why Kliper isn't going to make it. Russian overstatements!

[dobbins]

Sigh...<br /><br />I knew it was too good to last.<br /><br />

 

[gaetanomarano]

please, don't change you evaluation every 10 seconds!<br /><br />I think that your 5.4 tons evaluation is too much, it is 20-25% of Shuttle payload, but the 7-8 astronauts of Shuttles don't use 15% of payload for a 16-days mission!<br /><br />please, don't exaggerate with numbers only to demonstrate that I'm wrong!<br />

 

[ve7rkt]

<font color="yellow">please, don't change you evaluation every 10 seconds!</font><br /><br />I changed it once, from 5.4 tons (mostly water) to 1.8 tons (mostly O2).<br /><br /><font color="yellow">but in normal temperature 1/2 kg per astronauts is sufficient </font><br /><br />Surviving for a month on two cups of water per day, if the astronauts do make it back to Earth, they won't need to spread chemical dye in the water to help the helicopters find them, they can just take a leak, it'll be fluorescent enough. Hey! Additional mass savings for the safety gear!<br /><br />(Yes, I realize the ship would be a land-landing, not a water-landing. It's a joke.)<br /><br /><font color="yellow">the 7-8 astronauts of Shuttles don't use 15% of payload for a 16-days mission!</font><br /><br />You have a good point. Now, just how much DO the consumables for a shuttle crew mass? I don't have specs.

 

[gaetanomarano]

probably you live in Arizona or Nevada... in my country, in winter, with normal home temperature and no sport trial, I drink about half liter per day... double it for astronauts and you have only 180 liters for 30 days<br /><br />consider that the base weight INCLUDE 5-days life support, so, you need to add 20-25 days extra-life-support weight<br /><br />in case of emergency the most important thing is "oxygen"... using a 16-days-Shuttle-mission-like food & water reserve with reduced portions (only in case of emergency, of course), the crew may survive much more than 30-days... if they have OXYGEN<br /> <br />200 kg of water can be sent "as water" (not LOX/LH2) and energy can come from solar panels, so, Kliper don't need so much extra LOX/LH2 and fuel cells... only a 30+ days oxygen reserve<br /><br />the total extrawater+extrafood+extraoxygen+extraCO2scrubber for 25-days extraLIFE may be under one extra-ton<br /><br /><font color="yellow">do you think that "one ton of extra-supply" may worth the "value" of six astronauts?<br /></font>

 

[ve7rkt]

I live in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, one of the wetter places in North America. We're told we should drink 2kg of water per day (well, we're told 8 cups, which is 2L, which is of course 2kg). And that's a rough guideline. I weigh 190 lbs ~ 118kg [EDIT: whoops, used the wrong conversion. That's 86kg.] American doctors seem to believe it would be healthier for me to be drinking 4kg water per day. I tried, but I spent the whole day in the washroom.<br /><br />Do you drink 1/2kg of water per day, <i>and nothing else?</i><br /><br />Okay. I'm going to give another, honest crack at the numbers here; I'll post in a moment.

 

[gaetanomarano]

I'm not 118 kg. and half liter is my "medium" drink quantity per day... some days may reach one liter, but only if I eat so much salted foods<br /><br />only in the summer my drink need grows to 3-4 liter per day, but I live in the part of Italy with higher temperatures in summer<br /><br />ok... 2 liters per day per astronauts... it is only 300 extra-liters for 25-days extra-LIFE<br /><br />I think it is not so much weight to launch in space if it may save a crew!!!<br />

 

[ve7rkt]

