The Tug, part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

j05h

Guest
What are the issues involved in using a manned capsule (Soyuz currently) to meet and tug EELV-launched Station modules? I'm picturing Soyuz doing an Gemini-Agena trick with the Kibo and Columbus modules. The capsule would dock, assume control and using either it's own propulsion or a motor added to the module, fly the whole stack to ISS. The module would be grappled by the station's arm and docked.<br /><br />If implemented, this would seem to negate the need for expensive orbital maneuvering hardware and keep a man in the loop for a very delicate op.<br /><br />Thoughts?<br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>
 
M

mlorrey

Guest
Soyuz has limited fuel capacity for tugging large cargos, unless you converted the Orbital Module into a fuel tank. <br /><br />A better idea would be to use a Progress M tanker, in which the Soyuz reentry module is replaced with fuel tanks (normally used to refuel space stations) that will supplement the fuel needs of the vehicle, thus increasing its delta v and cargo capacity. However, this would still be a one-off thing.<br /><br />Ideally, you'd want to replace the OM and CRM with a fuel tank, convert the chemical rocket engines to electric, mount some bigger solar panels, and make it an unmanned plasma propelled OMV.<br /><br />USAF Phillips Lab has produced a solar thermal propelled OMV that they'd like to launch.
 
S

shoogerbrugge

Guest
I like the idea of the a Progress M tug, but I doubt that it will be powerfull enough to transfer whole modules from LEO to the ISS. But I leave the mathematics to the ones capable of it. <br /><br />The fact that Russia used the TKS as spacetug for most modules of space stations should give some indication of the lack of power. As far as I know only the Pirs was added to the ISS with Progress as a tug.
 
J

j05h

Guest
The exercise is to make it as nearterm as possible, Soyuz, progress, maybe ATV are the only real candidates. Tanker configured Progress already exists. It'd need APAS on the target module, or a small node/PMA/adapter. So the module is launched via EELV, has stabilization of some kind, stay-alive and all that. One Progress meets it soon after achieving orbit, burns for ISS, disengages for burnup. A second Progress shadows, meets the module and brings it within berthing range for the robot arm. Total cost: maybe $500m/module. That includes DeltaIV, two Progress, adapter engineering. <br /><br />If Progress could handle it, that makes a lot of sense. I just like the idea of actual pilots being involved. This is further out, but a stack of Soyuz+Parom+Module+Progress1 would be pretty cool. There are enough Soyuz pads at Baikonur to play like this,which also helps. I thought of the Stretch-Soyuz (no OM, big SM) as well, but wanted to keep the post short. The issues with that: no toilet, limited lifesupport. Stretching the tank shouldn't be to hard. Other candidates include stacks of Fregat or Star68(?) upper stages docked onorbit.<br /><br />Ideally, yes, electric/solar propulsion makes the most long-term sense. What I want is some critical discussion on getting Kibo, Columbus and the PV arrays to ISS, sans Shuttle. The strident STS supporters always hose the discussion when I bring it up. Here's the deal: How do we complete/expand the station if Shuttle doesn't fly again? $20+billion is a lot of money for solutions. <br /><br />The options include: manned tug, unmanned tug, maybe electric tug, and the easiest (IMHO): Reinstalling the European and Japanese equipment in long-duration ATVs, fly, dock and call it done. Final option, already mentioned in thread, is to use TKS vehicle ("FGB").<br /><br />Critique, discuss. Naysayers need not apply.<br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>
 
M

mlorrey

Guest
It is now 2006. We need this option by 2010. That is four years. Now, I believe it when shuttle_guy says NASA couldn't do it in that amount of time.... doesn't mean its impossible, just that NASA is incompetent.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts