DOCSLIB.ORG

The Chelomei Alternative to Buran

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

“LKS” The Chelomei alternative to Buran Giuseppe De Chiara 31 – 08 – 2012 All the drawings are copyright of the author Foreword In 1976 the Soviet government formally authorized the “head-designer” Valentin Glushko to proceed with the Buran project, intended as a mere Space Shuttle copy at that times in advanced development stage. The Buran project, and its massive launcher Energia (strongly supported by Glushko himself) were the targets of several critics among Russian space designers and scientists. One of them was the authored Vladimir Chelomei, a Glushko’s former alley, and also responsible of the famous OKB-52 (from which was sorted the Proton rocket, the TKS spacecraft and the Almaz and Salyut space stations). Chelomei affirmed that the Buran project was too big, heavy and expensive for the Russian possibilities of that times so he proposed, as alternative, a scaled down copy of the actual Space Shuttle, such spacecraft would be lighter and launched by one of his Proton rockets. The result of such idea was the LKS ( Легкий Космический Самолет – Light Spaceplane) project, proposed in 1979 as alternative to Buran/Energia. The LKS maintained all the main features of the original Shuttle/Buran project only scaled down, included a cargo bay with the possibility to carry a wide range of both military and civilian payloads to LEO. In 1980 Chelomei ordered the construction of a full scale mock-up that was realized by his team in only one month of full ahead work, as way to further stimulate Soviet authorities in his direction. In 1982 was officially ordered to stop Chelomei any further activity about the LKS project and was reprised to had expended more than 400.000 rubles in a program not formally authorized as the LKS was. In December 1984 the great designer died leaving unfinished his most ambitious project. The real aftermath happened only in 1991 when the mock-up was destroyed in a so called “act of sabotage” by unknown people for unknown reasons. It remains the idea that if the LKS were approved and realized it would be a valid alternative not only to Buran but to Soyuz itself from mid ’90s until today for Mir and ISS space operations (a special thanks to Grigory Omelchenko for the precious help provided). “LKS” Giuseppe De Chiara © 2010-2012 2 LKS Full Scale Mock-Up images Courtesy of NPO Mashinostroyenia “LKS” Giuseppe De Chiara © 2010-2012 3 OKB-52 LKS – 3 views (1/2) According to 1980 mock-up Top View Front View Side View “LKS” Giuseppe De Chiara © 2010-2012 4 OKB-52 LKS – 3 views (2/2) According to 1980 mock-up Bottom View Back View Side View “LKS” Giuseppe De Chiara © 2010-2012 5 OKB-52 LKS – Launch Configuration Top View Front View Side View “LKS” Giuseppe De Chiara © 2010-2012 6 OKB-52 LKS – On-orbit Configuration Top View Front View Side View “LKS” Giuseppe De Chiara © 2010-2012 7 OKB-52 LKS – Landing Configuration Top View Front View Side View “LKS” Giuseppe De Chiara © 2010-2012 8 LKS – Proton (8K82K) Main Characteristics: Length: 60,8 m (with LKS) Max Diameter: 7.3 m Total Mass: 693.810 kg Payload: 20.700 Kg Propellants: N2O2/UDMH Stages: 3 Launch Site: Baikonur LC-81 “LKS” Giuseppe De Chiara © 2010-2012 9 LKS – Proton Exploded view Launch Configuration LKS Third Second Stage First Stage Stage 11D442 (x 2) RD-0212 (x 1) RD-0210 (x 3) RD-0275 (x 6) RD-0211 (x 1) “LKS” Giuseppe De Chiara © 2010-2012 10 LKS Main Features Light Spaceplane (LKS): Crew: 2 Length: 18,75 m Wing Span: 11,60 m Height: 6,70 m Habitable volume: 16.00 m 3 Cargo bay volume : 30.00 m 3 (6,5 x 2,5 m) Launch mass: 19.950 Kg Landing mass: 17.800 Kg Empty mass: 13.800 Kg Payload: 4.000 Kg Engines: 11D442 (2) x 445 kgf Propellants: UDMH/N2O2 x 2.000 Kg Power System: Batteries/Fuel Cells Escape System: Ejection Seats (Zvezda K-36D) Performances: ∆∆∆v: 300 m/sec (total) Orbital parameters: 259 x 220 Km @ 51,65° L/D Ratio: 1,5 (Hypersonic) Cross-range: ± 2.000 Km Landing speed: 300 Km/h “LKS” Giuseppe De Chiara © 2010-2012 11 LKS – Cross sections Top View Front View Side View “LKS” Giuseppe De Chiara © 2010-2012 12 Russian manned spacecrafts comparison All drawings are at same scale VKK Buran LKS TKS Soyuz TMA “LKS” Giuseppe De Chiara © 2010-2012 13 LKS – Proton Launch LEGEND 1. Launch (T = 00:00) 2. First Stage Separation (T = 02:06) 3. Second Stage Separation (T = 05:34) 4. Third Stage Separation (T = 09:49) 5. LKS OMS Ignition (T = 10:00) 6. LKS in LEO (T = 13:20) “LKS” Giuseppe De Chiara © 2010-2012 14 LKS Atmosphere re-entry LEGEND 1. LKS gain the correct asset for burn 2. LKS OMS ignition & de-orbit burn 3. Braking maneuverings 4. LKS re-entry into atmosphere “LKS” Giuseppe De Chiara © 2010-2012 15 LKS Landing LEGEND 1. LKS is back into atmosphere 2. Braking maneuverings 3. LKS gain the landing alley 4. LKS assume a steep descent angle 5. LKS turns to Baikonur runaway 6. LKS lands and open the brake chute “LKS” Giuseppe De Chiara © 2010-2012 16.
Recommended publications
  • AN IMPROVED STATISTICAL METHOD for MEASURING RELIABILITY with SPECIAL REFERENCE to ROCKET ENGINES By• Robert B. Abernethy Subm