So, we start by reducing the size of the reserve right off the bat. I thought you wanted a 30 day emergency supply. You clarified -- thank you -- that you wanted 30 days total (5 in flight plus 25 days backup). So, I'll be working out just the 25 day reserve.<br /><br />BY MY SCHEME<br />"""""""""""""""<br />4.5kg O2 per person per day = 675kg of O2 for breathing<br />3kg water per person per day = 450kg water (which could be 50kg H2 and 400kg O2)<br />3kg food per person per day = 450kg food<br /><br />TOTAL: 1575kg, plus.<br />(that's the same guess as my 1.8 tons, but for 25 days instead of 30)<br /><br />BY YOUR SCHEME<br />""""""""""""""""""<br />4.5kg O2 = 675kg of O2 for breathing<br />1.5kg water = 225kg water for drinking (which could be 25kg H2 + 200kg O2)<br />(zero water for hygeine; add a few kilos of air to repressurize after Karl goes crazy and opens the hatch to escape the mould under Komarov's seat that has evolved into the ship's seventh... er, well, now, sixth crewmember)<br />??kg food = ??kg<br /><br />TOTAL: 900kg plus whatever you guess for food, plus.<br /><br />WHAT THAT'S REALLY WORTH<br />""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""<br />1 to 2 tons, per launch. Every launch. Every single launch. In the "hope" that, maybe, someday, perhaps, there might be an accident that falls somewhere between "they can't get home" and "the catastrophe killed the astronauts before we knew about it". Compared to 1 to 2 tons of something you know will be useful every time, like propellants or scientific gear. Pack the machine down with gear you don't need, and you won't be able to do anything when you get where you're going.<br /><br />CONCLUSION<br />""""""""""""""<br />I've wasted both our time, and we need somebody who knows that they're doing to answer this, because by this point, we're both making wild guesses.<br /><br />I admit, my initial 5.4 tons was way, way over. Is 1 to 2 tons still too much to ask? I say yes, 1 to 2 tons on any spacecraft is a big deal.<br /><br />You can get

 

[gaetanomarano]

I can accept your 1.5 ton evaluation despite I think that real water & food is more than they needed in case of emergency<br /><br />I think that NEW spacecrafts may save on internal-space, cargo-bay, robot-arm, assembly, etc. (like the poorCEV) but NOT on safety and life support that MUST BE INCREASED ad much as possible<br /><br />probably 30 days is too much, but the "5-days" planned for Kliper may be a SUICIDE also if little problems will happen<br /><br />I think that the MINIMUM life support must be the same of Shuttles... 16 days... why less?<br /><br />then... 5-days standard + 0.5-0.7 extra-ton for 16 extra-days + a few days without food and water... 25-30 days total... then... OUR CREW WILL STILL BE ALIVE WHEN A RESCUE KLIPER WILL ARRIVE!!!<br />

 

[gaetanomarano]

I've found the Kliper-Parom image below (I don't know if it is an "official" image)<br /><br />The Kliper "autonomous flight duration" is of 3 DAYS ONLY!<br /><br />its Cargo Mass is only 0.5 ton (an "old" Progress can send 2.4 tons payload)<br /><br />Kliper weight may be 12-14.5 tons, while Soyuz is 8 tons, so, it can't be launched with the same rocket (then, Kliper+Soyuz rockets are fake-images...)<br /><br />also, Kliper don't have any "escape-rocket" on top (like Apollo, CEV, Soyuz, etc.) but only a few little engines not sufficient to fly on earth (it need a Parom to fly in space), then, if something goes wrong at lift-off, the crew will DIE!<br /><br />Parom must be launched separately from Kliper and its weight is 7 tons, so, it can't have "fuel" for too much missions, probably only 2-3<br /><br />Parom is a cargo-WITHOUT-cargo, it don't have any pressurized or unpressurized cargo-bay, it is only an outboard-engine for a Kliper or a cargo-container that must be launched SEPARATELY!<br /><br />Then, also a simple cargo mission (now made with ONE Progress) will need a Parom already in orbit and a second launch with the cargo-container!<br />

 

[nacnud]

<font color="yellow">also, Kliper don't have any "escape-rocket" on top (like Apollo, CEV, Soyuz, etc.) but only a few little engines not sufficient to fly on earth (it need a Parom to fly in space), then, if something goes wrong at lift-off, the crew will DIE! <br /><br /><font color="white">Rubbish, thats what the eight motors around the base of the vehicle are for. Fire them all at once for launch escape or in pairs near the end of the launch for extra delta-v</font></font>

 

[gaetanomarano]

This is the "cheap & easy" Kliper-Parom "system":<br /><br />- ONE launch for the Kliper-dinghy (with a rocket twice the power and cost than with Soyuz)<br /><br />- ONE launch for the Parom-outboard engine<br /><br />- ONE launch for the cargo-box (that need a <font color="yellow">SECOND</font>Parom to fly in space!)

