Space Launch System - Orion
Discussion
Flooble said:
I think that the study showed it would create a gas bubble in the water which would turn the surrounding water into a sound-absorbing foam, so as long as a few square miles was cleared out with some active sonar pings the marine life would probably be largely safe. Particularly if you launched from somewhere with minimal life anyway - there are dead zones conveniently along the equator: http://phys.org/news/2015-04-ocean-dead-zones-disa...
Do the military still drop depth charges on exercise? Or set off those massive torpedoes the russians used to have (big enough to take out a Typhoon class double-hulled sub?)
Not sure about the bird life, but probably not going to be that much worse than an airliner and there aren't that many birds out in the middle of the ocean surely? I haven't seen pigeons fitted with long range tanks or eagles carrying out air-to-air refuelling
All a bit speculative, I think.Do the military still drop depth charges on exercise? Or set off those massive torpedoes the russians used to have (big enough to take out a Typhoon class double-hulled sub?)
Not sure about the bird life, but probably not going to be that much worse than an airliner and there aren't that many birds out in the middle of the ocean surely? I haven't seen pigeons fitted with long range tanks or eagles carrying out air-to-air refuelling
At the time these studies were made, care for the environment was pretty low on the agenda. I think we would be a little bit more cautious now.
As it was, the idea never got very far and I don't think we will ever see anything on this scale ever being operated off earth. However, it might be a useful concept for operating from other planetary and moon locations.
The rocket tests I always find interesting to watch.
What spacex have managed so far has been very impressive, but I wonder if they'll almost become too successful with satellite and cargo launches that further work towards the moon/ Mars might have to take a back seat to an extent. They just seem to be getting busier and busier!
You'd get 100 tons of stuff lifted up to orbit cheaper and quicker with spacex doing it, but if you need to launch a 100 ton piece of kit out of orbit, if there isn't a current commercial need for it could it be argued NASA would potentially be better doing it themselves?
What spacex have managed so far has been very impressive, but I wonder if they'll almost become too successful with satellite and cargo launches that further work towards the moon/ Mars might have to take a back seat to an extent. They just seem to be getting busier and busier!
You'd get 100 tons of stuff lifted up to orbit cheaper and quicker with spacex doing it, but if you need to launch a 100 ton piece of kit out of orbit, if there isn't a current commercial need for it could it be argued NASA would potentially be better doing it themselves?
Commercially there are very few current sats that require more than 6t to geo. But thats because its expensive. Same as the leo sat business.
Start throwing up rockets for next to nothing and the market will expand.
NASA will never be a cheap launcher (well they dont build rockets anyhow..) and yes if you can launch what you need in several goes SLS etc dont make sense.
But building something out of many smaller parts isnt always a good thing, more couplings, more weak points, more wasted mass. Even SpaceX dont see their Mars project doing that, which is why they are working on the MCT, a 100t to mars launch vehicle ( said to be a 10-15m diameter rocket, some details hopefully later in the year).
This NASA test was good, and needed. Its a 5 section booster compared to the shuttles 4 section. As its a solid booster and single use you cant fire it more than once so they have to be very consistent in production and test multiple examples before they are sure its ok. ( oh and this booster alone is about twice the thrust of a falcon 9!)
Supposedly its only temporary with a liquid booster possible later in the program but I really dont see how that will happen given the structure of the SLS and its requirement for support through these boosters.
Start throwing up rockets for next to nothing and the market will expand.
NASA will never be a cheap launcher (well they dont build rockets anyhow..) and yes if you can launch what you need in several goes SLS etc dont make sense.
But building something out of many smaller parts isnt always a good thing, more couplings, more weak points, more wasted mass. Even SpaceX dont see their Mars project doing that, which is why they are working on the MCT, a 100t to mars launch vehicle ( said to be a 10-15m diameter rocket, some details hopefully later in the year).
This NASA test was good, and needed. Its a 5 section booster compared to the shuttles 4 section. As its a solid booster and single use you cant fire it more than once so they have to be very consistent in production and test multiple examples before they are sure its ok. ( oh and this booster alone is about twice the thrust of a falcon 9!)
Supposedly its only temporary with a liquid booster possible later in the program but I really dont see how that will happen given the structure of the SLS and its requirement for support through these boosters.
Test article for the SLS LH2 tank has been completed
http://www.nasa.gov/exploration/systems/sls/multim...
http://www.nasa.gov/exploration/systems/sls/multim...
Eric Mc said:
I presume that will be going into the enlarged "ET" and then shaken and vibrated on the big test rig NASA has had since the Apollo days.
I think the article in the link mentions a new test stand - I can't check right now as the current thunderstorm seems to have screwed up BT's DNS and I can't get to NASA's website Connected now
"It will be tested in a new, twin-tower test stand currently under construction for the tank at the Marshall Center."
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/marshall/multimedia/st...
Edited by MartG on Wednesday 20th July 09:28
Separate smaller test stand for the Lox tank http://www.nasa.gov/exploration/systems/sls/two-ne...
I wonder if they are going to use the old Saturn stand for testing the completed stage, or if they'll be building another new one for that
I wonder if they are going to use the old Saturn stand for testing the completed stage, or if they'll be building another new one for that
Maybe the old stand is just getting old and would need a massive rebuild and refit to make it appropriate for modern testing. It's over 50 years old now.
Also, looking at 500F in the stand, I assume they hoisted in each stage and stacked the whole thing in the stand itself (like it was a mini-VAB). I bet they wouldn't be able to manoeuver the whole SLS core section into the old stand.
Also, looking at 500F in the stand, I assume they hoisted in each stage and stacked the whole thing in the stand itself (like it was a mini-VAB). I bet they wouldn't be able to manoeuver the whole SLS core section into the old stand.
Article about the new test stands, but no mention of a new integrated test stand for the complete vehicle - I suspect the saturn V one will be refurbished & reused for that
http://www.nasa.gov/exploration/systems/sls/new-te...
http://www.nasa.gov/exploration/systems/sls/new-te...
Eric Mc said:
Very good.
The new facility seems to be mainly concerned with testing the intertank structure i.e. the bit that connects the LOX tank with the LH tank (the corrugated section you can see on Shuttle External Tanks.
Small stand for LOX tank and intertank testing, big one for LH2 tank testingThe new facility seems to be mainly concerned with testing the intertank structure i.e. the bit that connects the LOX tank with the LH tank (the corrugated section you can see on Shuttle External Tanks.
RobDickinson said:
Really, what the fk would they eat when the got up there?
Havnt thought that one through have they?
The last attempt at orbiting a cetacean wasn't that successful.Havnt thought that one through have they?
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff