Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'esa'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • General
    • Announcements
    • Welcome Aboard
  • Kerbal Space Program 2
    • KSP 2 Discussion
    • KSP 2 Suggestions & Development Discussion
    • KSP 2 Dev Diaries
    • Show and Tell
  • Kerbal Space Program
    • The Daily Kerbal
    • KSP Discussion
    • KSP Suggestions & Development Discussion
    • Challenges & Mission ideas
    • The Spacecraft Exchange
    • KSP Fan Works
  • Community
    • Player Spotlight
    • Science & Spaceflight
    • Kerbal Network
    • The Lounge
  • Gameplay and Technical Support
    • Gameplay Questions and Tutorials
    • Technical Support (PC, unmodded installs)
    • Technical Support (PC, modded installs)
    • Technical Support (Console)
  • Add-ons
    • Add-on Discussions
    • Add-on Releases
    • Add-on Development
  • Making History Expansion
    • Making History Missions
    • Making History Discussion
    • Making History Support
  • Breaking Ground Expansion
    • Breaking Ground Discussion
    • Breaking Ground Support
  • International
    • International
  • KerbalEDU Forums
    • KerbalEDU
    • KerbalEDU Website

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start



Website URL



About me



Found 23 results

  1. Kratos "Don't ever let anyone tell you you can't do anything" -Tim Peake, Astronaut In 1988, ESA devised a plan to completely rebrand the agency, with the hopes of taking the agency from a less known counterpart of NASA, to a mighty force of equal status and prestige. 3 goals were set in place to guide the project: 1. Completely rebrand the agency, placing public involvement, promotion of upcoming missions, and science at the forefront of the agency. Redesign branding to be more contemporary in order to communicate the new modern and futuristic mindset of ESA. The main changes include the Kratos logo itself, and a focus on primarily white and blue. 2. Design a simpler, more cost effective and efficient launch vehicle to replace the aging the design of the Ariane 3, now slated for retirement in early 1992. Alongside this, design a new pad and other necessary launch infrastructure to streamline production. The newest ESA member Iceland will create a production and launch site in the area of Hóll in North East Iceland for high inclination orbits and increased launch cadence (Location seen below). The UK will provide a optional third stage named Loki for high energy missions. 3. Awaken the curiosity and excitement of the European people about space much like the Apollo program, and create a passion around space exploration to inspire new generations. In order to reflect the new mindset and aspirations of ESA, a new motto has been created. Dream Great Things. Full Details on launcher and booking below: Mission List:
  2. The SLS was planned to have a large upper stage called the Exploration Upper Stage(EUS). This would take the SLS Block 1 to the SLS Block 2, needed for a single flight lunar architecture. However, the multi-billion dollar cost for development of a large upper stage from scratch means it’s unlikely to be funded. NASA is proposing a solution using the Starship making separate flights. But this plan takes 6 flights total or likely more of the Superheavy/Starship for the Starship to fly to the Moon to act as a lander. One look at this plan makes it apparent it’s unworkable: Actually, it’s likely to be more complex than portrayed in the figure, needing 8 to 16 refueling flights. This is what SpaceX submitted to NASA in proposing the plan, requiring 6 months to complete the Starship refueling: SpaceX CEO Elon Musk details orbital refueling plans for Starship Moon lander. By Eric Ralph Posted on August 12, 2021 First, SpaceX will launch a custom variant of Starship that was redacted in the GAO decision document but confirmed by NASA to be a propellant storage (or depot) ship last year. Second, after the depot Starship is in a stable orbit, SpaceX’s NASA HLS proposal reportedly states that the company would begin a series of 14 tanker launches spread over almost six months – each of which would dock with the depot and gradually fill its tanks. … In response to GAO revealing that SpaceX proposed as many as 16 launches – including 14 refuelings – spaced ~12 days apart for every Starship Moon lander mission, Musk says that a need for “16 flights is extremely unlikely.” Instead, assuming each Starship tanker is able to deliver a full 150 tons of payload (propellant) into orbit after a few years of design maturation, Musk believes that it’s unlikely to take more than eight tanker launches