 

[gaetanomarano]

<br />I hope you're right (for Kliper's crews and their families)<br />

 

[gaetanomarano]

in the entire story of manned spaceflights only the Challenger exploded after launch<br /><br />the Apollo-style "top-escape-rocket" is (only) "supposed" to save the crew, but, since (fortunately) it was never used in really aborted manned flights, we can't be sure that it may really save the crew if (e.g.) the "stick" will explode a few second after its solid fuel start burning<br /><br />the Kliper "external-escape-rockets" may work... but Kliper weight is three times an Apollo capsule (top-rockets carry away only the capsule, not CM/SM) ...so... I can only say... "good luck Kliper crew!"<br />

 

[nacnud]

The escape rocket on the Soyuz has saved the crew on a couple of occasions, to the escape rocket idea has been proven to work in real life.<br /><br />Link

 

[gaetanomarano]

<br />you're right... but Kliper is heavy...

 

[gaetanomarano]

I think that spaceplanes must be launched with a "mother-plane", it's the ONLY way to increase its safety on departure<br /><br />of course, "safety" is not the only Kliper's problem... I hope engineers will re-design it from zero or abandon the Kliper project and upgrade the successfull and cheap Soyuz/Progress duo (this second is the smarter choice!)<br /> <br />if you think that spaceplane is a BAD idea... then... BUILD A TRUE CAPSULE!<br /><br />if you think that spaceplane is a GOOD idea... then... BUILD A TRUE SPACEPLANE!<br /><br />Kliper is a bad and dangerous "hybrid"<br />

 

[Swampcat]

<font color="yellow">"Kliper is a bad and dangerous 'hybrid'"</font><br /><br />The problem here, as I see it, is that you see everything as dangerous and bad. You state your opinions as if they are fact and, when confronted with fact, you either ignore it or state matter of factly that your facts are superior to the facts of others.<br /><br />This is tiresome. You're a one trick pony. You have nothing but opinion and keep stating it over and over and over again. You have taken a thread that could have covered interesting ground and hijacked it into another of your pointless, repetitive tirades. At least come up with some new arguments. Please. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="3" color="#ff9900"><p><font size="1" color="#993300"><strong><em>------------------------------------------------------------------- </em></strong></font></p><p><font size="1" color="#993300"><strong><em>"I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical. Unsuccessful rebellions, indeed, generally establish the encroachments on the rights of the people which have produced them. An observation of this truth should render honest republican governors so mild in their punishment of rebellions as not to discourage them too much. It is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government."</em></strong></font></p><p><font size="1" color="#993300"><strong>Thomas Jefferson</strong></font></p></font> </div>

 

[dobbins]

Haven't you realized that Gaetano has mystic powers that gives him better insights than all of the world's Aerospace engineers combined?<br /><br />He has a magic ability to turn anything into reality simply by chanting it over and over and over...<br /><br />

 

[gaetanomarano]

"...everything as dangerous and bad..."<br /><br />no<br /><br />Soyuz is cheap and proven safe and reliable<br /><br />Progress is cheap<br /><br />Shuttle is dangerous only at lift-off (because it is a "rocket with wings") but it is full of great features that we will never have in next 30+ years after its retirement<br /><br />Kliper can't be cheap like Soyuz but may be safe with:<br /><br /> /> "mother-plane" launch<br /><br /> /> 15+ days autonomy<br /><br /> /> larger wings<br /><br /> /> its own navigation and propulsion system (not Parom)<br /><br />I've read many posts in many threads and some interesting articles about CEV... with doubts about CEV dimensions, CEV/CLV costs, engines, etc... critics similar to my posts on uplink of last two months...<br /><br />I've received insults and critics when I've said that CEV may fly only 15 times in 2015-2025... now I've read that "US will withdraw ISS in 2016"... then... CEV test/orbital/lunar flights will be 20-22 only... as I've evaluated weeks ago...<br /><br />and CEV/CLV launch costs will be over $1 billion each (over $250 million/seat)... as I've predicted in my evaluation<br /><br />sorry, but, I can't say that a "thing" is good if (I think) it is bad or dangerous or costly or useless<br /><br />------------------------<br /><br />I've a doubt...<br /><br />- I propose the crewless shuttle to still fly 50+ times... and you say me that shuttle MUST be retired<br /><br />- I propose to stop now shuttle flight with crew... and you say me that shuttle MUST fly 19 times until 2010<br /><br />- I suggest to build a new and better spaceplane... and you say me that capsule is better<br /><br />- I post critics about Kliper semi-spaceplane... and you say me that Kliper semi-spaceplane is good and safe while I'm wrong<br /><br />- I say that send back on the moon astronauts only for rocks and images is risky and useless... and you say me that moon is full of science and interesting things<br /><br />- I suggest to explore moon with rovers to find these t

