The IIS Express

[craigmac]

Nice diagram back in the old message board it seemed like your could easily post pictures just by using

<br /><br />Wonder whatever happened to SuperGun Sadam Hussien was trying to develope back in the late 80's. That idea could probably work for delivery of satillites and even personnel in to orbit.<br />

 

[marcel_leonard]

I think the safe money will probably be placed into OSP!!!<br /><br />ESA OSP<br />Boieng OSP<br />Orbital OSP<br />Air force OSP<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "A mind is a terrible thing to waste..." </div>

 

[halman]

marcel-leonard,<br /><br />I find it highly amusing that the building blocks of matter do not occur in nature. The are only found in large, high energy accelerators. And the more we learn about sub-atomic physics, the more it seems that there are NO rules. Particles appearing out of nowhere, hanging out for a moment or two, and then going back where they came from...<br /><br />Probably, we are going to have to rely upon good old exothermic chemical reactions for a while. But, hey, what fun would a silent rocket launch be? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> The secret to peace of mind is a short attention span. </div>

 

[marcel_leonard]

In the immortal words of Einstien's TA; "your guess is as good as mine!!!" <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "A mind is a terrible thing to waste..." </div>

 

[fatjoe]

Nacnud what exactly is Ion Propulsion? The first time I heard of ion propulsion was as a kid watching Star Trek now I here they are actually trying to develope this technology...<br /><br />On a different note I here the ISS is going the have A Room With A View.

 

[marcel_leonard]

Here is a site that might help you out w/ solar electric propulsion. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "A mind is a terrible thing to waste..." </div>

 

[craigmac]

I'm not 100% when it comes to QM and high energy physics but I do know that any physicist worth their salt will scratch his head first before he/she makes the sweeping statement what constitutes the sub-atomic particles, or how any there are.<br /><br />On another the like your idea about using virtual reality as a control mechanism on ISS robotic construction.

 

[halman]

CraigMac,<br /><br />The first statement that I made regarding the building blocks of nature is a joke that I came across a few years back.<br /><br />After reading "The Dancing Wu Li Masters", I was quite mystified by some of the conclusions the author drew, because they are well substantiated by the evidence that he used, yet they assert that the Universe, or at least this corner of it, has some way of communicating information that is contrary to everything that the science of physics is based upon.<br /><br />If I remember correctly, one example of this regards the spin states of quarks. Quarks apparently come in pairs, and each pair exists in one of six states of 'spin'. If a physical seperation is created between a pair quarks which includes a physical barrier, the quarks are still able to discern if one of them undergoes a change in spin state, because the pair will ALWAYS have the same spin state. If you change the spin state of one , the other instantly changes state to match.<br /><br />Another example used was the detection of a single photon in a darkened space by one of several detectors. If all of the detectors are sheilded from input except one, the photon will ALWAYS be detected. Yet when all detectors are not sheilded, the photon will randomly hit one or another, so the photons are not being 'aimed' at any given detector. But every photon released when there was only one detector capable of detecting it is detected!<br /><br />And I read a few years back about muons which appear suddenly from nowhere, exist in this time-space continuim for a fraction of a second, and then disappear. Each muon represents energy, so the popping in and out would seem to contradict the law of the Conservation of Energy.<br /><br />And then there is the Uncertainty Principle, which indicates that the mere act of observing a particle affects its qualities in such a way that we can never measure more than one at any given time.<br /><br />Is the Universe shy, or what?<br /><br />Ho <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> The secret to peace of mind is a short attention span. </div>

 

[spacester]

Fascinating. <br /><br />I think it was a year and a half ago that I read an intriguing ("pop sci" if you must) article:<br /><br />A distinguished physisist is speculating that the act of creation is the direct result of the act of observation. In other words, the universe is expanding because the ability to observe it is increasing. Wild stuff, the details were way over my head, but the concept was quite elegant.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[halman]

spacester,<br /><br />I sometimes wonder if our quest for knowledge prevents us from understanding. We have learned that matter is composed of atoms of various elements, then we learned that atoms are made of certain particles, and then we learned that those particles consist of OTHER particles. Will furthur reducing the components of those particles make understanding easier? How can such knowledge be applied to the world that we live in?<br /><br />We seek a total understanding, yet the closer we look, the more the looking disturbs what we are looking at.<br /><br /><br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> The secret to peace of mind is a short attention span. </div>

 

[craigmac]

I the immortal words of Curtis Mayfeild: "Educated fools graduate from on uneducated schools!!!"

 

[marcel_leonard]

I would like to know what are you thoughts on using Burt Rutan's model on a larger scale to provide delivery to the ISS? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "A mind is a terrible thing to waste..." </div>

 

[marcel_leonard]

I didn't say Rutan's ship, but rather a larger scale model based on his example...<br /><br />I think if NASA would adobt some of his principles in conjuction w/ a heavy lift booster; I think that the plan would be executed... <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "A mind is a terrible thing to waste..." </div>

 

[craigmac]

Rutan's spaceship one is a good prototype for developing future NASA RVLs!

