Orbiter Derived Station

[Jestersage]

Real world explanation: During the design phase of Space Station Freedom, a proposal is to utilize an old space shuttle (typically Columbia) with all the space station parts assembled and launch in one piece. (Reference: https://www.wired.com/2012/03/space-station-columbia-1991/) . Some, such as the version mentioned in the WIRED article, is merely man-tended, in that it cannot be fully used unless it was docked with a shuttle/Command module, and require additional station modules. Some others, such as the one on patent US5350138, proposed an all-up solution, having all parts permanently attached to the orbiter. The patent further stated that such scheme allows all parts to be tested on the ground, therefore reducing the complexity (and budget). A personal cross-reference to The 1993 Study imply it evolved into the Option C, which is launched on a Shuttle Derived HLV with parts cannibalized by Columbia. If so, this plan is not that popular, as Option C would minimize the involvement of international contribution to the station. In the end, that plan was not accepted, with the Freedom Study Option-A and and Mir-2 merged into ISS.

In universe explanation: After KSP received a bunch of surplus and atmosphere-burned Mk3 parts, Max Kerman proposed the reuse of these barely-held together parts for a ready made space station. His proposal was instantly accepted under "Dual Hull-1", and he was made to be the supervisor of the launch in its cockpit. Plan to retrieve Max Kerman from the station is yet to be determined.

https://kerbalx.com/Jestersage/Orbiter-Derived-Station-C

Would someone please comment whether the station is good or not?

Edited July 26, 2019 by Jestersage

[MangoRises]

No idea how this thread is the first result Google shows for "orbiter derived station" (1991), so sorry for digging it up.

(BTW this is my first time hearing about this patent from Philip E. Culbertson so thanks for sharing.)

Both of these designs are just ideas, made by industry insiders but not contracted by NASA, (And the impression 1993 Redesign Option C gave me is that it was never serious, created just for the sake of having another option.)

Either way, the 1991 stripped-down Columbia one fascinated me. It mostly uses the modules that went into ISS so it is easy to make it in a modded KSP. I tried to build my own in a 2.7x scale system. It seems very reasonable. The main objective seems to be having more pressurized volume for micro-gravity experiment, Earth-sensing and space-observation experiments are diverted into other unmanned spacecrafts. It does accommodate all the international modules, are have just enough docking ports for some expansion.

 

All the drawings available online:

Spoiler

 

 

 

Launch:

Initial configuration: (unfortunately no way to get rid of thermal protection here)

Assembly complete: (CST-100 to act as a "Apollo derived ACRV")

Further expansion based on the description: (50% more solar power from module attached to nose, docking port at belly. Also I believe extra radiator would be helpful)

 

[The Dressian Exploder]

wow! I'd never seen this idea before! Great work dude

[Jestersage]

Nice!

Related to this is the Shuttle-C, which is suppose to use End-of-life space Shuttle hardware, with one proposal even involved converting the Columbia or Enterprise into a single-use cargo launcher. They would have gutted or even remove the front cockpit, leaving only a fairing. In fact, my version is called Orbiter Station-C because it is my imagining of the concept using Shuttle-C.

If you actually trace the history of US Space Station design, most of them actually started out a Wet Workshop concept, such as Skylab, this Shuttle derived station, the Shuttle External Tank Station, and even LOP-G started out as "Skylab-II", a proposal by marshal Space Center to use a spent upper stage of SLS for moon. In comparison, Soviet concept for Almaz and then Salyut is "from scratch" (the core modules) or conversion of TKS, both of which had life support from the get-go.

ADDITIONAL. I think the reason is because USA grasped the LH2 rocket earlier than soviets - the N-1 have no LH2 stages, and it's only during Vulkan/Energia do they have LH2 rocket stage.

Edited July 26, 2019 by Jestersage

[Galileo chiu]

On 7/26/2019 at 2:48 PM, MangoRises said:

No idea how this thread is the first result Google shows for "orbiter derived station" (1991), so sorry for digging it up.

(BTW this is my first time hearing about this patent from Philip E. Culbertson so thanks for sharing.)

Both of these designs are just ideas, made by industry insiders but not contracted by NASA, (And the impression 1993 Redesign Option C gave me is that it was never serious, created just for the sake of having another option.)

Either way, the 1991 stripped-down Columbia one fascinated me. It mostly uses the modules that went into ISS so it is easy to make it in a modded KSP. I tried to build my own in a 2.7x scale system. It seems very reasonable. The main objective seems to be having more pressurized volume for micro-gravity experiment, Earth-sensing and space-observation experiments are diverted into other unmanned spacecrafts. It does accommodate all the international modules, are have just enough docking ports for some expansion.

 

All the drawings available online:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

 

Launch:

Initial configuration: (unfortunately no way to get rid of thermal protection here)

Assembly complete: (CST-100 to act as a "Apollo derived ACRV")

Further expansion based on the description: (50% more solar power from module attached to nose, docking port at belly. Also I believe extra radiator would be helpful)

 

this thread is old, but do you have the craft file?

[Richmountain112]

There is also an Alternate History in which Enterprise got converted into a Space Station and kept the tank with it. Do you want me to give you a link?