    AN IMPROVED STATISTICAL METHOD for MEASURING RELIABILITY with SPECIAL REFERENCE to ROCKET ENGINES By• Robert B. Abernethy Subm

    AN IMPROVED STATISTICAL METHOD FOR MEASURING RELIABILITY WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO ROCKET ENGINES by• Robert B. Abernethy Submitted as a thesis for the Ph.D. Degree in the Faculty of Science.at the Imperial College of Science and Technology in the University of London. July 1965 - 2 ABSTRACT The current procedure employed in industry to estimate rocket engine reliability is based entirely on discrete, success-failure, variables. The precision of this method is inadequate at high levels of reliability; large changes in reliability cannot be detected. A new method is developed based on treating the performance parameters as continuous, measured variables and the mechanical • characteristics as discrete variables. The new method is more precise, more accurate, and has wider applica- tion to the complex problems of estimating vehicle and mission reliability. Procedures are provided for frequen- tist, likelihood and Bayesian reliability estimates. Estimates of the proportion of a normal distribution exceeding or satisfying a limit, or limits, are treated in detail and tables of these estimates are tabulated. Monte Carlo simulation is used to verify analytical results. Computer programs in Extended Mercury-Atlas Autocode and Fortran IV languages are included with typical com- puter output for the estimates developed. 3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The author is deeply indebted to Professor G. A. Barnard and Professor E. H. Lloyd, his advisors, for their guidance and counsel; to Dr. D. J. Farlie for his many constructive comments; to Mr. T. E. Roughley for his help with computer services; and to his wife for her encouragement and patience. INDEX Part I Introduction Chapter 1 OBJECTIVE 11 a.
  • Features of Legal Support of Space Activities in Ukraine

    Features of Legal Support of Space Activities in Ukraine

    Features of Legal Support of Space Activities in Ukraine Dmytro Zhuravlov1 Doctor of Law, Professor. First Deputy Director of the Institute of Law and Postgraduate Education of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine (Kyiv, Ukraine) E-mail: [email protected] https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2045-9631 Andrii Halunko2 Ph. D. in Law. Inspector of the public order department of the DPA HNPU in Kherson region (Kherson, Ukraine) E-mail: [email protected] https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1842-2506 In the article, the authors reveal the historical and legal aspects of space activities in Ukraine. The historical and legal acts of the Ukrainian SSR and the Soviet Union, regulating the space industry, are analyzed. Considerable attention was paid to the peculiarities of legal regulation of the activities of the main space design bureaus of the time. It is concluded that the space activities of the USSR — in general and the Ukrainian SSR were provided on the basis of sublegislative normative legal acts (resolutions of the Council of Ministers and orders of the Central bodies of the Communist party). However, the lack of the national space law was offset by systematic and full funding of space activities, resulting in the Soviet Union having a powerful space industry. In the conditions of modern development, Ukraine has all the opportunities to achieve significant development of the space industry, using the positive experience of the USSR and opening access to space activities of private investment. Keywords: space activities, law, space law, space technologies, private investments, Soviet regime, launch vehicles Received: September 11, 2019; accepted: October 07, 2019 Advanced Space Law, Volume 4, 2019: 116-124.
  • Space Planes and Space Tourism: the Industry and the Regulation of Its Safety

    Space Planes and Space Tourism: the Industry and the Regulation of Its Safety

    Space Planes and Space Tourism: The Industry and the Regulation of its Safety A Research Study Prepared by Dr. Joseph N. Pelton Director, Space & Advanced Communications Research Institute George Washington University George Washington University SACRI Research Study 1 Table of Contents Executive Summary…………………………………………………… p 4-14 1.0 Introduction…………………………………………………………………….. p 16-26 2.0 Methodology…………………………………………………………………….. p 26-28 3.0 Background and History……………………………………………………….. p 28-34 4.0 US Regulations and Government Programs………………………………….. p 34-35 4.1 NASA’s Legislative Mandate and the New Space Vision………….……. p 35-36 4.2 NASA Safety Practices in Comparison to the FAA……….…………….. p 36-37 4.3 New US Legislation to Regulate and Control Private Space Ventures… p 37 4.3.1 Status of Legislation and Pending FAA Draft Regulations……….. p 37-38 4.3.2 The New Role of Prizes in Space Development…………………….. p 38-40 4.3.3 Implications of Private Space Ventures…………………………….. p 41-42 4.4 International Efforts to Regulate Private Space Systems………………… p 42 4.4.1 International Association for the Advancement of Space Safety… p 42-43 4.4.2 The International Telecommunications Union (ITU)…………….. p 43-44 4.4.3 The Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS).. p 44 4.4.4 The European Aviation Safety Agency…………………………….. p 44-45 4.4.5 Review of International Treaties Involving Space………………… p 45 4.4.6 The ICAO -The Best Way Forward for International Regulation.. p 45-47 5.0 Key Efforts to Estimate the Size of a Private Space Tourism Business……… p 47 5.1.
  • The Annual Compendium of Commercial Space Transportation: 2017

    The Annual Compendium of Commercial Space Transportation: 2017

    Federal Aviation Administration The Annual Compendium of Commercial Space Transportation: 2017 January 2017 Annual Compendium of Commercial Space Transportation: 2017 i Contents About the FAA Office of Commercial Space Transportation The Federal Aviation Administration’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation (FAA AST) licenses and regulates U.S. commercial space launch and reentry activity, as well as the operation of non-federal launch and reentry sites, as authorized by Executive Order 12465 and Title 51 United States Code, Subtitle V, Chapter 509 (formerly the Commercial Space Launch Act). FAA AST’s mission is to ensure public health and safety and the safety of property while protecting the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States during commercial launch and reentry operations. In addition, FAA AST is directed to encourage, facilitate, and promote commercial space launches and reentries. Additional information concerning commercial space transportation can be found on FAA AST’s website: http://www.faa.gov/go/ast Cover art: Phil Smith, The Tauri Group (2017) Publication produced for FAA AST by The Tauri Group under contract. NOTICE Use of trade names or names of manufacturers in this document does not constitute an official endorsement of such products or manufacturers, either expressed or implied, by the Federal Aviation Administration. ii Annual Compendium of Commercial Space Transportation: 2017 GENERAL CONTENTS Executive Summary 1 Introduction 5 Launch Vehicles 9 Launch and Reentry Sites 21 Payloads 35 2016 Launch Events 39 2017 Annual Commercial Space Transportation Forecast 45 Space Transportation Law and Policy 83 Appendices 89 Orbital Launch Vehicle Fact Sheets 100 iii Contents DETAILED CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .
  • N AS a Facts

