Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by sgt_flyer

  1. It was tested once by rocketdyne within a tripropellant rocket engine, with an ISP of 542 (record with chemical engine) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tripropellant_rocket they went with gaseous H2, Fluorine and liquid lithium. outside of the absolute madness of that combo : Lithium : in case of a leak, the lithium at these temps would end up catching fire by itself and be very hard to extinguish Liquid Fluorine : 'nuff said Afterwards you need to store those fuels in a rocket without thermal transfers between your h2 and your liquid lithium (180°c) . (Imagine between liquid hydrogen and liquid lithium naturally liquid metal at ambient temperature you likely don't want to handle that stuff (mercury).
  2. Regarding ESA's collaboration for SLS's EUS, there was apparently talks about using Vinci rocket engines in place of the RL-10C3 https://web.archive.org/web/20161227034806/http://seradata.com/SSI/2014/11/next-steps-for-sls-europes-vinci-is-a-contender-for-exploration-upper-stage-engine/ Though given the delays they had in develloping that engine...
  3. Well, something at least sized like ISS solar panels (kerbal scaled of course), even at kerbal scale it would be nearly 3 gigantors long & two side by side wide - for 1 kerbal scaled iss solar panel. Going from there, a way to disable the panels automatic suntracking, especially if we could combine that with a servo that can do sun tracking (this way we could create iss style rotating assemblies). (that kind of sun tracking servo could also help for radiators) else, a way to 'wrap' folded solar panels around cylindrical bodies would be nice too, so they could more easily fit within fairings (look at folded soyuz / zarya / zvevda solar panels) As for procedural solar panels, i guess rosa style solar panels could be the right tool
  4. When looking at Gerakl concept, looks like that's where stratolaunch's inspiration came from (minus the forward canards) as far as crazy arrangements with canards, i think the be-2500 concept still as it beaten - with jet engines above the forward canards ^^
  5. With the front right of the wingbox / forward aircraft spine damaged, the forward fuselage / cockpit collapsed on itself (especially if fire weakened further the structure). with the spine damaged, the nosecone locking system was likely not enough to preserve the fuselage rigidity (they might not even be locked if the aircraft was undergoing servicing) the aircraft Aft section fared better, as the spine was not damaged on this side of the wingbox, and there's no rear ramp on the AN-225 to compromise rear rigidity. AN-124s have the rear ramp i've read somewhere that the planned a conventional tail for the second 225 (similar to the 124 tails), combined with a rear ramp to achieve rollon / roloff of cargo. (The split tail was for limiting the effect of turbulences from external payloads) on the tail) As for the fire, there seems to be very limited charring (even on the right wing), there was no fuel to further the fire from the ordinance initial explosion. (Fuel tanks were likely fully drained as they removed several engines for maintenance)
  6. [snip] for mriya itself, forward fuselage and cockpit seems completely destroyed (maybe the floor fared better but...), wingbox seems damaged (right wing is twisted it's root severely damaged, and seems barely hanging to the wingbox), aft fuselage / tail seems relatively intact. Not really easy to see the damage to the main landing gear. on the left wing, two engines seems to have been removed during the planned maintenance, the remaining engine seems to not have suffered external damage
  7. A new very short video of the airport, with mriya's hangar in the background Not a lot to be seen, but the aircraft seems to have been really badly damaged (More than likely complete loss) only the nose is recognizable... edit : same video as @DDE's link
  8. Port wing deployment has started https://blogs.nasa.gov/webb/2022/01/07/primary-mirror-deployment-has-begun/ From the blog, releasing the latches / relatching once it's in position is going to take the most time of the operation (rotation of the wing itself is only 5 minutes) - i guess they have to operate & check that each latch worked correctly after triggering them. (Plus maybe check the port wing systems after the operation)
  9. You would see yes, but mostly by occultation. not very useful for checking if there's wrinkles in the sunshield with a camera. you can see how much light earth atmosphere is diffusing - even in the shadow, while iss parts are seen by occultation. (Outside of the few parts that receive some light from earth itself) And according to the comments, the series of photo for the vid below has 1.6s exposure time...
  10. On earth, atmosphere scatters a lot of light and reflects / deflects some of it, even during the night without clouds or moon (light pollution is a thing) , the same way they can bounce radio waves against the atmosphere. in vacuum, they would need a lot of exposure time per frame to get enough light on the cold side to see anything (even then, you would mostly only be able to see through stars occultation) without also having projectors (light or IR) scroll around the ISS EVAs videos, you'll see quickly how dark it is with cameras in space when iss is in earth's shadow
  11. Well, on the cold side, you won't have light outside the stars, so any camera would need to have a way to illuminate the parts to have a chance to see them - which would be likely to disturb the instruments (between the heat from cabling resistance, etc) - and you'll need cameras able to resist to the extreme cold. on the hot side, outside of the antenna, flap, solar arry and external sunshield, you don't really have anything to look for that couldn't be easily tested. antenna and solar array are pretty straightforward, if they didn't deploy you wouldnt have power or high speed communications. (Easy to test) outside of reading motor values, basic detectors on the latches can check if the various parts reached their intended positions. And i guess they could measure the angular moments the spacecraft was submitted to from deploying the parts from the gyroscopes, so you can know if the parts moved accordingly too The more or less only 'unknown' would be the sunshield's layers, and i guess they can check from the pulley system if there's abnormal forces from the motors to detect anomalies.
  12. Temperature data is now available https://webb.nasa.gov/content/webbLaunch/whereIsWebb.html?units=metric (they indicates they would update the values on the website daily) i guess JWST is still more or less within's earth's shadow atm, given the reported hot side temperatures
  13. Seems nasa confirmed that the precision of the launch should allow for much more than 10 years of operation for james webb https://blogs.nasa.gov/webb/2021/12/29/nasa-says-webbs-excess-fuel-likely-to-extend-its-lifetime-expectations/ In the blog, they give figures of 20m/s of delta-v change for the mcc-1a burn, and 2.8m/s for the mcc-1b burn. they also started to extend the telescope tower, they indicate that it could take up to 6 hours, as it is controlled from the ground. https://blogs.nasa.gov/webb/2021/12/29/webb-team-begins-process-of-extending-deployable-tower-assembly/
  14. Well, there was some research about this propellant combination for small satellites, but i guess they still prefer mmh/nto in terms of ISP / density, which don't have to be chilled. could still be useful due to the low toxicity, but needing chilled propellants compared to mmh/nto adds complexity https://tfaws.nasa.gov/TFAWS06/Proceedings/Aerothermal-Propulsion/Papers/TFAWS06-1026_Paper_Herdy.pdf
  15. Sunshield deployment has started with the forward pallet, https://blogs.nasa.gov/webb/2021/12/28/forward-pallet-structure-lowered-beginning-multiple-day-sunshield-deployment/ so within the next few days, here comes some of the most complex deployement steps ever done in space, outside of space station assemblies i guess edit : aft sunshield pallet deployed : https://blogs.nasa.gov/webb/2021/12/28/aft-sunshield-pallet-deployed/ From reading the blog, seems the actual motion is around 20 minutes - but they have a lot of intermediate steps to check before / after the motion (heaters, latches, attitude checks, etc) turning each step into a multi-hour process
  16. Webb did it's second MCC burn (MCC-1B), of 9 minutes 27 seconds. (567s) https://blogs.nasa.gov/webb/2021/12/27/webbs-second-mid-course-correction-burn/ next steps should be the sunshield's pallets opening
  17. Arianespace's CEO shared their preliminary orbital parameters analysis i guess they are allowed to say bullseye
  18. Well, nauka is still catching up - but it's still on time for tomorrow 's rendezvous given the relative orbital periods (simply search "iss (" here : http://www.stuffin.space ) Should give you ISS (ZARYA) and ISS (NAUKA)
  19. No, the grapple fixture is there this specific airlock module is currently attached on the side of rassvet (Which was launched by space shuttle) this poor thing waited Nauka for nearly 11 years ! once the european arm (launched with nauka) is operationnal, one of the operations will be to move it from rassvet to nauka you can see it on rassvet pictures https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rassvet_(ISS_module)
  20. Couldn't they scale it up to limit g forces by using a maglev vacuum tube (hyperloop style, in a circle), with several 'exit ramps' climbing on mountainside at various headings (so you can target a few different orbits) Though, friction will still be insane when the stage leaves the tube (use a MHD to limit air friction maybe one it leaves the tube ?) For large circular facilities with a magnetic tube, LHC is 26km diameter for example much more reasonable than a 50m catapult on lateral G forces... Of course, the initial investment is much higher :p
  21. Use both a parabolic primary mirror and a parabolic secondary mirror, or a lense as a secondary. you'll be able to concentrate sunlight in a very small area (depends on the distance at which you want to focus your secondary) No need to make the light fully coherent the beam between the secondary and the focal point will be smaller than your secondary Now, if the primary mirror is polished enough (recommanded to limit thermal transfers...) , your space mirror would double as a very powerful space telescope
  22. nifty updates on the rcs (the new small rcs will be nice on my constellations of small commsat - allow to very precisely tune the satellites orbits Would be nice to have some variants for the place anywheres too. maybe a sideways variant to place nearly 'flush' with hulls - imagine a vernor's shape, but with a nozzle and exhaust channel parallel to the shape, like on the space shuttle's nose and nose's sides. (At least, a place anywhere's 7 variant with the same style of mount as the small one, instead of the big ball :p) replicating the shuttle's RCS arrays is quite part intensive
  23. Hello - wet workshop skylab was only a proposal, so it could have been launched with a S-IB lower stage. However, skylab was launched on S-V lower stages fully equiped as a dry workshop. (Skylab was still built from a modified S-IVb - but it was fully equipped on ground) The main problem with wet workshops is reamenaging the fuel tanks after launch. most of the useful equipment would be difficult to assemble once in orbit (the large parts have to be broken up to fit through the docking ports, etc) you’ll need several subsequent launches to ferry in the needed equipment (not recommended to put sensitive electronics inside cryogenic fuels / oxydizers, so you’ll have to launch them after) - in the end, it’s not really cost effective because of the added compexity and the subsequent manned launches required to finish the assembly in orbit.
  24. Well, we would need the following basic capability for the factory part - the factory part can build another factory part - you can dock multiple factory parts to build bigger things The probe would then need the basics for to setup a self growing factory : 1) the factpry part itself ^^ 2) resource scanning systems (Scanning satellites, small lander / rovers with scand, etc) 3) either drills, mining rovers, or enough basic resources to build those with the factory part 4) enough electricity to make the above. 5) communications (if autonomous probe) ———————— once the probe arrives, start resource scanning, land at a good spot start exploitation by creating new drilling / electric generators (or solar arrays) / storage needed to build new factory parts. once the factory has grown enough, it would be able to start producing new probes to start the process on another planet (while the first factory A variation could occur if the factory part is orbital only then you’ll need a mining lander to separate from your probe, and the probe would grow an orbital shipyard around it from the landers resources
  • Create New...