| User | Post |
|
7:26 pm November 28, 2009
| Rocket-To-The-Moon
| | Altus, Oklahoma, USA | |
| Member | posts 685 | |
|
|
We have discussed maneuvering the CM and Lander in close proximity and then tethering them together.
Could we just use two strong magnets to link the vehicles? Here is a link to the kind of magnet I'm thinking about.
My thought is that one magnet is on the lander and then the second is on the tip of the CM's "Life Support Unit" probe. The astronaut would be able to directly see what he is doing through the forward looking window. See this thread to help you visualize it.
|
Main Workgroups: Propulsion & Spacecraft Engineering
|
|
|
8:10 pm November 28, 2009
| Luke Maurits
| | Adelaide, Australia | |
| Admin
| posts 1483 | |
|
|
How do we undock afterward? Those Neodymium magnets are serious business, getting two of them unstuck could take a fair bit of work. Small solid fuel rockets on either craft pointed in opposite directions?
|
Main CLLARE workgroups: Mission Planning, Navigation and Guidance. I do maths, physics, C, Python and Java.
|
|
|
8:25 pm November 28, 2009
| Rocket-To-The-Moon
| | Altus, Oklahoma, USA | |
| Member | posts 685 | |
|
|
If one of the magnets has a hole in the center then we could have some sort of plunger push them apart.
|
Main Workgroups: Propulsion & Spacecraft Engineering
|
|
|
9:13 pm November 28, 2009
| perpindicular
| | |
| Member | posts 9 | |
|
|
time to invent the tractor beam
|
|
|
9:56 pm November 28, 2009
| brmj
| | Rochester, New York, United States | |
| Member | posts 402 | |
|
|
Luke Maurits said:How do we undock afterward? Those Neodymium magnets are serious business, getting two of them unstuck could take a fair bit of work. Small solid fuel rockets on either craft pointed in opposite directions?
I wouldn't be suprised if the RCS systems alone would be sufficient, if both sets were fired at once.
|
Main work groups: Propulsion (booster), Spacecraft Engineering, Computer Systems, Navigation and Guidance (software)
|
|
|
9:59 pm November 28, 2009
| Rocket-To-The-Moon
| | Altus, Oklahoma, USA | |
| Member | posts 685 | |
|
|
Very good point. The magnet I linked to has 166lbs of holding force. I suppose that the RCS could be designed to put out that much thrust.
Of course we can always size the actual magnet later, this is just an example.
|
Main Workgroups: Propulsion & Spacecraft Engineering
|
|
|
10:21 pm November 28, 2009
| brmj
| | Rochester, New York, United States | |
| Member | posts 402 | |
|
|
Here's another thought: If we put at least one side on some sort of string set-up, the RCS system wouldn't have to be more powerful than the magnet's holding force. The RCS thrusters could stretch the springs, and once it reaches the end of whatever track they are using, the momentum combined with the thrusters could do the rest. If the springs compressed in addition to stretching, such a design could also serve to dampen the initial impact associated with docking, and a "bouncing" maneuver could be used o further reduce the force needed to escape the magnets.
Note that I am not really sold on this scheme as I have yet to hear what, if any, advantiges this would have as compared to just matching orbits and doing EVA.
|
Main work groups: Propulsion (booster), Spacecraft Engineering, Computer Systems, Navigation and Guidance (software)
|
|
|
10:30 pm November 28, 2009
| Rocket-To-The-Moon
| | Altus, Oklahoma, USA | |
| Member | posts 685 | |
|
|
Post edited 4:32 am – November 29, 2009 by Rocket-To-The-Moon
The main benefit that I saw was that it would at least give us some rigidity. Unless the two are in physical contact it would be nearly impossible to keep them from drifting slowly together or apart. Also if we don't physically doc then how do we move from one to the other without a space suit that has its own RCS? I suppose you could always take a leap, but that is sort of a one time deal.
I figure that with magnets this strong as long as you get within 40cm or so from where you want to be it will gradually pull it into position. Just based on the concept drawings, the back of the lander's seat might be a good place to dock to but that does put us in close proximity to the fuel tanks.
|
Main Workgroups: Propulsion & Spacecraft Engineering
|
|
|
10:58 pm November 28, 2009
| brmj
| | Rochester, New York, United States | |
| Member | posts 402 | |
|
|
"The main benefit that I saw was that it would at least give us some rigidity. Unless the two are in physical contact it would be nearly impossible to keep them from drifting slowly together or apart."
I would suggest tethering them together, and perhaps putting them into a very slow spin such than centrifugal force prevents them from colliding.
"Also if we don't physically doc then how do we move from one to the other without a space suit that has its own RCS? I suppose you could always take a leap, but that is sort of a one time deal."
I would suggest havving a sturdy rope or cable hooked to the suit and jumping with the other end attached to the vehicle the astronaut starts on. Missed jumps could be recovered frm by pulling back in on the tether, and for sustained EVA the line could be streached between the two vehicles, with the astronaut clipped onto it.
|
Main work groups: Propulsion (booster), Spacecraft Engineering, Computer Systems, Navigation and Guidance (software)
|
|