Return To The Moon, Everything Old is New again Options

[Guest_spaceffm_*]

By the way, i always wanted to see the CEV Concept compared to Apollo.
Unfortunately there was no such diagram in the www.
So i had to make one by myself and would like to show it to you as well.

So based on the 5.5m diameter and moon config compared to the 3.9m diameter of the apollo caspule i made this little diagram:

CEV with lunar lander ( without transfer module ) and on the right side apollo with their moon Lander. In between a typical human in a space suit...

[David]

Here's a real low cost way to land!  Why have structural landing legs when you have your own? 

Might not be such a bad approach to landing on a small asteroid -- say, Itokawa-sized. Not to knock Hayabusa at all, but I don't know what it's doing that couldn't be done as well or better by a manned mission. (Yes, I know we're supposed to say that the other way around. )

[ljk4-1]

NASA Seeks Innovative Ideas for Revolutionary Concepts

KurzweilAI.net Dec. 19, 2005

*************************

The NASA Institute for Advanced
Concepts is seeking revolutionary
ideas to advance the Vision for
Space Exploration.

Interested parties from outside the agency are
invited to submit 2006 Phase 1 proposals by
February 13, 2006.

The focus for solicitations is on
revolutionary, advanced concepts for
architectures and systems that meet NASA...

http://www.kurzweilai.net/email/newsRedire...sID=5125&m=7610

[Bob Shaw]

Some grabs from the ESAS Report - there's a good article on NASA Watch!

Bob Shaw

Attached thumbnail(s)

 

[nprev]

Is the CEV intended to splash down, or is a (far more economical!) terrestrial landing capability envisioned, perhaps augmented by an inflatable landing skirt...I don't want to say "airbags"...

[dvandorn]

Go ahead, say "airbags" -- NASA does. The CEV is designed to use a jettisonable, replaceable ablative heat shield that gets discarded after entry. The base then fills up with airbags, and the whole thing bumps down on land.

They're not exactly the same kind of airbags used on Pathfinder and the MERs, though. It's not a "bounce 'til you stop" landing. These airbags deflate as they strike the ground, both attenuating the landing shock and settling the CEV solidly onto the ground. But yes, NASA calls them airbags.

The CEV will also be able to land on water, the airbag cushion will be watertight. And the airbags will serve as a flotation collar in the case of a water landing. But it's designed for a nominal land landing.

-the other Doug

[ljk4-1]

Go ahead, say "airbags" -- NASA does.  The CEV is designed to use a jettisonable, replaceable ablative heat shield that gets discarded after entry.  The base then fills up with airbags, and the whole thing bumps down on land.

They're not exactly the same kind of airbags used on Pathfinder and the MERs, though.  It's not a "bounce 'til you stop" landing.  These airbags deflate as they strike the ground, both attenuating the landing shock and settling the CEV solidly onto the ground.  But yes, NASA calls them airbags.

The CEV will also be able to land on water, the airbag cushion will be watertight.  And the airbags will serve as a flotation collar in the case of a water landing.  But it's designed for a nominal land landing.

-the other Doug

You mean... no more aircraft carriers, no more white helicopters with frogmen leaping into the water while astronauts emerge from the capsule and roll into rubber liferafts while wearing gray decontamination suits?

Once we were men.

[edstrick]

FYI:
http://www.nasawatch.com/archives/2005/12/..._repo.html#more
ESAS Final Report - First Installment
Executive Summary (Introduction): NASA Exploration Systems Architecture Study Final Report (DRAFT) October 2005, NASA HQ

Executive Summary (CEV): NASA Exploration Systems Architecture Study Final Report (DRAFT) October 2005, NASA HQ

Keith Cowing has been busy, and finally got his hands on the report.

" Editor's note: 793 pages to wade through - all quite interesting. More to follow -- after Christmas. At first glance, you can tell that they really put a lot of thought into this report - the schematics (below) of a lunar outpost build-up plan and the LSAM trade studies are good examples. Of course as the budget "sand" chart (below) shows, this is not going to be cheap."

