DOCSLIB.ORG

Study of Technology Requirements for Atmosphere Braking to Orbit About Mars and Venus

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Study of Technology Requirements for Atmosphere Braking to Orbit About Mars and Venus " .. ," NASA CONTRACTOR ~..NIA REPORT STUDY OF TECHNOLOGY REQUIREMENTS FORATMOSPHERE BRAKING TO ORBIT ABOUT MARS AND VENUS Volume I - Summary Prepared by NORTH AMERICANROCKWELL CORPORATION Downey, Calif. for Ames Research Center NATIONALAERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON,D. C. SEPTEMBER 1968 w NASA CR-1131 / /-- /J STUDY OF TECHNOLOGY REQUIREMENTS FOR y a.e ATMOSPHERE BRAKING TO ORBIT BOUT MARS AND VENUS 14 b ' -. Distribution of this report is provided in the interest of informationexchange. Responsibility for the contents resides in the author or organization that prepared it. / SD 67-994-1" 9 ,/Prepared under Contract No. NAS 2-4135 by NORTH AMERICAN ROCKWELL CORP- Downey , Calif . for Ames Research Center NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION - " - . - ~ ". .. .. For sale by the Clearinghouse for Federal Scientific and Technical Information Springfield,Virginia 22151 - CFSTI price $3.00 FOREWORD This volume presents a condensed summary of the study. It is being submitted in accordance with Paragraph 2. 6 of Specification A-12241 contained in Contract NAS2-4135, Study of Technology Require- ments for Atmosphere Braking to Orbit About Mars and Venus, which was issued by the Mission Analysis Division, National Aeronautics and Space Adminis- tration. The data were generated between January and October 1967 and are presented in three volumes: Volume I - Summary (SD67-994- 1) Volume I1 - Technical Analyses (SD 67-994-2) Volume I11 - Appendices (SD 67-994-3) Volume IV - Final Briefing (SD 67-994-4) CONTENTS Section Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION . 1 2. 0 STUDYGUIDELINES AND SCOPE . 4 3. 0 AEROBRAKING MISSION-SYSTEM DESCRIPTION 6 4. 0 SIGNIFICANTRESULTS . 9 4. 1 AerobrakingVehicle Requirements . 9 4. 2 ConfigurationAnalysis . 12 4. 3 RecommendedConfigurations . 16 4. 4 SensitivityAnalyses 17 4. 5 Modular Approach to Vehicle Synthesis 20 4. 6 Testand Qualification Considerations . 21 5. 0 RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER NASA PROGRAMS . 21 6. 0 SUGGESTIONS FORFUTURE WORK . 22 6. 1 Planetary-CaptureMission-System Analyses 22 6. 2 Atmosphere-Braking-Vehicle TechnologyStudies 23 -v- ILLUSTRATIONS Figure Page 1 MarsAerobraking Maneuver . 1 2 Initial Mass in Earth Orbit - Mars Missions 2 3 Initial Mass in Earth Orbit - Venus Missions 2 4 Study Logic Diagram . 3 5 Flared-Cone Concept . 4 6 Mars and Venus Parking-Orbit Characteristics 6 7 MarsAerobraker Miss'ion Profile . 7 8 Spacecraft Configurations . 7 9 Effect of Orbit Eccentricity on Vehicle Weight 10 10 Lift-to-DragRatio Requirements . 10 11 Effect of m/C+ and Analytical Model on Mars AerobrakerStagnation-Point Heating . 11 12 Effect of Entry Velocity on Heatshield Weight 12 13 Heatshield Weight Breakdowns . 17 14 Modular Approach to Aerobraker Synthesis . 20 TABLES Table Page 1 Entry Parameters . 4 M ission Trip Times Trip2 Mission . 5 M ars Orbiter Mission VehiclesMission Orbiter 3 Mars 13 M ars Lander Mission Vehicles 13 Vehicles Mission Lander4 Mars V enus Orbiter Mission VehiclesMission 5 Orbiter Venus . 14 M odu le Shape Variations Shape6 Module . 14 7 AerobrakerSpacecraft Weight Sensitivities . 18 - vii - " . .. ~ . 1.0 INTRODUCTION Manned missions to Mars and rational selection at the earliest Venus, although not a stated national date. goal, are a logical extension of the currentspace program. Overall Previous studies have shown that technical feasibility of such mis- atmosphere braking to orbit about sions appears within the current and Mars and Venus (shown schemat- projected near-term state of the art. ically in Figure 1) offers the poten- However, the eventual accomplish- tial of significantly lower gross ment is constrained by certain key system weights in Earth orbit as issue? which must be resolved in the compared to retropropulsive cap- earlyplanning phases. One key ture. Weightcomparisons for decision which must be made early aerobrakers using space-storable in the program involves the choice propellants for planet-orbit depar- of the mode to effect planet capture ture and all nuclear retrobrakers (i.e. , retrobraking or aerobraking). are shown in Figures 2 and 3 for Each mode obviously must be Mars and Venus mission opportuni- studied intensively to develop the ties from 1980 to 2000. Both orbiter requisite background data for a and lander missions which are shown 1000 KM ALTITUDE I APO PLANET OF SPACECRAFT SPACECRAFTRETRACTS ALL EXTERNAL EQUIPMENT ll AND ASSUMES ATTITUDE SPIRAL MANEUVER FOR ENTRY INTO MARS -*.. V. .., -._ / SPACECRAFTFIRES /Q."" , D- .-. - - - - SPACECRAFT HALTS SPIN Figure 1. MarsAerobraking Maneuver 1 NUCLEAR EARTHDEPARTURE STAGES ASSUMED 800 km (430 n mi) CIRCULAR PARKING ORBIT AEROBRAKERS AT MARS (SPACESTORABLE PROPELLANTS) 1 IO3 Ib n 24w Z r 1980I9821984 1986 1988 19W 19931995 IW9 1980I982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1W3 1995 1999 LAUNCH YEAR Figure 2. Initial Mass in Earth Orbit-Mars Missions IO3 kg IO3 Ib 0NUCLEAR RETROBRAKERS Mars, while the Venus data were AEROBRAKERS (SPACE-STORABLE obtained from the recently completed I200 PROPELLANTS) -24M) 45.400 kg P/L Commonalitystudy(2). The three (100.000 Ib) opportunities for Venus represent 8 the minimum, nominal, and maxi- 2 BO 3 mum energy requirements for Venus missions'in the 1980 to 2000 period. m The use of elliptical parking orbits at Mars and Venus result in 0 - significant weight reductions for both 1988 198890 91 90 91 aerobrakersand retrobrakers. For LAUNCH YEAR example, results obtained for Venus Figure 3. InitialMass in Earth orbiter missions showed that the Orbit-VenusMissions nuclear retrobraker wasapproxi- mately 50 percent heavier for circu- weresynthesized using AV require- lar orbitsand 20 percentheavier for mentsdetermined by Deerwester(1)elliptical orbits than the aerobraker forVenus-swing-by missions for utilizing space -storable propellants (lberwester, J. M. and S.M. D'Haem."Systematic (2)Codik, A. and R. D. Meston,"Final Report - Comparison of Venus Swingby Mode With Standard Technological Requirements Commonto Manned Mode of Mars Round Trips. " Journ. of Spacecraft Planetary Missions. " North American Rockwell andRockets. Vol. 4 No. 7(July 1967). pp. 904-912. Corp., Space Division, SD 67-621 (Dec. 1967). 2 for all possible mission years. The the advantages and disadvantages of aerobraking maneuver is potentially this mode could be evaluated. more complex than the retrobraking Included were parametric and con- maneuver, however, and the space- ceptual design studies to define the craft designs contemplated are more spacecraft weights and their sensi" than an order of magnitude larger in tivity to variations in the environ- mass and volume than the largest mental models assumed, crew size, entry vehicles yet considered. mission profile, propellants , etc. , Potential technology problems in the as well as internal packaging fields of gasdynamics ,-thermodynam- arrangements. A secondaryobjec- c_ ics, structuresand materials, and tive was to analyze the requirements guidance and control could possibly for system simulation, testing, and negate some of the indicated weight qualification. savings; additionally, no serious consideration has previously been The study was conductedin accord given to the problems of system test with the logic diagram shown in Fig- and qualification. ure 4. Initially,the aerobraking vehicle requirements, including The primary objective of this entry corridors, heating, loads, and study was to conduct a detailed packaging, were determined para- investigation of integrated