Re: Station-building: a vessel proposal

[David Henderson <orbiter@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, Roger Burton West wrote:

> Gentlemen of the list,

Sir. :-)

I've not contributed before, but have been dabbling in Orbiter for a few
months no.

> - cargo bay, at least 10x2x2 metres (to fit a module-1 or a stacked pair
> of module-2s). Ideally, big enough to fit a Dragonfly (15m x 8m x 8m?),
> but that might be pushing things a bit - great for realism, though...
> Carried mass should be balanced on the thrust/drag centreline, of
> course, and ideally on the centre of mass of the vehicle.

Arianne V has ~12x4x4m and can insert 18,000kg into LEO. There is a
current model available for Orbiter too.

Energia could launch 100,000kg into LEO and has about 30x5x5. Might be
able to squeeze a Dragonfly on it (width problems) but could certainly
carry lots of extra fuel.

I don't think there's presently a model going, though.

> - cargo bay configuration. This is the tricky bit - we need to be able
> to undock a carried module-1 without it passing through the vehicle. I
> suspect the best approach is something like the Super Guppy transport 
> aircraft (see http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n0007/27p1truss/guppy.jpg 
> for an image), with the entire nose area being hinged away to expose 
> the cargo bay, and the internal docking point(s) at the back of the bay.

Energia would just dump the payload, jetison the fairing and let Dragonfly
get on with it.

> - capable of reaching orbit with an 8000kg payload (again, a module-1).
> Ideally, 10000kg (a fully-fuelled Dragonfly). Enough fuel to reach orbit
> fully laden, donate some fuel to the station, and land again.

Easy.

> - aerodynamic - not necessary but would certainly make things easier!
> (Yes, I've tried taking the new shuttle-A through atmosphere...)

If you're going to be lugging big things up, a booster makes a lot more
sense than an aerodynamic design.

> A vessel-vessel fuel transfer MFD - and possibly a "fuel module", much
> like a standard module-1 but with a fuel capacity - would also be
> needed.

Hmm, fuel module wouldn't be a problem (mount it above the dragonfly), a
fuel-transfer MFD. Hmm. Is this needed? How do the current stations do it?
(The ones that are classed as vessels.) If it is, again, it shouldn't be a
problem.

> A standard operation would see the cargo ship lifting a module (or
> several), and matching orbit with the station-in-progress; then the
> Dragonfly would extract modules from the cargo bay and attach them to
> the station. Between missions, the user would edit the scenario file to
> load new modules into the cargo vessel.

Doesn't really need to be reuseable, though, does it? Boost the payload to
orbit, dump the booster, have an Arianne-like payload burner to match
orbits, then let Dragonfly get on  with it.

> Unfortunately, I don't have access to the supported C compiler - has
> anyone tried to get the Orbiter SDK working with Cygnus GCC? I'd be
> happy to help with 3-D modelling, though.

Not tried that, sorry. I've been writing some experimental MFDs, though,
so I might be able to help out there. I'm sure config-based launch
platform should be easy enough if we can produce the 3d models.

Sounds like a good little project.

-- 
yours etc.                                             [gin.aibs.org.uk]
                                               Mobile:      07960 217459 
David.                             Work (Direct/Vmail): 020 8898 6565x38
d.henderson.96@cantab.net          Work (Main):            020 8893 3884



-- 
Orbiter discussion list:
- mail orbiter-request@firedrake.org with subject "unsubscribe" to leave
  or ask the listmaster (@firedrake.org)
- archives at http://lists.firedrake.org/orbiter/