| |
 |
|
| Science Forum Index » Physics Forum » Small // Compact Translunar Rockets for Microsatellites |
|
Page 1 of 1 |
|
| Author |
Message |
| BradGuth |
 Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2006 5:08 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 08 Nov 2004
Posts: 3051
Location: 1-253-8576061
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2006 8:18 am |
|
|
|
|
Say, that sounds pretty good! Why don't you submit your proposal to
NASA???????? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth |
| Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2006 1:40 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 08 Nov 2004
Posts: 3051
Location: 1-253-8576061
|
[quote:2fe76a362c]donstockba; Say, that sounds pretty good! Why don't you submit
your proposal to NASA????????
Point well taken, as I may have to do just that. After all, this[/quote:2fe76a362c]
method of achieving highly cost effective microsatellite deployment
isn't the least bit science instrument limited for obtaining the vast
majority of what's missing in our knowledge of our moon, nor even of
other moons as well as per accomplishing certain planetary
explorations.
However, I'm thinking that I'll restart this topic once again as
"Compact Translunar Rockets for Microsatellites"
so that I can manage to fix a couple of my usual words and syntax
related matters.
-
Brad Guth |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Art Deco |
| Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2006 10:17 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Brad Guth <ieisbradguth@yahoo.com> wrote:
[quote:297ac65996]Since my initial topic has been quite summarily trashed by all of those
nasty little brown-nosed naysay MIB, that not only have the "right
stuff" but otherwise are clearly out to get anyone that's bringing up
[/quote:297ac65996]
Poor baby Brad, so oppressed he is.
[quote:297ac65996]the notions of accomplishing any such reasonable rocket/payload ratio
for deploying of whatever into orbiting and eventually landing upon our
extremely nearby moon:
MICROSATELLITES; how small? How cheap?
[/quote:297ac65996]
424 kg!
--
Official Associate AFA-B Vote Rustler
Official Overseer of Kooks and Saucerheads in alt.astronomy
Co-Winner, alt.(f)lame Worst Flame War, December 2005
"Causation of gravity is missing frame field always attempting
renormalization back to base memory of equalized uniform momentum."
-- nightbat the saucerhead-in-chief
"Have patience. First I shall deal with the State of Oregon
and County of Josephine, Then the AFAB, government/media
disinformation Agents with whom you conspire to libel me and my
family. Your time will come."
-- Raymond Ronald Karczewski©, usenet "christ"
"Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, and rather ironic, coming from
someone who obviously has no understanding of what a signature is. Tell me,
Haslam, do you sign your checks as 'Can't you show a little restraint?'"
-- David Tholen, Clueless Newbie of the Month, February 2003 |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Art Deco |
| Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2006 10:18 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Brad Guth <ieisbradguth@yahoo.com> wrote:
[quote:a27ca8264e]donstockba; Say, that sounds pretty good! Why don't you submit
your proposal to NASA????????
Point well taken, as I may have to do just that. After all, this
method of achieving highly cost effective microsatellite deployment
isn't the least bit science instrument limited for obtaining the vast
majority of what's missing in our knowledge of our moon, nor even of
other moons as well as per accomplishing certain planetary
explorations.
However, I'm thinking that I'll restart this topic once again as
"Compact Translunar Rockets for Microsatellites"
[/quote:a27ca8264e]
424 kg!
[quote:a27ca8264e]
so that I can manage to fix a couple of my usual words and syntax
related matters.
-
Brad Guth
[/quote:a27ca8264e]
--
Official Associate AFA-B Vote Rustler
Official Overseer of Kooks and Saucerheads in alt.astronomy
Co-Winner, alt.(f)lame Worst Flame War, December 2005
"Causation of gravity is missing frame field always attempting
renormalization back to base memory of equalized uniform momentum."
-- nightbat the saucerhead-in-chief
"Have patience. First I shall deal with the State of Oregon
and County of Josephine, Then the AFAB, government/media
disinformation Agents with whom you conspire to libel me and my
family. Your time will come."
