Re: White Elephant (was Re: Naming 'the stick')
- From: "William Mook" <william.mook@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 3 Jul 2005 10:13:46 -0700
We're a lot closer to returning to the moon than many think...
Some good slides on shuttle derived hardware here;
http://www.abo.fi/~mlindroo/Station/Slides/sld051p.htm
I favor an eight element vehicle consisting of seven External Tanks
(ETs) equipped with cross-feeding each propelled by seven SSME derived
engines called STME - more about STME here;
http://books.nap.edu/openbook/0309047269/html/58.html
A total of 49 STME at lift off. All engines fire at lift off - the
seven tanks are clustered together;
(1)(2)
(3)(4)(5)
(6)(7)
With 1 and 6 feeding 3
and 2 and 7 feeding 5
and 3 and 5 feeding 4
THis way only 1,2,5,7 are drained - they're the first stage.
Then, they're dropped - and reovered...
Then you have
(3)(4)(5)
With 2 and 5 feeding 4 - and 2 and 5 are drained with 21 engines
firing...
They're dropped when empty, leaving 4 - to continue the flight...
that's the second stage.
Element (4) is the third stage...
The eighth element sits atop (4) in line with it, and is propelled by a
trio of STMEs. It makes it all the way to orbit, carrying 200 tons -
with a delta vee capability that allows the 200 tons to be projected
anywhere in the inner solar system.
The bulk of the 200 tons can be landed on Mars one way (with
aerobraking). Or, 120 tons can be soft landed one way on the moon,
with a lander (propelled by a cluster of RL10 engines equipped with
high-expansion nozzles)
A return vehicle amounting to 60 tons can be sent back to Earth - with
this direct landing approach - from the moon - allowing 60 tons to be
shuttled back and forth from the moon.
60 tons can be returned from Mars as well, following Zubrin's ideas of
using Mars' atmosphere to resupply the propellant- and carrying a small
nuclear energy source along with a small amount of hydrogen - to create
methane and oxygen from Mars' air.
On the moon a larger nuclear source, combined with frozen water
supplies believed to exist below the surface, allows return of 120 tons
from the moon - without leaving any hardware on the moon, or in
transit. Thus, 300 people could visit the moon for about $300 million
- or $1 million per person - with reasonable rates of return.
There are about 30,000 people some estimate that would be willing to
spend $1 million each to visit the moon each year. Tihs is enough to
support 100 flights and create an industry worth $30 billion per year.
A fleet of 10 vehicles would be needed to sustain a twice weekly flight
to the moon. The Earth's economy is currently $40 trillion - this
small number of super-rich people could easily be sustained.
Of course, in this stream of activity governments and corporations
could also pick up trips to the moon and mars, along with workers at
the lunar and mars hotels, outposts, restaurants, research centers,
schools, hospitals, police stations engineering service centers, flight
service stations, and so forth...
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: White Elephant (was Re: Naming 'the stick')
- From: Tom Cuddihy
- Re: White Elephant (was Re: Naming 'the stick')
- References:
- Re: White Elephant (was Re: Naming 'the stick')
- From: Michael Kent
- Re: White Elephant (was Re: Naming 'the stick')
- Prev by Date: Re: Space Shuttle costs.
- Next by Date: Re: Griffin Wants Inline SDLV and 5 Segment SRB/CEV
- Previous by thread: Re: White Elephant (was Re: Naming 'the stick')
- Next by thread: Re: White Elephant (was Re: Naming 'the stick')
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading