Emperor of the Titan Squid

My Vision for Exploration of Space

What do you think?  

21 members have voted

  1. 1. Is this possible?

    • yes
      5
    • no
      16


Recommended Posts

This is my idea for a space exploration road map. Not all of it is politically plausible.

2016: Orion program replaced with  with the integrated space exploration vehicle, or ISEV program, which utilizes orion and a privately developed DragonRider with Orion life support and a service module in addition to a trunk. DreamChaser selected for ISS crew delivery, in addition to other spacecraft. BEAM on station, with good results. Bigelow begins developing a module to fit the dragon trunk.

2017: Commercial crew delivery begins. Exploration sats deployed.

2018: Insight launch,  SLS test flight to the moon, Falcon heavy test flight, ExoMars launch, dragonlab in service, Nauka delivered. Mars cubsats delivered. OSIRIS REX mission. JWST.

2019: Falcon 9R flight.

2020: ARM vehicle launched. Bigelow station alpha on orbit. 2020 rover.

2021: em1, Taingong 3 construction.

2022: Lunar orbit station begins construction to support future moon bases and deep space missions. Probe to Apophis. Mars exploration landers/ rovers.Luanar base tests asteroid equipment.

2023: Europa clipper launch, Jupiter cubesat network, includes lander cubes.

2024: deep space mission from lunar station, flies to asteroid.Phobos satellites.Saturn titan submarine.

2025: SpaceX starts work on Falcon X. ULA starts work on Vulcan, ACES and ZEUS.

2026:Skylon test flight, Deep space mission.BA2100 launch. Shackleton crater outpost construction begins.

2027: Falcon X launch. NTR MTV construction begins. Taigong 3 finished.

2028: Deep space mission. Skylon comes into service.

2029: Phobos hab launched, supplies launched.

2030: ISS decommissioned. Skylon begins space station construction, International and corporate collaboration allow a 2nd MTV, with a centrifuge, to be built.

2031: Phobos mission.

2032:Moon base is enlarged.

2033:Mars supply run, Falcon X heavy, falcon XX in service, Phobos return.

2034: MTV 2 finished.

2035: MTV Embarks on mars excursion. Humanity becomes an interplanetary civilization!

2036: Venus landers sent.

2037: 2nd mars mission launched. Previous one returns.

2038: Space exploration becomes a huge business. Preparations are made for venus mission.

2039: Mars missions launch and return.

2040: Venus mission.

2041: mars outpost established, MCT  Constructed.

2042: SpaceX begins mars colony construction.

2050:FUSION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

2055: Space Elevator.

I will be adding details and more events later, but for now, what do you think?

 

 

 

Edited by Maximus97

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what is a falcon X and why on earth (or off it in this case) would ULA and spaceX collaborate on a rocket.?

Edited by Maximus97

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like it.

I also agree with insertname, why the heck would SpaceX and ULA collab together?

Even with SpaceX's iffy launch dates, I highly doubt the Falcon heavy will launch in 2018, it will almost certainty be this year, but it could very well launch next year, but 2 years from now? No.

I do quite like the Lunar space station in 2022.

A TItan submarine? In 2024? Try 2040. When NASA made the concept, the most realistic date they could launch it was 2040, we don't know enough about Titan yet, so if it happens, we'll likely need to launch a Titan orbiter about a decade prior.

I think Skylon will be built/tested before 2026, but it does seem more realistic when it comes to the engines.

 

 

In the end, it does seem realistic with some exceptions :)

On 4/3/2016 at 3:39 PM, insert_name said:

even if we get a pro-spaceflight president, he won't be inaugurated till 2017, also what is a falcon X and why on earth (or off it in this case) would ULA and spaceX collaborate on a rocket.?

I think he means the MCT, I'm pretty sure the "Falcon X" was just fan art.

Edited by Maximus97

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 4/3/2016 at 2:02 PM, Emperor of the Titan Squid said:

2016: Orion program killed, and replaced with the integrated space exploration vehicle, or ISEV, basically DragonRider with Orion life support and a service module in addition to a trunk. DreamChaser selected for ISS crew delivery, in addition to other spacecraft. BEAM on station, with good results. Bigelow begins developing a module to fit the dragon trunk.

Not possible, or otherwise extremely, extremely, unlikely.  Also, although the Dreamchaser lost out on the Commercial Crew contracts, a cargo variant is being developed, but with Boeing and SpaceX both promising that they will be ready to fly by next year, NASA is unlikely to alienate one of their biggest contractors and a huge political power in the Aerospace Industry (Boeing) by upending their portion of the CST-100 contract.  Bigelow and SpaceX is plausible, since both share common ground (Both founded by billionaires who made their fortunately relatively early, both newcomers to the Aerospace Industry), but it might not happen, it might.  I'll give it a 50/50.  BEAM will probably happen next year as well, so I'd bet on that one.

