Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Magistrum]

PBS SpaceTime dis a video on the densest white dwarf to date.
It's the one they found last month and I was very eager to see when they would cover. Everyone should check out that channel, it's one of the few pop-science channel that actually explains the phenomenon instead of only showing pretty graphics and making analogies.

[Starver]

Looks like Virgin Galactic are 'grounded' for a while, with the authorities investigating reports that they didn't entirely stick to their intended/authorised flight-profile on its pioneering passenger space-scraping trajectory. (Nothing particularly/more dangerous than expected, when at height, but it was outside the parameters filed in advance, and could apparently have easily been too shallow a rise to have then safely glided onto their landing zone...)

Nothing for certain, yet, but obviously enough to need official checking.

[Bralbaard]

Two launch failures by new space companies over the last week. Let's hope they get there for their next attempts.

The first by Astra is quite amazing. I watched it live, and did not quite believe that it got as far as it did. It is a good thing someone left the gate to the launch site open, so the rocket could get off the pad.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfjO7VCyjPM

The second failure by Firefly happened last night. Only their first attempt, and most new launch companies need a few before succeeding:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4iUdm-gLjho

[Starver]

You'll maybe have heard by now, but William Shatner has been officially confirmed as one of Bezos's imminent space-tourists, as long rumoured. And allegedly he turned down Branson's offer to join that other waiting list, last decade, because that chance wasn't a freebie. It'll make him the oldest person in space, so good luck to him!

(And fingers crossed in general, with the recent issues about safety with both Blue Origin and Virgin Galactic. Both seem to be back, continuing with their suborbital sauntering.)

SpaceX's recent "all-amateur" Dragon crew/tourists went higher than Hubble. I'm sure it's been suggested that this would be an opportunity to go and do some fixing[1], but nowhere I've been recently has said anything about it, so... Elon? NASA? Call me, I'll happily act as liaison.

Further up and out, BepiColombo has made its first contact with Mercury. Looking forward to how that goes.


[1] Not that spacewalking capability has been exhibited, yet, but there's some options available.

[Madman198237]

Dragon doesn't have a manipulator arm or anything like the infrastructure the Space Shuttle had to facilitate on-orbit operations so, no, unfortunately it is very much not really possible to effect repairs/upgrades/anything of that sort to the Hubble or other unmanned satellites using Dragon. Starship could do it, should it get some form of manipulator arm, though. It's big enough, has the cargo space for the arm and repair materials, and could have actual airlocks and a large enough crew to run any number of EVAs over a long enough duration to make serious repairs or upgrades.

It'd be nice to have that capability again, for sure.

[Starver]

For both that and the spacewalks (without resorting to the old Voskhod/Gemini technique of just complete depressurising) I was thinking of what is effectively a modified docking node also being sent up (seperately, for rendezvous, or Apollo-LEM-like in the Crew Dragon aft-trunk) that could have attached manipulator arm(s) as well as act as the proper EVA lock, there should be spare APAS/ODS units, as well as

Although if it is at all possible to conceivably do the necessary actions without EVAs at all[1], just manipulators, then it could even be a telepresence operation with an unmanned service-vehicle. I know this was a prior (even pre-postshuttle) idea, and has its own problems, but even without full Boston Dynamics autonomy there probably have been a few good mechanical developments that could now be fed into such a product.

A non-trivial problem to solve, but truly a plethora of potential solutions which I'd have trouble narrowing down. I'm sure there's engineers already fully on top of  each and every one, of course, vying to produce something definitive for this or similar purposes. As far as finance and other pressures allow.


[1] Current suits for Crew Dragon use are IVA-rated only. Bulky NASA-vintags EVA suits, including free-flight backpack, might not be best launched within the Dragon cabin anyway. The issues involved are why the Quest airlock was needed for US egress and Zvezda required for Russian egress on the ISS (and I don't think there's been much more than incremental changes since). I don't know how far Dragon-EVA has been planned, and Starship is a little too far off, while there's a proven hardware that could augment Dragon, without too much tinkering. And a bespoke solution is surely also onnthe cards, possibly even mocked up.

