Thread View: sci.space
2 messages
2 total messages
Started by John Roberts
Tue, 26 Jan 1993 05:43
Re: SSF & Mir & Energia
Author: John Roberts
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 05:43
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 05:43
42 lines
2809 bytes
2809 bytes
-From: chrisb@seachg.uucp (Chris Blask) -Subject: Re: Freedom's orbit -Date: 25 Jan 93 19:10:22 GMT -Organization: Sea Change Corporation, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada -'scuse me if this has been covered, but Buzz Aldrin apparently has been -advocating using the Energia boosters (larger and cheaper than enything we -have, yes?) to boost US payloads, and possibly putting Freedom into Mir's -orbit to take advantage of both Mir and the leftover Russian lifting -capability (OMNI Jan '93). -I'm sure there are lots of great arguments why it isn't that simple, but -still, if it comes to having or not having a platform (which is really -where we are now) we need to have the damn thing. Combining the two -services seems like a brilliant idea to me, with the shuttle and our -high-tech experience and know-how and the Russian workhorse lifters, Mir -(for what it's worth) and their experience with 'just do it' engineering, -we could be in business within my lifetime. Current scheduling doesn't -seem to have a chance in hell of actually _getting_ the thing up there any -time soon. I can't find the official numbers at the moment, but I believe assembly in orbit is scheduled to start sometime around 1997 - I hope your lifespan extends that long. Mir would serve very nicely as a "construction shack" in the early stages of SSF assembly, and the new station could then be maneuvered to a lower inclination orbit using an ion engine if desired. Russia has a lot of experience boosting payloads into orbit, but very little experience with Energia (it's only flown twice). The main problem with choosing these options at this point is that if they are to be used, the decision should have been made several years ago. This close to scheduled launch of the first components, the redesign required could very easily *increase* the time to assembly, which was your principal objection to the status quo. Cooperation between the US and Russian space programs is still a good idea. Adapting Soyuz as an SSF emergency return vehicle (ACRV) appears to be the most favored ACRV option at this point. John Roberts roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov
Re: SSF & Mir & Energia
Author: Sean Michael Gallagher
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 17:00
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 17:00
12 lines
1117 bytes
1117 bytes
roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov (John Roberts) writes: >Energia (it's only flown twice). The main problem with choosing these options >at this point is that if they are to be used, the decision should have been >made several years ago. Yes, but several years ago we were too busy worrying about whether the Soviets' more advanced booster technology would be used to lob a couple of hundred nuclear missles our way. The Russians are offering us help (for a fee), so why are we so unwilling to accept it? Goldin's NASA is supposed to work smarter, faster, and cheaper, and Energia is a heckuva lot faster and cheaper than Shuttle, and that seems like a smart idea to me.
Thread Navigation
This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.
Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.
Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.
Back to All Threads