    N AS a Facts

    National Aeronautics and Space Administration Commercial Crew Development Round 2 ASA’s Commercial Crew Program is certified, NASA would be able to The agency also signed unfunded N(CCP) is investing in multiple purchase transportation services to meet agreements to establish a framework American companies that are designing its ISS crew rotation and emergency of collaboration with additional and developing transportation return obligations. aerospace companies. As part of those capabilities to and from low Earth orbit Through Commercial Crew agreements, NASA is reviewing and and the International Space Station (ISS). Development Round 2 (CCDev2), NASA providing expert feedback to Alliant Through the development and awarded $270 million in 2011 for the Techsystems Inc. (ATK), United Launch certification processes, NASA is laying development of commercial rockets and Alliance (ULA) and Excalibur Almaz Inc. the foundation for future commercial spacecraft. This development round will (EAI) on overall concepts and designs, transportation capabilities. Ultimately, be completed in mid- to late-2012. systems requirements, launch vehicle the goal is to lead to safe, reliable, The industry partners with whom compatibility, testing and integration affordable and more routine access to NASA signed funded Space Act plans, and operational and facilities plans. space so that commercial partners can Agreements (SAAs) are Blue Origin, To find out more about the beginning facts market transportation services to the U.S. The Boeing Co., Sierra Nevada Corp. of a new era in space exploration and government and other customers. and Space Exploration Technologies NASA’s Commercial Crew Program, visit After a transportation capability (SpaceX). .www.nasa.gov/commercialcrew. ATK Liberty NASA INVESTMENT: Unfunded PROFILE: Solid rocket boosters, Ariane 5 core stage, Vulcain 2 engine CAPABILITY: 44,500 pounds to low Earth orbit ASA and Alliant Techsystems Inc.
  • Developing the Space Shuttle1

    Developing the Space Shuttle1

    ****EU4 Chap 2 (161-192) 4/2/01 12:45 PM Page 161 Chapter Two Developing the Space Shuttle1 by Ray A. Williamson Early Concepts of a Reusable Launch Vehicle Spaceflight advocates have long dreamed of building reusable launchers because they offer relative operational simplicity and the potential of significantly reduced costs com- pared to expendable vehicles. However, they are also technologically much more difficult to achieve. German experimenters were the first to examine seriously what developing a reusable launch vehicle (RLV) might require. During the 1920s and 1930s, they argued the advantages and disadvantages of space transportation, but were far from having the technology to realize their dreams. Austrian engineer Eugen M. Sänger, for example, envi- sioned a rocket-powered bomber that would be launched from a rocket sled in Germany at a staging velocity of Mach 1.5. It would burn rocket fuel to propel it to Mach 10, then skip across the upper reaches of the atmosphere and drop a bomb on New York City. The high-flying vehicle would then continue to skip across the top of the atmosphere to land again near its takeoff point. This idea was never picked up by the German air force, but Sänger revived a civilian version of it after the war. In 1963, he proposed a two-stage vehi- cle in which a large aircraft booster would accelerate to supersonic speeds, carrying a rel- atively small RLV to high altitudes, where it would be launched into low-Earth orbit (LEO).2 Although his idea was advocated by Eurospace, the industrial consortium formed to promote the development of space activities, it was not seriously pursued until the mid- 1980s, when Dornier and other German companies began to explore the concept, only to drop it later as too expensive and technically risky.3 As Sänger’s concepts clearly illustrated, technological developments from several dif- ferent disciplines must converge to make an RLV feasible.
  • Worldwide Equipment Guide

    Worldwide Equipment Guide

    WORLDWIDE EQUIPMENT GUIDE TRADOC DCSINT Threat Support Directorate DISTRIBUTION RESTRICTION: Approved for public release; distribution unlimited. Worldwide Equipment Guide Sep 2001 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Page Memorandum, 24 Sep 2001 ...................................... *i V-150................................................................. 2-12 Introduction ............................................................ *vii VTT-323 ......................................................... 2-12.1 Table: Units of Measure........................................... ix WZ 551........................................................... 2-12.2 Errata Notes................................................................ x YW 531A/531C/Type 63 Vehicle Series........... 2-13 Supplement Page Changes.................................... *xiii YW 531H/Type 85 Vehicle Series ................... 2-14 1. INFANTRY WEAPONS ................................... 1-1 Infantry Fighting Vehicles AMX-10P IFV................................................... 2-15 Small Arms BMD-1 Airborne Fighting Vehicle.................... 2-17 AK-74 5.45-mm Assault Rifle ............................. 1-3 BMD-3 Airborne Fighting Vehicle.................... 2-19 RPK-74 5.45-mm Light Machinegun................... 1-4 BMP-1 IFV..................................................... 2-20.1 AK-47 7.62-mm Assault Rifle .......................... 1-4.1 BMP-1P IFV...................................................... 2-21 Sniper Rifles.....................................................
  • Lockheed-Martin OV-200 Class Space Shuttle (2011 –2138)

    Lockheed-Martin OV-200 Class Space Shuttle (2011 –2138)

    - 1 - Original texts and document concept copyright © 2007 by Richard E. Mandel STAR TREK, its on-screen derivatives, and all associated materials are the property of Paramount Pictures Corporation. Multiple references in this document are given under the terms of fair use with regard to international copyright and trademark law. This is a scholarly reference work intended to explain the background and historical aspects of STAR TREK and its spacecraft technology and is not sponsored, approved, or authorized by Paramount Pictures and its affiliated licensees. All visual materials included herein is protected by either implied or statutory copyright and are reproduced either with the permission of the copyright holder or under the terms of fair use as defined under current international copyright law. All visual materials used in this work without clearance were obtained from public sources through public means and were believed to be in the public domain or available for inclusion via the fair use doctrine at the time of printing. Cover art composited from the work of Andrew J. Hodges (DY-100) and Industrial Light and Magic (Excelsior) This work is dedicated to Geoffery Mandel, who started it for all of us. Memory Alpha and SFHQ/Mastercom cataloging data: UFP/SFD DTA HR:217622 - 2 - Gfefsbujpo!Tqbdfgmjhiu!Dispopmphz! First History (Prime Two) Edition Modified Okuda Timeline preview build 20070915 by Richard E. Mandel - 3 - Table of Contents Notes to self: no more than five major starships per section, ONLY canon/semi-canon/licensed/“reality”
  • Seeking a Human Spaceflight Program Worthy of a Great Nation

    Seeking a Human Spaceflight Program Worthy of a Great Nation

    SEEKING A HUMAN SPACEFLIGHT PROGRAM WORTHY OF A GREAT NATION Review of U.S. HUMAN SPACEFLIGHT Plans Committee Review of U.S. Human Spaceflight Plans Committee 1 SEEKING A HUMAN SPACEFLIGHT PROGRAM WORTHY OF A GREAT NATION 2 Review of U.S. Human Spaceflight Plans Committee SEEKING A HUMAN SPACEFLIGHT PROGRAM WORTHY OF A GREAT NATION “We choose...to do [these] things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard...” John F. Kennedy September 12, 1962 Review of U.S. Human Spaceflight Plans Committee 3 SEEKING A HUMAN SPACEFLIGHT PROGRAM WORTHY OF A GREAT NATION Table of Contents Preface .......................... ...................................................................................................................................... 7 Executive Summary ..... ...................................................................................................................................... 9 Chapter 1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 19 Chapter 2.0 U.S. Human Spaceflight: Historical Review ............................................................................ 27 Chapter 3.0 Goals and Future Destinations for Exploration ........................................................................ 33 3.1 Goals for Exploration ............................................................................................................... 33 3.2 Overview of Destinations and Approach .................................................................................
  • Round Trip to Orbit: Human Spaceflight Alternatives