to refuel the depot ship – or a total of ten launches including the depot and lander. https://www.teslarati.com/spacex-elon-musk-starship-orbital-refueling-details/ Everyone, remember the Apollo missions where we could get to the Moon in a single flight? In fact, this would be doable with the SLS given a large upper stage. Then the suggestion is for the ESA to provide a Ariane 5 or 6 as the upper stage for the SLS. It would save on costs to NASA by ESA paying for the modifications needed for the Ariane core. As it is now ESA is involved in a small role in the Artemis lunar program by providing the service module to the Orion capsule. But it would now be playing a major role by providing the key upper stage for the SLS. The argument might be made that the height of the Ariane 5/6 is beyond the limitations set forth by NASA for the EUS. However, if you look at the ca. 30 m height of Ariane 5 core compared to the 14 m height of the interim cryogenic upper stage now on the SLS, this would put the total vehicle height only a couple of meters beyond the height that had already been planned for the SLS Block 2 anyway: See discussion here: Budget Moon Flights: Ariane 5 as SLS upper stage, page 2. https://exoscientist.blogspot.com/2013/09/budget-moon-flights-ariane-5-as-sls.html Coming up: ESA also could provide a low cost lander for the Artemis program. Robert Clark
  3. Kratos The Successor to Ariane IV Kratos ahead of her maiden flight Kratos is the newest launch vehicle developed and operated by Arianespace for the European Space Agency (ESA). Kratos will begin operations in 1991, and replace the Ariane IV. The Kratos-S (Standard) variant can carry up to 21 Metric Tons to LEO. For more demanding missions to further out destinations, such as a probe, the variant Kratos-E (Expanded) is available. The Kratos-E features a 3rd stage called "Loki" Named after the God of power; Kratos represents the strength, might and power of ESA. With a new launch capabilty, ESA aims to become a strong force in the launch market. Both Launchers have a long and short fairing variant, identified by an 'S' or 'L' following the Kratos type. For example: 'Kratos-SS' A standard Kratos with a short fairing 'Kratos-EL' An expanded Kratos with a long fairing The system was designed as an expendable heavy-lift space launch vehicle. Standing 68m tall and 5.4m wide, it is comparable to Atlas V, Ariane 5 and Proton rocket. The system is powered by hydrogen and oxygen. Now for the stats: First Stage: 10 Vulcain 2 engines with a combined thrust of 13590kN and a burn time of 103s. Second Stage: 6 HM7B engines with a combined thrust of 373.2kN and a burn time of 361s. Third Stage (Loki): 1 HM7B engine with a thrust of 62.2kN and a burn time of 748 s. This new launch vehicle features a more modern look than the previous Ariane rockets. Sleek white with the classic blue ESA colour for accents. This new launch vehicle is soon to hit the market and the launch pad too. And for the first time, you the readers will have a say in its future career... You can book a flight to launch your own mission on Kratos. As long as the mission is 1) Based in the real world 2) possible and plausible, I will launch it for free and make its own post on this forum. This idea allows me to share the magic of good looking rockets and ksp images to people who maybe cannot do it themselves. It also gives me something to launch, I'm tired of ore tanks lol So send me your missions, I can't wait to make them! Book here! PS: By the way, I go to school so getting the missions out could be a couple of days, or a couple of weeks, just depends how busy i am. PS PS: Timeline of launches is not chronological, could jump from 1995 to 2012 Mission List
  4. Here is something I made for you guys! It's an Arianespace-styled trailer for KSP! (I believe).
  5. What would it take to do a "real"-ish BepiColombo mission, using the actual sequence of flybys? Would it save delta-v at the cost of a huge amount of time?
  6. Today is when the ESA updates comes to KSP PS4 and Xbox and I went to check my KSP on PS4 but there was no update file notification. I was worried so I restarted it and updated the PS4. Still no sign of update. My KSP is at 1.2 when Menuver Nodes where added. Can anyone help me. If yes please help! I really want to play with the new ESA parts but I can’t because the update file for KSP won’t show. Someone please help!
  7. Ever since I heard about the 1.10 update I've been trying to do a BepiColombo recreation, but I just can't get the gravity assists right. What's a good time to launch so that I get the right gravity assists at the right times?
  8. Commissioning Solar Orbiter instruments from home amid COVID-19 lockdown
  9. Hello, I'm trying to make a cinematic video on the ESA moon space station and landing envisioning around 2008: I managed to found this two link: http://esamultimedia.esa.int/docs/exploration/ReferenceArchitecture/Final ReviewJan09/04_Human_moon_mission_version9esa120109.pdf http://esamultimedia.esa.int/docs/exploration/IntlExplorationArchitectures/IntegratedArchReview/Exploration_architecture_Study_Draft_v9web_version.pdf I also find this link who doesn't work anymore, if someone has working up to date working link it's will be cool: http://spaceflight.esa.int/strategy/pages/PDF/home/events/integrated_architecture_review/7_july/03.Integrated_Architecture.pdf http://spaceflight.esa.int/strategy/pages/PDF/home/events/integrated_architecture_review/7_july/07.Joint_CAA_Overview.pdf http://spaceflight.esa.int/strategy/pages/PDF/home/events/integrated_architecture_review/7_july/10.European_Strategic_Priorities.pdf http://spaceflight.esa.int/strategy/pages/PDF/home/events/integrated_architecture_review/7_july/International_Architecture_Splinter_Session/ESA_Yoder_Standards_ESA_Format.pdf http://spaceflight.esa.int/strategy/pages/PDF/home/events/integrated_architecture_review/8_July/01.Human_mission_to_LEO.pdf http://spaceflight.esa.int/strategy/pages/PDF/home/events/integrated_architecture_review/8_July/02.Man_Tended_Station_ESA.pdf http://spaceflight.esa.int/strategy/pages/PDF/home/events/integrated_architecture_review/8_July/Splinter_Session_Role_of_the_Moon/03_Moon_Mars_Synergies.pdf http://spaceflight.esa.int/strategy/pages/PDF/home/events/integrated_architecture_review/8_July/05.Automated_Moon_and_Mars_Surface_Exploration.pdf http://spaceflight.esa.int/strategy/pages/PDF/home/events/integrated_architecture_review/8_July/06. Moon-scenario-1.pdf http://spaceflight.esa.int/strategy/pages/PDF/home/events/integrated_architecture_review/8_July/07+08_Servicing_Stations_light_and_Scenario2.pdf http://spaceflight.esa.int/strategy/pages/PDF/home/events/integrated_architecture_review/8_July/14.Communications_Navigation_&_Space_Weather.pdf http://spaceflight.esa.int/strategy/pages/PDF/home/events/integrated_architecture_review/8_July/15.Demo_mission.pdf http://spaceflight.esa.int/strategy/pages/PDF/home/events/integrated_architecture_review/8_July/17. _2008 07 08 VEGA ESTEC IAR_MP_5.pdf http://spaceflight.esa.int/strategy/pages/PDF/home/events/integrated_architecture_review/8_July/Splinter_Session_Private_Sector_Engagement/Industrial_lunar_cargo_concept.pdf http://spaceflight.esa.int/strategy/pages/PDF/home/events/integrated_architecture_review/8_July/Splinter_Session_Private_Sector_Engagement/NASA_Initiatives.pdf I make a preliminary planning for the mission:
  10. Ariane 5 is ESA's most iconic heavy-lift rocket and soon all Kerbonauts will be able to recreate it in the upcoming 1.10 Update!
  11. Welcome to AemerFactory Cinematic Thread. Here i post some video i made in my free Time. There mostly based on French and European Space Program. Real mission, alternate history or canceled. I only a beginner for this kind of thing. Advice and tip are welcome. Here the first one, the Airbus Adeline concept for Ariane 6: Here another one feature Ariane 543C concept for a Moon mission: Thanks for watchings.
  12. I like how ESA uses animation and anthropomorphized characters now. This mission launched last night (UTC time) and will take seven years for the spacecraft complex to gradually bleed off kinetic energy by multiple encounters with Earth, Venus and Mercury itself. Hopefully everything turns out fine. Who knows what'll be the state of KSP in seven years...
  13. Release v0.1 (Beta) Hi guys!! Here's some work i'v beem on this weekends! It's some "compact" version of a moon base fully functional, with few parts and functional as hell!! Only have 3 models until now, an Science Lab, a Mining Facility and GreenHouse (because its pretty, that's all... ). This is the ESA concept for a moon base that i really enjoy and like how it looks! This base's features where made for land build with KAS and KIS! Enjoy! Modules: "Interactive Interiors": Science Lab: GreenHouse: Mining Facility: Ground Solar Panels: Altair Lander - "Big Boy"! (Up to 8 Kerbals) Download Link (SpaceDock) I remember, this is an early release, bugs are expected! If you report it here, I'm gonna be glad to help and fix it! The KSP P.R. don't allow cameras on kerbal's room's, so, this mod, for now won't have an IVA! Known Bugs: - Mining facility - on reload you have to expand the base again... some problem with the mining modules of KSP. Don't know how to solve it yet... This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License Other CC's Mods:
  14. There doesn't appear to be a thread for European rocket launches so I made this. This Tuesday ESA is launching Galileo 19-22 https://spaceflightnow.com/2017/12/08/galileo-navigation-satellites-buttoned-up-for-launch-on-ariane-5-rocket/
  15. It was more or less expected, after last year both confirmed the existence of gravitational waves and saw the tech demonstration precursor LISA Pathfinder blow all testing requirements out of the water within a day of setting up: The European Space Agency has formally greenlit the implementation of its ambitious Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (LISA) as a flagship "L-Class" mission. It will consist of three spacecraft, flying in a triangle formation several million kilometers apart, performing laser interferometry between each other with the goal of measuring gravitational waves. The incredible precision of this instrument will far outmatch anything that could ever be built on the curved surface of Earth. LIGO, our only currently operational gravitational wave detector, only has two beams with a few kilometers of distance to work with, by comparison. The mission is currently slated for launch in 2034. "Why so late?", I hear you ask. Well, it's simple, really: it's going to be ESA's third L-Class mission - and the first one hasn't even launched yet! Before LISA gets its turn, we will see the Jupiter Icy Moons Explorer (JUICE) in 2022, and the Advanced Telescope for High Energy Astrophysics (ATHENA) X-ray observatory in 2028. Also, keep in mind that ESA's budget is only roughly 1/4th that of NASA, and thus they can't quite pound out missions like these in rapid succession. Finally, ESA's plans for a gravitational wave observatory were delayed from an originally more aggressive timeline when the US congress made NASA pull out of a cooperation agreement in 2011. Without this delay, it might have gotten the 2028 slot. Now, while the two other L-Class missions are both impressive in their own right, the sheer ambition behind LISA cannot be overstated. It might be the most revolutionary mission that ESA has ever undertaken, and I am very pleased to see it move forward.
  16. ESA Launchers @Yogui87 ESA Pack is just to nice to leave lying by the road. So here is the continuation and expansion of a great set of parts. No pics no clicks Download from GitHub: https://github.com/macluky/ESA-Launchers or SpaceDock: <soon> Current release consists of: Diamant A small early solid rocket that launches the first european satelite Europa Early ESA rocket based on French and British rockets VEGA Light launcher for ESA Ariane Family Consists of 3, 4, 5, and 6 Credits All modelling and texturing by Lionhead. Ariane 3 parts made by MacLuky based on the the Ariane 4. Original Forum Post http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/12078-025-lionhead-aerospace-inc-icarus-v04-updated/ License CC-BY-NC-SA Known Issues - Though I can get all rockets in orbit there are several issues. The parts feel unbalanced. Especially the Ariane 5,6 and Vega seem extremely overpowered. Please help me create proper values for thrust, fuel and ISP. Once balanced properly we can release it to the general population.
