Mar 98-053 Boosters for Manned Missions to Mars

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Mar 98-053 Boosters for Manned Missions to Mars MAR 98-053 BOOSTERS FOR MANNED MISSIONS TO MARS, PAST AND PRESENT Greatly expanded version will be made available at: http:// www.webcreations.com/ptm/pubs.htm. Scott Lowther INTRODUCTION A large number of space launch boosters have been proposed throughout the years, many of which were designed for or were applicable to launching components required for manned missions to Mars. In this paper, past and current designs for booster vehicles needed to perform manned Mars missions are examined and compared, with emphasis on current and very recent concepts. Included are such designs as: von Braun’s Ferry Rocket, the Saturn V and various Saturn V derived vehicles, various Nova studies from the 1960’s, the Soviet N-1, the Soviet Energia, various Shuttle Derived Vehicles (such as Shuttle-C, Ares and similar designs), the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle, VentureStar, StarBooster 400, StarBooster 1800, VentureStar and Magnum. Vehicle designs are described and shown and capabilities are compared, along with any manned Mars mission modes originally proposed for each booster. The utility of each booster for piloted missions and cargo missions at current technological levels are examined, as are launch site and infrastructure modification requirements. Three baseline Mars missions based on modern technology are also briefly described: a Mars Direct architecture, a JSC baseline Mars Semi-Direct architecture and a stereotypical large on- orbit assembled single vehicle. Each booster is described in relation to these missions. The results are then compared and contrasted. Conclusions are drawn based upon these results, with certain boosters showing a higher level of ability and confidence. Notes on Data Tables Where possible, payloads for the examined boosters have been referenced for the same orbit (typically 407 kilometers and either 28.5 or 51.6 degrees inclination) to permit more direct comparisons. For some vehicles, however, this direct comparison is not possible. For launchers with multiple strap-on boosters, the data for the strap-ons is the cumulative total for all, not for a single strap-on. COMPARISON MISSIONS On-Orbit Assembled From the late 1940’s until the late 1980’s, the main line of thinking for mission modes for manned Mars missions involved some degree of on-orbit assembly. This has ranged everywhere from a few components simply docked together to far more involved orbital construction programs. 529 One essentially stereotypical on-orbit assembled Mars mission was produced by the NASA Lewis Research Center in 1991 for the Space Exploration Initiative. This concept utilized nuclear thermal rocket research then underway at Lewis for lunar logistics support. The main stage of the Mars vehicle used a derivative of the reusable lunar core stage, with additional liquid hydrogen tanks. The Mars vehicle included a space-only mission module and an Apollo capsule-shaped Mars Excursion Module similar to 1960’s designs. Total vehicle length was 105.6 meters, with a mass in Low Earth Orbit of 668,000 kilograms. Heavy lift boosters derived from the Saturn V were the presumed launch system. On-orbit assembled Mars vehicles were the standard NASA and industry design until the early to mid 1990’s, when smaller single-launch vehicles (Mars Direct) and dual launch, on orbit docked (Design Reference Mission) vehicles utilizing Martian resources for propellant became preferred. While the design of such vehicles have been many and varied, on-orbit assembled vehicles that do not make use of Martian resources have tended to be extremely massive. A selection of such designs produced by Boeing for NASA-Marshall in the late 1980’s and early 1990’s showed initial masses on Low Earth Orbit of between 478,000 kilogram (for designs with advanced nuclear propulsion) to 828,000 kilograms (for all-chemical vehicles). Such vehicles have always required heavy lift boosters due to the weights of individual components, and have often had outsized components (fuel tanks, aeroshells, truss structures, etc.) that required large payload fairings. Mars Direct The idea of using Martian resources for rocket fuel (primarily the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere) has been around for several decades, but did not receive a great deal of study until 1990. A group of scientists and engineers at Martin-Marietta proposed a manned Mars mission mode that made maximum use of Martian resources in response to the Space Exploration Initiative. The mission mode became known as “Mars Direct,” primarily due to the use of a single heavy lift launch vehicle to loft components of the mission directly to Mars with no stopover needed in Earth orbit. Two launches of the “Ares” booster would be required for a single manned expedition. The first would send an unmanned Earth Return Vehicle directly to Mars, with its fuel tanks virtually dry. Once there, the Earth Return Vehicle would begin processing the local carbon dioxide with onboard chemical reactors and a small supply of liquid hydrogen. Sufficient fuel and oxidizer can be produced to allow the two-stage Earth Return Vehicle to launch directly back to Earth. The piloted mission would be launched to Mars on the next available window, after the ERV has completed its fueling. This mission would contain a single habitation module with a pressurized rover and four crew. The habitation module would, it was planned, be landed within walking or driving distance of the ERV. The crew would spend in excess of one Earth year on the surface of Mars; at the end of which time they would board the ERV and return home. The mission would leave behind the habitation module and all its provisions, to serve as a basis for future explorations. The ERV had a mass of 28,600 kilograms; the habitation module massed 25,200 kilograms. These masses do not include the masses for the required aeroshells, parachutes and lander stages. 530 While the Mars Direct concept is generally regarded as overly optimistic, some of the basic premises have been incorporated into current NASA thinking. The current Design Reference Mission uses In Situ propellant production to fuel the ascent stage used to boost the crew from the Martian surface to the orbiting Earth return vehicle. The habitation module will also be left behind. Design Reference Mission NASA’s current studies for a manned mission to Mars revolve around the Design Reference Mission. This is an ongoing study to design low cost and reliable Mars mission using available or near term technology. As of this writing, the current NASA Design Reference Mission involves the use of six launches of a Magnum class booster. Each launch would orbit a Mars- bound spacecraft or its trans-Mars injection stage; the payload and stage would be docked in LEO, and then sent to Mars.. The current baseline for the trans-Mars injection stage is a nuclear thermal rocket (NTR) system with three engines using liquid hydrogen as the reaction mass. Trans Mars Injections stage has a dry mass of 27,000 kilograms and a propellant loading of 50,000 kilograms. The three payloads to be sent to Mars are the Earth return vehicle (71,400 kilograms, to be left in Mars orbit, with 147,500 kilograms launched from Earth), the ascent stage (66,000 kilograms, to be landed on Mars, with 134,700 kilograms launched from Earth) and the piloted TransHab (60,800 kilograms, to be landed on Mars, with 137,500 kilograms launched from Earth). Total payload to be launched into Earth orbit (407 kilometers by 51.6 degrees) is 419,700 kilograms. The Design Reference Mission follows a mission similar to that proposed for Mars Direct, in that the Earth return vehicle and the ascent stage are sent to Mars unmanned and several years before the manned stage. The ascent stage would use an ISRU plant to produce the fuel required to make the ascent from the Martian surface to the orbiting Earth return vehicle; the Earth return vehicle would be fully fueled prior to launch from Earth. WERNHER VON BRAUN’S “FERRY ROCKET” The first truly large space launch vehicle ever designed at any level of practical detail was Wernher von Braun’s “Ferry Rocket.” This vehicle, which first appeared in von Braun’s 1948 book “Das Marsprojekt,” had it’s origins with the A-4, A-9 and A-10 rockets of World War Two. The Ferry Rocket was designed to fulfill three main missions: launching components for a space station, a lunar mission and a Mars mission. The Ferry Rocket’s design had elements that, seen from a vantage point fifty years further on, seem both quaint and oddly futuristic. The Ferry Rocket was intentionally designed to not break new ground, technologically; everything about it was meant to be possible using early 1950’s technology. Propulsion for the giant three stage vehicle was to be provided by no less than 51 rocket engines in the first stage, 22 in the second and 5 in the winged third stage. These engines burned the propellant combination of hydrazine and nitric acid; while thoroughly toxic, this fuel combination did at least have the advantage of being hypergolic, thus reducing problems of ignition. These propellants were also non-cryogenic. The rocket engines on the first two stages were to be packed so closely together that instead of having circular cross-section bell nozzles they had hexagonal cross section nozzles, a practice virtually unknown in the world of rocketry. 532 The third stage of the ferry rocket was winged and manned, and used conventional tricycle landing gear for a return to a runway. In this respect it was similar to the current Space Shuttle. However, it was to be made of primarily stainless steel, and had a small, hockey-puck shaped cargo bay.
Recommended publications
  • Victor Or Villain? Wernher Von Braun and the Space Race
    The Social Studies (2011) 102, 59–64 Copyright C Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: 0037-7996 print / 2152-405X online DOI: 10.1080/00377996.2010.484444 Victor or Villain? Wernher von Braun and the Space Race JASON L. O’BRIEN1 and CHRISTINE E. SEARS2 1Education Department, University of Alabama in Huntsville, Huntsville, Alabama, USA 2History Department, University of Alabama in Huntsville, Huntsville, Alabama, USA Set during the Cold War and space race, this historical role-play focuses on Wernher von Braun’s involvement in and culpability for the use of slave laborers to produce V-2 rockets for Nazi Germany. Students will grapple with two central questions. Should von Braun have been allowed to emigrate to the United States given his affiliation with the Nazis and use of slave laborers? Should the U.S. government and military have put Braun in powerful positions in NASA and military programs? This activity encourages students to hone their critical thinking skills as they consider and debate a complex, multi-layered historical scenario. Students also have opportunity to articulate persuasive arguments either for or against von Braun. Each character sketch includes basic information, but additional references are included for teachers and students who want a more in depth background. Keywords: role-play, Wernher von Braun, Space Race, active learning Victor or Villain? Wernher von Braun and the Space Role-Playing as an Instructional Strategy Race By engaging in historical role-plays, students can explore In 2009, the United States celebrated the fortieth anniver- different viewpoints regarding controversial topics (Clegg sary of the Apollo 11 crew’s landing on the moon.
    [Show full text]
  • An Overview of Mars Vicinity Transportation Concepts for a Human Mars Mission
    An Overview of Mars Vicinity Transportation Concepts for a Human Mars Mission Carol E. Dexter NASA/MSFC Exploration Transportation Office Larry Kos NASA/MSFC Preliminary Design Office/Mission Analysis Team Abstract To send a piloted mission to Mars, transportation systems must be developed for the Earth to Orbit, trans Mars injection (TMI), capture into Mars orbit, Mars descent, surface stay, Mars ascent, trans Earth injection (TEI), and Earth return phases. This paper presents a brief overview of the transportation systems for the Human Mars Mission (HMM) only in the vicinity of Mars. This includes: capture into Mars orbit, Mars descent, surface stay, and Mars ascent. Development of feasible mission scenarios now is important for identification of critical technology areas that must be developed to support future human missions. Although there is no funded human Mars mission today, architecture studies are focusing on missions traveling to Mars between 2011 and the early 2020's. Introduction For several years engineers and scientists at NASA have been developing mission scenarios for sending humans to Mars and returning them safely to Earth. The HMM has evolved as analyses have been completed and updated. The design reference mission (DRM) :'2 describes the baseline mission architecture at a given time, it is not intended to be a final or recommended mission scenario. As development of the HMM continues, the DRM and various mission architecture options or design reference points (DRPs) are refined and updated. Several locations are included in the DRPs: Mars, the Moon, and asteroids. At this time, only the Mars DRP has been evaluated in any detail.
    [Show full text]
  • The Flight to Orbit
    There are numerous ways to get there— Around the Corner Th As then–US Space Command chief from rocket The Gen. Howell M. Estes III said to launch to space defense writers just before his re- tirement in August, “This is going maneuver to come along a lot quicker than we vehicles—and the think it is. ... We tend to think this stuff is way out there in the future, Air Force is but it’s right around the corner.” keeping its Flight The Air Force and NASA have divided the task of providing the options open. US government with a means of reliable, low-cost transportation to Earth orbit. The Air Force, with the largest immediate need, is heading to up the effort to revamp the Expend- to able Launch Vehicles now used to loft military and other government satellites. Called the Evolved ELV, this program is focused on derivatives of existing rockets. Competitors have been invited to redesign or value- engineer their proven boosters with new materials and technologies to provide reliable launch services at a he Air Force would like to go Orbit far lower price than today’s bench- back and forth to Earth orbit as bit mark of around $10,000 a pound to T O easily as it goes back and forth to Low Earth Orbit. The reasoning is 30,000 feet—routinely, reliably, and that an “evolved”—rather than an relatively cheaply. Such a capability all-new—vehicle will yield cost sav- goes hand in hand with being a true ings while reducing technical risk.
    [Show full text]
  • An Early Manned Lunar Landing Q
    . ' - ,, ,, ,, . ... , " X64 80440 O~s7!- A FEASIBLE APPROACH FOR AN EARLY MANNED LUNAR LANDING Q PART I SUMMARY REPORT OF AD HOC TASK GROUP STU6Y (u) JUNE 16, 1961 Restriction/Classification Cancelled NA§A HEADQUARTERS, NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION ' I ------AD HOC TASK .GROUP . William A. Fleming - Chairman, Hq. Facilities Addison M. Rothrock - Deputy Chairman, Hq.· Albert J. Kelley - Hq. Samuel Snyder - Hq. Berg Paraghamian - Hq. Robert D. Briskman - ·Hq. Walter W. Haase - Hq. Secrest L. Berry - Hq. Spacecraft Llle Sciences . ..John H. Disher - Hq. James P. Nolan, Jr. - ·Hq • Merle. G•. Waugh - Hq. A.H. Schwichtenberg - Lovelace Foundation. Kenneth Kleinknecht - STG Alan B. Kehlet - STG Advanced Technology Launch Vehicles Ernesto. Pearson, Jr. - Hq. Eldon W. Hall - Hq. Space Sciences Melvyn Savage - Hq. Heinz H. Koelle .- MSFC · William Shipley - JPL William L. Lovejoy_~_Hq. Robert Fellows - Hq •.. Norman Raf el - Hq. Alfred M. Nelson - Hq. The effort: or the Ad Hoc Task Group were supplemented very signllicantly by major contributions in each technical area from a large number or other staff members at the various NASA Centers and at NASA Headquarters. Although these· added participants are too numerous to mention individually, their contributions are a vital part of the study results. i Restriction/Classification Cancelled lil TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ~ Purpose and Study Approach 1 Ground Rules and Guidelines 2 Program Elements 3 Use of the Sequenced Milestone System 4 Approach to Program Funding 5 PROGRAM PLAN ·objectives 6 Program Scope 8 Mission Approach 12 Spacecraft Requirements 24 Launch Vehicle Development 32_ Facilities 48 ' Supporting Research 62 Early .Managemen:b·;_ Actiort:s.
    [Show full text]
  • Space Launch System (Sls) Motors
    Propulsion Products Catalog SPACE LAUNCH SYSTEM (SLS) MOTORS For NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS), Northrop Grumman manufactures the five-segment SLS heavy- lift boosters, the booster separation motors (BSM), and the Launch Abort System’s (LAS) launch abort motor and attitude control motor. The SLS five-segment booster is the largest solid rocket motor ever built for flight. The SLS booster shares some design heritage with flight-proven four-segment space shuttle reusable solid rocket motors (RSRM), but generates 20 percent greater average thrust and 24 percent greater total impulse. While space shuttle RSRM production has ended, sustained booster production for SLS helps provide cost savings and access to reliable material sources. Designed to push the spent RSRMs safely away from the space shuttle, Northrop Grumman BSMs were rigorously qualified for human space flight and successfully used on the last fifteen space shuttle missions. These same motors are a critical part of NASA’s SLS. Four BSMs are installed in the forward frustum of each five-segment booster and four are installed in the aft skirt, for a total of 16 BSMs per launch. The launch abort motor is an integral part of NASA’s LAS. The LAS is designed to safely pull the Orion crew module away from the SLS launch vehicle in the event of an emergency on the launch pad or during ascent. Northrop Grumman is on contract to Lockheed Martin to build the abort motor and attitude control motor—Lockheed is the prime contractor for building the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle designed for use on NASA’s SLS.