    Round Trip to Orbit: Human Spaceflight Alternatives

    Round Trip to Orbit: Human Spaceflight Alternatives August 1989 NTIS order #PB89-224661 Recommended Citation: U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, Round Trip to Orbit: Human Spaceflight Alternatives Special Report, OTA-ISC-419 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, August 1989). Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 89-600744 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402-9325 (order form can be found in the back of this special report) Foreword In the 20 years since the first Apollo moon landing, the Nation has moved well beyond the Saturn 5 expendable launch vehicle that put men on the moon. First launched in 1981, the Space Shuttle, the world’s first partially reusable launch system, has made possible an array of space achievements, including the recovery and repair of ailing satellites, and shirtsleeve research in Spacelab. However, the tragic loss of the orbiter Challenger and its crew three and a half years ago reminded us that space travel also carries with it a high element of risk-both to spacecraft and to people. Continued human exploration and exploitation of space will depend on a fleet of versatile and reliable launch vehicles. As this special report points out, the United States can look forward to continued improvements in safety, reliability, and performance of the Shuttle system. Yet, early in the next century, the Nation will need a replacement for the Shuttle. To prepare for that eventuality, NASA and the Air Force have begun to explore the potential for advanced launch systems, such as the Advanced Manned Launch System and the National Aerospace Plane, which could revolutionize human access to space.
  • Part 2 Almaz, Salyut, And

    Part 2 Almaz, Salyut, And

    Part 2 Almaz/Salyut/Mir largely concerned with assembly in 12, 1964, Chelomei called upon his Part 2 Earth orbit of a vehicle for circumlu- staff to develop a military station for Almaz, Salyut, nar flight, but also described a small two to three cosmonauts, with a station made up of independently design life of 1 to 2 years. They and Mir launched modules. Three cosmo- designed an integrated system: a nauts were to reach the station single-launch space station dubbed aboard a manned transport spacecraft Almaz (“diamond”) and a Transport called Siber (or Sever) (“north”), Logistics Spacecraft (Russian 2.1 Overview shown in figure 2-2. They would acronym TKS) for reaching it (see live in a habitation module and section 3.3). Chelomei’s three-stage Figure 2-1 is a space station family observe Earth from a “science- Proton booster would launch them tree depicting the evolutionary package” module. Korolev’s Vostok both. Almaz was to be equipped relationships described in this rocket (a converted ICBM) was with a crew capsule, radar remote- section. tapped to launch both Siber and the sensing apparatus for imaging the station modules. In 1965, Korolev Earth’s surface, cameras, two reentry 2.1.1 Early Concepts (1903, proposed a 90-ton space station to be capsules for returning data to Earth, 1962) launched by the N-1 rocket. It was and an antiaircraft cannon to defend to have had a docking module with against American attack.5 An ports for four Soyuz spacecraft.2, 3 interdepartmental commission The space station concept is very old approved the system in 1967.
  • Design Evolution and AHP-Based Historiography of Lifting Reentry Vehicle Space Programs

    Design Evolution and AHP-Based Historiography of Lifting Reentry Vehicle Space Programs

    AIAA 2016-5319 AIAA SPACE Forum 13 - 16 September 2016, Long Beach, California AIAA SPACE 2016 Design Evolution and AHP-based Historiography of Lifting Reentry Vehicle Space Programs Loveneesh Rana∗ and Bernd Chudoba y University of Texas at Arlington, TX-76019-0018 The term \Historiography" is defined as the writing of history based on the critical examination of sources. In the context of space access systems, a considerable body of lit- erature has been published addressing the history of lifting-reentry vehicle(LRV) research. Many technical papers and books have surveyed legacy research case studies, technology development projects and vehicle development programs to document the evolution of hy- personic vehicle design knowledge gained from the early 1950s onwards. However, these accounts tend to be subjective and qualitative in their discussion of the significance and level of progress made. Even though the information addressed in these surveys is consid- ered crucial, it may lack qualitative or quantitative organization for consistently measuring the contribution of an individual program. The goal of this study is to provide an anatomy aimed at addressing and quantifying the contribution of legacy programs towards the evolution of the hypersonic knowledge base. This paper applies quantified analysis to legacy lifting-reentry vehicle programs, aimed at comprehensively capturing the evolution of LRV hypersonic knowledge base. Beginning with an overview of literature surveys focusing on hypersonic research programs, a com- prehensive list of LRV programs, starting from the 1933 Silvervogel to the 2015 Dream Chaser, is assembled. These case-studies are assessed on the basis of contribution made towards major hypersonic disciplines.