User Panel
Posted: 8/7/2005 9:08:02 AM EDT
Watching Fox News...
They were talking about a posible replacement for the shuttle.. There is suppose to be some sort of announcement by NASA officials this week of what direction that NASA will be going for a replacement vehicle. Some option includes a Apollo or Gemini type vehicle instead of a Shuttle style vehicle.. |
|
The Starship Enterprise!!! Or maybe an X-wing, or Star Destroyer. One or all will do!!!
|
|
Perfect the Shuttle C for heavy lift capability. Could prolly put a capsule on top of the cargo module.
|
|
The shuttles are obviously getting a little old. Probably time to move on to a new system.
|
|
|
|
|
|
We should to using booster rockets for most of the missions, cheaper and no crew necessary.
I voted for Burt, if he can send a live human into orbit successfully on a few million, then he'll at least save us some money doing the same job at NASA. |
|
Damn! Gene Roddenberry had all this crap solved in 1967!
What the hell is NASA waiting for? |
|
|
I say scrap the concept of the shuttle's being NASA's "flagship" vehicle.
This is not new. It is not difficult. Shuttle flights should be routine by now, if it weren't for the damned beuracracy! If they want to be the "putting communications birds in orbit" people, fine. But what happened to space exploration? Someone call W. and tell him there's oil on Mars already |
|
|
There you go! Millenium Falcon and Battlestar Galactica (original version) would be my choices! |
|
|
We need to fix this generation of manned shuttle orbiters and work on the next generation. So I say Get Both.
I want man to be on Mars and ideally have a base on the moon in my lifetime. |
|
No need to poll this one becuase these are what you are gonna get:
And this: Look closely Vito, this is way more than a glorified Apollo Capsule, it is frikkin' huge! www.spaceref.com/news/viewnews.html?id=1055 There will be a new article on the new plan up tommorow. The shuttle is old and obselete. It is going to be decomissioned over the next few years, it will only fly a few more times and this is a good thing. 30 years is long enough, time to move beyond it. |
|
no way in hell am I going to loan my X-wing to the .gov!!!!! time for a full blown subspace vehicle!!!!! |
|
|
Sorry if seems like I duped your thread.. Just responding to Sunday morning shows. Nice vehicles on your thread. But I seem to remember a Larger Gemini Rocket program that was pre-Apollo. It seated seven or more astronaut. I can't find a link to it. It was to be used for the moon landing. |
|
|
scrap the whole thing and use the funding to put out bids for private companies to do what they want done
seemed to work for the "x prize" |
|
I like that CEV concept. Looks perfect for Rescue or as a Personal transporter to the Space Station. I don't see it used for a combined man and satelite deployment as like the current Shuttle mission. We could use more than one vehicle at this time. Putting all your eggs in one basket was a big mistake by NASA. The CEV would be cheaper with most missions not needing heavy lifting or retrieval of satelites. The new Shuttle should be much larger for use in heavy transporting. Burt Rutan's type vehicles would be a better concept for personal transport. There is a lot of posibilities for a vehicle... People like Rutan should be included in the bids for these vehicles. Hell.. Maybe Rutan could design a vehical to be used by Fed-Ex or UPS for pick up or deliveries to the space station. |
|
|
Can anyone here explain what the major obstacle is that needs to be overcome?
Thrust vs. capacity? Heat/thermal? Money? I can't imagine materials are an issue at this point. What happened to the spaceplane idea? The ability to fly out of the atmosphere? |
|
Wings are dead weight outside the atmosphere. This is intended to be a deep space vessel capable of interplanetary travel. |
|
|
J2S, not RL-10. |
|
|
I have some serious doubts wether the J2S is a viable option, the tooling for the origional J2 has long since disapeared and it would be a significant investment to reopen them. I suppose it has the fact that it's all ready man rated is something it has going for it, but I think using an engine that's in current production makes more sense. Both the SSME and RS68 were also being looked at but both are heavy, and both would have to be modified for air start. |
||
|
I hear they have like a dozen J2S's mothballed and they claim they can restart production within 2 years.
|
|
Really, that's a development I hand't heard, in fact, I never thought that the J2s ever made it into the testing phase like the rest of the hardware for the uprated Saturn. I wonder if there are any F1As in a hanger somewhere.... I know it would be completely infeasable but I wonder what a revived Saturn using F1as and modern cryogenic upperstage engines combined with SRBs could lift. To make the H2M happen on a truncated time table we're going to need heavy lift and even the largest SDV on the drawing board now (Inline config, single SSME/RS-68r upper stage + 4 x 5 segement SRBs + 5 x SSMEs/RS-68rs) only lifts 125 tons, IIRC the uprated Saturn was supposed to be gunning for 200 tons to LEO. |
|
|
|
|
|
My understanding is they completed the hot fire testing and it was ready for service. |
|
|
I got my money on a modified Super Hornet. Why not? It's replacing everything else. |
|
|
I think they need to fix the brake problem first.. |
||
|
I think we need to stop thinking about all-purpose machines and start thinking of different levels of transportation. You walk to your car, drive to the airport, and fly to your destination. You don't sit around trying to figure out how to get your car to drive you to India from Chicago. The Apollo/Gemini/Soyuz style capsules are seemingly ideal for atmospheric re-entry. Sure, they can't fly, but the shuttle flies like a brick strapped to a paper airplane. Deal with it. Symmetric, robust, dependable, great track record. With that idea as a base, let's design our atmospheric ascent/re-entry vehicles with that in mind. You want re-usable? No reason we can't have replaceable ablative heat shields on the capsules. Need payload capacity? Send the payload before the astronauts on an unmanned cargo ship, or stick a payload container behind the capsule on the way up. Design it so you can park it at the space station and it becomes a storage closet, shield, or even send the This Old House team up to remodel it into an apartment. Want to get out of Earth orbit? Park your vehicle at the space station. Send up fuel in unmanned ships. Send astronauts up in a capsule, they can fuel up and be on their way from the station. Etc. etc. Jim |
|
|
|
I think I speak for all of us when I say all we need to so is add more door gunners.
|
|
I remember reading a book called Silver Tower by Dale Brown. In it, they had an aircraft which was launched on a 5 or 10 mile rail. The rail got the plane up to hypersonic speed and then the scramjets took over.
I vote for that. |
|
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.