OFMM General Discussions

[Bj]

Sure it would, the ERV could also have its own propellant supply, since the crew is not expected to stay in the ERV. But I don't feel well with toxic fuels in the settlement. And any kind of fuel tank is a potential hazard, that could be avoided.

Good point, but what if the tanks where empty? The tanks could be moved off site And reinstalled when needed or we could use some non hypergolic propellent. How does it work with the orbiters RMS? Isnt that stuff toxic?

 

[Izack]

Good point, but what if the tanks where empty? The tanks could be moved off site And reinstalled when needed or we could use some non hypergolic propellent. How does it work with the orbiters RMS? Isnt that stuff toxic?

I believe you mean OMS. The RMS isn't dangerous as long as you don't get out and try to lick it.

Anyway, yes, monomethylhydrazine is toxic, but it is only stored in relatively small amounts on the opposite end of the Shuttle from the crew. The OMS pods are removable from the Shuttle while it's grounded for maintenance and storage.

 

[Salun]

When can we start getting some of this gear to test and practice with? I really wanna try my hand at manuvering the stack

 

[River Crab]

Beautiful, beautiful. Not that I pretend to be helping, but still, awesome job so far.

I volunteer for the development of good luck.
I'll start by hailing Probe whilst waving a ritual gohei and chanting "Akuryou taisan", then flushing an ice cube down the toilet. :hail:

EDIT: Also, the moment you decide for sure what the vehicles will look like, interplanetary anthropomorphism will commence.

 

[Bj]

I believe you mean OMS. The RMS isn't dangerous as long as you don't get out and try to lick it.

Anyway, yes, monomethylhydrazine is toxic, but it is only stored in relatively small amounts on the opposite end of the Shuttle from the crew. The OMS pods are removable from the Shuttle while it's grounded for maintenance and storage.

errr not sure why I did that

I meant to say RCS which burns monomethyl hydrazine fuel and nitrogen tetroxide but that happens to be the same as the OMS.

Well anyway, alright on second thought maybe fuel tanks under where they sleep for a few years isn't such a good idea. Since (I think) we are packing 2x skycranes, chances of 2 failing are remote.

Um sorry guys, but I don't think I can make the few changes by tonight. I actually had a few updates and changes to the parts I didn't show above yet. Delay 24 hours, hope the list will be out by then

...then flushing an ice cube down the toilet.

:rofl:

EDIT: Also, the moment you decide for sure what the vehicles will look like, interplanetary anthropomorphism will commence.

Well the blanks without pictures/specific designs I am really lenient on the designs, so long as they 'fit' collapsed or not, inside a module capable of being launched from Earth.

 

[Izack]

I volunteer for the development of good luck.
I'll start by hailing Probe whilst waving a ritual gohei and chanting "Akuryou taisan", then flushing an ice cube down the toilet. :hail:

Get your ice cubes out of the WCS! You'll attract a comet doing that!! :rofl:
You know...snow days...comets...hahah?

 

[Voyager]

You forget a proposal, sending the communication satellites ahead of time with a massive rocket holding 4 communication satellites to act as communication.

 

[River Crab]

You forget a proposal, sending the communication satellites ahead of time with a massive rocket holding 4 communication satellites to act as communication.

We forgot...what?

 

[Voyager]

It was an idea of mine that wasn't added which could've been very great.

 

[fireballs619]

When did we say we were going to do that?!? I will once again say that it is impossible to launch anything ahead of the main mission. It's all at once or nothing, because the launch windows between the Earth and the Moon are 26 months apart. Once again, it could be found here http://orbiter-forum.com/picture.php?albumid=337&pictureid=2728

That does bring an interesting point up, however. How do we plan on managing communications? Are we just going to man it up while we are there, and deal with the ~20 min delay for radio transmissions, or are we going to pack satellites that will better communications. I can foresee problems arising from losing contact with ground control.

 

[Voyager]

Either we launch 26 months prior to the mission or we launch with the mission so the satellites deploy when the crew is ready to land at Mars.

 

[fireballs619]

I think launching 26 months prior is unfavorable, because people want to get everything there with one mission. That leaves launching with the missions, and, if we do that, it is probably better just to attach it to the MTV than to have a separate rocket launch. Of course, I don't know if we will do this.

EDIT:
I also think we should pick out a rover right now. We have it down between the Azure or Lunar rover. My vote goes to the Azure, simply because it has more to it. The only reason we would pick the lunar, in my opinion, is for range:fuel consumption. If we are doing anything far from the base, we should use an atmospheric vehicle, perhaps similar to the Shuttle PB or X-38.

 

[lennartsmit]

Wow! Finally this project lifted itself to a higher stage. Great work on the PDF, and I haven't spotted any errors.

 

[Voyager]

How about we use the Ares? If so it could fly across the equator.

 

[River Crab]

I agree with Fireballs for the rover. Azure is just beefier, so we might as well.
As for atmospheric vehicles, do they need to be manned? The X-38 on Mars sounds horribly inefficient; it's already a flying brick on Earth. Could we use something like the Mars Ares Glider, air-dropped from a Skycrane?

IDK any of this, just putting stuff out there. :shrug:

 

[fireballs619]

How about we use the Ares? If so it could fly across the equator.

That is much to heavy to bring along, let alone the fuel needed to launch it, and the need for launch facilities. We need something much smaller and lighter. You don't need the power that the Ares offers to fly across the equator- it can be done much more efficiently.

 

[River Crab]

By Ares, do you mean[ame="http://www.orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=2581"] the glider? [/ame]
Is it possible to air-launch a glider from the Skycrane? We wouldn't need too much extra infrastructure that way. It doesn't have to be Ares, maybe smaller...
Anyway, isn't the X-38 much heavier?
:idk:

 

[Bj]

That does bring an interesting point up, however. How do we plan on managing communications? Are we just going to man it up while we are there, and deal with the ~20 min delay for radio transmissions, or are we going to pack satellites that will better communications. I can foresee problems arising from losing contact with ground control.

Other than placing a static (for looks only) satellite in orbit, there's really not much to making a communication satellite.

Orbiter simply doesn't simulate the need for radio communications right now. I mean if you needed to send a message (what would it be) and why... Are you going to send a message to yourself on Earth saying what?

Do you see what I mean?


However in real life I cannot see NASA using the aging Mars satellites currently available, given their orbit and low(er) bandwidth. I would guess they would attempt to place a geostationary (whats if called over Mars?) satellite over the main landing designation.

This could only be feasibility done if the MTV would enter the stationary orbit then release the satellite, then continue on its way back to its regular orbit.

Second option is to add a whole engine/guidance system/fuel ext to the module with enough DV to attain its own orbit when released from the destination orbit from the MTV.

How about we use the Ares? If so it could fly across the equator.

What?

 

[River Crab]

Erm...I don't see a better place to put this, so, uh, here goes:

Yeah...It was originally supposed to be an epic-looking OFMM wallpaper, but it kind of just ended up looking ridiculously inaccurate. Oh well, let's not be wasteful.
Good enough to my wallpaper at the moment, although it looks like something murderous is going to happen at the Mars settlement... :shifty:


Yeah...you can go back to what you were doing now. :embarrassed:

 

[Bj]

I agree with Fireballs for the rover. Azure is just beefier, so we might as well.

Azure it is.

As for atmospheric vehicles, do they need to be manned? The X-38 on Mars sounds horribly inefficient; it's already a flying brick on Earth. Could we use something like the Mars Ares Glider, air-dropped from a Skycrane?

IDK any of this, just putting stuff out there. :shrug:

X-38 might be a good idea for the ERV (Earth (not mars) return vehicle) which I forgot to include in the reference BTW... :suicide:

If you read the reference, the OSHV is going to be the habitational vessel where crew will live, eat, sleep in space and on Mars. Really going to be similar to the LM though much bigger and more long-term.