Subscribe to rss feed

Launch vehicle options for CLLARE | Booster | Forum

 
You must be logged in to post user permissions login Login register Register


Register? | Lost Your Password?

Search Forums:


searchicon 






Minimum search word length is 3 characters – Maximum search word length is 84 characters
Wildcard Usage:
*  matches any number of characters    %  matches exactly one character

topic

Launch vehicle options for CLLARE

print
small tagNo Tags
UserPost

7:55 am
January 6, 2010


Luke Maurits

Adelaide, Australia

Admin

posts 1483

offline
link
print
1
0
ratedowngrey
rateupgrey

Just some thoughts on launch vehicles for CLLARE.

The latest estimate for total mass of the CLLARE mission stack is 6531 kg – but this does not take into account the mass of the astronaut, some consumables, and the structure to hold those consumables.  Once we take into account those masses and the mass of the extra fuel to push it around, I think we will be getting close to the 10,000 kg mark the for the whole stack.

The American company SpaceX is currently developing a two stage LOX/RP-1 booster called Falcon 9.  This is a man rated booster (SpaceX have a contract from NASA to take over resupply of the ISS after the shuttle is retired) which can carry about 11,000 kg to LEO, at a cost of $35 million per launch (which is a lot in absolute terms, of course, but in terms of dollars per kg to orbit it's a very good deal, and they expect to be able to get it down even further).

Since it seems very feasible that we will be able to get our total mass quite close to this amount, I think it makes perfect sense to plan to use the Falcon 9 for the launch of complete CLLARE mission stacks.  The effort involved in developing our own booster for this will be immense – the Falcon 9 will be off the shelf, well tested and known to be safe.

Of course, this does not completely remove the need for our own booster technology.  Our first CLLARE flights will be suborbital and brief orbital flights of just the CM, at around 1500 kg.  This is a very small payload comparatively speaking, and I don't think there are any man-rated commercial options for something of this size.  So it would be sensible to build our own hybrid boosters for this.  This will be a much easier task for us to accomplish (maybe we could use a larger version of Copenhagen Suborbital's HEAT rocket, or a cluster of HEATs?).

Once we have built the small hybrid booster to do just CM launches we will have a much better idea of how hard building an alternative to the Falcon 9 would be and decide then if we wish to pursue that option to make future CLLARE stack launches cheaper.  For now we should plan on using the Falcon 9 because it will be fairly cheap, reliable and it makes our overall mission plan look more achievable.

Main CLLARE workgroups: Mission Planning, Navigation and Guidance. I do maths, physics, C, Python and Java.

8:14 pm
January 6, 2010


Luke Maurits

Adelaide, Australia

Admin

posts 1483

offline
link
print
2
0
ratedowngrey
rateupgrey

An updated total mass estimated based on very approximate first guess figures for the neglected structures in the first one has our total mass at about 8008 kg.  The Soyuz-2 can lift 7800 kg into LEO and is available for commercial launches, so if we can shed a bit of mass that may be an option too.

Main CLLARE workgroups: Mission Planning, Navigation and Guidance. I do maths, physics, C, Python and Java.

8:42 pm
January 6, 2010


Rocket-To-The-Moon

Altus, Oklahoma, USA

Member

posts 685

offline
link
print
3
0
ratedowngrey
rateupgrey

From every commercial booster that is currently on the market (or will be soon), the Falcon 9 will probably be the best choice by far.

I also love the idea of using Copenhagen Suborbital's HEAT rocket (or derivative) to fill the position of the Selene (ie, suborbital test flights). This fits in perfectly with our collaborative model; there is no reason that we have to reinvent the wheel.

Main Workgroups: Propulsion & Spacecraft Engineering

8:50 pm
January 6, 2010


Luke Maurits

Adelaide, Australia

Admin

posts 1483

offline
link
print
4
0
ratedowngrey
rateupgrey

It may be worth asking CS how much they expect their capsule to weigh.  Depending on how many times heavier our CM is we may simply be able to cluster a few HEATs together.  If the CM is too much heavier we may need to actually scale the HEAT up.

Main CLLARE workgroups: Mission Planning, Navigation and Guidance. I do maths, physics, C, Python and Java.

9:15 pm
January 6, 2010


Rocket-To-The-Moon

Altus, Oklahoma, USA

Member

posts 685

offline
link
print
5
0
ratedowngrey
rateupgrey

Rocket-To-The-Moon said:

I also love the idea of using Copenhagen Suborbital's HEAT rocket (or derivative) to fill the position of the Selene…


For the record; I mean to put Selene 1.

Main Workgroups: Propulsion & Spacecraft Engineering

7:29 am
January 10, 2010


brmj

Rochester, New York, United States

Member

posts 402

offline
link
print
6
0
ratedowngrey
rateupgrey

I agree that using the HEAT design or a derivative there of for suborbital tests would be great.

Main work groups: Propulsion (booster), Spacecraft Engineering, Computer Systems, Navigation and Guidance (software)

small tagNo Tags

About the CSTART – Collaborative Space Travel and Research Team Forum

Forum Timezone: UTC -6

Most Users Ever Online: 59

Currently Online:
12 Guests

Currently Browsing this Topic:
1 Guest

Forum Stats:

Groups: 4
Forums: 36
Topics: 512
Posts: 3809

Membership:

There are 1133 Members

There are 2 Admins

Top Posters:

Rocket-To-The-Moon – 685
brmj – 402
rpulkrabek – 348
DenisG – 69
antinode – 64
J. Simmons – 46

Recent New Members: jmwright, uhwuggawuh, seikialice88, bishvabis, alijayadv, harris

Administrators: Luke Maurits (1483 Posts), Rizwan (170 Posts)



 
share save 120 16