Klipper update thread (part 1)

[tomnackid]

Not to be chauvanistic, but Russia is not ahead of the U.S. in space exploration. They have yet to successfully land any probe on mars. They have never sent anything to the outer planets. They have not rendezvoused with an asteroid or comet. They have nothing that can even come close to Hubble, not to mention all of the IR, UV, x-ray, and gamma ray observatories that we have launched.<br /><br />Maybe you only count manned space activity. Soyuz may be robust and reliable, but you can't compare it to the STS. 7 people and 50,000 pounds of cargo into orbit in one go. 23,000 pounds returned to a runway landing. How many Soyuz flights would it take to bring down 23,000 pounds of payload--assuming that it could even be brought down in Soyuz size chunks.<br /><br />The Shuttle has been flying for 20 years. Right now it is a political football with powerful forces are fighting to save or scuttle it--very little of the fighting has anything to do with engineering or technology.<br /><br />Russian space exploration is a one trick pony, ok 2 tricks--Soyuz and space stations. And as far as Soyuz goes the only reason that it can now hold 3 average size adults in full pressure suits is because of all the money NASA funneled into the upgrade effort.<br /><br />I don't mean to belittle Russian space achievements. Russian engineers are obviously able to produce great spacecraft and they certainly have benefited by taking a methodical, evolutionary approach. I hope the Kliper is a big success, but spaceplane projects have come and gone before: DynaSoar, Hermes, Hope, Buran, etc. etc.

 

[krrr]

"Zenit3"<br /><br />What changes would be necessary on the Zenit 2 for Klipper, apart from whatever "man-ratedness" means?

 

[radarredux]

> <i><font color="yellow">I'd never thought I'd see the day when the Ruskies are clearly ahead of the US in space exploration.</font>/i><br /><br />Of course in much of space, Russia has led the way. First satellite. First humans into space and orbit. Many early probes to the Moon. Probes to Venus. Long-term space stations.<br /><br />The "Man on the Moon" goal was set in part because it was far enough out that America could catch up and then surpass Russia.<br /><br />What I am surprised about is that Russia is leading America in the commercialization of human space travel.</i>

 

[spacefire]

of course. and the Kliper is clearly much more advanced than the CEV, at least as far as operations on LEO are concerned.<br /><br /><br />Wondering-will the Kliper be able to make it to the moon?<br />The Soyuz could, why not the Kliper? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[spacefire]

you yourself can review the proposals submitted so far by Lockheed, Boeing and Rosviakosmos <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[ronatu]

13.5 tonn payload... <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <br /><br />The improved rocket was named Zenit-3SL...

 

[spacefire]

can't wait to hear the new requirements/missions. Don't want to be an 'I told you so' but I predicted they were going to change. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[krrr]

"13.5 tonn payload...<br /><br />The improved rocket was named Zenit-3SL..."<br /><br />Well the Zenit-3 is the Zenit-2 with a Block DM upper stage, which is not needed for LEO. The Zenit-2SLB can lift 13920 kg into a 200 km orbit.

 

[tomnackid]

The point I was trying to make is that NOTHING but the shuttle has the capability to bring back significant amounts of payload. And NOTHING but the shuttle can put a crew and a large payload that needs human interaction (Spacelab, Hubble etc) into orbit together. Granted these are capabilities that have not ben used nearly as much as NASA had expected back in the 1970s. The shuttle has always been too far ahead of its time.<br /><br />I'm not trying to dis the Russian space program. They have highly reliable system for getting men to and from LEO, and for putting payloads into LEO. But on the other hand they have very little in the way of space science, long range probes, planetary landers. Russia and the US have pursued different goals. One could make just as easily make the case that Russia has wasted money on antiquated crew-carrying capsules while the US went on to develop sophisticated computers and robotics, developed accurate space navigation systems and ion drives as in Deep Space 1, prospected on the surface of Mars, asteroids and comets, and did all the other groundwork for REAL space travel.<br /><br />I think both arguments have a grain of truth to them, but neither is the complete story. Apples and oranges. <br /><br />And as I said before I hope Kliper is a big success, but as important as having a reliable ferry to and from orbit is to have something important, useful, and profitable for people to do once they get there!

