PDA

View Full Version : This does not bode wll for return to moon, etc...



banquo's_bumble_puppy
2005-May-10, 10:37 AM
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/oped-05zl.html

oped piece

banquo's_bumble_puppy
2005-May-10, 12:39 PM
"The LockMart CEV is laden with a variety of weighty systems that Apollo somehow got along without: wings, airbags, super-expensive titanium structure, an absurdly thin "Orbital Debris Shield", reusable RCC thermal protection, "active thermal control", elevons driven by huge electric motors, even a "Fire Depression System". This kind of massively overweight grab-bag design is often derided by space engineers with the term "Battlestar Galactica" after a huge spaceship in a cult 1978 TV series (not the pretentious low-budget remake now running on the SciFi Channel).

The Battlestar CEV isn't a serious design for returning to the Moon. It's the kind of proposal you slap together cheaply at the last minute for a dumb program that you know will be cancelled rather like LockMart's late X-33 program."

Candy
2005-May-10, 12:47 PM
I have faith.

banquo's_bumble_puppy
2005-May-10, 01:17 PM
of the heart?

Moose
2005-May-10, 02:40 PM
Wrong show.

Glom
2005-May-10, 04:09 PM
I enjoy reading all these editorials. Have they done away with the EOR component of the moon mission now, then? How could they do that without a heavy lift rocket? Are there any rockets with an upper stage that could be turned into a space station like Skylab. I think that idea was elegent in its ingenuity.

Lurker
2005-May-10, 04:35 PM
We got there once, why is it so damn hard to get back!! :-?

Captain Kidd
2005-May-10, 04:39 PM
We got there once, why is it so damn hard to get back!! :-?
Now that we've been there we threw away the maps. After all, what guy would admit to not knowing how to get somewhere? Maybe we need a woman in command of the next mission. :D

Glom
2005-May-10, 04:39 PM
We need a smegging superbooster.

Lurker
2005-May-10, 04:53 PM
We got there once, why is it so damn hard to get back!! :-?
Now that we've been there we threw away the maps. After all, what guy would admit to not knowing how to get somewhere? Maybe we need a woman in command of the next mission. :D
Shhhhhh, I am already in trouble with the government over this. I told my Persian this secret about American men and I think she passed it on the Iranian government. That's why we are so reluctant to invade!! 8-[

Candy
2005-May-10, 05:15 PM
We need a smegging superbooster.
I'll volunteer. I have a good track record. :wink:

Jpax2003
2005-May-11, 03:34 AM
We need a smegging superbooster.
I'll volunteer. I have a good track record. :wink: :o You do know what smeg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smeg) means, right? [-X

Lurker
2005-May-11, 03:43 AM
We need a smegging superbooster.
I'll volunteer. I have a good track record. :wink: :o You do know what smeg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smeg) means, right? [-X
Why do I click on some of these links??? #-o

Jpax2003
2005-May-11, 04:23 AM
We need a smegging superbooster.
I'll volunteer. I have a good track record. :wink: :o You do know what smeg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smeg) means, right? [-X
Why do I click on some of these links??? #-oHey now, it's just a wikipedia article with no pictures describing the etymology of the word associated with a certain biological function. It's not like I linked to an image of Ron Jeremy. :D

I seem to remember the BA admonishing people not to use it on this board, but I forget when and where.

jrkeller
2005-May-11, 04:29 AM
The author of the piece does not know much about manned space flight. His statement about the new vehicle having an unnecessary active thermal control system, clearly shows his ignorance. All manned space vehicles, since Mercury had or have an active thermal control system. It is the cooling system for the capsule. Back in the early days of the NASA, the active thermal control system was called the Environmental Control System (ECS).

You can view the Gemini ECS here, (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/diagrams/gemini4.gif) here2 (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/diagrams/gemini5.gif) and here too. (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/diagrams/gemini6.gif)

Here also didn't read or chose to ignore the article (http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/space/1534782.html) on the Popular Science website about the Lockheed CEV which mentioned some the reasons why the design looks the way it does.

Maksutov
2005-May-11, 04:38 AM
[edit]I seem to remember the BA admonishing people not to use it on this board, but I forget when and where.
It was somewhat indirect, rather than specifying that particular word. (http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=326559#326559)

Maksutov
2005-May-11, 04:58 AM
Glom,

Given his obsession with heavy lift launch vehicles, shouldn't that be a publiusring superbooster?

http://fool.exler.ru/sm/sumo.gif

crosscountry
2005-May-11, 01:00 PM
there was something in there about a debris shield.



the Apollo's had no debris shield. But they did have lots of emergency equipment for fires due to the launch pad fire of "Apollo 1".


"they would rather drive a firetruck than an armored vehicle" - paraphrased from Neil Armstrong's book "First on the Moon"

Candy
2005-May-11, 07:14 PM
We need a smegging superbooster.
I'll volunteer. I have a good track record. :wink: :o You do know what smeg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smeg) means, right? [-X
I do now. :o