aerobrak- metrically for a wide range of mis- ing spacecraft and the associated sion and vehicle parameters. With technology implications so that both these requirements established, a -ITUDIOBJECllVES .CONFlGUlUllON .DtMLOPMlNI REQUIREMENTS DAlA R~QUIREMfNlS lEQUlREMENlS .SCALING UWS .GlOUND ltS1S EUlH AIMOSWEI 6 CIS-LUNAR SPACE PROfElUNlS I RfIRO 6 AtR0 Figure 4. Study Logic Diagram 3 I. .. configuration analysis was initiated. selected, and the technology impli- Concurrently, sensitivity analyses cations associated with each were were conducted to establish the delineated.In addition, preliminary effects of variations in mission consideration was given to test and parameters, propellant selection, qualificationrequirements. The and module selection on the vehicle pertinent results are summarized in designs.Over 30 detaileddesigns this volume; more detailed analyses were generated and evaluated on are presented in the volumes comparative performance, size, entitled, Technical Analyses and weight, and technology requirements. Appendices, SD 67-994-2and In the final phase, the four most 67-994-3. attractive configurations were 2.0 STUDY GUIDELINES AND SCOPE The candidate configurations were Entry trajectories were deter- derived from a family of symetri- mined'for the entry velocities and cal, biconic shapes trimmed to atmosphere models specified in operate at lift-to-drag ratios of from Table 1. Allowableentry corridors 0.5 to 1.0. In addition, a blunt, were determined assuming a 10-km Apollo-type configuration was ana- (32,810-ft) minimum-altitude con- lyzed to determine its applicability straint at Mars and 5- and 10-g tothe aerobraking mission. The undershoot trajectories at Venus. basic biconic configuration is shown An approach corridor guidance- in Figure 5. accuracy capabilityof 20 km ( 10 n.mi.) Table 1. EntryParameters I Planet I Entry Velocity 1 AtmosphereModels (32, 810 ft/sec) VM-8, MSC-3( 4) 12 km/sec MSFCLDM, I Venus I (39, 370 ft/sec) MDM, UDM (4) (3)Martin, C. D., Physical Characteristics and Atmospheric Data for Mars, NAA/SID 65- 1684 (Nov. 1965). (4)Venus and
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Abort Capabilities from Manned Mars Missions in 1986 David Harold Kruse Iowa State University
    Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Retrospective Theses and Dissertations Dissertations 1967 Abort capabilities from manned Mars missions in 1986 David Harold Kruse Iowa State University Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd Part of the Aerospace Engineering Commons Recommended Citation Kruse, David Harold, "Abort capabilities from manned Mars missions in 1986 " (1967). Retrospective Theses and Dissertations. 3190. https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd/3190 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Dissertations at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Retrospective Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. This dissertation has been microfilmed exactly as received 6 8-5961 KRUSE, David Harold, 1941- ABORT CAPABILITIES FROM MANNED MARS MISSIONS IN 1986. Iowa State University, Ph.D., 1967 Engineering, aeronautical University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan ABORT CAPABILITIES PROM MANNED MARS MISSIONS IN I986 by David Harold Kruse A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty in Partial Fulfillment of The Requirement for the Degree of DOCTOR OP PHILOSOPHY Major Subjects: Aerospace Engineering Mechanical Engineering Approved: Signature was redacted for privacy. :n'Charge or Major work Signature was redacted for privacy. Heads of Major Departments Signature was redacted for privacy. Dèan of Gradua' Iowa State University Of Science and Technology Ames, Iowa 1967 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. INTRODUCTION 1 A. Necessity for Rescue Research 1 B. Previous Work 3 C. Problem Definition 7 D.
    [Show full text]
  • IAC-20-B3.1.11.58416 Page 1 of 6 IAC-20-B3.1.11.58416 NASA's
    71st International Astronautical Congress (IAC) – The CyberSpace Edition, 12-14 October 2020. Copyright ©2020 by the International Astronautical Federation (IAF). All rights reserved. IAC-20-B3.1.11.58416 NASA’s Human Lunar Landing Strategy Dr. Lisa Watson-Morgana, Dr. Greg Chaversb, Mr. John Connollyc, Mrs. Alicia Dwyer-Cianciolod, Mr. Chance Garciae, Mr. Dan Mazanekf, Ms. Laura Meansg*, Ms. Beverly Perryh, Mrs. Tara Polsgrovei a NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, United States, [email protected] b NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, United States, [email protected] c NASA Johnson Space Center, United States, [email protected] d NASA Langley Research Center, United States, [email protected] e NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, United States, [email protected] f NASA Langley Research Center, United States, [email protected] g NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, United States, [email protected] h NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, United States, [email protected] i NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, United States, [email protected] * Corresponding Author Abstract In early 2020, NASA's Human Landing System Program made awards to a set of American companies to compete for the design, delivery and demonstration of an integrated human landing system to land the next Americans near the South Pole of the Moon by 2024. Awards were made utilizing the NextSTEP Broad Agency Announcement procurement mechanism and kicked off a seven-month Certification Baseline Review, leading up to a Continuation Review and possible down-select by NASA at the end of 2020.
    [Show full text]
  • COMPARISON of TRAJECTORY PROFILES and NUCLEAR-PROPULSION-MODULE ARRANGEMENTS for MANNED MARS and MARS-VENUS MISSIONS by Edwurd A
    NASA TECHNICAL NOTE COMPARISON OF TRAJECTORY PROFILES AND NUCLEAR-PROPULSION-MODULE ARRANGEMENTS FOR MANNED MARS AND MARS-VENUS MISSIONS by Edwurd A. Willis, Jr. Lewis Reseurch Center Cleuelund, Ohio 44135 NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON, D. C. FEBRUARY 1971 / . I f TECH LIBRARY KAFB. NM - 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. NASA TN D-6176 ____ __ I ­ 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date COMPARISON OF TRAJECTORY PROFILES AND February 1971 NUCLEAR-PROPULSION-MODULE ARRANGEMENTS FOR 6. Performing Organization Code MANNED MARS AND MARS-VENUS MISSIONS - - . ~ ~ ~ 7. Author(s1 8. Performing Organization Report No. Edward A. Willis, Jr. E-5854 -__ 10. Work Unit No. 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 124-08 Lewis Research Center 11. Contract or Grant No. National Aeronautics and Space Administration _.CleyeLzyd, Ohio 44135 TType of Report and Period Covered 2. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address Technical Note National Aeronautics and Space Administration 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Washington, D. C. 20546 .- - - - - ­ 5. Supplementary Notes -_ - ~ ___ _____ .­ . .. 6. Abstract A brief comparison is made between opposition class (with three impulse return), conjunction class, Venus swing-by to Mars and Mars-Venus double stopover trajectories. Vehicle config­ urations based on NERVA-I engines of varying life and restart capability are considered. It is found that the opposition and Venus swingby trajectories to Mars yield competitive mission performance; the double stopover entails about 30-percent penalties in initial mass and trip time; and that the minimum-weight vehicle uses a single, restartable engine. - ­ 7. Key Words (Suggested by Author(s1 ) 1.18. Distribution Statement Interplanetary trajectories; Nuclear propulsion; Unclassified - unlimited Propulsion module; Interplanetary missions; Mars; Venus; Manned space flight; Vehicle configuration __~~_- ____ 19.
    [Show full text]
  • How Technologies Shaped Beyond-Low-Earth-Orbit Exploration Roadmaps
    How Technologies Shaped Beyond-Low-Earth-Orbit Exploration Roadmaps Stuart M. Feldman, Erica A. Hampton, Keithe E. Baggett, Jason P. Hundley, and Karin A. Feldman Zero Point Frontiers Corp, Huntsville, AL, 35801 This paper provides an overview of key technologies for beyond-LEO human spaceflight for two different space exploration roadmaps: NASA’s Roadmap for Solar System Exploration (1970-1990) and Rockwell’s Integrated Space Plan (ISP) (1989-2100). Both plans were generated at dynamic points in U.S. space exploration history: the first developed in the midst of a successful Apollo lunar landing program, and the second during the first decade of the Space Shuttle program. The policies, research and development, technologies, funding and support of each era impacted each plan’s development and focus on technologies. The NASA Roadmap is technology-driving and outlines a specific plan for Martian exploration that uses technologies developed specifically for the leading missions. The ISP is technology-driven and provided a gradual plan for solar system exploration, implementing technologies as they are developed and defining new missions to make use of those technologies. This paper will discuss how existing technology development efforts and assumptions about future technologies shaped each roadmap. Six key technology areas have been identified: artificial gravity, environmental control and life support systems, radiation shielding, in space resource utilization, Earth-to-orbit propulsion, and beyond-LEO propulsion. How the current and planned developments in each of these areas influenced the design of the roadmaps and how those technologies shaped the proposed development of key infrastructure assets (space stations, launch vehicles, and surface bases) will be reviewed.
    [Show full text]
  • Generalizable Skills and Knowledge for Exploration Missions
    NASA/CR-2018-220445 Generalizable Skills and Knowledge for Exploration Missions Jack Stuster, PhD, CPE Anacapa Sciences, Inc. Santa Barbara, California Jurine Adolf, PhD Vicky Byrne, MS Maya Greene, PhD KBRwyle Johnson Space Center Houston, Texas National Aeronautics and Space Administration Johnson Space Center Houston, Texas 77058 July 2019 NASA STI Program Office ... in Profile Since its founding, NASA has been dedicated to the • CONFERENCE PUBLICATION. advancement of aeronautics and space science. The Collected papers from scientific and NASA scientific and technical information (STI) technical conferences, symposia, seminars, program plays a key part in helping NASA or other meetings sponsored or maintain this important role. co-sponsored by NASA. The NASA STI program operates under the • SPECIAL PUBLICATION. Scientific, auspices of the Agency Chief Information Officer. technical, or historical information from It collects, organizes, provides for archiving, and NASA programs, projects, and missions, disseminates NASA’s STI. The NASA STI often concerned with subjects having program provides access to the NTRS Registered substantial public interest. and its public interface, the NASA Technical Report Server, thus providing one of the largest • TECHNICAL TRANSLATION. collections of aeronautical and space science STI in English-language translations of foreign the world. Results are published in both non-NASA scientific and technical material pertinent to channels and by NASA in the NASA STI Report NASA’s mission. Series, which includes the following report types: Specialized services also include organizing • TECHNICAL PUBLICATION. Reports of and publishing research results, distributing completed research or a major significant specialized research announcements and feeds, phase of research that present the results of providing information desk and personal search NASA Programs and include extensive data or support, and enabling data exchange services.