-- Raymond Ronald Karczewski©, usenet "christ"
"Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, and rather ironic, coming from
someone who obviously has no understanding of what a signature is. Tell me,
Haslam, do you sign your checks as 'Can't you show a little restraint?'"
-- David Tholen, Clueless Newbie of the Month, February 2003 |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Michael Gallagher |
| Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 12:10 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
I looked in my copy of *The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Space
Technolgy* for unmanned lunar probes, for clues to how big the
boosterd were historically.
On 17 Jan 2006 02:08:52 -0800, "Brad Guth" <ieisbradguth@yahoo.com>
wrote:
[quote:42904bd595]I have three basic translunar goals of:
1) deploying an individual 10 kg microsatellite = 10 kg
[/quote:42904bd595]
Nothing at exactly 10 kg. But Pioneer 4, which flew by the Moon,
weighted 6 kg was launched by a Juno 2, which weighed in at 55,530 KG.
So maybe something a little bigger for 10 KG. I don't think we have
anything in its size range in inventory; I'm thinking it would be
smaller than a Delta 2.
[quote:42904bd595]2) of deploying a 10X 10 kg collective at one shot = 100 kg
[/quote:42904bd595]
Explorer 35 went into a lunar orbit and weighed 104 kg; it's booster
was a Thrust-Augmented Delta, one of the precurssors to the modern
Delta 2 Booster. So a modern Delta would fill that bill more or less.
The Delta 2 weighs (or weighed) 216,600 kg
[quote:42904bd595]3) a mother shipment load of 100X 10 kg microsatellites = 1000 kg
[/quote:42904bd595]
Finally! Surveyor 2 weighed exactly 1000 kilos -- no guestimation
here. It was launched by an Atlas Centaur Booster, which tipped the
scales at about 360,000 kg (my chart has two figures -- don't ask me
to say why). The Atlas Centaur -- eventually known simply as Atlas --
was superseeded by bigger rockets in that line. But I suppose a
single Atlas Core would do it.
[quote:42904bd595]Now all the we need is to select the two or three stages of a little
rocket configuration that'll seriously kick butt because of it's
extremely slight inert mass.
-
[/quote:42904bd595]
You'll need more than that.
To recap: The smallest rocket capable of sending a payload higher
than LEO for your purposes is a Delta 2. So if not those rockets,
you'd need rockets with that amount of lifting power.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth |
| Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 3:10 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 08 Nov 2004
Posts: 3051
Location: 1-253-8576061
|
Michael Gallagher,
Thanks again for this terrific feedback, as being exactly the sort of
news I can use to learn from.
[quote:0a905ee818]Nothing at exactly 10 kg. But Pioneer 4, which flew by the Moon,
weighted 6 kg was launched by a Juno 2, which weighed in at 55,530 KG.
So maybe something a little bigger for 10 KG. I don't think we have
anything in its size range in inventory; I'm thinking it would be
smaller than a Delta 2.
Delta 2 is rather spendy, though certainly doable as long as I wasn't[/quote:0a905ee818]
spending my loot.
[quote:0a905ee818]Explorer 35 went into a lunar orbit and weighed 104 kg; it's booster
was a Thrust-Augmented Delta, one of the precurssors to the modern
Delta 2 Booster. So a modern Delta would fill that bill more or less.
The Delta 2 weighs (or weighed) 216,600 kg
At 2083:1 and perhaps $60 million just for the Delta 2 isn't exactly[/quote:0a905ee818]
turning me on.
[quote:0a905ee818]Finally! Surveyor 2 weighed exactly 1000 kilos -- no guestimation
here. It was launched by an Atlas Centaur Booster, which tipped the
scales at about 360,000 kg (my chart has two figures -- don't ask me
to say why). The Atlas Centaur -- eventually known simply as Atlas --
was superseeded by bigger rockets in that line. But I suppose a
single Atlas Core would do it.
IIAS-Star 48B at $160 million is certainly making the old Athena 2 as[/quote:0a905ee818]
looking damn good at $30+ million, especially if that little/compact
all-solid were slightly stretched and further upgraded to composites,
plus hauling a somewhat better Star kicker might just manage the 1000+
kg for not even close to half the price of the Atlas.
