Re: Space Access Update #112 9/19/05

Fred J. McCall wrote:
> "Len" <len@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> :Pete Lynn wrote:
> :> "Fred J. McCall" <fmccall@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> :> news:a5vil1p203v26arp7v4e1ncvu62232k5c3@xxxxxxxxxx
> :
> :......
> :> > Otherwise, one is probably going to have to count on
> :> > flying the prototypes as the operational vehicles as
> :> > well
> :>
> :> It would be silly for initial prototypes not to be operational vehicles,
> :> and vice versa. An operational vehicle which is not a prototype is a
> :> wasted opportunity.
> :
> :Of course. I have never thought that the first commercial
> :space transports would be anything but "operational
> :prototypes." IMO, Clipper Ships are a better economic
> :model.
>
> Then you better be planning for clipper ship load rates. How many
> tons and how many people did the typical clipper ship move in a year?
>
The current space transportation market is measured
perhaps in the couple of hundred tonnes per year range.
However, the same money spent on space transportation
with an elasticity of 1 would result in perhaps
some thousands of tonnes per year. The nature of payloads
and payload costs should change accordingly. Propellants
are dirt cheap even compared to low-cost space
transportation. Clipper ships addressed a moderate-size,
transition market--far from insignificant, but far less
than would be moved later.
.......
>
> If you're building little one-man ships, you'd better have more than
> one of them from the very beginning.

I agree. Even if they are not particularly tiny, I
think that scheduled maintenance and a reasonably high
traffic level would require an initial fleet of at least
three vehicles.
>
......
> :I personally would not consider designing a space tourism
> :vehicle without a pilot, co-pilot and flight attendant.
>
> Why not? Now you're moving a bunch of 'dead headers' back and forth.

Zero-g corporation uses flight attendants on their
flights to enhance the experience of the paying
passengers.

>
> :Accordingly, I would not think less than four of five
> :passengers would make sense. Our current design accommodates
> :eight passengers--plus pilot, co-pilot and attendant--on an
> :eleven-orbit flight at a proposed price that is a a good deal
> :less than others are planning for a short sub-orbital flight.
> :The co-pilot position is also a training position.
>
> What does the attendant do (other than point out where to find the
> barf bags)? Why do you need a regular copilot position?

As I mentioned to Pete, we could very well get by
with less than three crew members. However, we
create a mass margin by designing for three crew
members. True enough, the pilot and/or copilot could
also perform flight attendant duties. Two pilots
provide minimal training opportunities--especially
since the cargo flights use only one pilot.
>
> :The cargo version has only one pilot plus about 1500 kg of
> :payload.
>
> Why do you need a pilot on this one?
>
Cheaper and easier. If I'm wrong, out he goes.

> :IMO, a pilot makes development easier and cheaper
> :and does not seriously compromise cargo payload at the size
> :vehicle that I think is appropriate to avoid extreme sensitivity
> :of performance to size.
>
> What are your expected flight durations? Don't forget about providing
> all the mass for the pilot (seat, escape system, atmosphere, water,
> etc.)

Expected flight durations are about 3/4 day. We would
also expect to be able to launch a rescue mission on
short notice, if necessary.

No escape system for operations. I think the basic
design approach will be orders of magnitude safer than
the Space Shuttle. The basic cabin shell is already
accounted for. The basic allowance is just under
200 kg per passenger, plus another 200 kg for the
combined allowance for the copilot and attendent.

>
> :> It is quite sufficient. The Wright flier and those which followed were
> :> not four person aircraft.
> :
> :However, I would hope that the first commercial space transport
> :would be a little further down the space path than the Wright
> :Flyer was down the aviation path.
>
> Yeah, no kidding!
>
> :> > I think you better plan on being able to put up at least
> :> > 4, even if a couple of those are kids.
> :>
> :> There will be a lot of developmental water under the bridge before kids
> :> are on the cargo manifesto. Kid proofing a space station is non trivial
> :> and will come much later. Initial passengers will be competent and
> :> trained individuals.
> :>
> :> > Plus cargo space for luggage and all supplies needed
> :> > to sustain the group for however long they'll be up.
> :
> :The passenger version of the Space Van 2010 is designed
> :to accommodate eight passengers plus attendant and
> :second pilot for less than a one-day fligt, in lieu of
> :1500 kg of cargo--so go figure. Moreover, at least one
> :crew member would likely be a female to help the overall
> :mass budget.
>
> Your mass budget doesn't seem high enough for adding 10 people.

See above.
>
> --
> "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
> man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore,
> all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
> --George Bernard Shaw

I never admitted to not being unreasonable.

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

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: was June 21 an X Prize attempt?
    ... Pressure suits wouldn've helped them. ... or design a decent vehicle where the ... I think the pilot was lucky to survive. ... then the demonstration becomes "Another Flight By ...
    (sci.space.shuttle)
  • Re: was June 21 an X Prize attempt?
    ... Pressure suits wouldn've helped them. ... or design a decent vehicle where the ... I think the pilot was lucky to survive. ... then the demonstration becomes "Another Flight By ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: question on hyrdogen launchers
    ... >> high payoff for being able to launch people who do ... >> vehicle that can carry a pilot plus a passenger. ... >manned and unmanned flight. ... Even if you're fully confident that a pilot is never required for vehicle ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: USAF F-16 Instructor Discusses Flying Into MOAs
    ... If one regulation prohibits an aircraft from approaching closer than ... Because the lateral distance between aircraft in flight is not an altitude ... and a pilot may fly as low as he pleases there. ... responsible for a runway. ...
    (rec.aviation.piloting)
  • Re: Air Force One Had to Intercept Some Inadvertent Flyers / How?
    ... HISTORY OF FLIGHT ... The Cessna 172, registered to Crystal ... airline transport -rated Cessna pilot was killed. ... Air Force training, flight evaluations and flight records indicated ...
    (rec.aviation.piloting)