    [Show full text]
  • IAC-17-D2.4.3 Page 1 of 18 IAC-17
    68th International Astronautical Congress (IAC), Adelaide, Australia, 25-29 September 2017. Copyright ©2017 by DLR-SART. Published by the IAF, with permission and released to the IAF to publish in all forms. IAC-17- D2.4.3 Evaluation of Future Ariane Reusable VTOL Booster stages Etienne Dumonta*, Sven Stapperta, Tobias Eckerb, Jascha Wilkena, Sebastian Karlb, Sven Krummena, Martin Sippela a Department of Space Launcher Systems Analysis (SART), Institute of Space Systems, German Aerospace Center (DLR), Robert Hooke Straße 7, 28359 Bremen, Germany b Department of Spacecraft, Institute of Aerodynamics and Flow Technology, German Aerospace Center (DLR), Bunsenstraße 10, 37073 Gottingen, Germany *[email protected] Abstract Reusability is anticipated to strongly impact the launch service market if sufficient reliability and low refurbishment costs can be achieved. DLR is performing an extensive study on return methods for a reusable booster stage for a future launch vehicle. The present study focuses on the vertical take-off and vertical landing (VTOL) method. First, a restitution of a flight of Falcon 9 is presented in order to assess the accuracy of the tools used. Then, the preliminary designs of different variants of a future Ariane launch vehicle with a reusable VTOL booster stage are described. The proposed launch vehicle is capable of launching a seven ton satellite into a geostationary transfer orbit (GTO) from the European spaceport in Kourou. Different stagings and propellants (LOx/LH2, LOx/LCH4, LOx/LC3H8, subcooled LOx/LCH4) are considered, evaluated and compared. First sizing of a broad range of launcher versions are based on structural index derived from existing stages.
    [Show full text]
  • Character of Signal and Noise Sources in Dispersive and Static Fourier Transform Remote-Sensing Raman Spectrometers
    CHARACTER OF SIGNAL AND NOISE SOURCES IN DISPERSIVE AND STATIC FOURIER TRANSFORM REMOTE-SENSING RAMAN SPECTROMETERS A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE DIVISION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI‘I AT MĀNOA IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN EARTH AND PLANETARY SCIENCE AUGUST 2020 By: Miles Jacob Egan Dissertation Committee Shiv K. Sharma, Chairperson Anupam K. Misra Przemyslaw Dera Jasper Konter David Jameson One man’s noise is another man’s data. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Many people contributed in various ways to this thesis. I would like to thank my research advisors Shiv Sharma and Anupam Misra who supported my development as a graduate student both academically and financially. I would like to thank my committee members Przemyslaw Dera, Jasper Konter, David Jameson, Paul Lucey and Jeff Taylor for instructing me on mineralogy, elemental isotopic measurements, luminescence, remote-sensing, and petrology of the Moon and Mars. I would like to thank Tayro Acosta-Maeda for moral support and finding lost items. I would like to thank Mike Angel and his research group at the University of South Carolina for inviting me to visit his lab on two occasions and getting me started on research related to spatial heterodyne spectrometers. I would like to thank Roger Wiens for his support and direction in characterizing the SuperCam noise sources, and Ray Newell, Sam Clegg, Ann Ollila and Dawn Venhaus for offering their time and feedback on those characterizations. I would like to thank Nancy Hulbirt for her tireless help in producing publication-quality figures, often on short deadlines.
    [Show full text]
  • L AUNCH SYSTEMS Databk7 Collected.Book Page 18 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM Databk7 Collected.Book Page 19 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM
    databk7_collected.book Page 17 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM CHAPTER TWO L AUNCH SYSTEMS databk7_collected.book Page 18 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM databk7_collected.book Page 19 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM CHAPTER TWO L AUNCH SYSTEMS Introduction Launch systems provide access to space, necessary for the majority of NASA’s activities. During the decade from 1989–1998, NASA used two types of launch systems, one consisting of several families of expendable launch vehicles (ELV) and the second consisting of the world’s only partially reusable launch system—the Space Shuttle. A significant challenge NASA faced during the decade was the development of technologies needed to design and implement a new reusable launch system that would prove less expensive than the Shuttle. Although some attempts seemed promising, none succeeded. This chapter addresses most subjects relating to access to space and space transportation. It discusses and describes ELVs, the Space Shuttle in its launch vehicle function, and NASA’s attempts to develop new launch systems. Tables relating to each launch vehicle’s characteristics are included. The other functions of the Space Shuttle—as a scientific laboratory, staging area for repair missions, and a prime element of the Space Station program—are discussed in the next chapter, Human Spaceflight. This chapter also provides a brief review of launch systems in the past decade, an overview of policy relating to launch systems, a summary of the management of NASA’s launch systems programs, and tables of funding data. The Last Decade Reviewed (1979–1988) From 1979 through 1988, NASA used families of ELVs that had seen service during the previous decade.