On 4/3/2016 at 2:02 PM, Emperor of the Titan Squid said:

2040: Venus mission.

We are nowhere close to this advanced as to be able to land a human on Venus and return them safely (This is coming from a person who already thinks that a Mars mission could be accomplished with todays technology - see Mars Direct).  Toss in another century into the equation and it'll be plausible, but if you mean a manned mission, this is wildly optimistic.  NASA had studies for manned missions to Jupiter and Saturn and not Venus.  If the space program is willing to leave the inner solar system rather than go to one of the closest planets, that's saying something about the likelihood of a manned mission to said planet occurring anywhere this century.  

 

 

Edited by Maximus97

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/4/2016 at 8:30 PM, Butterbar said:

Not possible, or otherwise extremely, extremely, unlikely.  Also, although the Dreamchaser lost out on the Commercial Crew contracts, a cargo variant is being developed, but with Boeing and SpaceX both promising that they will be ready to fly by next year, NASA is unlikely to alienate one of their biggest contractors and a huge political power in the Aerospace Industry (Boeing) by upending their portion of the CST-100 contract.  Bigelow and SpaceX is plausible, since both share common ground (Both founded by billionaires who made their fortunately relatively early, both newcomers to the Aerospace Industry), but it might not happen, it might.  I'll give it a 50/50.  BEAM will probably happen next year as well, so I'd bet on that one.

We are nowhere close to this advanced as to be able to land a human on Venus and return them safely (This is coming from a person who already thinks that a Mars mission could be accomplished with todays technology - see Mars Direct).  Toss in another century into the equation and it'll be plausible, but if you mean a manned mission, this is wildly optimistic.  

 

 

Alright then.

Well, they haven't so much as built a lander prototype, or engines, or hab, or really anything but Orion, and partially the SLS, so it wouldn't be the craziest idea, not the best, but not the craziest, plus it'd be a much more easier plan, and if we collab with other countries, it could be like a "ISS" 2.0 :) .

I think he should change it to manned Venus balloons tbh.

 

Edited by Maximus97

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 4/3/2016 at 4:44 PM, Spaceception said:

I think Skylon will be built/tested before 2026, but it does seem more realistic when it comes to the engines.

I say fat chance it will be built before 2046, if ever. RLVs are yet to be shown to actually work on the orbital side of rocketry, and the demand for an RLV SSTO is very low.

On 4/4/2016 at 8:30 PM, Butterbar said:

We are nowhere close to this advanced as to be able to land a human on Venus and return them safely

I hoped he meant Venus Airships, and the landers were just for getting a taste of what should be carried on the manned missions in terms of science (and new landers/rovers for teleoperation), but I could be wrong....

On 4/4/2016 at 8:40 PM, Spaceception said:

 

Well, they haven't so much as built a lander prototype, or engines, or hab, or really anything but Orion, and partially the SLS, so it wouldn't be the craziest idea, not the best, but not the craziest, plus it'd be a much more easier plan, and if we collab with other countries, it could be like a "ISS" 2.0 :) .

They have built engines (if you mean LV engines, or RL-10s) and cancelling it at this point is very unlikely. We've gone far past the point of Constellation cancellation in terms of development, and we're nearing the part in development where President Jimmy Carter was advised against cancelling the Shuttle Program in 1979. Once we go past EM-1, SLS/Orion is past the point of no return. We just have to figure out a way to deal with it now.

http://www.nasa.gov/50th/50th_magazine/10presidents.html

Edited by Maximus97

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/3/2016 at 2:02 PM, Emperor of the Titan Squid said:

This is my idea for a space exploration road map. Not all of it is politically plausible.

It's also not technically and financially possible.

On 4/3/2016 at 2:02 PM, Emperor of the Titan Squid said:

2016: Orion program killed, and replaced with the integrated space exploration vehicle, or ISEV, basically DragonRider with Orion life support and a service module in addition to a trunk. DreamChaser selected for ISS crew delivery, in addition to other spacecraft. BEAM on station, with good results. Bigelow begins developing a module to fit the dragon trunk.

People have already said why cancelling Orion/SLS is a bad idea. The Orion/SLS program isn't really technically flawed, it's more that NASA is being over-cautious, and has to fund 3 manned space programs (ISS, CCDev, and Orion) at the same time. Also, Dragon to deep space would not be easier than Orion. It would be starting all over again, on a base too small for even 4-man lunar missions (and significant down-cargo).

On 4/3/2016 at 2:02 PM, Emperor of the Titan Squid said:

 

2020: ARM vehicle launched. Bigelow station alpha on orbit. 2020 rover.

ARM is

 

not happening anyways, as noone in NASA or Congress supports it. The White House is keeping the useless waste of an SLS launch propped up, and NASA is probably depending on it's cancellation (thus, why they've done so little work on it.)

If you want to see NASA's current (approximate) plans for launches, go to this link:

 

It's based off what NASA has stated they want to do, but is currently unconfirmed, and can sway under budgetary pressures. Currently, it's 1 mission a year from 2021-2024, then the game's up from there.

On 4/3/2016 at 2:02 PM, Emperor of the Titan Squid said:

 

2022: Lunar orbit station begins construction to support future moon bases and deep space missions. Probe to Apophis. Mars exploration landers/ rovers

Too fast. Even with a sudden concentration on space, a lunar orbital station should start by 2024, after all SLS test flights, as SLS is the launch vehicle for any proposed US Lunar Station.

On 4/3/2016 at 2:02 PM, Emperor of the Titan Squid said:

 

2024: deep space mission from lunar station, flies to asteroid.Phobos satellites.Saturn titan submarine.

No precursors for the asteroid mission? You'd think they'd test out long-term travel and deep space HABs (and asteroid landing equipment) from the Lunar Space Station, don't you think?

On 4/3/2016 at 2:02 PM, Emperor of the Titan Squid said:

 

2025: SpaceX and ULA start joint work on ACES, FAlcon X/ Vulcan.

Not happening. OrbitalATK might join with ULA, Orbital's launcher side is not very economical, and they are building a new solid rocket- solids are faster to develop than liquids, and so it can be a better alternative to the current Vulcan. Also, their business climates are more similar. Lastly, if ULA joins with SpaceX, that brings us back to a launcher monopoly. Why would we want that?

ACES is also a dead fish on arrival, no payloads actually need it.

On 4/3/2016 at 2:02 PM, Emperor of the Titan Squid said:

2026:Skylon test flight, Deep space mission.BA2100 launch. Shackleton crater outpost construction begins.

2027: Falcon X launch. NTR MTV construction begins. Taigong 3 finished.

2028: Deep space mission. Skylon comes into service.

2029: Phobos hab launched, supplies launched.

2030: ISS decommissioned. Skylon begins space station construction, International and corporate collaboration allow a 2nd MTV, with a centrifuge, to be built.

2031: Phobos mission.

2032:Moon base is enlarged.

2033:Mars supply run, Falcon X heavy, falcon XX in service, Phobos return.

2034: MTV 2 finished.

2035: MTV Embarks on mars excursion. Humanity becomes an interplanetary civilization!

2036: Venus landers sent.

2037: 2nd mars mission launched. Previous one returns.

2038: Space exploration becomes a huge business. Preparations are made for venus mission.

2039: Mars missions launch and return.

2040: Venus mission.

2041: mars outpost established, MCT  Constructed.

The rest of this is so ridiculously ambitious it makes the old STS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Transportation_System plans look reasonable in comparison. And those needed higher- than Apollo- peak level funding.

 

 

Edited by Maximus97

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, insert_name said:

The SLS doesn't suffer from technical issues, so much as a lack of payloads

And cancelling it will solve nothing in that aspect. Giving it an actual goal, will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your 2016 prediction is not realistic. Orion will not be cancelled at this point and Dragon will not be converted to a deep space mission (why bother, when you have Orion as a deep space vehicle). DreamChaser will not selected for Commercial Crew, that boat has sailed.

Edited by Maximus97

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

10 hours ago, Emperor of the Titan Squid said:

Orion program killed

Well, this bit might happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Nibb31 said:

I really wouldn't count on that if I were you.

I was being optimistic, one involves bug meteorites and the other requires the canidate to psychic and have an understanding of the Chaos field.

I have my bets hedged on the bug-meteorites.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

for (int y = 2024; y < 2100; y+=5)
{
    try
    {
        ISS->extendLifespan(y);
        ::showAnimationAboutMars();
    }
    catch(...)
    {
        printf("Oops...");
 
        try
        {
            ISS->deorbit();
        }
       catch(...)
       {
           printf("Oh-oh...");
           return;
       }

    break;
    }
}

Edited by kerbiloid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guess NASA will be something weird : maybe Interstellar would be real. Only if we could catch up and not die in the meantime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Europeans have a better chance of getting mankind into space IF they do a deal with the Russians, Japanese, Indians and Chinese.

