Space Launch System - Orion

[Eric Mc]

You could get a Lunar Module in there

[Eric Mc]

A big zipper would do the trick - or a set of hinges from B & Q.

[Eric Mc]

How about a "flat pack" Lunar Module then?

[Eric Mc]

A version of that came with the Airfix "Astronauts" figure set.

[Eric Mc]

I remember seeing a drawing of one of these with a Bell 47 helicopter type perspex bubble over the cockpit.

[Eric Mc]

When is the last time there was a spaceship on the White House lawn?

[Eric Mc]

I knew the answer would be Hollywood based. I was thinking of "The Day The Earth Stood Still" but "Mars Attacks" will do.

[Eric Mc]

I presume this section performs the same function that the Instrument Unit did on the Saturn V -

[Eric Mc]

It's very different in most respects to Apollo - apart from the basic shape (which is the correct shape for a re-entry vehicle entering the earth's atmosphere at speeds of 25,000 mph).

[Eric Mc]

The problem with Buran was that the Soviets were shadowing the American design without a clear idea as to why the Americans had built it in the first place. The Soviets kept asking themselves, "Why have they built this thing the way they have? It doesn't make any sense". However, they kind of hoped that by building their version of it, the logic would eventually emerge.

In the end, although the Buran orbiter vehicle bore some similarities to the Space Shuttle orbiter, it differed fundamentally in some areas - notable the lack of main engines for use during launch. It also could be flown with jet engines for ferrying purposes - something which was impossible with the American Shuttle.

[Eric Mc]

Flooble said:

Could it actually take off using those jet engines? I was always under the impression they were for the landing phase to increase the potential landing sites?

Indeed it could. The jet engines were not intended to be fitted for actual orbital space flights. It would have glided in, just like the American shuttle.

Here's a picture of a test Buran taking off using jet thrust -

Edited by Eric Mc on Thursday 23 August 19:30

[Eric Mc]

The Service Tower for the SLS is now fully kitted out with all the swing arms, umbilicals, work platforms and pipe work and will be wheeled into the VAB later on today -

[Eric Mc]

At the pace the project is moving, it's likely that the tower will be used for at least a decade as the Block 2 won't be arriving anytime soon.

[Eric Mc]

That was because in the early stage of Apollo, they thought that each moon landing missions would require two Saturn V launches. It's also the reason why the VAB was built to accommodate two Saturn Vs side by side (and the reason why the VAB has two sets of doors.

[Eric Mc]

How do they access the crawler way on the other side of the building. Is there some sort of massing turning circle?

[Eric Mc]

MartG said:

Looks like it was Skylab one...



Edit: I've posted the question on a forum frequented by people who worked there at the time - will post any definitive answer here

Edited by MartG on Saturday 8th September 12:34

Skylab was a bit of a "back door" project.

[Eric Mc]

I wonder what the criteria was for choosing between the front doors or the back doors?

[Eric Mc]

The SSMEs they already had needed rebuilding and recertification for their new role. They are not the same as the SSMEs as used on the Shuttle - even if the hardware is identical.

[Eric Mc]

RobDickinson said:

2bn to polish up some old engines, really?

You obviously haven't read up on what has been done to the former SSMEs in order to make them work on the SLS. It's a bit more than a clean up and polish.

[Eric Mc]

I read that as "Deep Space Pocket"