[Madman198237]

The problem with doing that is that you're talking about MILLIONS of dollars to design and build a module to be launched on its own rocket (+ several hundred million dollars in cost) for a single use and it's probably not a good solution anyway. The Shuttle could field a team of at least three astronauts on an EVA and they didn't have to launch, maneuver to Hubble's altitude and orbit, rendezvous, then perform the repairs and return to Earth without ever leaving their spacesuits...which you'd likely have to do in Dragon because the internal volume is probably not going to be large enough to allow changing into and out of suits. Everything from the oxygen pre-breathe to the suit storage is just not there on Dragon because it's not MEANT to be. And any sort of repairs are going to require too much dexterity for ANY robot. No manipulator arm is capable of popping open an access panel on Hubble (since it's, y'know, not designed to be accessed by a robot) and then doing delicate interior work.

For all that the Space Shuttle had serious problems, THIS is the sort of capability it had. In order to replicate it you need more than a space capsule.

It's certainly possible to make that capability again. It's possible to build a vehicle on-orbit (which I wish somebody would do) capable of executing the plane changes and maneuvers and the like (ion thrusters to maneuver around, anyone? Just maneuver while there's no crew on board and the months it takes you don't matter) and carrying the airlocks and crew space and manipulator arms and EVA suits and spare parts and all. But it isn't something SpaceX will EVER do for Falcon 9 because Starship will obsolete it within, hopefully, a year or two. It's not something NASA will likely do because it'd become obsolete and because they've got a different priority set, what with Artemis.

In short: while possible, I guarantee it won't actually happen. If it does, I'll say I was wrong. Unlike Peter Beck, I'm more willing to be wrong and less willing to promise something drastic

Also, somebody please convince the people that be to start producing space station modules and a powerful enough bank of electromagnetic engines to move it around Earth orbit or further because seriously it's about time we started producing that sort of infrastructure. The possibilities would be incredible and all the technology exists. What is the ISS if not a way to test the long-term use of habitable spaces in, er, space?

[Starver]

[...I believe I covered all this bit I snipped... Rather more tongue-in-cheek about pure robotic repair, but haptic feedback might be much more developed these days.]

For all that the Space Shuttle had serious problems, THIS is the sort of capability it had. In order to replicate it you need more than a space capsule.

I also regret its retirement, though it arguably delayed other developments in the US space program (covered by the Soviet-as-was one, but even they did quite a lot for the arguably better Buran, which got just one unmanned flight before mothballed/roof-collapsed.

It's possible to build a vehicle on-orbit (which I wish somebody would do) capable of executing the plane changes and maneuvers and the like (ion thrusters to maneuver around, anyone? Just maneuver while there's no crew on board and the months it takes you don't matter) and carrying the airlocks and crew space and manipulator arms and EVA suits and spare parts and all.

Which orbit? The one Hubble is in? Or what will eventually become the transfer-orbit to Hubble - hopefully to be met by the manned flight that still has to match it in the same trajectory as it is about to make its way to the Hubble rendezvous, then burn to match Hubble for everyone to work then reverse that to get everyone back to Earth (wherever you leave the repair-station, unmanned again)...

If they can't LEM-like the EVA/manipulator adapter with the Crew Dragon, for size/weight reasons, then indeed send up such a tin-can separately, but it wouldn't (especially with dedicated rocketry allowing it to be larger without the bag of humans on its tip) need to be of a size needing orbital pre-assembly (yes, something that would be useful to do, at some point, but not for this), but could certainly be equipped with a Shuttle-Arm/Canadarm (without needing the travelling rails across strut-segments, or even any travelling capabilities) or three for heavy 'lifting' or man-platforming where EMU/MMUing is not possible.

Docking with the human-lifter should be enough assembly to still give a 'station' with camp-out pre-EVA facilities and airlock. The single connector in use during heavy orbital adjustments may need to be more robust than the more passively-orbitting ISS ones, though they clearly survive trash-avoidance and decay-delaying manouvers, plus Nauka's thruster-error which spun the station all the way around and more and I think there's not much more problem for a planned, in-line reboosting stress. At both ends of the transfer (and maybe back) of the combined unit.


