CEV: Freeze The Important Stuff Now, Or lose Too Much?

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

mattblack

Guest
They'd better not shrink the Crew Module any further. 5 meters diameter is about optimum, and with 30 degree capsule sidewalls, the internal pressurised volume for a crew of four will be 487 cubic feet. That's 121 cubic ft per crew member, up from the 70 cubic ft per man for Apollo. And with a crew of six: 81 cubic ft per person. Better than Apollo in all cases. But if they shrink it anymore, it'll be very tight. Because of the move to hypergolic propellants, they want to save weight. Yeah, but how much will they save in the overall scaling down: 1 ton? Two tons? Every bit's going to count, I suppose.<br /><br />And it's official -- It WILL be the J-2S for the CLV:<br /><br />http://www.usspacenews.com/<br /><br />As I suspected all along! Only question now is whether it will be 1 or 2 engines. I'd hope for 2, along with the 5-segment SRB so as to keep the desired performance as close to the original reference standard payloads as possible. After all: the HLV will be using 5-segments and J-2S on it's upper stage -- might as well standardize, eh? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p>One Percent of Federal Funding For Space: America <strong><em><u>CAN</u></em></strong> Afford it!!  LEO is a <strong><em>Prison</em></strong> -- It's time for a <em><strong>JAILBREAK</strong></em>!!</p> </div>
 
M

mattblack

Guest
4-segment CLV versus 5-segment. Note: This info presumes a 1x J-2S powered upper stage. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p>One Percent of Federal Funding For Space: America <strong><em><u>CAN</u></em></strong> Afford it!!  LEO is a <strong><em>Prison</em></strong> -- It's time for a <em><strong>JAILBREAK</strong></em>!!</p> </div>
 
R

rfoshaug

Guest
The extra SRB segment obviously results in more fuel for the booster.<br /><br />But will this extra fuel be used for more thrust over the same time period (2 minutes), or will it have the same thrust over a longer period? Or something in between? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#ff9900">----------------------------------</font></p><p><font color="#ff9900">My minds have many opinions</font></p> </div>
 
B

BReif

Guest
SOunds like the research is going forward, and the CEV is well underway in the design and developement stage. I do think, though, that if they were to shrink the size of the spacecraft any further, it would compromise the stated mission goals of the program itself, thereby crippling the VSE.<br /><br />However, the VSE itself has a tough way to go. I am all for it, BTW, however, the OMB has drastically reduced the amount of funding available for the Space Station's science, and the number of shuttle missions to completely outfit it. According to a letter written by Senator Kay Baily Hutchinson to the president, this could have drastic impacts upn the developement of the CEV, and the implementation of the VSE itself.<br /><br />Link: http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=19380<br /><br />
 
S

subzero788

Guest
Thanks for that graphic comparing the capsules, matt, it makes the size reduction a lot more clearer in my head now. I don't think they will dare shrink it any further, which would mean a reduction in crew size. <br /><br />What are the main differences between the J2-S and the J2 engine used on the Saturn V?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts