Space fairing Nations - The ever changing view

SpaceNut · 2004-11-23 12:10:14

NASA officials held an international workshop last week in Washington D.C., with representatives from China, the European Union, and 17 other countries to consider opportunities and possible collaborations in forthcoming missions that are a part of the U.S. Vision for Space Exploration.

SpaceNut · 2004-11-30 06:22:57

Setting the stage for future research with ultra-high-speed aircraft, the Air Force is studying two potential hypersonic flight corridors leading from Edwards Air Force Base to Nevada and Utah.

"Edwards AFB has historically been selected as a primary testing site for new aircraft and space vehicles because of the remote surroundings and viable landing options," according to the draft study. "The hard flat surface of the Rogers Dry Lakebeds and hard surface runways has proven ideal for normal aircraft landings. The open terrain and lack of vertical features has contributed to the safe recovery of many test vehicles that would not have been possible in a less remote area."

The Defense Department is interested in hypersonic technology to power aircraft and missiles. NASA is interested in the technology for launching spacecraft.

Martian Republic · 2004-12-01 00:39:13

A new space shuttle? Why? Where do you want to fly it to?
The regular scramjets as demonstrated on the X-43 don't have a prayer of reaching orbital velocity, and the USAF knew this back in the X-30 project days. It will require a huge investment to develop the next-next step, a regenerative Scramjet. Such an engine could get pretty close to orbital velocity, but it isn't nessesarry for the Pentagon's hypersonic bomber, and developing it would cost billions of dollars most likly. More basic research needs to be done on fuel additives as well.
It probobly wouldn't cost less then building a TSTO "Shuttle-II," more basic research needs to be done.

If we intend to put several thousand people in space over the twenty to thirty years, then a next generation shuttle is the only way to go. But, if we only intend to put fifty or sixty people over the next twenty to thirty, then the rockets are the way to go. So I suppose that it all depends on how aggressive we intend to be that should determine how aggressive we should be on whether we should be building a new shuttle or not.

Larry,

SpaceNut · 2004-12-01 06:01:40

Kind of the chicken and the egg problem.
If we have no where to go then we have no need to make the means to get there.

Build it and they will come if the cost is low enough. As to getting large quantities of people to say a LEO Base size ISS. Convert the shuttles to do the job. I am sure you could get 100 seats easily in the cargo bay at over 1 million a pop but less than 20 and it would pay for every flight if filled...

SpaceNut · 2005-01-12 05:23:32

Ottawa will have to increase space agency budget for Mars missions: Marc Garneau

The federal government will have to increase the Canadian Space Agency's budget if it wants Canada to be part of future missions to Mars or the moon. Canada is involved in discussions with NASA to find out how it can contribute to a Mars mission. But he said the agency's annual $300-million budget would have to be increased in order to get Canada involved.

Canada's strengths are robotics, mining technology, atmospheric technology and communications.
The future of the space station would be discussed at a Jan. 26 meeting in Montreal with the heads of the world's space agencies.
But he added the space station program isn't in jeopardy.
"All of the partners have agreed that they will support their undertakings until at least 2016."

Martian Republic · 2005-01-12 11:27:37

Kind of the chicken and the egg problem.
If we have no where to go then we have no need to make the means to get there.
Build it and they will come if the cost is low enough. As to getting large quantities of people to say a LEO Base size ISS. Convert the shuttles to do the job. I am sure you could get 100 seats easily in the cargo bay at over 1 million a pop but less than 20 and it would pay for every flight if filled...

I doubt that you could make the present shuttle into a hundred passenger shuttle even it we took out the cargo bay and put seats all the way across. But, even if we could, the current shuttle cost 500 to 600 hundred million dollars per launch and to buy even one new shuttle would cost over two billion dollars to build. So we are looking at five to six million dollars. Then it takes six months to get the shuttle ready for the next launch. The current shuttle is just a little better than a research vehicle or laboratory experiment, but it will never serve as a commercial style jet liner for people on the level of thousand's of people. At any rate it would be in the tens of billion if not hundreds of billion of dollars to do it with the present shuttle. We also would need special ground support like the Kennedy space center and we would not be able to use a regular air port. It will need too much ground support to keep it flying like a new tank, retrofit those solid buster. But, it most likely that we would only be able to get thirty or forty people within the current configuration of this shuttle, because of life supports and other needed items to reengineer the current shuttle to act like a regular passenger shuttle instead of dual passenger cargo shuttle. Also since we would need more than one passenger shuttle of maybe four or so, we would be sending eight billion dollars to get those shuttles.

That said, if we are going to spend eight billion dollars for shuttles, then let spend another two to four billion dollars and design a whole new group of shuttle that cost 1/10 to operate as the current shuttle cost. Let develop scram jet/rocket piloted assisted lower busters so we don't have to throw half our space ship away every time we do a launch. Then the 100% percent rocket part of our two piece shuttle can go the rest of the way into space. The lower part of our new shuttle we could have ready in maybe two or three days and ready to go again. It would not need any special equipment or large ground support to assemble it for launch like the current shuttle has to have. The upper part of our shuttle that we send into space we would probably be able to service it and get it ready for it next trip in maybe a two to four week time frame so we would have a faster turn around time. The fact that we would have a smaller pit crew and that we are not throwing away half our space craft would decrease the cost of our new space shuttle. The way that our new space shuttle goes into space is also more efficient too. So it this is so, it would drop our 500 to 600 million launch to 50 to 60 million dollar launch once our new shuttle have been built that could do basically the same thing. It won't take very many launches for us to decide that we wanted those new shuttle vs trying to revamp those old shuttle and trying to make them work for us.

The current shuttle is a transitional shuttle and will never morph into a 747 air craft type shuttle.
The current shuttle is basically just a cross between rockets and a full blow reusable shuttle. It not fully a rocket and it not fully a shuttle either. For that reason the current shuttle is too expensive if we only want to send a few people into space and it too expensive if we want to send a lot of people into space. It has the benefit of neither system, but hold out the promise on both sides of trying to develop more cost effective way of getting into space. But, the current shuttle has serve it purpose and now it time to continue this progress of going from rockets to a more workable shuttle that will both reduce the cost and increase the number of people that can go into space. To do that, we need a new shuttle with new technological principle that have been learned over the last twenty years or so and new principle that we will learn by developing these scram jets and other things that we will learn when we build this new shuttle. It will be a two piece shuttle with present technology. We will figure that it will last twenty to thirty years and in the mean time we will be planning on engineering and building a third generation of shuttles after that which will be one piece shuttles. At that point we will have shuttle that are more like jet liners that go up and down and do what ever they need to do to do there job of moving people around.

The other choice is to back down from this line of thought and just go right back to rockets because there cheaper. If you look at the dollar amount, yes there cheaper. If you look at the industries that were not created, technologies that were not developed, the wealth that was not created, the price per ticket for individuals to go into space, the rocket in the long run are more expensive and retard development of space and stop a full blown colonization of space.

Larry,

SpaceNut · 2005-01-12 11:51:47

Lets sort of recap, 500 to 600 million launch fee, roughly 8 billion for 3 or 4 to be serviced for a single launch each and they can carry maybe 50 with the needed life support equipment. Lets call it an even 10 billion for a years sum and the total passenger count of 200 grand total. That means each would need to pay $$$$ 50,000,000 ea. if I did my math correct. We thought taking a ride on a soyuz was expensive at 10 million but I wonder if the numbers are all that, if it were done the right way and with a much higher head count? ???

The problem of sending large quantities of people into space is not all that bad with a rocket but the problem arises when its time to all come home.

Martian Republic · 2005-01-12 14:43:36

Lets sort of recap, 500 to 600 million launch fee, roughly 8 billion for 3 or 4 to be serviced for a single launch each and they can carry maybe 50 with the needed life support equipment. Lets call it an even 10 billion for a years sum and the total passenger count of 200 grand total. That means each would need to pay $$$$ 50,000,000 ea. if I did my math correct. We thought taking a ride on a soyuz was expensive at 10 million but I wonder if the numbers are all that, if it were done the right way and with a much higher head count? ???
The problem of sending large quantities of people into space is not all that bad with a rocket but the problem arises when its time to all come home.

Even assuming that those number are right, which I don't necessarily agree with those number, because there are several thinks that could affect those numbers, but just for the sake of the argument we will go with those numbers.

Beside the actual cost of sending up a thousand people into space you also has to consider the launch vehicle that you intend to use. For example 1000/3=334 soyuz that have to be launched to get one thousand people into space or that almost 29 launches a month. If we are using the current configuration of shuttles depending if we are using the 100 or 50 person shuttle it will be either ten to twenty launches a year or almost one to two launches a month to send a thousand people into space. Now if it was going to be for tourist, the shuttle would beat the soyuz out hand down, because one out of every third person is a pilot and only one out of 50 or one out of 25 is a pilot or co-pilot.

So we are not just worried about the price either, although we do look at the price tage.