The other big alternative is capturing Hubble (safely, remotely) and bringing it to ISS (or ISS levels), before reboosting, but I'd be more scared of its fragility than of a sevicing crew and their vessel.


(I'm all very pro-Starship as an idea, but I can't see it being used to help Hubble soon enough. This all arose from having had Inspiration demonstrate the wherewithall to at least reach the right sort of apogee, the first manned craft to do so since the shuttle mission on the last Hubble-repair, everyone else since then has only ever visited the ISS or the new Chinese one, that went into orbit at all. Even at SpaceX development speeds, and Muskite perserverence, I'm not sure they'll get a fully capable Starship up there soon enough to be Shuttle 3.0.)

edit:

Spoiler: The following was inadvisably posted in the other thread after wierd's post that follows (click to show/hide)

But bear in mind the Russian modules. And other non-US ones, but Russia (maybe for their own reasons) are also starting to talk loud about how the use-by-dates on their current bits are passing, or passed already, with smoke alarms having sounded. And their newest addition, just this year, malfunctioned and spun the station round 540-odd degrees before its thrusters ran out of fuel and the attitude could finally be corrected.

It's only a matter of time before some hopefully not too severe emergency causes even bigger problems. But then also I'm afeared for the first big public accidents for the space-tourist efforts (probably going to happen for one or other of the current big three corporations, rather than Russia if they even restart that side of things[1], before the market gets too many more players into active service).


[1] Their vehicles, if not their modules, are generally good quality (rogue holes in cargo modules aside!) and have proven launch-escape survivability when the rockets go wrong. Plus they haven't been sending tourists up since they used the seats involved only for ISS expedition crewmembers. Theoretically Dragon's ISS crew-servicing could free those back up again for those who might make the same safety assessment for me but also have the money to burn on such a jaunt.

...didn't feel like adding as a (new) new post, but it's now out of order and repetitive.

Editedit:...aaaand I'm wrong on one point, already. Soyuz MS-19 is about to blast up with a Russian actor and actress (no non-Russians! ...which might be the first time for Soyuz for yonks) so they are taking 'tourists'.

[wierd]

(putting this where it belongs)

IIRC, given that we have the ISS (and that it is due to be officially discontinued soon), which is designed to have modules attached to it---

Rather than de-orbit it, sell it on the open market and let Elon buy the fucker.  THEN, semi-permanently dock a special service vehicle to it.

Said service vehicle would have a canadarm, and a service bay, as well as beefy maneuvering thrusters.  It can be sent on capture missions for service and repair, and would need occasional fuel shipped to it on dragon cargo pods every so often.  Service and repair could be carried out on board the repurposed ISS, after the module docks again.

Crew is rotated like ISS crew normally is.

[Madman198237]

You can't move Hubble to the ISS. Plane change maneuvers are extremely costly and Hubble is in a very different orbit to the ISS. My suggestion is that you just have an autonomous spaceship in orbit using highly efficient ion thrusters to move itself around orbit from repair target to repair target (or whatever other use it may have), sending crew up to meet it only after it has rendezvoused with the target vehicle, meaning your much-less-capable crew vehicle never performs a plane change (which it probably couldn't do anyway, due to the delta-V requirements).

The Buran was inarguably better than the Space Shuttle. To be fair, this is partly because it was developed later and with many of the lessons of the Shuttle learned. No solid boosters, a launcher that had uses other than carrying the orbiter, an orbiter that didn't have to haul heavy engines about on-orbit, and a somewhat more robust heat shield IIRC. Also, it was fully autonomous and could

Also, don't worry about the fragility of these things when it comes to altering orbits. They were put into orbit at first using the same accelerations you'd need to move things pretty much anywhere and the ISS regularly moves to avoid things and it's designed as a pure space "station"...AKA "a spaceship that doesn't have much delta-V".


Anyway, fundamentally with regards to Crew Dragon being used for repairs you'll never overcome the rapid obsolescence of the repair airlock/manipulator arm/servicing thing, especially since it'd need a solid amount of development and investment and would fundamentally be hideously expensive since you'd basically have to throw it away after every mission.

Hubble might be on its way out, eventually, but hopefully that would galvanize producing a replacement with greater capability...like the one NASA is working on and has been working on for far too long.


Sell the ISS to SpaceX? That would be...interesting...I doubt it'd happen, though. Musk and SpaceX in general are highly focused on multiplanetary operations and given their vessels' design it's unlikely such an awkwardly-placed (highly inclined orbit) waystation would have serious utility.

[Gentlefish]

Once the ESA gets their telescope up into space (after how many delays now?) I think the hubble deserves a retirement.

It'd be great to salvage something out of it as a historical souvenir but that's so hilariously difficult as mentioned above that it's not at all worth it with our current tech.

[Starver]

Aside from the multinational title-deeds/treaties needed to rework in a mutually agreeable manner, the ISS is very much a patchwork of tech and legacy. I don't know what would even be the best end-of-life/second-owner use for it/bits of it, apart from whatever dismantling can be done, limited repurposing if there's somewhere to repurpose it to, perhaps some recoverable de-orbitting for lucrative elements (that can be given/put inside a heatshield and some form of aerobraking package[1]) and otherwise arrange for the rest to go to the Pacific in whatever burnt and melted bits come out of the unprotected re-entry. It couldn't really be left unmanned where it 'is', and the effort to boost into a higher garbage-orbit (or a similar 'museum-' one, with an eye to future legacy?) wouldn't currently be justifiable.

Some fictional treatment might have some billionaire or other (with one obvious expy) buy it and arrange for it to go to form part of his Phobos-orbitting base, or something. But probably not in this reality.
 

Russia had intended to dedock a number of its modules to transfer to its proposed OPSEK station, but aborted that plan for the ROSS one (to be built from, once they exit the ISS project later this decade). I think "oh, they're old and broken anyway" might be partially behind their downplaying of the safety of the ROS section of ISS. It seems uncharacteristic, although whether other more recent failures fit into their narrative/it into them, I don't know. Well beyond my non-existant paygrade. Would again make a good base synopsis for a technothriller, though.


I think it's probably still a matter of crossing that orbit when we get to it, if things aren't forced some direction by uncontrolled events of some kind. Minds greater than mine, or at least more influential, will have their own ideas and contingencies.


(Space-related xkcd, BTW: https://xkcd.com/2524/ ...not really relevent, but it came out last night and also involves 'tidying things up'. )

@Gentlefish: Aye, and as you ninja re: Hubble itself. Would be a prize recovery, but... as already written below.



[1] If we can get Starships/similar up there capable of 'Jonah And The Whale'ing like in You Only Live Twice, in time, I'd be more surprised than with the Hubble-repair scenario. Can't rule out it happening, and getting places like the Smithsonian/wherever an extra special set of new exhibits, but I don't think there's much potential willpower/funding out there for it. YMMV. And they need to try it all out with the likes of Prospero, first, I'd suggest.

[LordBaal]

SpinLaunch completes first test flight gentleman. While this is a no no for manned flights this can replace the space elevator on a way to build up a mature orbital infrastructure by providing a cheaper way to put the first raw materials and robots needed.

If ever want to achieve something like 100% sustainable industry we need to transport the mining infrastructure to space. But for that a lot of equipment and fuel is needed up there first. This could help boosting that.

[Telgin]

That's pretty cool, and I had no idea anyone was even attempting to build something like it.  If it starts to get used very much then that will pave the way for versions that can launch larger payloads, which will really open up the possibilities.

[LordBaal]

Allegedly they only used 20% of the power in this test and the rocket had no propellant. The complete power would in theory reach 50.000 meters or roughly half way to space,  then ignite the boosters.

However there is still a long way to LEO. Guess bigger devices with smaller payloads could help.