Space shuttle to Luna

[Nibb31]

Like others said, it would take a huge amount of fuel to move it to the Moon. Still, I think the idea of having a space shuttle flying around the Moon to be pretty cool.

No it isn't. Wings look stupid on a spacecraft.

Maybe the dream chaser could be used instead?

No because:

- The heatshield isn't designed to handle reentry from lunar velocities.

- The life support system is only for 3 days.

- It has those silly wings and hydraulics and wheels that serve no purpose in space.

[PDCWolf]

Stop thinking about it, this guy already set up the mission for us.

http://spaceshuttletothemoon.blogspot.com.ar/

[shynung]

Stop thinking about it, this guy already set up the mission for us.

http://spaceshuttletothemoon.blogspot.com.ar/

Link goes to KSP Forums' home page.

Good link:http://spaceshuttletothemoon.blogspot.com.ar/

[PDCWolf]

Link goes to KSP Forums' home page.

Good link:http://spaceshuttletothemoon.blogspot.com.ar/

It's a spoiler, I bet you clicked on it with your mousewheel or something of the sort, the link inside is not clickable)

[shynung]

It's a spoiler, I bet you clicked on it with your mousewheel or something of the sort, the link inside is not clickable)

Actually, I saw the link by clicking 'Reply With Quote'. Didn't know how spoilers work, so I assumed it was a regular link, which results in my going to KSPF home page earlier.

[Rakaydos]

While the shuttle was a lousy design, I think the best way to make this work woud be to redesign the orbital ejection component. In three launches, the shuttle could put up 1) the CSM with a 10 ton hydrogen tank, 2) the LEM with 3 ten-ton tanks, and 3) 50 tons of ejection engine, fuel, and mounting points for the 4 other tanks.

[bigdad84]

Stop thinking about it, this guy already set up the mission for us.

http://spaceshuttletothemoon.blogspot.com.ar/

He talks like the shuttle will land on the moon like an airplane. Wonder if he realizes there's no air pressure to generate lift up there.

Just a bit off topic, but instead of using the shuttle to launch crafts, why not launch something using the Shuttle-C concept? It still has the shuttle like launch style but with a higher usable payload to orbit.

[Rakaydos]

The problem is, the shuttle style is an engineering nightmare. Both times the shuttle failed were do to the inherent problems of a laterally mounted payload section- Challanger had a large shockwave striking the entire length of the craft, instead of a small disk of a capsule, and Collumbia was killed by the foam from the External tank's fuel line striking a surface BELOW it. The center of mass issue is painful, and despite claims of reusability, over 75% of the vehical had to be replaced every mission.

[bigdad84]

Challanger had a large shockwave striking the entire length of the craft, instead of a small disk of a capsule

Challenger had it's right SRB disintegrate after O-ring failure 73 seconds after launch, causing an almost instantaneous explosion. There was not too much of a "shockwave" involved.

[Nuke]

space planes should only be used for surface to (low) orbit operations (on bodies with sufficient atmosphere). that is their niche, go outside of that, and you have a very inefficient space ship.