 

[JonClarke]

The problem is that there has been very little need to return large payloads from space. LDRF, a couple of salvaged comsats, Solar Max are about it.<br /><br />Hubble was designed for human servicing because of the shuttle. Lot's of excellent work have been done by space telescopes without the shuttle.<br /><br />Spacelab was a poor man's space station. Those experiments would have been much better prefromed in a space station which smaller spacecraft would have visited. the station was not available so Spacelab was the best alternative.<br /><br />The may be aherad of it's time, but that does not alter the fact it most of its missions can be performed by other spacecraft that exist now.<br /><br />Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>

 

[ronatu]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>"... êà÷åñòâå íîñèòåëåé áóäåò èñïîëüçîâàòüñÿ äîðàáîòàííûé âàðèàíò äâóõñòóïåí÷àòûõ ðàêåò-íîñèòåëåé «Çåíèò-2» ïîä íîâûì èìåíåì «Çåíèò-2ÑËÁ», à òàêæå òðåõñòóïåí÷àòàÿ ðàêåòà-íîñèòåëü «Çåíèò-3ÑËÁ». Èìåííî íà íåé ìîæíî âûâîäèòü íà îðáèòó íîâûé ìíîãîðàçîâûé êîñìè÷åñêèé êîðàáëü «Êëèïåð»... "<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />Short translation:<br />For a moment the booster for Cliper was selected - Zenit 2SLB and/or Zenit 3SLB. <br /><br />http://www.federalspace.ru/NewsDoSele.asp?NEWSID=1091

 

[john_316]

For those who need to know Klipper is a nice idea for Russia and all those who want apart of that project.<br /><br />But some people to sit back and look at the picture here. We are not investing in Klipper nor will we for NASA's sake. We are going our own route and with out own designs.<br /><br />Now for some who say CEV is behind the klipper in design and any other elementary things I say this.<br /><br />Oh Really!!!!!!!<br /><br /><br />What do you call the test vehicles X-37/X-38 and DART? We have built subscale models and test articles for drop test and evaulation.<br /><br />To perfectly honest and frankly to the point we are ahead of every one else in the little mini shuttle game. We have done testing and evaluations on new vehicles over the last 10-15 years involving the X-38 and X-37 not to mention the X-43, DART, DC-X, OSP, and X-33.<br /><br />That should tell you that we are doign testing, evaulation and systems integration. So before I hear that Klipper is so much better its just a mini shuttle or should I say min-ferry as it isnt like the STS or Soyuz.<br /><br />CEV has more than just LEO applications with it. CEV will not be the same vehicle for Mars as it will be for LEO, GEO, and Lunar applications. CEV is just designed for one thing in mind for now. LEO applications and we dont need another Shuttle to do that. <br /><br />If they decide they do I am sure it will be better than Klipper and and will be robust whether its a lifty body, capsule, or even a conical or hybrid ballistic type vehicle. <br /><br />Still no word on which it is and until we find out then my focus is still on CEV. I honeslt could care less about Klipper and i dont want any of my tax dollars spent in it either. It isnt an American project thus it doesn't need our funding. If you want to fund it then send them your hard earned money and maybe they will send you a thank you note. But as for sending any of my tax dollars to a program that is not AMERICAN DESIGNED then I don't see an AMERICAN prog

 

[ronatu]

Personnaly, I like X-38 which is BTW closes to Kliper... <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

 

[shoogerbrugge]

hey what do you know, a prediction of mine actually came true (the Zenit thingy) Good news....<br /><br />My main hobby is actually Russian aviation, and when somebody went to the MAKS2005 show I asked him if he could take a couple of pictures of the mock-up overthere.<br /><br />And I'll try to repost the same pictures he took in this forum. All credits belong to Ken from "Flanker Freak & Russian Aviation Enthusiast." Flankers (& others) website at :- http://flankers.co.uk/ <br /> <br />Ai, can't post the pictures, file too big<br /><br />If you want to see them anyways, go to<br /><br />http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=46329&page=2<br /><br />the bottom of the linked page

 

[ace5]

does anyone knows what is function of the circular shaped antenna on the bottom of the BO of kliper?<br />that is, the plate with those 8 circles surrounding the center circle?<br />and, what about the final touchdown procedure for Kliper?<br />I guess that there are tiles aon the underside of the vehicle, and if I am right they may be very weak to withstand a rough shock. Is there any airbag?