If those four space programs worked together, we could be on Mars inside 5 - 10 years.

Edited by Maximus97

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/3/2016 at 3:39 PM, insert_name said:

what is a falcon X and why on earth (or off it in this case) would ULA and spaceX collaborate on a rocket.?

Falcon X is a proposed spaceX vehicle, good point, and that collaboration is what i mean by politically impossible.Their would be cubesats orbiting saturn.

 

On 4/4/2016 at 9:32 PM, fredinno said:

It's also not technically and financially possible.

People have already said why cancelling Orion/SLS is a bad idea. The Orion/SLS program isn't really technically flawed, it's more that NASA is being over-cautious, and has to fund 3 manned space programs (ISS, CCDev, and Orion) at the same time. Also, Dragon to deep space would not be easier than Orion. It would be starting all over again, on a base too small for even 4-man lunar missions (and significant down-cargo).

 

If you want to see NASA's current (approximate) plans for launches, go to this link:

 

It's based off what NASA has stated they want to do, but is currently unconfirmed, and can sway under budgetary pressures. Currently, it's 1 mission a year from 2021-2024, then the game's up from there.

Too fast. Even with a sudden concentration on space, a lunar orbital station should start by 2024, after all SLS test flights, as SLS is the launch vehicle for any proposed US Lunar Station.

No precursors for the asteroid mission? You'd think they'd test out long-term travel and deep space HABs (and asteroid landing equipment) from the Lunar Space Station, don't you think?

Not happening. OrbitalATK might join with ULA, Orbital's launcher side is not very economical, and they are building a new solid rocket- solids are faster to develop than liquids, and so it can be a better alternative to the current Vulcan. Also, their business climates are more similar. Lastly, if ULA joins with SpaceX, that brings us back to a launcher monopoly. Why would we want that?

ACES is also a dead fish on arrival, no payloads actually need it.

The rest of this is so ridiculously ambitious it makes the old STS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Transportation_System plans look reasonable in comparison. And those needed higher- than Apollo- peak level funding.

 

What does that mean?

 i know that none would fund this, but it is supposed to be a collaboration between all nations, however impossible it is.we could use aces for lunar missions.

 

On 4/4/2016 at 8:30 PM, Butterbar said:

Not possible, or otherwise extremely, extremely, unlikely.  Also, although the Dreamchaser lost out on the Commercial Crew contracts, a cargo variant is being developed, but with Boeing and SpaceX both promising that they will be ready to fly by next year, NASA is unlikely to alienate one of their biggest contractors and a huge political power in the Aerospace Industry (Boeing) by upending their portion of the CST-100 contract.  Bigelow and SpaceX is plausible, since both share common ground (Both founded by billionaires who made their fortunately relatively early, both newcomers to the Aerospace Industry), but it might not happen, it might.  I'll give it a 50/50.  BEAM will probably happen next year as well, so I'd bet on that one.

We are nowhere close to this advanced as to be able to land a human on Venus and return them safely (This is coming from a person who already thinks that a Mars mission could be accomplished with todays technology - see Mars Direct).  Toss in another century into the equation and it'll be plausible, but if you mean a manned mission, this is wildly optimistic.  NASA had studies for manned missions to Jupiter and Saturn and not Venus.  If the space program is willing to leave the inner solar system rather than go to one of the closest planets, that's saying something about the likelihood of a manned mission to said planet occurring anywhere this century.  

 

 

SLS won't be cancelled, ISEV will reuse orion tech. We will have Venus tech in 2040.(maybe)Thanks on the DreamChaser part, i didnt know.

 

On 4/4/2016 at 2:36 PM, kiwi1960 said:

The Europeans have a better chance of getting mankind into space IF they do a deal with the Russians, Japanese, Indians and Chinese.

If those four space programs worked together, we could be on Mars inside 5 - 10 years.

America will make a comeback, and the people of the world will unite to make the human race better, and expand to the stars!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Mostly a joke.Would be nice , though.

On 4/3/2016 at 4:44 PM, Spaceception said:

I like it.... But It's unlikely that we'll get a pro spaceflight president in 2016, maybe 2020, but probably not 2016, but who knows, I've heard Ted Cruz likes NASA, but I could be wrong.

Anyway, enough of the President stuff, so it doesn't get locked.

I also agree with insertname, why the heck would SpaceX and ULA collab together?