Of course my second alternative has to do with what's reasonably
possible to R&D that's better than Athena 2, such as incorporating the
Steven Pietrobon LRB upgrade of using that somewhat better than
all-solid method of h2o2/c3h4o as core instead of his original
h2o2/kero performance <http://www.sworld.com.au/steven/pub/lrb.pdf>,
which beggs the same question as to how much extra rocket/payload per
translunar ratio performance are we looking at. Whereas it seems this
method of using a slush-liquid core of h2o2/c3h4o should have the
capability of accomplishing the task at a much better ratio, as meaning
that it involves less liftoff inert mass than offered by the Athena 2
that's already proven as good for better than 185 kg, especially if the
LRB core had two or three composite/disposible SRBs or just another LRB
stage of h202/c3h4o, plus a final Star SRM kicker stage, thus either
way it's essentially down to 3 stages to the moon.
Ideally, I'd like to see the most afordable capability of deploying 100
each of the 10 kg microsatellites per shot, thus we'd need to explore
the possibility of a 1,000+ kg payload. However, for the moment I'd
settle for the 100+ kg capability of deploying 10 units, especially if
that could be accomplished at less than half the Athena 2
configuration. Or should I have been asking this question to Steven
Pietrobon, as to what his LRB alternative to whatever the all-solid has
to offer?
Otherwise the very newest improved Athena 2 might already accommodate
as many as 24 of these 10 kg microsatellites. In which case we'd need
perhaps 260 kg capability, which I'm thinking sime getting there fast
isn't essential, and of whatever improvements in solids should do the
trick.
-
Brad Guth |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth |
| Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2006 12:42 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 08 Nov 2004
Posts: 3051
Location: 1-253-8576061
|
Michael Gallagher,
I see that you're getting lots of advice from your brown-nosed
puppeteers.
-
Brad Guth |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth |
| Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2006 9:31 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 08 Nov 2004
Posts: 3051
Location: 1-253-8576061
|
Scott Hedrick,
Here's my rational response to the likes of yourself and your Third
Reich fellow brown-nosed members of your Skull and Bones: Go jump off
the nearest tall building or bridge.
On your way down, consider that you've had 5+ years to put up or shut
up. Obviously you and your kind have had no intensions of putting up
squat, much less giving a tinkers damn about humanity.
-
Brad Guth |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Michael Gallagher |
| Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2006 11:15 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 19:43:36 -0500, "Scott Hedrick"
<diespammers-dinehnm@yahoo.com> wrote:
[quote:2b8990ffaa]
.... We killfiled him so we wouldn't see it.
Since you insist on quoting him, it looks like we'll have to killfile you as
well.
[/quote:2b8990ffaa]
Actually, I put him back in my killfile yesterday. But if you and Om
still want to killfile me, go right ahead.
[quote:2b8990ffaa]You will not get a rational response from Brad Guth ....
[/quote:2b8990ffaa]
Probably; call me a believer in giving people the benefit of the
doubt.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Michael Gallagher |
| Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2006 11:15 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On 25 Jan 2006 21:42:21 -0800, "Brad Guth" <ieisbradguth@yahoo.com>
wrote:
[quote:62c42ed416]Michael Gallagher,
I see that you're getting lots of advice from your brown-nosed
puppeteers.
-
[/quote:62c42ed416]
I'm not puppeted by anyone, Brad, but I have heeded on of their bits
of advice and put you back in my killfile. Have a good one.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth |
| Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2006 5:24 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 08 Nov 2004
Posts: 3051
Location: 1-253-8576061
|
[quote:53077530ce]Michael Gallagher; I'm not puppeted by anyone, Brad, but I have heeded on
of their bits of advice and put you back in my killfile. Have a good one.
[/quote:53077530ce]
That sounds exactly like a puppet to me, and otherwise extactly as
though butt-licking and brown-nosed to boot.
-
Brad Guth |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Sun Nov 08, 2009 5:21 am
|
|