 

[ace5]

I was talking about the circles in a plate under the docking system, at the edge of a retractable Kurs-type antenna, such as present in Soyuz TM-models.<br /><br />I wonder what kind of system they will use to expose the retrorocktes. certainly they will protect the solid-fuellled retros with a kind of doors that will be ejected prior to landing. I think that they will must replace these doors after each touchdown.

 

[nacnud]

I think that it is part of the kurs system, the soyuz has a glass sheet in the same place. Though it could well be something else.

 

[ronatu]

Not even close.<br />FlyingWind Kliper will land as airplan on gears.<br /><br />What you try to speculate was earlier project for system with expandable heat shield.

 

[shoogerbrugge]

Loads and loads of space related pictures from MAKS2005 on this site<br /><br />http://www.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/content/photogallery/gallery_042/index.html<br /><br />I was quite surprised to find some systems on exhibition. For example there were at least 3 (!) BOR testbeds. Those vehicles were phased out at the end of the seventies. Wonder why they were presented, maybe they will play a role in the Kliper development. And I never expected to see a revival of the START LVs either, but there are plenty of mock-ups of those as well<br /><br />Further there are some pictures from inside the Kliper mock-up, right now lots and lots of LCD screens, but I doubt this is how it will really look like<br /><br />On one of the the posters the 3 launch options for the Kliper are mention Angara 3b, Soyuz 3 and Zenit 2.<br /><br />

 

[JonClarke]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4286086.stm<br /><br />Looks like ESA is nibbling very hard at the bait. <br /><br />Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>

 

[darkenfast]

Some time ago, someone asked a couple of questions on this thread, which I believe were not answered.<br />1. Regarding the circular device mounted below the docking hatch: I'm going to guess that it's a connection device for electrical cables and possibly fuel and oxidizer, if the vehicle is going to replace Progress as well as Soyuz. This avoids cables going through hatches, something that caused problems on Mir when they had the fire.<br />2. Someone asked about retrorockets, but from the context, I believe they were referring to the "Engines for Softening(?) Landing", shown on the drawing of the earlier model, but missing from the winged version. Those would function like the Soyuz, and I assume they would blow out a patch or section of the thermal protection. For leaving orbit, I believe the vehicle will use its orbital engines, probably modeled on the Soyuz version.

 

[shoogerbrugge]

Does anybody has a clue what kind of heat shield they will use for re-entry. Will it be tiles or something else?<br /><br /><br />About the Beeb article, its good to see that there is some actual sign of movement within ESA, its just a study, but at least its more then rethoric.<br /><br />I wonder if the RSA has enough funds to develop a replacement for the Progress vehicle as well. The idea they had was pretty cool, although I forgot its name.<br /><br />

 

[nacnud]

Do you mean the Parom ? [uplink.space.com]

 

[shoogerbrugge]

This is from: http://www.spacedaily.com/news/spacetravel-05zzzr.html<br /><br />_________________________________________<br /><br /><b>Russian Space Agency Mulls Launches From Kourou</b><br />Moscow, Russia (SPX) Oct 06, 2005<br /><br />The Russian Space Agency (RSA) may launch its new Kliper spacecraft from the Kuru space center in French Guiana, RSA Deputy Director Nikolai Moiseev said Wednesday, reports RIA Novosti. The plan while still on the drawing board, could involve Russia's new reusable spacecraft Kliper, which was designed from the start to be an international spacecraft and, therefore be capable of being launched from different space centers throughout the world, Moiseev told RIA Novosti.<br /><br />He also said construction work was in full swing on the new launch pad for the Russian Soyuz-2 rocket at the Guiana space center, located on South America's Caribbean coast. "The contractors are to build the new launch pad and make it operational within 36 months, beginning in April 2005," he said<br /><br />____________________________________________<br /><br />Note from the copier. This leaves open the question whether the Ariane-5 will launch the Kliper, or an Soyuz LV deriavitive. Im quite positive that the more powerful Onega would need a different pad then the Soyuz LV they plan to launch from Kourou.

 

[nacnud]

I think Onega and Soyuz-3 are possible to launch from a sutably modified Soyuz pad. Much easier than trying to man rate the Ariane V.<br />