  17. Greetings all fellow space nerds and Kerbonauts, I am a passionate lover of all space related topics. From Astronomy of our local group of stars, until deep space Cosmology, since I was a kid I dreamed of participating in this amazing field of science. For that regard, I have dived into an Engineering career, specifically in electronics, having one year ago relocated myself to Belgium to work for a French aerospace company. Finally achieving my long-lasting goal, I feel now professionally fulfilled. But... (there is always a but...) Since now I have been integrated in the European space industry, instead of just being a spectator from the outside, I have come to understand a few issues with it. My background I am currently a Power Electronics design engineer and my responsibilities are to design analog and power electronic circuits to be used in space. For those not familiar with electronic design for space I can summarize it in four main activities: 1) Conceptualize a circuit given a certain set of specifications (not space specific); 2) Perform all kinds of analysis (Failure Mode and Effects Analysis, Part Stress Analysis, Reliability Analysis, Worst Case Analysis, Corner Analysis, and the list goes on and on) (space specific) 3) Writing a plethora documentation that justifies every design decision taken (space specific) 4) Build, test and qualify your electronic module (not space specific) You probably begin to imagine that 2) and 3) takes up most of my time. For example, in the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis, given a circuit with thousands of components, I am in charge of analyzing the effect of a failure of one of those components in the whole circuit. And yes, this is done component-by-component. Of course, I don't mind doing this, as I am so in love with my job that time does really fly. The reputation However, even though all this analyzing effort, in the end we can still watch multiple times European made satellites and space probes fail, like for example: - Ariane 5 maiden flight, guidance software failure due to reuse of Ariane 4 design; - Beagle 2, failed to deploy solar panels; - Schiaparelli, failed to land; - Philae, landing harpoons failed and the thruster designed to keep it on the comet's surface failed to fire; - Galileo, multiple clock failures. You name it... To the point My point is: even though most of the time of a designer's job is to write justification documents - that few people read, and performing many detailed analysis - that no one will review, stuff still fails. I don't judge failures! Not at all. I admire and applaud Elon Musk and SpaceX, for going all-in with their launchers and trying things that many said were impossible. But looking at Europe what I am skeptic about is the over bureaucratization and conservationism of the European space industry. While SpaceX is taking huge risks, yet showing amazing progress, in the old continent I feel that space is a decaying over expensive failure fest, with no incredible life changing achievements. Ariane 6, for example, a rocket in development by Airbus was this week made redundant by the reusable Falcon 9 first stage. The pillars of the problem I have come to think of the problem more deeply and I have come to realize four factors that are slowing down space development in Europe: 1) Bureaucratic culture. Too much documentation and paper work. Designers should spend more time testing and trying new stuff, rather than writing boring documents and thinking about every possible failure, when in practice the failure will happen from something that theoretically is not predictable. 2) Conservative approach. Any reuse of an already used design in the past is broadly well received. Innovation is repressed and slowed down in order for the progress steps to be as small but "controllable" as possible. 3) Lack of Entrepreneurial mindset. For the general public and politicians, space is seen as a money sink and not as an opportunity to grow, explore and innovate. 4) Outdated standardization. Yes, I am looking at you “ECSS”. The consequences The consequences are obvious: - The technology used in space is largely outdated when compared to ground applications. This disincentives engineers to work in space due to the feeling of “working in the past”. - Some engineers frustrated with the innovation repressing culture do not feel motivated to have a career in the sector. - The bureaucratic nature of the performed work drives away the smartest engineers out of the sector. - With each failure, the credibility of the industry is little by little being degraded. Even if the culture of the industry would change, public and political opinion is still remarkably indifferent regarding space. Solutions Now the question must be asked: what can Europe, ESA and to a further extent the EU, should do to reverse this trend? TLDR Europe has endured a lot of failures despite efforts to standardize space design. Bureaucratic and conservative culture is repressing innovation in the sector and disincentivizing engineers to dedicate their careers. Politicians and the general public are indifferent to space. What should be done to reverse this trend
  18. Is anyone aware that ExoMars's Schiaparelli Lander will be touching down tomorrow morning? http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Space_Science/ExoMars/Watch_ExoMars_arrival_and_landing Oops. Did not see proper post. Oh well.
  19. So ESA is building the "back end" (no idea why they give the service module that ridiculous name!!) which is great, and it's got some mars credentials and NEO satellites. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-36343542 But should ESA be doing more? Europe (ESA members) have a combined economy greater than many more space faring nations, but seem reluctant to put any money into it! What should ESA do? Go it alone or collaborate (and listen) and how to get ESA more money??
  20. I was going to put this in cool sciency stuff, but . . . . . Heres a question, if a black hole is not exactly at the center of rotation of a galaxy, is it a polynary stellar system? sort of like alpha-centauri, except having a central star it has a central BH.
  21. http://spacenews.com/esa-members-give-space-agency-an-18-percent-budget-boost/ ESA's budget has recently been increased 18.4% to $5.71 Billion- an increase fuelled by increased investment by the European Commission, along with several European governments- especially Italy. One major area where this funding increase is concentrated in is the Galileo navigation satellite program, along with the Copernicous Earth Observation program- both of whom are owned by the European Commission (But operated by ESA). Thus, the increase in funding the Commission is giving to ESA is largely going to these two programs- which are in the manufacturing and deployment stages, and require the most money at this point. A 72% increase has also been given to ESA for "launchers"- most of which is going to fund the Vega-C and Ariane 6 projects. Italy and France, with majority stakes in the Vega-C and Ariane 6, respectively, have thus increased their funding of ESA by 55% and 18% repectively. However, with the concentration on Earth observation, navigation, and rocket development, some programs have still remained underfunded. One high-profile program is the ExoMars mission, a two part joint program with Rocosmos (the Russian Space Agency) with launches in 2016 and 2018. Woerner, the Director-General of ESA, has stated the 2018 may have to be delayed to 2020 to make up for the underfunding- though this will increase overall mission cost. This portion, which is at risk of delays, includes a lander and a rover being sent to Mars. This possible delay of ExoMars, if undertaken, would be due to ESA underfunding, not Rocosmos- Rocosmos has stated they do not have any delays on their side of the mission. ESA's ISS contributions are also at risk- Weorner has stated that he will do his utmost to convince his member governments to fund ESA's use of the ISS to 2024, from 2020. ESA members are sceduled to meet in December 2016 to determine their future role in the ISS. TL;DR: ESA has been given more money, but it's mostly to new rockets and Earth Observation and GPS-esque satellites. ExoMars may be delayed due to lack of funding, and ISS's ESA use to 2024 is being reviewed.
  22. Over the years, there have been many proposals to give ESA its own Crew Launch Capability- something that (in my opinion) ESA may be closer to this capability than ever before (even closer than the Hermes Era). However, budgets are cramped (as expected), so my proposal attempts to make this as cheap as possible to develop: Note: things in BOLD are the baseline proposal. My proposal would use a minimal-modification ESA Orion Service module as the base (and service module), launching fully fueled on an Ariane V ECA or ES (or Ariane 6 w/ 4 SRBs)- all which have a payload capacity of 21T to LEO, (however, a burn of the Orion CM does the final, orbital insertion burn, along with rendezvous and deorbit burns). The other components, the Launch Escape System (LES) and the Command Module (CM) would be basically European-made clones of the Orion CM and LES, respectively. (Building these parts in the US, is also an option, but would probably be a lot less politically palatable). This would be used in a few flights to the ISS, before moving to a new, European Space Station, based of the Columbus MTFF proposal:http://www.astronautix.com/craft/colrmtff.htm but (ASSUMING INFINITE THE MONEY IS AVAILABLE) be built with a front docking port (which would have a node-like adapter with a total of 6 available berthing ports (2 with adapters for crewed spacecraft, 1 for cargo deliveries, 1 by the connection to the Columbus Module, and 2 ports used by the airlock and an unpressurized experiments bay). Its crewed module would be a modernized Columbus module of the ISS, and use a Orion SM as its service module, located at the space station's aft (but with larger solar arrays and with radiators), which is also used for re-boosts (along with the crewed ESA-Orion and Cargo Vehicle) and life support. This space station (I call it the MTFF-2) would be launched fully fueled by a single, expendable Falcon Heavy (the MTFF-2 being 53T in mass)- in the case of mass overruns, the fuel would be launched separately, in cargo spacecraft. The Cargo Deliveries would be done by a newly-produced ATV, by a Progress Spacecraft (both which would require adapters to dock to the space station) or by a Cygnus. One question, despite all this would be if it could be funded. If S*** hits the fan, the ESA Crewed Spacecraft would be used for SpaceLab-like Science missions, with unpressurized science experiments located between the spacecraft adapter jettisoned panels and the Service Module. If money is somewhat more available however, the MTFF-2 would launch, but lack the node, airlock, unpressurized experiment bay (they would have to be carried next to the Orion SM if needed), only one docking port, and no cargo resupply vessels, and the space station would instead launch on a Reusable Falcon Heavy. THIS IS MY BASELINE PROPOSAL. Good, Dumb, or Impossible? Comment below!