 

[Swampcat]

<font color="yellow">"He has a magic ability to turn anything into reality simply by chanting it over and over and over..."</font><br /><br /><img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /> That appears to be the case. <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="3" color="#ff9900"><p><font size="1" color="#993300"><strong><em>------------------------------------------------------------------- </em></strong></font></p><p><font size="1" color="#993300"><strong><em>"I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical. Unsuccessful rebellions, indeed, generally establish the encroachments on the rights of the people which have produced them. An observation of this truth should render honest republican governors so mild in their punishment of rebellions as not to discourage them too much. It is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government."</em></strong></font></p><p><font size="1" color="#993300"><strong>Thomas Jefferson</strong></font></p></font> </div>

 

[Swampcat]

<font color="yellow">"sorry, but... do you are against spaceplanes and moonrovers... or only against me and my opinions?"</font><br /><br />This isn't personal, Gaetan. It's not about you personally. It's not even specifically about your opinions. <br /><br />I have no problem with spaceplanes, moonrovers, capsules, Klipers, soyuz, STS...whatever is best for a given application. Though I have taken some engineering courses, I am not an engineer so I don't presume to know better than those who have the credentials, unlike others around here <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" />. If the engineers think it's worthwhile to pursue, then I'll go along with it. Like I said in another thread, it's all good.<br /><br />And I have no problem with someone expressing their opinion. What I <b><i>do</i></b> have a problem with is those who choose to repeat, ad nauseum, their opinions in many threads as if, as John says, "they will turn into reality" by virtue of their repetition. <br /><br />You've stated your opinion. We've heard you. 'Nuff said, capisci? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="3" color="#ff9900"><p><font size="1" color="#993300"><strong><em>------------------------------------------------------------------- </em></strong></font></p><p><font size="1" color="#993300"><strong><em>"I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical. Unsuccessful rebellions, indeed, generally establish the encroachments on the rights of the people which have produced them. An observation of this truth should render honest republican governors so mild in their punishment of rebellions as not to discourage them too much. It is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government."</em></strong></font></p><p><font size="1" color="#993300"><strong>Thomas Jefferson</strong></font></p></font> </div>

 

[josh_simonson]

>Soyuz can carry up to three cosmonauts and provide life support for them for up to 3.2 days. (wikipedia)<br /><br /> />Soyuz is cheap and proven safe and reliable (gaeta 12/9)<br /><br /> />probably 30 days is too much, but the "5-days" planned for Kliper may be a SUICIDE also if little problems will happen (gaeta 12/8)<br /><br />So a nearly 2x improvement on the 'safe and reliable' soyuz is suicidal. It all makes sense now. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /><br /><br />Gaeta also fails to realize that a second parom in orbit could rescue the kliper in the unlikely event that the first parom dies and the kliper is somehow unable to re-enter. It's far cheaper and easier to have rescue capability on-orbit than on the ground - and parom would be the first spacecraft capable of this.<br /><br />While a space-tug built for that specific purpose would be a new thing, parom will be developed from the progress freighter, which basically has all the parts that parom will need, just remove the large cargo canister and make the fuel tanks easy to re-fill or swap-out and you're done. <br /><br />Oh, also from wikipedia:<br /> />It has carried fuel and other supplies to all the space stations since Salyut 6. The idea for the Progress came from the realisation that in order for long duration space missions to be possible, there would have to be constant source of supplies. It had been determined that a cosmonaut needed 30 kg of consumables a day; this equates to 5.4 tonnes over a 6 month stay. It was impractical to launch this along with cargo of the Space Shuttle missions, or in the small space available in the Soyuz.<br /><br />So each guy needs 30kg of consumables/day, that comes out to 5.4 metric tones for 6 guys and 30 days. Hmm...

 

[gaetanomarano]

"...repeat, ad nauseum, their opinions..."<br /><br /><br />1. my posts here are not "repetitions" since I've given my opinions about Kliper<br /><br />2. I read uplink's posts like you and I see TONS of "repetitions" about spaceplanes, capsule, etc.<br /><br />THE MOST REPETITIVE POSTS ARE OF THOSE THAT RUN ***ALL*** THREADS AND POST THEIR **REPETITIVE** OPINIONS ABOUT... "CAPSULE MASS/VOLUME SUPERIORITY"... "CEV GOOD CHOICE"... "BAD SPACEPLANES"... "VSE AS THE ONLY POSSIBLE CHOICE"... ETC. AGAINST ***ALL*** USERS (NOT ME ONLY) THAT HAVE LITTLE OR BIG DOUBTS ABOUT THESE ARGUMENTS AND **EXPERT** ENGINEERS' CHOICES!<br /><br />I've not so many time and patience to be "repetitive" like those propaganda-men!!!<br /> <br /><font color="yellow">and... don't forget that ALL objects that (now) you call "mistakes" was designed & made by engineeers...</font>

 

[gaetanomarano]

about Soyuz... it is undoubtly cheap and reliable, in fact it was used also by NASA and ESA but it is an OLD vehicle with all limits of an OLD vehicle... <font color="yellow">and, don't forget that Soyuz DON'T NEED an "external" vehicle (coming from another orbit!) like Parom to save itself!</font><br /><br />if you read my posts without prevention, you can see that I suggest to:<br /><br />1. build new vehicles with better and safer specs about autonomy<br /><br />2. upgrade the successful Soyuz/Progress<br /><br />I think that Kliper need to be changed in design to be a really new and good vehicle but it will be more expensive than to-day's solutions... it's completely useless to build another capsule-limousine (Kliper IS a capsule, with little wings) to compete with already available and cheaper capsules (made in the same country!)... I think that funds are BETTER spent to design REALLY new and improved vehicles... not another Soyuz, another Progress, another Apollo...<br /><br /><br />"...30kg of consumables/day..."<br /><br />if it's true... all ISS crews are dead years ago...<br /><br />I can't accept absurd evaluations only because "they are on the web"... all people can evaluate the "consumable" that may need a single person in a day... also if you multiply by 2 or 3, it will NEVER reach 30kg!<br /><br /><br />about vehicle autonomy... I think that all new vehicles with LESS autonomy than Shuttle (16 days) will be a REGRESS... and the 5-day Kliper IS a BIG regress!<br /><br /><font color="yellow">New products MUST be BETTER than old products if they want to be a "PROGRESS"!</font><br /><br /><br />about Parom... I think that space-tugs are a great idea if made by itself for space-works, NOT if used for vital functions of bad made vehicles like Kliper... new manned vehicle MUST have ALL they need INSIDE, without any external help

 

[Swampcat]

<font color="yellow">"THE MOST REPETITIVE POSTS ARE OF THOSE THAT RUN ***ALL*** THREADS AND POST THEIR **REPETITIVE** OPINIONS ABOUT... "CAPSULE MASS/VOLUME SUPERIORITY"... "CEV GOOD CHOICE"... "BAD SPACEPLANES"... "VSE AS THE ONLY POSSIBLE CHOICE"... ETC. AGAINST ***ALL*** USERS (NOT ME ONLY) THAT HAVE LITTLE OR BIG DOUBTS ABOUT THESE ARGUMENTS AND **EXPERT** ENGINEERS' CHOICES!"<br /><br />"don't forget that ALL objects that (now) you call "mistakes" was designed & made by engineeers..."</font><br /><br />Dude, shouting doesn't make your point any more valid.<br /><br />Where did I say anything about mistakes? I didn't call them mistakes. I know English isn't your primary language, but try reading what I write. Try reading what others write. You might learn something. And then again...<img src="/images/icons/rolleyes.gif" />. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="3" color="#ff9900"><p><font size="1" color="#993300"><strong><em>------------------------------------------------------------------- </em></strong></font></p><p><font size="1" color="#993300"><strong><em>"I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical. Unsuccessful rebellions, indeed, generally establish the encroachments on the rights of the people which have produced them. An observation of this truth should render honest republican governors so mild in their punishment of rebellions as not to discourage them too much. It is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government."</em></strong></font></p><p><font size="1" color="#993300"><strong>Thomas Jefferson</strong></font></p></font> </div>