 

[najab]

><i>Rutan's is a good prototype for developing future NASA RVLs!</i><p>A good example of unconventional ideas? Yes. A prototype? No. SS1 cannot simply be 'scaled up' or modified for orbital flight. NASA has little use for a sub-orbital space craft and a great need for a surface to LEO vehicle.</p>

 

[marcel_leonard]

<font color="yellow">No. SS1 cannot simply be 'scaled up' or modified for orbital flight. </font><br /><br />Why not? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "A mind is a terrible thing to waste..." </div>

 

[marcel_leonard]

I'm not talking about using SS1 rockets; but somthing with the lift capacity of the Adriana, and some type of heavy lift cargo jet... <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "A mind is a terrible thing to waste..." </div>

 

[bobvanx]

Are you proposing that a heavy lift jet would airlaunch a heavy lift booster?

 

[halman]

marcel_leonard,<br /><br />If a wing can be built capable of lifting the shuttle and a fully loaded External Tank to 50,000 feet, we would be able to put a payload of about 100,000 pounds in orbit. I am not sure what the shuttle plus 100,000 pounds plus a fully fueled ET weighs, but I am sure that the shuttle could reach orbit from that altitude with that payload. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> The secret to peace of mind is a short attention span. </div>

 

[halman]

shuttle_guy,<br /><br />That figure of 4,500,000 pounds includes the Solid Rocket Boosters, does it not? So the External Tank weighs 1,650,000 pounds, the shuttle weighs about 220,000 pounds(?) with consumables, and a 100,000 pound payload brings the total the wing would have to lift to 1,970,000 pounds. Early 1960's technology developed an aircraft with an all-up wartime rating of about 850,000 pounds, which only uses four engines. And the wing is swept for high speed cruising, which reduces lift. A wing designed expressly for lift would be long and straight, ala the White Knight. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> The secret to peace of mind is a short attention span. </div>

 

[bobvanx]

>I am sure that the shuttle could reach orbit from that altitude with that payload<br /><br />It's not altitude, it's velocity!<br /><br />Are you going to have the shuttle dive and pick up speed? I think it'd require passing through about 2,000 miles of lithosphere if that's your flight plan.<br /><br />People often misunderstand how truly thin our atmosphere is. At just 10 miles up, it's already almost too thin to even hold an airplane in the sky. By the time you go fast enough to generate enough lift to carry the giant load you're describing, you're generating a plasma.<br /><br />These first 10 miles of air act like a shell to hold space vehicles back. You really want to punch through it as quickly as possible and then multiply your speed by a factor of 10 so you can stay in orbit.

 

[halman]

bobvanx,<br /><br />The concept that I am thinking of has the orbiter on the BACK of the wing, not underneath it. The orbiter lights its engines, the wing pulls up, the orbiter seperates, the wing dives, and the orbiter climbs away at a low inclination. The steeper the climb, the more velocity is lost to gravity. By accelerating parallel to the planet's surface from the moment of seperation, the orbiter begins to climb as the planet curves away beneath it. Using all of the fuel in the External Tank for gaining velocity, instead of less than half of it, the payload to Low Earth Orbit is increased over current launch methods. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> The secret to peace of mind is a short attention span. </div>

 

[strandedonearth]

Even without doing the math, even at 50kft I doubt the shuttles SSME's can accelerate a fully loaded ET fast enough to keep the trajectory out of the lithosphere. I guess the really interesting numbers would be:<br /><br />What is the altitude, velocity vector (airspeed/climb angle), and remaining ET fuel load (percentage) at SRB separation? Some of those numbers are easier to find than others.<br /><br />The carrier wing needs to be able to meet or beat those numbers.<br /><br />Side question for any aeronautical engineers: Picture a typical airliner shape. Replace the fuselage with a fully loaded ET (1.65 million pounds, according to the All-Knowing Shuttle-Guy). Ignoring the weight of the wing itself, how big would the wing have to be to support the mass, for whatever altitude/airspeed figure you wish to plug in? How much drag force would be expected in that flight regime?

 

[halman]

StrandedonEarth,<br /><br />If I remeber correctly, from when we went through all of this back before the Big Crash, at Solid Rocket Booster seperation, the downrange velocity is up around 1 mile per second, and the External Tank is half empty. SRB sep happens around 120,000 feet, I think. However, a modern airliner is a poor choice for the carrier wing, as the wing is swept to allow high speed cruising. A flying wing configuration works best, because it minimizes drag. Something like 12 747-size fanjets would be needed to provide enough speed to lift the payload.<br /><br />The impartant thing to remember is the amount of propellant used to overcome gravity and climb to an altitude where high velocities are possible. The shuttle is in a shallow climb when it is accelerating the fastest because velocity relative to the center of gravity of the planet is the goal. Launching from 50,000 feet, a shallow climb coupled with the curvature of the Earth results in a fairly high rate of climb with a couple of g's acceleration.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> The secret to peace of mind is a short attention span. </div>

 

[marcel_leonard]

<font color="yellow">A flying wing configuration works best, because it minimizes drag. Something like 12 747-size fanjets would be needed to provide enough speed to lift the payload. <br /></font><br /><br /><br />As far as I know Boeing/Lockheed Martin are developing a RVL prototype w/ that very idea... <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "A mind is a terrible thing to waste..." </div>