    [Show full text]
  • Status of the Space Shuttle Solid Rocket Booster
    The Space Congress® Proceedings 1980 (17th) A New Era In Technology Apr 1st, 8:00 AM Status of The Space Shuttle Solid Rocket Booster William P. Horton Solid Rocket Booster Engineering Office, George C. Marshall Space Flight Center, Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.erau.edu/space-congress-proceedings Scholarly Commons Citation Horton, William P., "Status of The Space Shuttle Solid Rocket Booster" (1980). The Space Congress® Proceedings. 3. https://commons.erau.edu/space-congress-proceedings/proceedings-1980-17th/session-1/3 This Event is brought to you for free and open access by the Conferences at Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Space Congress® Proceedings by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. STATUS OF THE SPACE SHUTTLE SOLID ROCKET BOOSTER William P. Horton, Chief Engineer Solid Rocket Booster Engineering Office George C. Marshall Space Flight Center, AL 35812 ABSTRACT discuss retrieval and refurbishment plans for Booster reuse, and will address Booster status Two Solid Rocket Boosters provide the primary for multimission use. first stage thrust for the Space Shuttle. These Boosters, the largest and most powerful solid rocket vehicles to meet established man- BOOSTER CONFIGURATION rated design criteria, are unique in that they are also designed to be recovered, refurbished, It is appropriate to review the Booster config­ and reused. uration before describing the mission profile. The Booster is 150 feet long and is 148 inches The first SRB f s have been stacked on the in diameter (Figure 1), The inert weight Mobile Launch Platform at the Kennedy Space is 186,000 pounds and the propellant weight is Center and are ready to be mated with the approximately 1.1 million pounds for each External Tank and Orbiter in preparation for Booster.
    [Show full text]
  • Delta Clipper a Path to the Future
    Delta Clipper A Path to the Future By Jason Moore & Ashraf Shaikh Executive Summary Although the Space Shuttle has well served its purpose for years, in order to revitalize and advance the American space program, a new space launch vehicle is needed. A prime candidate for the new manned launch vehicle is the DC-X. The DC-X isn’t a state-of-the-art rocket that would require millions of dollars of new development. The DC-X is a space launch vehicle that has already been tested and proven. Very little remains to be done in order to complete the process of establishing the DC-X as an operational vehicle. All that’s left is the building and final testing of a full-size DC-X, followed by manufacture and distribution. The Space Shuttle, as well as expendable rockets, is very expensive to build, maintain and launch. Costing approximately half a billion dollars for each flight, NASA can only afford to do a limited number of Space Shuttle missions. Also, the Shuttle is maintenance intensive, requiring hundreds of man-hours of maintenance after each flight. The DC-X, however, is very cheap to build, easy to maintain, and much cheaper to operate. If the DC-X was used as NASA’s vehicle of choice, NASA could afford to put more payloads into orbit, and manned space missions wouldn’t be the relative rarity they are now. Since not much remains in order to complete the DC-X, a new private organization dedicated solely to the DC-X would be the ideal choice for the company that would build it.
    [Show full text]
  • Space Shuttle Chronology Spacecalc
    CBS News/Spaceflight Now STS Flight History by Launch Date 7/20/06 Space Shuttle Chronology SpaceCalc Space Shuttle DD HH MM SS Flights Notes Challenger 062 07 56 22 10 MET based on main gear Columbia 300 17 40 22 28 touchdown. Compiled from Discovery 268 15 29 30 32 news reports, NASA files. Atlantis 219 21 27 17 26 Endeavour 206 14 12 17 19 Compiled by William Harwood Program Total 1058 04 45 48 115 CBS News/Spaceflight Now OV # STS DD HH MM SS Launch Mission Description 102 N/A 01 00 00 00 00 02/28/81 Flight readiness firing 102 01 01 02 06 20 53 04/12/81 First shuttle flight 102 02 02 02 06 13 11 11/12/81 Fuel cell failure; MDM flight 102 03 03 08 00 04 46 03/22/82 White Sands, N.M., landing 102 04 04 07 01 09 31 06/27/82 Final shuttle test flight 102 05 05 05 02 14 26 11/11/82 1st STS satellites launched 99 N/A 06 00 00 00 00 12/18/82 Flight Readiness Firing 99 N/A 06 00 00 00 00 01/25/83 FRF-2 99 06 06 05 00 23 42 04/04/83 TDRS-1; 1st STS spacewalk 99 07 07 06 02 23 59 06/18/83 Three comsats 99 08 08 06 01 08 43 08/30/83 Insat, CFES 102 09 09 10 07 47 24 11/28/83 First Spacelab flight 99 10 41B 07 23 15 55 02/02/84 2 comsats lost; MMU EVA 99 11 41C 06 23 40 07 04/06/84 Solar Max repair; MMU EVA 103 N/A 41D 00 00 00 00 06/02/84 Flight readiness firing 103 N/A 41D 00 00 00 00 06/26/84 RSLS abort 103 12 41D 06 00 56 04 08/30/84 SBS, Syncom, Telstar 99 13 41G 08 05 23 38 10/05/84 ERBS; 1st female EVA 103 14 51A 07 23 44 56 11/07/84 Westar, Palapa retrieval 103 15 51C 03 01 33 23 01/24/85 DOD (Magnum?) 103 16 51D 06 23 55 23 04/12/85
    [Show full text]
  • Actual Problems Актуальные Проблемы
    АКАДЕМИЯ НАУК АВИАЦИИ И ВОЗДУХОПЛАВАНИЯ РОССИЙСКАЯ АКАДЕМИЯ КОСМОНАВТИКИ ИМ. К.Э.ЦИОЛКОВСКОГО RUSSIAN ASTRONAUTICS ACADEMY OF K.E.TSIOLKOVSKY'S NAME ACADEMY OF AVIATION AND AERONAUTICS SCIENCES СССР 7 195 ISSN 1727-6853 12.04.1961 АКТУАЛЬНЫЕ ПРОБЛЕМЫ АВИАЦИОННЫХ И АЭРОКОСМИЧЕСКИХ СИСТЕМ процессы, модели, эксперимент 1(42), т.21, 2016 RUSSIAN-AMERICAN SCIENTIFIC JOURNAL ACTUAL PROBLEMS OF AVIATION AND AEROSPACE SYSTEMS processes, models, experiment УРНАЛ 1(42), v.21, 2016 УЧНЫЙ Ж О-АМЕРИКАНСКИЙ НА ОССИЙСК Р Казань Daytona Beach А К Т УА Л Ь Н Ы Е П Р О Б Л Е М Ы А В И А Ц И О Н Н Ы Х И А Э Р О К О С М И Ч Е С К И Х С И С Т Е М Казань, Дайтона Бич Вып. 1 (42), том 21, 1-210, 2016 СОДЕРЖАНИЕ CONTENTS С.К.Крикалёв, О.А.Сапрыкин 1 S.K.Krikalev, O.A.Saprykin Пилотируемые Лунные миссии: Manned Moon missions: problems and задачи и перспективы prospects В.Е.Бугров 28 V.E.Bugrov О государственном управлении About government management of программами пилотируемых manned space flights programs космических полетов (критический (critical analysis of problems in анализ проблем отечественной Russian astronautics of the past and космонавтики прошлого и present) настоящего) А.В.Даниленко, К.С.Ёлкин, 90 A.V.Danilenko, K.S.Elkin, С.Ц.Лягушина S.C.Lyagushina Проект программы развития в Project of Russian program on России перспективной космической technology development of prospective технологии – космических тросовых space tethers applications систем Г.Р.Успенский 102 G.R.Uspenskii Прогнозирование космической Forecasting of space activity on деятельности по пилотируемой manned astronautics космонавтике А.В.Шевяков 114 A.V.Shevyakov Математические методы обработки Mathematical methods of images изображений в аэрокосмических processing in aerospace information информационных системах systems Р.С.Зарипов 140 R.S.Zaripov Роль и место военно-транспортных Russian native military transport самолетов в истории авиации aircrafts: history and experience of life России, опыт их боевого применения (part II) (ч.
    [Show full text]