Orbiter-Forum  

Go Back   Orbiter-Forum > Far Side of the Moon > Spaceflight News
Register Blogs Orbinauts List Social Groups FAQ Projects Mark Forums Read

Spaceflight News Share news, stories, or discussions about government and private spaceflight programs; including ESA, ISS, NASA, Russian Space Program, Virgin Galactic, & more!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-12-2019, 02:14 AM   #31
barrygolden
Orbinaut
 
barrygolden's Avatar
Default

The saga of the X 33 is an example of a Failed NASA. Yes Urwumpe your right, lots of issues with the odd shape and composite tanks. But Lockheed built some aluminum tanks and found they were lighter than the composite tanks and then they solved the composite tanks by filling the honeycomb structure. The word I got was that the X 33 was 90% complete but a NASA big wig said that it wouldn't be advanced enough so they canceled the funding. Lockheed was ok with that because they didn't have the funding to finance the Venture Star.
I thought the X33 with a Space hab module launched on a Delta 4 would have made a great ISS resupply craft. I shared that with my co workers here at Space X and really raised some eye brows and some looks at it. They looked at it as an upper stage with the Sats carried in the payload bay which with the smaller fuel tanks would be a bigger bay and totally reusable.
I do have a Venture Star addon in orbiter thanks to gattis and have been flying different missions and really have enjoyed it.
Seeing men and women walk on the moon before I pass would be great but don't think it will happen . Landing on the Moon in 5 years ? I don't think the SLS will fly in 5 years if ever. Maybe an inflatable gateway with a modified X33 might be cool to see. It could carry fuel to refill a reusable lander docked to Gateway might work
barrygolden is offline   Reply With Quote
Thanked by:
Old 06-12-2019, 07:12 AM   #32
Urwumpe
Certain Super User
 
Urwumpe's Avatar

Default

Well, you know: The final 10% of work take 90% of the time.
Urwumpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2019, 12:01 PM   #33
barrygolden
Orbinaut
 
barrygolden's Avatar
Default

As you can tell I was a big fan of the X 33 and venture Star. No way was NASA going to have astronauts ride inside a hydrogen bomb but SSTO is the Holy Grail to solve the most expensive 100 miles. I like Jim Bridenstine but I see a song and dance routine. What I would like to see is the same charts that Sally Ride explained in her report to the Augustine commission and showed Constellation was a " Dead Man Walking" . I have ask my Congressman Kevin Brady to show us those but I was told " Stay calm All is Well" ( see Animal House movie)
Look no further than "Freedom" 8 years and 10 billion sent and all we got were paint samples and computer generated images. $ 10 billion !! All those guy draw NASA pensions and live on Fisher Island

Last edited by barrygolden; 06-12-2019 at 12:11 PM.
barrygolden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2019, 01:15 PM   #34
Urwumpe
Certain Super User
 
Urwumpe's Avatar

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by barrygolden View Post
 As you can tell I was a big fan of the X 33 and venture Star. No way was NASA going to have astronauts ride inside a hydrogen bomb but SSTO is the Holy Grail to solve the most expensive 100 miles.
Sure SSTO is it psychologically. It is the dream of flying to space like flying from New York to Denver. But I think this is lacking imagination.

During the early days of flight, people compared flying from Paris to New York to passenger ships, because they had no idea how travel in an aircraft would eventually be like. (Just imagine telling them in 1912 about the future Concorde. )

We still like to compare a well-running, boring, efficient spaceflight to aircraft, but I am not sure if this is really the best goal.

For example I think TSTOs are way more capable as long as we are talking about rockets. If you can build a barely working SSTO, a TSTO could fly loops around it while still hauling more into orbit. (That TSTO is what SpaceX currently plans with their BFR.)

But what if somebody manages to build a space elevator? Or something completely new regarding engines? Then TSTO would be likely an obsolete concept and a SSTO would look different to what we imagine today.
Urwumpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2019, 11:00 PM   #35
Richfromengland
Orbinaut
 
Richfromengland's Avatar
Default

The aim to do what is proposed end of, may be make some money on the side if it lasts, this is exploration. If no station around the Moon, how does learning to live in orbit of a moon not advance human understanding?

The idea of an actual outpost on the Moon is nonsense. I mean may be anywhere, like how they did the Taurus littrow valley, landing on the darker locations isn't much fun.
Richfromengland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2019, 11:57 PM   #36
Richfromengland
Orbinaut
 
Richfromengland's Avatar
Default

The problem with the US congress it is full of benefactors, the long term goal of space fight will never happen with the chamber only looking for funds, I was sure that doing one or two mission with Astronauts is the only way by government, otherwise it will be the wealthiest companies that will may be try and do this alone, but even they will need money to keep it going, unless it is just done for knowledge, like out of star trek.
Richfromengland is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

  Orbiter-Forum > Far Side of the Moon > Spaceflight News


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:22 PM.

Quick Links Need Help?


About Us | Rules & Guidelines | TOS Policy | Privacy Policy

Orbiter-Forum is hosted at Orbithangar.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2017, Orbiter-Forum.com. All rights reserved.