LOST... Old concepts to project never going off paper

[Rutabaga22]

On 11/21/2022 at 12:58 PM, Beccab said:

The Science and Applications Manned Space Platform (SAMSP)


From back when NASA was still hoping the orbiter would guarantee cheap access to space and space platforms were being proposed left and right, both in LEO and GEO

Imagine that, but docked with a Dragon that carries new payloads in the trunk like with the Bishop airlock and that Bigelow thing

I love the idea of this. I'm not sure I fully understand, but I'm thinking of this as a kind of scientific satellite that can expanded and have parts switched out. Do I have that right?

[SunlitZelkova]

Gemini derived Mars lander

http://www.astronautix.com/b/bygeminitomars.html

This mission is interesting as it uses a ballistic descent at a time when most proposals made use of gliders, meaning it is one of the few crewed Mars mission proposals that remained viable after Mariner IV's discovery of how thin the atmosphere actually is there.

For some reason, despite the proposal using a ballistic descent, the illustrations they included used wings. Assuming the lander would have been similar in configuration but without the wings, it gives off Starship vibes given how elongated it would be, IMO.

It would have spent only five days on the surface, with two crew landing and two remaining in orbit. There is no Earth return capsule, it was planned to propulsively brake into Earth orbit and presumably be picked up by a shuttle (perhaps Big Gemini if this proposal had gone through ). Given the lander is mounted on the front of the craft, the landing astronauts would likely need to spacewalk to their lander, N1-L3 style. It is propelled by a single NTR. It would use a series of drop tanks, with the number of tanks differing depending on the required amount of fuel stipulated by the chosen launch window.

Inspired by this proposal, I intend to create a working (if absurd) Gemini derived Callisto expedition proposal, and perhaps even greater proposals.

This proposal also makes me wonder if there is a Vostok derived Mars mission hiding somewhere in the RSC Energia archives...

[tater]

 

[kerbiloid]

5 hours ago, SunlitZelkova said:

This proposal also makes me wonder if there is a Vostok derived Mars mission hiding somewhere in the RSC Energia archives...

Only:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TMK

http://www.astronautix.com/t/tmk-e.html

http://www.astronautix.com/t/tmk-1.html

https://www.russianspaceweb.com/spacecraft_manned_mars.html

http://www.astronautix.com/m/mk-700.html

Particulary Energia:

http://www.astronautix.com/m/marpost.html

[tater]

 

[AckSed]

Rockwell's 80s concept for a jet-sled-assisted Trans-Atmospheric Vehicle is so presciently Kerbal it's amazing:

It does make a bit of sense, though. Why build an expensive, one-off launch track that's fixed to one location when you could build an expensive, one-off aircraft that can launch from a normal airfield? (Stratolaunch says hi.)

[Blufor878]

https://www.deviantart.com/brickmack/art/Bridenstine-Stack-946824690

Something I learned about recently. There was a time when NASA was considering using private heavy lifters (Falcon Heavy and Delta IV Heavy) to launch Orion. The Falcon Heavy version was supposedly called the "Bridenstine Stack".
As a bonus, I may or may not have tried to make it in KSP. The appearance isn't 100% accurate, but it definitely works (in KSP anyway).


Edit: GOOD NEWS EVERYONE!
https://kerbalx.com/ManateeAerospace/Falcon-Heavy-Bridenstine

Edited February 7, 2023 by Blufor878

[tater]

 

[AckSed]

The rocket - I'm flying!

Sled - Aaaahahooeeey!

True shame it, well, never took off.

Edit: I see they left out the retro-rockets from the illustration. Maybe it's funnier this way.

Edited February 11, 2023 by AckSed

[Blufor878]

And I'm not just posting this because I'm trying to create it in KSP (the launch vehicle anyway)...

 

Edited February 11, 2023 by Blufor878

[Beccab]

1964: A different Surveyor

A Hughes proposal for a Surveyor lander capable of surviving for 1 year on the lunar surface with a closed thermal system (keeping the experiments isolated) and an improved landing accuracy led to a completely different design top the surveyor we know: a 4-legged , mostly rectangular lander with a solar panel in the front. 
The source document is this: https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=54383.0;attach=2048270;sess=66463 and includes some more interesting design options, like an all-liquid Surveyor:

A surveyor with an RTG and a tiny Sojurner-ish lunar rover:

And some more advanced Surveyor designs

[tater]

 

 

@Beccab

https://www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com/ev1n2.htm

 

[DDE]

4 hours ago, tater said:

 

 

@Beccab

https://www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com/ev1n2.htm

 

LOL at the Mk 1 Cockpit on the wing.

[magnemoe]

23 hours ago, tater said:

 

 

@Beccab

https://www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com/ev1n2.htm

 

Interesting design, is the first stage booster part of the plane, it has its own fins? But why should you drop it? 
And the cockpit was interesting  

[Pipcard]

On 7/30/2022 at 11:34 AM, Beccab said:

Now I'm curious, has NASDA/JAXA ever published a design of a crewed mars lander/base? I've tried searching a bit for it on google to no avail, the furthest I got was finding a few lunar landers (and even then, it's one crew lander and one cargo lander)

On 7/30/2022 at 1:47 PM, SunlitZelkova said:

A search of “日本の有人火星着陸” (Japanese crewed Mars landing) yields nothing.

English Wikipedia cites a bizarre news article claiming the “ministry of science and technology” decided to pursue “crewed Mars exploration”, but that ministry, which also encompasses education, culture, and sports, is usually referred to by its abbreviation MEXT in the press, and the article claims the government had “originally only planned to focus on building settlements on the Moon”. Neither the government nor JAXA ever declared this. It is possible the news site took preliminary information about MMX and trumped it up for clicks.

Perhaps there may be something hiding in their archives that hasn’t been digitalized yet (I would not be surprised given some government organizations still regularly use fax), but I think it is unlikely.

The JAXA Digital Archives has a few pieces of concept art (from the 1980s and more recently), but there have never been any substantial plans for crewed Mars missions that I know of.

(Category: General - Future Concept)

(Category: Human Space Activities - Others)

Quote

A space station or crewed lunar landing is one thing, but everyone in the West seems to agree Mars is too expensive for one nation alone to handle.

If you are still interested though you might try creating your own. Here are some ideas. After writing these down they seem really cool and I will probably use these myself, but feel free to use them too!-

Japan would probably adopt a split architecture (IIRC the indigenous lunar architecture JAXA proposed had the lander sent to lunar orbit ahead of the crew vehicle) and you could have the lander design based somewhat on their real lunar lander proposal, but with a heat shield and added fuel, and so on. The American SEI’s Mars lander was basically their Lunar OTV but with a heat shield on the bottom, for lack of a better alternative, it could be assumed JAXA might utilize a similar method to save costs instead of developing an entirely new lander.

The MTV would definitely need a lot of launches to assemble, and could either use a huge number of cryogenic drop tanks and a single engine unit (kind of similar to the SEI STCAEM-CAB) based on how their lunar architecture utilized various stages for getting to the Moon (each launched one at a time and then docked together before TLI), or it could use solar electric propulsion, based on their experience with the Hayabusa series.

It may plausible for Mitsubishi Heavy Industries to develop an even larger rocket than the H3 Heavy for such a mission, allowing the MTV to be assembled in fewer launches. Because an SHLV would be expensive and a bit large for Tanegashima, perhaps a Falcon Heavy/R-56 class launcher might be pursued (40 to 60 tons to LEO, real life H3 Heavy only does 28 tons or so to LEO). I am not sure whether that could be built by slapping existing engines on larger tanks or if a new engine would be needed.

I did a fictional Japanese Mars mission set in a universe where JAXA isn't restricted by budgets and economies, and launches hundreds of tonnes into orbit at a time.

Quote

They would probably use an opposition class profile, to avoid a prolonged stay on the surface. If the Fukushima disaster still happens in any world you decide to use this in, nuclear power is likely out of the question. Lack of a reactor would probably not permit a prolonged surface stay.

If somehow Japan doesn’t develop a “nuclear power allergy”, nuclear electric propulsion would also be a possible choice. But NTRs are unlikely to be adopted, simply because Japan has more experience with ion propulsion.

I was thinking of the same thing, too. But Japan has started to come back to nuclear power in spite of the Fukushima disaster.

I know that in reality, Japan would be more likely to use (low-thrust) electric propulsion over nuclear thermal, and was considering it for my Ceres mission, but from what I've read elsewhere, the Persistent Thrust mod isn't always reliable.

 

Edited March 4, 2023 by Pipcard

[tater]

 

[AckSed]

Were the electron beams a way to model the plasma generated during reentry?

[Blufor878]

Bonus, I'm trying to recreate at least a couple of these. I'm personally fond of ESAS (Number 4 from left).

 

Edited March 21, 2023 by Blufor878

[AckSed]

The whole Ares program was "You'll believe a noodle can fly. ...please?"

[magnemoe]

5 hours ago, AckSed said:

The whole Ares program was "You'll believe a noodle can fly. ...please?"

I has an "shuttle" a lot like the Ares rocket in KSP1. A MK 1-3 cockpit with docking port in front, 2,5 m equipment bay, 2.5 to MK3 fuel tank, the 16 man aircraft passenger module, a short MK3 tank, engines, heat shield and landing legs, then a decopler and a fairing going down a bit on the SRB for aerodynamic.  Used the largest or second largest SRB as first stage and the shuttle as second. 

[steve9728]

Every time I saw Ares, always remains me this:

Spoiler

Just occurred to me that this abbreviation for this rocket isn't something good word in the UK...

Edited March 26, 2023 by steve9728

[Blufor878]

I wish the picture were bigger, but I thought this was interesting. Especially the last one with the NERVA upper stage.
The Saturn C3's, which were (at least in this proposal) 3-engine Saturn proposals. On that note.

[tater]

 

[Blufor878]

On 3/31/2023 at 8:56 AM, tater said:

 

So not even gonna touch the orbiter/lander. But I thought I could do something with the boosters shown at the beginning.


I even gave it a centaur upper/kickstage, because Centaur goes great with (almost) everything.

[tater]