spacecraft

#92 2004-02-24 20:59:37

Re: Post central for information on CEV - iformation station for the spacecraft

#93 2004-02-26 09:54:13

Re: Post central for information on CEV - iformation station for the spacecraft

#94 2004-02-27 17:30:17

Re: Post central for information on CEV - iformation station for the spacecraft

#95 2004-03-01 16:38:42

Re: Post central for information on CEV - iformation station for the spacecraft

#96 2004-03-01 16:54:28

Re: Post central for information on CEV - iformation station for the spacecraft

#97 2004-03-30 17:06:55

Re: Post central for information on CEV - iformation station for the spacecraft

#98 2004-03-31 15:06:47

Re: Post central for information on CEV - iformation station for the spacecraft

#99 2004-03-31 15:22:40

Re: Post central for information on CEV - iformation station for the spacecraft

#100 2004-03-31 15:33:17

Re: Post central for information on CEV - iformation station for the spacecraft

Board footer