Even with SpaceX's iffy launch dates, I highly doubt the Falcon heavy will launch in 2018, it will almost certainty be this year, but it could very well launch next year, but 2 years from now? No.

I do quite like the Lunar space station in 2022.

A TItan submarine? In 2024? Try 2040. When NASA made the concept, the most realistic date they could launch it was 2040, we don't know enough about Titan yet, so if it happens, we'll likely need to launch a Titan orbiter about a decade prior.

I think Skylon will be built/tested before 2026, but it does seem more realistic when it comes to the engines.

 

 

In the end, it does seem realistic with some exceptions :)

I think he means the MCT, I'm pretty sure the "Falcon X" was just fan art.

Edited by Maximus97

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 4/4/2016 at 3:52 PM, Emperor of the Titan Squid said:

SLS won't be cancelled, ISEV will reuse orion tech. We will have Venus tech in 2040.(maybe)Thanks on the DreamChaser part, i didnt know.

SLS without Orion is a duck without a head.

On 4/4/2016 at 2:36 PM, kiwi1960 said:

The Europeans have a better chance of getting mankind into space IF they do a deal with the Russians, Japanese, Indians and Chinese.

If those four space programs worked together, we could be on Mars inside 5 - 10 years.

NASA is still a leader. But the lack of attention to the industry is what is causing the US space program's downfall. Money isn't flowing in anymore.

"The Europeans have a better chance of getting mankind into space IF they do a deal with the Russians, Japanese, Indians and Chinese."

They also have to deal with the refugee crisis, and the collapsing EU block. Beside, US has the basic LV and CTV. No one else does, (and they have experience being space leaders from the ISS) so better to start with NASA than ESA, which has a much smaller budget.

NASA has less than 0.5% US budget. And it still has an equivilant NASA budget of all other space agencies in the world, COMBINED. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_government_space_agencies

NASA is wealthy compared to CNSA.

 

Edited by Maximus97

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/4/2016 at 1:06 AM, Nibb31 said:

Space is way down on the list of stuff that voters care about. Being a pro-space politician these days only means keeping the pork barrel rolling. There is no ambition or goal behind it.

 

18 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

A brief vision of an algorithm of the future Exploration of Space.

Since 2024 till 2100, every 5 years:
  Extend ISS lifespan for 5 years more and show a brand new animation about the future Mars flight.
  If sh.. happened:
     Report "Oops" and try to deorbit ISS.
       If sh.. happened:
          Report "Oh-oh!" at try to get away before somebody cares.
 

 

14 hours ago, fredinno said:

But either way, if you realize your 'vision' is sci-fi, and unrealistic, why did you bother?

Stuff like this just proves that this is the most anti-space "spaceflight" forum I have ever seen. "We won't get to Mars in this century, nothing is ever going to be possible, why bother, we should all just give up because it is all pointless."

Edited by Pipcard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Pipcard said:

 

 

Stuff like this just proves that this is the most anti-space "spaceflight" forum I have ever seen. "We won't get to Mars in this century, nothing is ever going to be possible, why bother, we should all just give up because it is all pointless."

Hey, being realistic is just understanding how the world around you actually works. Sorry if it sounds pessimistic, but you won't change anything by ignoring politics, economics and society. 

If you want to go to Mars this century, then you need to find a compelling reason for society to divert the R&D and resources to that goal instead of other stuff. Wishful thinking won't be enough.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Pipcard said:

Then what do you think we should do in space? Nothing?

We should be aiming for achievable goals, stuff that we know we can do, now. We need to be concentrating on real accomplishments, not fantasy that is centuries away. Getting things done, making them routine, building infrastructure and industrial capability are more important than premature pipe dreams about Mars or Venus colonies.

At best, a manned Mars landing is 20 years away. Self-sustaining colonies are hopelessly delusional. And space exploration will be done through government space agencies because there is simply no business model that supports doing it through private investment.

I believe that Commercial Crew is much more important than NASA's stupid "#JourneyToMars" mantra. I believe that we should concentrate on accessing the Moon and building a sustainable research outpost there. We've got to learn to walk across the street before we can climb Mt Everest.

Edited by Nibb31

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Nibb31 said:

I believe that we should concentrate on accessing the Moon and building a sustainable research outpost there. We've got to learn to walk across the street before we can climb Mt Everest.

Agree with this 100%. Mars is a dream right now. In 10 years the Moon could be a actual reality. We (humans) could start with the groundwork within 2 to 3 years if we all got to work on it.

Edited by Maximus97

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.