  23. How do we fill up the SLS 2021-2025 launch manifiest and launch once a year? Currently there are 2 (3 if including Asteroid Redirect Mission) planned SLS Missions for this time period- EM-2, a Manned Lunar Orbital mission, for 2021. SLS-Europa Clipper, a unmanned SLS probe launch, for 2025. and EM-3/ARM, a manned mission to a captured boulder orbiting the Moon, also for 2025. This leaves 2023 and 2022 without having any SLS launches (since 2025 is a year with 2 SLS launches. The next presidency will choose the ultimate near-term goal for the SLS-Orion Program, but the hardware required may not be developed in time- especially if it requires more new technology (like a Lunar Lander), compared to the currently favoured Lunar Space Station (which can be developed more quickly and its lessons are valuable for various deep-space destinations (including long-term habitation of the Moon). On the other hand, ESA is developing its own Jupiter Orbiter, Jupiter Icy Moons Explorer, or JUICE, to study Castillo, Europa, and Ganymede (later orbiting Ganymede). It is planned to launch in 2022, using a VEEGA gravity Assist trajectory to sling it to the Jupiter system. As a result, it would arrive in 2030, while Europa Clipper, which is just as complex, if not more (now that it has a lander, and needs to survive Jupiter's radiation belts) arrives in 2027, BEFORE the somewhat less risky Ganymede and Castillo-focused JUICE. If JUICE instead used the SLS Block IB (To be safe, as JUICE is about Five Tons mass, and SLS Block I can only carry up to 4.3 T to Jupiter on a direct trajectory- even a STAR motor may not be enough, and the situation would get worse if the proposed Russian Laplace-P lander is built and attached to JUICE, though unlikely due to Rocosmos' budget cuts) it could get to Jupiter by 2024, a transit time of 2 years. This is advantageous for more than just filling SLS' launch schedule: 1. If it arrives in 2034, JUICE can also use its few Europa flybys during its 3 year tour of the Jupiter system before Ganymede orbit insertion to give missions planners guidelines on where to flyby- currently, only the old Galileo probe produced data capable of doing this job. Not only are these measurements from old 70's-80's era probes (Galileo was delayed from a 1986 launch due to Challenger), Galileo also had to use its low-gain antenna, as its high-gain antenna did not deploy, meaning even less data for Europa mission planners to work with. Using JUICE for basic reconnaissance of Europan destinations would make Europan mission planners more confident in where they should flyby (even more important, since they have to set down a lander at a scientifically important place), not to mention wet the tongues of scientists and science nerds like. 2. The lower transit time means more science, as the components of the probe will not have to survive the approx. 6 extra years in deep space- meaning the critical components (like instruments and solar panels) will likely last longer, meaning more science overall! (Especially solar panels, which degrades under Jupiter's radiation belts, so you need them in tip top condition when they get there in the first place.) 3. Faster transit time also means faster science, allowing future missions to these icy moons to themselves take place earlier (if the budget allows it, or course. Castillo Orbiter anybody?). It's also better for scientists. There are disadvantages, though: 1. Higher Cost for launch (duh). Ariane V, the current JUICE launcher, costs $200 Million per launch, while the SLS Block I costs $500 million per launch (the Block IB is more costly, but cost per launch is unknown. Let's just say $700 Million. (Saturn V was about $1.5 Billion per launch, depending on the estimates) That's a 3.5 x greater cost per launch. 2. Less science from Venus and Asteroids, due to no Venus flybys on a direct trajectory to Jupiter, and only one pass through the asteroid belt via a direct trajectory, rather than 2 with VEEGA. 3. NASA would need to negotiate with ESA- they would need something in return for providing the free SLS launch. 4. Some planning and modifications to JUICE on ESA's side needs to be redone- however, this is likely not a huge issue, as JUICE is launching in 2022, 7 years into the future. Even if building the proposal, getting it approved, and the negotiation process takes 3 years, there are still 4 years to make changes to the probe- probably plenty of time. I propose that this SLS launch would be funded by having ESA build the now-required by Congress Europa Lander, while NASA gives ESA a free ride to Jupiter. So good idea or no? A poll has been set up for this tread.
  • Create New...