Larry,

SpaceNut · 2005-01-25 06:25:43

SKY'S THE LIMIT: Down, not out After the disasterous explosion, Japan's space development industry is counting on a revamped H-2A rocket series to restore its reputation.

Meanwhile, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd. and Japan's other key aerospace manufacturers will be glad to see the H-2A back in business. They hope it will signal moves to transfer the nation's commercial rocket projects to private enterprises.

SpaceNut · 2005-01-25 10:20:10

India's lunar mission in 2007: ISRO

Indian Space Research Organisation's unmanned lunar mission will be launched in 2007 as scheduled, ISRO chairman P Madhavan Nair said in Chennai on Tuesday.

SpaceNut · 2005-03-01 06:30:54

Well with the sucessful launch of Japan's H-2A rocket plans are surfacing for this nations industry to think of manned flight and of possibly the moon by 2025.

Japan Mulls Plan to Establish Lunar Base

JAXA now has a yearly budget of about $2 billion — compared with NASA's $16.2 billion. This seems like a long up hill battle for funding IMO.

JAXA hopes to develop a robot to conduct probes on the moon by 2010, then begin constructing a solar-powered manned research base on the moon and design a reusable manned space vessel like the U.S. space shuttle by 2025.
Officials at Japan's space agency, JAXA, confirmed the mission was under consideration, but said the plan is still being fleshed out and has yet to be formally accepted. A report outlining the plan is expected to be submitted to the government later this month or in early April.

Article also mentions china's intention of the same for manned moon missions of the future.

SpaceNut · 2005-03-08 14:01:49

Soon the changing face of space will include China. Media Rollout For Shenzhou 6 China's second manned space launch which is expected within the next nine months.

The Long March 2F launch vehicle and the Shenzhou 6 spacecraft it will carry are both apparently in their final stages of preparation.

Grypd · 2005-03-08 17:01:45

Well good luck to China and there taikonauts

God speed

SpaceNut · 2005-03-11 11:19:04

It is shaping up into a new space race with India, China and a few other nations attempting. The most recent entry is South Korea's KSLV-I rocket. This is an improved version of Angara, a next-generation launcher now being developed by the Moscow-based Khrunichev enterprise.

I love the picture at the bottom of the page of a 630 year old gunpowder-based weapon.

Countdown Begins for Launch of South Korea’s Space Rocket

SpaceNut · 2005-03-16 09:28:04

The Dart program has been mentioned before in this thresd so here is an update.
Steering system work delays Minotaur rocket launch

Yang Liwei Rocket · 2005-03-22 05:11:07

ESA and Indians may be looking at joint lunar efforts

seems like a good idea

SpaceNut · 2005-03-25 12:14:56

For lack of not having a china space thread:
Moon rover development contract in hot bidding

The Chinese government has also announced its plan to launch a satellite to orbit the moon by 2007 as part of China's three-stage lunar project. Moreover, the country plans to land an unmanned rover on the Moon for collecting Lunar soil samples around the year 2020.

Go china..

SpaceNut · 2005-03-30 12:01:02

NASA Announces DART Launch Date of April 15 from Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif.

DART is a flight demonstrator that provides a key step in establishing autonomous rendezvous capabilities for the U.S. space program. DART will rendezvous with the Multiple Paths, Beyond-Line-of-Site Communications (MUBLCOM) satellite.
It will perform several close proximity operations, such as moving toward and away from the satellite using navigation data provided by onboard sensors.
DART is the first demonstration program selected by NASA's Exploration Systems Mission Directorate to develop technologies for the Vision for Space Exploration

SpaceNut · 2005-04-05 07:56:02

India Hires American Geologist For Moon Mapping Mission

An American geologist, selected by the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) as an investigator for Chandrayaan-I, has said she is excited and honoured to be part of the historic lunar mission, which aims to "unlock the mysteries" of the moon.
geologist Carle Pieters told leading Indian news group, the Hindustan Times, in an exclusive interview: "I feel honoured that the project, funded by NASA, has been selected by the ISRO. I'm really excited to work on this ambitious project."

SpaceNut · 2005-04-05 12:22:06

Vulcain 2 engine now in full production designed for the new Ariane 5 ECA and Ariane 5 ES ATV launchers.

SpaceNut · 2005-04-12 07:46:13

China is slowly inching its way towards being a space fairing nation with its next manned flight coming soon.

Now on the drawing boards are design to turn it into a cargo vehicle as well much like the Russian's Progress as indicated in this article.

Progress With Shenzhou

Palomar · 2005-04-15 10:03:38

The Dart program has been mentioned before in this thresd so here is an update.
http://www.spaceflightnow.com/news/n0503/15minotaur/] Steering system work delays Minotaur rocket launch

*Searched and found at least 2 threads DART has been discussed in, so will post this here (seems the most appropriate thread):

http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/sf … tml]Launch is "GO" for DART

I also saw SpaceNut's post of March 30 (hi SpaceNut!).

If successful, DART will mark the first autonomous rendezvous conducted without any human involvement in U.S. space program history.
"DART is totally autonomous. There is no ability for human intervention," Snoddy said. "Of course systems of the future will want human intervention but DART was not designed to do that just to show that we could put all of these events together is a 24-hour timeline."
The 800-pound, 6-foot DART spacecraft uses its futuristic "brain" and "eye" to smartly chase down the target satellite and maneuver within feet of the object.
"DART has the ability to fire lasers, calculate precise distances down to millimeters to bring two objects together in space. Currently we don't have the technology to do that with a high degree of autonomy and accuracy, and six degrees of freedom so that we can know the X, Y and Z coordinates and be able to have vehicles with pitch, yaw and roll and bring those together with precise accuracy in space."
NASA developed the DART mission to test autopilot capabilities for the now-cancelled Orbital Space Plane project. But the technology is considered valuable for future human spacecraft, cargo-carrying resupply ships and satellite servicing concepts.
"DART is unique relative to the president's vision of going back to the moon and to Mars. We are going to have to put things together in space whether they be for cargo or crews," Snoddy said.

The web page I linked to will be constantly updating. They say the Pegasus countdown lasts four hours?? Hmmmmm.

Good luck.

--Cindy

SpaceNut · 2005-04-15 11:09:12

This was one of those programs that was not cancelled right away when the vision was first announced. It has been a long wait though to finally see if it will work as planned thou.

Palomar · 2005-04-17 07:25:58

http://www.spaceflightnow.com/pegasus/dart/]DART suffers "crippling flaw"

*Runs out of fuel a mere 300 feet from its target. :-\

Good grief.

DART placed itself in the retirement phase before completing all planned proximity operations, ending the mission prematurely.

(The above quote from the spacedaily.com article)

--Cindy

GCNRevenger · 2005-04-17 08:22:40

It had to ride on a Pegasus, which probobly mandated small fuel reserves. Oh well, it seems to work.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#101 2004-11-23 12:10:14

Re: Space fairing Nations - The ever changing view

#102 2004-11-30 06:22:57

Re: Space fairing Nations - The ever changing view

#103 2004-12-01 00:39:13

Re: Space fairing Nations - The ever changing view

#104 2004-12-01 06:01:40

Re: Space fairing Nations - The ever changing view

#105 2005-01-12 05:23:32

Re: Space fairing Nations - The ever changing view

#106 2005-01-12 11:27:37

Re: Space fairing Nations - The ever changing view

#107 2005-01-12 11:51:47

Re: Space fairing Nations - The ever changing view

#108 2005-01-12 14:43:36

Re: Space fairing Nations - The ever changing view

#109 2005-01-25 06:25:43

Re: Space fairing Nations - The ever changing view

#110 2005-01-25 10:20:10

Re: Space fairing Nations - The ever changing view

#111 2005-03-01 06:30:54

Re: Space fairing Nations - The ever changing view

#112 2005-03-08 14:01:49

Re: Space fairing Nations - The ever changing view

#113 2005-03-08 17:01:45

Re: Space fairing Nations - The ever changing view

#114 2005-03-11 11:19:04

Re: Space fairing Nations - The ever changing view

#115 2005-03-16 09:28:04

Re: Space fairing Nations - The ever changing view

#116 2005-03-22 05:11:07

Re: Space fairing Nations - The ever changing view

#117 2005-03-25 12:14:56

Re: Space fairing Nations - The ever changing view

#118 2005-03-30 12:01:02

Re: Space fairing Nations - The ever changing view

#119 2005-04-05 07:56:02

Re: Space fairing Nations - The ever changing view

#120 2005-04-05 12:22:06

Re: Space fairing Nations - The ever changing view

#121 2005-04-12 07:46:13

Re: Space fairing Nations - The ever changing view

#122 2005-04-15 10:03:38

Re: Space fairing Nations - The ever changing view

#123 2005-04-15 11:09:12

Re: Space fairing Nations - The ever changing view

#124 2005-04-17 07:25:58

Re: Space fairing Nations - The ever changing view

#125 2005-04-17 08:22:40

Re: Space fairing Nations - The ever changing view

Board footer