"BiConic" CEV (shuttle replacement)

[Dr Mordrid]

A 6 person capsule but with a twist: it re-enters nose first.

Burt Rutan proposed this idea a while back for manned ships because it allows for a "care free" re-entry akin to SpaceShipOne; it comes in like a shuttlecock, self stabilizing because of its shape. This design has a long history with un-manned craft, especially with film return modules for spy satellites.



Interesting.....

Because modularity is part of the NASA framework this could not only have its service module attached but perhaps a larger habitat (inflatable?) and drive system geared to the task at hand.

Dr. Mordrid

[Jammrock]

What NASA needs to do is figure out how to get SpaceShipOne to cary more cargo and get to 290 miles above the surface.

I remember one idea for re-entry in an old ... popular science or mechanics mag. The idea was to place a single astronaut on a quarter sphere that had it's own heat shielding, and a climate controlled presure suit. The way the disc was designed it wouldn't require any re-entry stabilization, and the single person could re-enter unscathed. Once they reached 5k feet and a safe terminal velocity, the astronaut would eject from the disc and parachute the rest of the way down.

Was originally designed for a space station where you wouldn't need to send a shuttle up to get someone down.

Jammrock

[Nowhere]

Yeah, I read also about these emergency "vehicles", Jammrock. Apparently some were inflatable in some sence (not exactly air).

Would be quite an experience deorbiting in something like that...hardcore even

[Dr Mordrid]

Hmm....the next X-game? Would make one helluvan Olympic event

Moving on;

No pictures yet, but Rutan and Virgin have already annonced that SpaceShipTwo will be a 9 seat vehicle: 2 crew and 7 passengers. They are also building a much larger version of White Knight to act as a launcher. This would be what Rutans timeline callsl "Tier Two". "Tier One" was SS1 and "Tier Three" is to be an orbital spaceship.

At the same time two other things are going on.

1. Rutan is running tests on Boeings X-37 spaceplane for NASA and DARPA using the White Knight launch plane used with SS1. They've already achieved captive carry and will soon be doing drop tests. Wonder how far this will go?

2. Bigelow Aerospace will be launching small testbeds of their inflatable space habitats within around Q2 of '06 on a SpaceX Falcon rocket. They are ramping up to modules up to 20+ meters long, which could be assembled into larger structures once in orbit.

NASA either needs to get on the manned EO stick quickly or the commercial guys will pass 'em right on by.

Dr. Mordrid

[MultimediaMan]

I remember one idea for re-entry in an old ... popular science or mechanics mag. The idea was to place a single astronaut on a quarter sphere that had it's own heat shielding, and a climate controlled presure suit. The way the disc was designed it wouldn't require any re-entry stabilization, and the single person could re-enter unscathed. Once they reached 5k feet and a safe terminal velocity, the astronaut would eject from the disc and parachute the rest of the way down...

Kinda Reminds me of Dr. Floyd's monolog (letter to Caroline) about the atmospheric braking maneuver used by the Leonov in 2010...he ends with this line: "It looks dynamite on paper, but the people who came up with the this aren't up here now...."

Truer words have never been spoken.

The nose-first re-entry is (again) predicated on a non-ballistic (sub-Mach 5) re-entry. The price of this is a longer Deorbit burn (which is really no biggie): the upside of all this is that no heatshield would be needed. The simple shape of the capsule would lend itself well to inexpensive mass production AND still be at least partially reusable.

NASA could build one hell of a nice semi-reusable capsule system that carries 6-10 Astronauts and their consumables for nearly a month or ~20,000 lbs of cargo in the same space. The idea would to have a single launch system with the ability to deliver multiple payloads. The Russians have been doing this for decades, with a nearly 100% success rate. (100% for the past 15 years...IIRC).

[Nowhere]

Something just struck me about reusability...cylinder shaped crew module inside rest, with one of its side basically outside? Hmmm...

That said, why not ballistic reentry? It's hard to fvck up this one...

[Dr Mordrid]

I prefer non-ballistic with a longer derobit burn as discribed by MM. This maximizes all the advantages Rutan has been pushing so correctly.

[MultimediaMan]

Well, a Ballistic Re-entry in a capsule would be very uncomfortable for the occupants...5-9 Gs maybe more. This happened in the not-too distant past with a Returning Soyuz Capsule....not fun.

You would also need the heat shielding, which is one thing Rutan (and everyone else) is seeking to avoid.

[Marshmallowman]

non-ballistic = space ship/vehicle
ballistic = brick

me, I would prefer to travel in a spaceship.

[Nowhere]

OK, but Soyuz is not so tough when everything is working as it should. This thing would be even less offcourse.
But when something goes wrong...

[MultimediaMan]

Yep, normally a Soyuz uses a re-entry profile which take the craft and crew to no more than 3.5G's....

For some reason on that particular trip, the flight computer literally "went ballistic"...

All the crew of the Soyuz had time for was to mutter kollectivly "Govno" and hang on for the ride.

[Dr Mordrid]

non-ballistic = space ship/vehicle
ballistic = brick

me, I would prefer to travel in a spaceship.

ballistic = brick = space shuttle

Dr. Mordrid

[DGhost]

see, personally i love sub-orbital and oribital ballistics

[Nowhere]

See, MmM, that's the point. I wonder what would the crew said in such vehicle (first post) when control systems freak out...

[Nowhere]

btw, about "hardcore"

http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?id=156&type=wmv