    [Show full text]
  • Electric Propulsion for Mars Cargo Missions
    Electric propulsion for Mars cargo missions ASEN 5053 Final Project Amal Chandran May 5, 2007 1 Contents 1. Introduction……………………………………..3 2. Mission Scenario………………………………..4 3. cargo mission mass requirements…………….....5 4. Cargo mission Launcher………………………...6 5. Electric propulsion……………………………....7 6. Solar Electric propulsion………………………..8 7. Nuclear electric propulsion…………………….10 8. Emerging Technologies……………………..…13 9. Conclusion……………………………………..14 10. References……………………………………..15 List of Figures Fig 1: Mars Cargo Mission [1]………………………………………………….…4 Fig 2: Mars mission stages 3, 4, and 5 [1] ……………………………….…….….5 Fig 3: ARES V launch image Courtesy NASA……………………………..….….6 Fig 4: Electric propulsion systems[2] ……………………………………….….…7 Fig 5:Variation in initial mass in LEO with trip time for different Isp[3] ….….….8 Fig 6: Schematic of SEP cargo vehicle[3] ………………………………………...9 Fig 7: Mass break down for SEP Mars cargo vehicle[3] ……………………….…9 Fig 8: NEXIS 57 cm diameter ion thruster[5] …………………………………....10 Fig 9: Schematic of a NEP cargo vehicle[6] ……………………………………..12 Fig 10. Conceptual design of ALFA2 Thruster[5] ………………………………..13 Fig 11: A Mars Exploration Camp courtesy www.marsproject.com…………..14 List of Tables Table 1: Mass breakdown for Chemical Rocket………………………………….5 Table 2: Mass breakdown for Nuclear thermal Propulsion……………………….6 Table 3: Mass breakdown for conceptual NEP vehicle………………………….12 Table 4 : CaLiPPSo and ALFA2 comparison [5] ………………………………...13 2 1. Introduction The human exploration of Mars is felt by many to be long overdue. When the first humans walked on the surface of the moon, the exploration of Mars was expected to follow inevitably, but this did not happen. Nevertheless, there remains a strong feeling that a human expedition to Mars will happen someday.
    [Show full text]
  • Futur Summary Report E Programs Task Gr
    I SUMMARYREPORT FUTURE PROGRAMS TASK GR / A/TIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION :#:; ,:.:.:‘.X, ‘.:.:#:p:: ::::: ::::: :::I: $3 :>> # SUMMARY REPORT ;:3 FUTUREPROGRAMS TASK GROUP JANUARY 1965 ,, NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION \ IWASHINGTON, D. C. 20546 I’ FOREWORD This summary report of the Future Programs Task Group, directed by Francis B. Smith of Langley Research Center, presents the results of studies made during 1964 to answer in- quiries made by President Johnson as to criteria and priorities for space missions to fol- low those now approved for the decade of the 1960’s. The President’s request was for a review of space objectives in relation both to what we have learned from our space efforts and to the most important emerging concepts of mis- sions needed for scientific purposes and for advances in technology. The President re- quested that our evaluation be made in relation to estimates of time and funds required to complete programs already approved and under way. The Future Programs Task Group was established to develop materials to meet the President’s request. It has studied: (1) the capability being created in the present aeronautical and space effort; (2) next-step or intermediate space missions that could use or extend this cap- ability; and (3) a number of long-range missions which deserve serious attention. This summary report, resulting from these studies, provides a source of information on accomp- lishments to date and indicates the general time periods within which we can assume or forecast the availability of further scientific and technical knowledge. It is, in addition to providing a review for the President, a timely and valuable working document for use within NASA and other agencies as a foundation for further analysis and discussion look- ing toward decisions that can be based on a broad consensus as to values and timing.
    [Show full text]
  • NEXT STOP MARS the Why, How, and When of Human Missions Next Stop Mars the Why, How, and When of Human Missions Giancarlo Genta
    Giancarlo Genta NEXT STOP MARS The Why, How, and When of Human Missions Next Stop Mars The Why, How, and When of Human Missions Giancarlo Genta Next Stop Mars The Why, How, and When of Human Missions Giancarlo Genta Torino, Italy SPRINGER-PRAXIS BOOKS IN SPACE EXPLORATION Springer Praxis Books ISBN 978-3-319-44310-2 ISBN 978-3-319-44311-9 (eBook) DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-44311-9 Library of Congress Control Number: 2016954425 © Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. Cover design: Jim Wilkie Project editor: David M.
    [Show full text]
  • Andrew-Shayler-Salmon-Marswalk-One-First-Steps-On-A-New-Planet.Pdf
    Marswalk One First Steps on a New Planet David J. Shayler, Andrew Salmon and Michael D. Shayler Mars walk One First Steps on a New Planet Published in association with ^ Springer Praxis Publishing pR Chichester, UK David J. Shayler, FBIS Andrew Salmon, BSc (Hon) Michael D. Shayler Astronautical Historian Space Writer Editor and Designer Astro Info Service Astronautics News Astro Info Service Halesowen Smethwick Hall Green West Midlands West Midlands Birmingham UK UK UK SPRINGER-PRAXIS BOOKS IN SPACE EXPLORATION SUBJECT ADVISORY EDITOR: John Mason B.Sc, M.Sc, Ph.D. ISBN 1-85233-792-3 Springer Berlin Heidelberg New York Springer is a part of Springer Science + Business Media (springeronline.com) Library of Congress Control Number: 2005922813 Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of research or private study, or criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, this publication may only be reproduced, stored or transmitted, in any form or by any means, with the prior permission in writing of the publishers, or in the case of reprographic reproduction in accordance with the terms of licences issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside those terms should be sent to the publishers. © Copyright, 2005 Praxis Publishing Ltd. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. Cover design: Jim Wilkie Copy editing and graphics processing: R. A.
    [Show full text]
  • Idea Journal Vol. 17 No. 1 (2020): Interior Technicity
    idea journal interior technicity: unplugged and/or switched on vol. 17, no. 01 2020 the journal of IDEA: the interior design + interior architecture educators’ association vol. 17, no. 01 interior research lydia kallipoliti learning from mars; or, 29 2020 technicity paper jestin george facing our shit learning from mars; or, facing our shit Lydia Kallipoliti Jestin George The Cooper Union University of Technology Sydney 0000-0003-2035-3295 0000-0002-8225-827X The intent to inhabit Mars carries many self-contradicting intentions, especially given our clear plan to extract Martian resources, domesticate the planet, and transfer the ideological framework of establishing territory in a newly found space free from jurisdiction. To that end, research into sustaining human life on Mars is highly problematic. Interplanetary habitation is arguably an escape from Earth. The latent narrative is defeat; that is succumbing to the climate crisis, while making alternative plans for a selected privileged population. Nevertheless, research into life on Mars forces us to face our shit on Earth, where resources for sustaining all forms of life have been abundant. Not until recently have we been mandated to consider their finite worth or replacement, or deal with the excessive waste we generate as a by-product of our daily production processes. On Mars, where every resource for sustaining life is precious and rare within a fully enclosed life support, waste becomes integral to our survival. This view from afar, in the words of Claude Levi Strauss, changes our viewpoint on how to retain and recycle waste. Arguably, it is not only insightful for Mars-based habitats, but also for helping in altering daily patterns of dealing with waste and the climate crisis on Earth.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Transcript Of
    Transcript of REVIEW OF U.S. HUMAN SPACE FLIGHT PLANS COMMITTEE Public Meeting Cocoa Beach July 30, 2009 8:00 A.M. Committee Members • Norman Augustine, Chairman, former CEO of Lockheed Martin, former Chairman of the Advisory Committee on the Future of the United States Space Program • Phil McAlister, Executive Director, Designated Federal Official (DFO) Members – Listed Alphabetically • Bob Cabana, Director, Kennedy Space Flight Center • Mike Coats, Director, NASA's Johnson Space Center • Edward F. Crawley, Ph.D - Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics • Dr. Wanda Austin, President and Chief Executive Officer, The Aerospace Corporation • Dr. Christopher Chyba, Professor of Astrophysical Sciences and International Affairs, Princeton University • General (ret) Lester L. Lyles, National Academies Committee on the Rationale and Goals of the U.S. Civil Space Program, Chairman • Jeffrey Greason, Co-Founder of XCOR Aerospace • Jeffrey Hanley, Program Manager, NASA Constellation Program • Pepper Phillips - Constellation Project Office at Kennedy - Deputy Director • Bob Ess, Mission Manager for Ares I-X Test Flight • Edward J. Mango, Deputy Director of Launch Vehicle Processing – NASA’s John F. Kennedy Space Center, Florida Public Commentary Section – Speakers Listed Alphabetically • Lou Jamison – Machinist Union Local 2061 • Don Beatty – Former NASA Employee • Wally Nelson – Retired Aerospace Engineer • Dale Ketchum – Spaceport Research & Technology Institute, Director • Ken Bates • Gregory Sacala – Ground Support Engineer for Constellation
    [Show full text]