If you don't regularly check NASA Watch, and SpaceRef, tsk. tsk. tsk.

http://www.spaceref.com/news/press.html

[David]

You mean... no more aircraft carriers, no more white helicopters with frogmen leaping into the water while astronauts emerge from the capsule and roll into rubber liferafts while wearing gray decontamination suits?

Once we were men.

Wow, it's been thirty years since the last splashdown of a manned capsule. July 24, 1975. The end of an era.

[edstrick]

David: "Wow, it's been thirty years since the last splashdown of a manned capsule. July 24, 1975. The end of an era."

In the Pedantic-Quibbles Department, I believe a Soyuz returning from a Mir visit sometime during the 80's or early 90's managed to land in a frozen or nearly frozen lake. It was one hell of a nasty recovery, but the crew survived.

[David]

David: "Wow, it's been thirty years since the last splashdown of a manned capsule. July 24, 1975. The end of an era."

In the Pedantic-Quibbles Department, I believe a Soyuz returning from a Mir visit sometime during the 80's or early 90's managed to land in a frozen or nearly frozen lake.  It was one hell of a nasty recovery, but the crew survived.

I think you mean the landing of Soyuz-23 (an Almaz military mission, not a Mir) on Lake Tengiz, October 16, 1976. That was a wet landing, but not so much of a splashdown as a crunch-burble-burble-glugg-down.

Bumpdowns, especially in the winter, are apparently not terribly safe.

[nprev]

Happy to hear that the CEV landings will be terrestrial nevertheless...don't need the additional criticism of the expense of maritime recovery. Besides, from a safety viewpoint, I think the risk of sinking is just an unnecessary add-on; a hard landing wouldn't feel good on land or water!

[edstrick]

David: "I think you mean the landing of Soyuz-23 (an Almaz military mission, not a Mir) on Lake Tengiz, October 16, 1976...."

(takes another swig of Geritol beer) Gorsh. Seems like only yesterday.

[dvandorn]

As someone who just got my very first invite to join AARP (the American Association of Retired Persons), by dint of my turning 50 a couple of months ago, I must say I resemble that remark!

-the other Doug

[Steve G]

Some grabs from the ESAS Report - there's a good article on NASA Watch!

Bob Shaw

Shortly after the Challenger accident in 1986 I sent a letter to the editor of Aviation Week suggesting that a manned capsule should compliment the shuttle and could also serve as a lifeboat, and get back to the moon.

No responce of course.

Then shortly after Bush's announcement of returning to the moon, I sent Marc Garneau a letter (I was living in Montreal at the time and met him at a Mars Society meeting there a year earlier) detailing my suggestion for a CEV that the CSA could make an opnion on.

The interior configuration of the Excalibur CEV would have pilot and copilot sitting tandem up front, with the 4 mission specialists in four back seats. The inward swinging hatch would be at their feet, not their heads.



The Mission Module would be made of standard components that could have mission modules of different shapes and sizes depending on mission requirements.



By substituting the Command Module, a mini space lab could be used for lunar orbit or even polar orbit if the crew could be launched from an appropriate site. Also, the same configuration could be used as a logistics mission for ISS or a Lunar Orbiting Space Station.




A LUNAR ORBITING SPACE LAB used with assembly line components.




I would have based the Avalon rocket family around the RD 173.

My profile for a lunar landing would be to launch the 30,000 kg LM into lunar orbit at a high altitude parking orbit, then the CEV on a separate launch which would dock in Lunar Orbit. The LM would have a pressurised lab / living quarters module that would remain behind. Two crew would remain in orbit and dock with a mini space station and conduct since in orbit.

So I got no responce on that either, but it was fun doing all the research! The artwork was mostly pirated from the ESA site and Mark Wade, so watch for copywriting issues!