Topic: Mars by shuttle (Read 1351 times)

Nemesis · « **on:** January 07, 2009, 06:40:33 pm »

Quote

• Fly two Space Shuttle orbiters into earth orbit.

• Rendezvous and connect the two orbiters together -- top to top -- by a truss.

• The ends of the truss are anchored to the bases of the orbiters' payload bays.

• At the center of the truss, dock a sufficiently sized propulsion stage.

• Install a "crew-transfer conduit" -- a pressurized, accordion-style inflatable system that connects the airlock hatches of the two orbiters so that the crew could freely move between the two spacecrafts.

• Once the propulsion stage has accelerated this entire system on its trek to Mars, the truss is detached from the two orbiters and the truss-propulsion assembly is jettisoned.

• The two orbiters then separate to a distance of a few hundred feet, but remain connected -- top to top -- by a tether cable that is spooled out.

• During the separation, the accordion-style inflatable crew-transfer conduit equally elongates.

• Once the orbiters are at their maximum fixed distance apart, they would simultaneously fire their reaction control systems to set the pair into an elegant pirouette -- creating a comfortable level of artificial gravity for the crew's voyage to the red planet.

Vipre · « **Reply #1 on:** January 07, 2009, 06:53:39 pm »

Be interesting to see but sounds like it has "space disaster" written all over it.

Wraith 413 · « **Reply #2 on:** January 07, 2009, 07:27:03 pm »

Not to mention that the shuttles would run out of power well before they arrived at Mars, much less make it back. And they couldn't carry enough food and water either.

Tus-XC · « **Reply #3 on:** January 07, 2009, 07:49:39 pm »

Quote from: Wraith 413 on January 07, 2009, 07:27:03 pm

Not to mention that the shuttles would run out of power well before they arrived at Mars, much less make it back. And they couldn't carry enough food and water either.

as they are currently configured yes, but solar power and/or nuclear power could solve that problem

Lieutenant_Q · « **Reply #4 on:** January 08, 2009, 12:22:19 am »

Would have to be Nuclear, and that in of itself will prevent it from ever being done. The greenie whackos will never allow something like that done by NASA.

The problem with Solar power is the further you get from the sun, the less you get. And say nothing about what happens when the Orbiter is behind Mars.

Even the current Constellation program is flawed in this manner, without a stable, self-generating power source, you run the risk of stranding astronauts out there. Not a risk that bureaucrats are ever willing to take.

Tus-XC · « **Reply #5 on:** January 08, 2009, 02:49:21 am »

we've done it before, and actually somewhat recently, sending nuke powered space craft.

Nemesis · « **Reply #6 on:** January 08, 2009, 05:43:26 am »

Its a novel idea. I don't expect it to be done but it did get me thinking.

Another method might be to use a main engine taken from the shuttle and attach it to the end of an external fuel tank. Mount 2 other tanks in line on top of the first one. The center one could be full of supplies and the forward one converted to a habitat. Then rotate the whole system end over end while coasting for simulated gravity. A pair of landers could be attached externally at opposite sides of the center of gravity.

The conversion of the two tanks to storage and living quarters could be done in space but they were originally designed so that type of conversion could be done. One of the original design options for the external tank was to carry it to orbit and use them as modules in a space station so it should be possible unless design changes blocked that option.

Just a thought.

Age · « **Reply #7 on:** January 10, 2009, 07:00:55 pm »

It would be tight sqeeze that is for sure for 2 yrs.

News: