Re: DIY space transport

Pete Lynn wrote:
> It is a bit of a dream of mine to build a small semi self sufficient
> space station in LEO, (with a large engineering workshop of course), and
> set up as a developer and tester of space based infrastructure as
> required for what would eventually pass as the space handy person
> market. Refining the development of small solar power systems, farming,
> mining, refining, manufacturing, habitat making, transport systems,
> etcetera.
>
> This is a DIY job which requires a small cheap and convenient space
> transport pickup truck and the means with which to build a small space
> station - that would grow in an organic fashion. Could this potentially
> be accomplished by a lone, well off and capable person, (assuming use of
> earth based contractors), as opposed to a standing army?
>
> Spaceshipone has a drymass around 2000kg. A space transport capable of
> carrying a single person, and a reasonable excess baggage allowance,
> might have a drymass as low as half of this - and perhaps even a similar
> cost? The space transport might look something like the t/Space CXV
> with much larger propellant tanks, much smaller cabin volume - and no
> aeroshell.
>
> Air launch is necessary for a number of reasons, starting with the need
> to avoid aerodynamic drag at such a small scale. Obviously high launch
> pad fees will not be sustainable, this will want launch site flexibility
> and perhaps the capacity to launch from international waters. This
> needs to be capable of less than $100/kg to LEO.
>
> It should be possible to build a specialist carrier aircraft for only a
> few million, this is more about climb and ferrying than efficiency -
> large fabric covered wings, basically an oversized ultralight. It would
> be nice to be able to carry bulky but light weight components in front
> of the space transport vehicle, (like thin wall habitat pressure
> vessels). This should be possible with air launching, the aircraft
> would likely have a large protective aeroshell for the space transport,
> and release at low dynamic pressure. If need be a very light weight
> fabric tent like structure could be placed over such external loads to
> ease asymmetric aerodynamic loads. With such a space transport a small
> transport it should be feasible to eventually assemble a very large
> space station.
>
> Along the minimalist design philosophy I was considering a skydiving
> parachute approach to landing. Using various tricks it should be
> possible, for a 2-3% drymass mass cost, to have pin point flared landing
> of the space transport on its side on a soft surface, (e.g. sand). The
> seat would probably be a very light weight hammock type design and I am
> even wondering about closed circuit TV, (some entirely independent),
> instead of portholes. If need be one might pop the hatch and stick ones
> head out to control the landing - or have an outside seat. Another
> thought is mid air LOX fuelling of the space transport from the carrier
> aircraft so as to minimise insulation.
>
> The question of two stage verse one stage is a tricky one. I am
> starting to favour single stage, which will be technically more
> challenging, as second stage recovery from flexible launch locations
> will be highly problematic. Single stage is more in keeping with the
> single person operation - excepting the carrier aircraft pilot of
> course. The point of the carrier aircraft design is that GLOW is not a
> design constraint. Space transport GLOW might be around twenty ton.
>
> I am considering the absence of an external aeroshell over the entire
> space transport. The nose might consist of a large diameter miniature
> capsule in which the pilot is situated. This would take the brunt of
> the re-entry load and might even offer various separation and abort
> capacities. The perhaps axis-symmetric multiple tanks would be aft of
> this and while possessing some direct insulation and shielding there
> would be no covering aeroshell over the intertank and capsule regions.
> Hopefully the small scale, low re-entry heat loading, and high altitude
> launch would make such an un-aerodynamically compromised design
> possible. The open tank format would hopefully make maintenance easier,
> increase frontal area during re-entry, and enable the capsule door to be
> located at the back of the capsule away from the re-entry shield.
>
> Such a miniature space transport design can I think reach assisted SSTO
> performance requirements. If one can air launch, scale effects actually
> favour smaller vehicle size with regard to drymass, and re-entry -
> except for fixed guidance system weights, which continue to reduce with
> each passing year. The engine design will be critical, something like a
> miniature Merlin designed solely for vacuum. Throttling will be highly
> desirable, and/or a multiple engine design.
>
> The price tag to develop such a space transport and to start building
> such a space station is probably 50 million at a minimum, (~twice
> Spaceshipone, ~maybe half the larger Falcons). I had better start
> putting away a little extra each week. :-)
>
> Pete.

Before some other poster questions the feasibility of what you propose,
let me say that I believe much of what you propose is quite feasible.
You and I have influenced one another's ideas quite a bit over the past
few years.

I think that you will be quite pleased with our latest concept when we
finish the conceptual design and publish it--assuming that it works out
as currently expected. It will be much larger than what you propose.
However, I believe that this should make it technologically easier--it
should also simplify operations and yield a several-ton payload that
should be of interest to even the government.

This newer concept permits a large vehicle without breaking the bank.
I will need more that the $50 million that you propose, but I think
that we cans still stay within our usual $200 million development
cost limit

As for price per kg of payload to LEO, this is highly dependent on
traffic levels--which, ultimately, is higly dependent upon price
per kg of payload. I think that--even at moderate traffic levels
(as measured in dollar value)--it should be quite easy to get under
$1000/kg. $100/kg is going to be quite difficult, but not out of the
question with high enough traffic levels and clever system design.

I know that some think that I am rather fickle with respect to the
variety of launch vehicle concepts that I have proposed. However,
with our very limited resources, I have found that this is, by far,
the best way to make the most progress for the fewest bucks. Even
I am amazed--after 49 years of studying launch vehicle concepts
--how much can be done on the conceptual system design level, as
opposed to "space technology development."

Best regards,
Len (Cormier)
PanAero, Inc.
x@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (change x to len)
http://www.tour2space.com

.

Relevant Pages

  • Maynards space station (was Re: Felxibility of Apollo design )
    ... Owen also prepared a design ... Patent Office search web site, and found the patent in question: ... launch on a Saturn V). ... "space station" itself. ...
    (sci.space.history)
  • Maynards space station (was Re: Felxibility of Apollo design )
    ... Owen also prepared a design ... Patent Office search web site, and found the patent in question: ... launch on a Saturn V). ... "space station" itself. ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • DIY space transport
    ... space station in LEO,, and ... The space transport might look something like the t/Space CXV ... Air launch is necessary for a number of reasons, ... Along the minimalist design philosophy I was considering a skydiving ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: staging, reliability, etc. (was Re: Towed Booster Stability)
    ... One D III failure was due to poor judgement by the company in not expending ... of the first flight. ... They appear to now have a mature design and operation. ... But launch ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Advanced V1s
    ... and launch procedures as well the lack of vibration was expected to ... steel hollow turbine blade design capable of a life of 2 hours. ... the missiles were reaching the target area. ... received these becons but towards the end of the campaign nearly 50% ...
    (rec.aviation.military)