HLV for SSU ?

[Donamy]

Would it be possible to incorporate the HLV into SSU ?

 

[Urwumpe]

Would it be possible to incorporate the HLV into SSU ?

The side-mount? Yes. Any other configuration would be a serious modification.

 

[Donamy]

Side-mount is what I had in mind. The one thing that I think would give problems, would be the RSS.

 

[santy86]

I don't think the side-mount HLV is supposed to be loaded by the RSS. I cannot imagine how the RSS will be used to mount those long fairings around the payload... maybe i'm wrong.

 

[Urwumpe]

Side-mount is what I had in mind. The one thing that I think would give problems, would be the RSS.

Yes, likely, because of the larger diameter. But on the other hand, such a large payload could be installed in the VAB.

 

[Donamy]

The problem is, alot of them need nearly constant power, if I'm not mistaken.

 

[Urwumpe]

The problem is, alot of them need nearly constant power, if I'm not mistaken.

That is a problem that can be solved, eg by having the electrical power supply in the MLP. Would be simpler than a new RSS.

 

[Donamy]

I suppose that would be a better way.

 

[Donamy]

I've set up the VC to the cockpit pics on the net, what should be the switch config ?

 

[Urwumpe]

I've set up the VC to the cockpit pics on the net, what should be the switch config ?

Hard to tell, since there is almost no information about that. I would suspect the seating would be similar to the Shuttle or apollo (commander left) and thus the commander functions would also be there, and the pilot functions would be on the right.

 

[Donamy]

The shuttle's greatest asset is it's up and down mass. Would a reentry module make sense?

 

[Urwumpe]

The shuttle's greatest asset is it's up and down mass. Would a reentry module make sense?

Yes, at least something large enough to bring standard payload racks back to Earth would be nice, that is missing now.

---------- Post added at 07:27 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:34 PM ----------

I just started some initial research in the Orion crew interface, have not yet found anything about the switches.

I think the Orion capsule should be better just attached as "payload" to the side-mount vessel, that would also give his more flexibility in the design. Also, the same Orion capsule could then also be fitted on the Ares I (-X).

Would maybe be another nice chance to work the Ultra franchise from a pure shuttle simulation into a basic "Ultra" framework/tool kit and a virtually unlimited number of vessels based on it. Ideally, we would have just one "Ultra.dll" that is shared between all the other projects and vehicles (eg, also the VAB or the Launch complexes). Would also be a good chance to get rid of the many fossils in the SSU code, especially the subsystem and VC code is full of grown stuff that needs streamlining. But that is something to be done parallel to the SSU project, I can't put the guilt of another SSU code overhaul on my soul.

This large PDF here BTW, is pretty interesting, since it shows the current state of the art fault message display inside NASA:

http://isis.arc.nasa.gov/publications/FAMSS_May_18_06.pdf

---------- Post added at 07:52 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:27 PM ----------

Here is a nice view of the GNC architure of Orion. Includes a early model of the software behavior.

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20090036321_2009036412.pdf

And this presentation has a drawing of the MFDs in the Orion in it, has seven soft buttons on each side:

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20090029218_2009028590.pdf

 

[Donamy]

Thanks for that Dennis. So the majority of systems and switches will be automated on MDUs.

 

[Urwumpe]

Thanks for that Dennis. So the majority of systems and switches will be automated on MDUs.

Yes, you will likely only have arm/safe and override switches for the absolutely minimum. Especially the reentry/landing would have many switches and pushbutton-indicators, also there would be the inevitable abort rotary switch + pb.

Also the crew is currently planned to be mostly monitoring automated sequences, a complete change to the space shuttle, that required more crew input as Apollo did.