Launching a Space Station to Other Worlds
- Analysis by Ray Villard
Tue Feb 22, 2011 04:56 AM ET
25 Comments | Leave a Comment
Imagine strapping a giant rocket engine on the International Space Station (ISS), inflating a few balloon-like structures to hold your luggage, and adding a spinning carousel-wheel for artificial gravity.
This ungainly-sounding assemblage, dubbed Nautilus-X, ("Non-Atmospheric Universal Transport Intended for Lengthy United States eXploration") has been proposed by the NASA Technology Applications Assessment Team at the Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas. The group is chartered with examining key technologies that can advance space exploration in a timely and affordable manner.
WIDE ANGLE: Supplying the Space Station
The designers optimistically believe that such a planet-roaming "space station with rockets" could be ready by 2020 at a cost of under $4 billion. If this number is realistic, the vehicle would be cheaper than the projected costs for the "Apollo-on steroids" Orion capsule.
NASA has already spent approximately $5 billion on Orion since 2006, and will need roughly another $6.6 to 7.1 billion to meet a 2015 launch.
The real ISS could be used to test components of the Nautilus, and no doubt the experience with the ISS would provide applicable spin-off technology.
NEWS: Space Station Reality Check: Now What?
Like building a house with room for additions, the Nautilus has a modular design that can expand with mission requirements. The central core is a linear truss with a 40-foot diameter giant rotating inner tube structure that serves as the low-gravity habitat. A nuclear, chemical or solar-electric propulsion system could be bolted at one end of the truss.
The trickiest piece of engineering is the inflatable spinning torus that would provide partial artificial gravity. The ring would need to spin at 10 RPM to provide a force one-half Earth gravity. The bearings, slip rings for power, liquid metal seals, and counter-rotating flywheel would be an engineering challenge. A scale working model of the centrifuge would be externally attached to the ISS for testing.
Various inflatable modules would be attached to the truss to provide maximum volume for supplies and storage. Like the ISS, the vehicle would have multiple docking ports for various spaceships. An onboard radiation "storm cellar" lined with liquid water or hydrogen slush would provide shielding from solar flares that would irradiate the vehicle.
But several additions don't make sense to me. First, there are hangars for landing vehicles for use on asteroids or the Martian surface. To significantly lower mass and therefore reduce transit time, why not simply send unmanned landers ahead and put them into a parking orbit to wait until the crew arrives.
The Nautilus has a huge deep-space antenna where laser transmission may make more sense. It also has a shuttle-derived remote manipulator arm which also seems like excess weight.
Over the past several decades there have been a wide variety of designs for interplanetary manned vehicles. The simplest are inflatable so-called Transhab modules strapped onto a nuclear propulsion stage. The most imaginative was a parasol-looking nuclear electric-ion propelled Mars vehicle, designed by rocket engineer Ernst Stuhlinger in 1954, that had a huge saucer-shaped heat radiator.
The Nautilus would be fully assembled and tested on the ISS. Two or three heavy lift booster launches would be needed to deliver the pieces to the ISS for assembly and integration.
The vehicle could go to Mars with a six-person crew, or fly out to the Earth-Moon Langranian point L1 to serve as a base, or visit an asteroid.
L1 would be a great staging point for launching manned lunar landers. Just don’t tell Congress this is funding for yet another space station -- albeit one that can change zip code.
As Volkswagen use to say about their classic Beetle: "it’s ugly but it get you there."
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
 |
 World's Tallest Buildings |
- Muammar Gaddafi: A Flair for Tyrrany: Slide Show
- Alien View of Earth Shapes Search for New Worlds
- Humans Stink More Than Other Animals
- Massive Iceberg Splits Following New Zealand Quake
- Earth Could be 'Unrecognizable' by 2050
- Quake Pummels New Zealand: Slide Show
- Launching a Space Station to Other Worlds
- Top 10 Places To Find Alien Life
- Trade Secrets: What Companies Don't Want You to Know: Slide Show
- Cell Phones May Affect Brain Metabolism
 |
 |
| |
COMMENTS (25)
If you want to get to mars, you need to send a series of supply vehicles in advance at a slower speed. Give each module a month lead time. Then send Americas best to mars, picking up the supply depots like bread crumbs on the trail to Mars.
They could be set up with timed hydroponic systems, so that when they astronots open the hatch, they have fresh fruit and veggies waiting for them, as well as O2, H20, and some beef jerky.
Once the crew is in flight, send a continuous rationing of supplies to keep them alive while on the surface. Imagine what we could learn in 30 days, compared to the cost of the space programs for the last 30 years.
For the return mission, you need to send some supply ships on a round trip mission around martian gravity and shoot back towards earth, creating the same bread crumb path back home.
Lets hijack an asteroid ! Self propelled ,doesn't matter where it is going ..Anywhere but here ! WE could send a probe to join with one we know will be back . Collect information (far reaching telescope) dust , radiation .... Retrieve data on the return. Very little investment , no astronauts , no propulsion system !
what is money to aliens ? we are not sending dollars out in space . we are circulating them through the system of earthlings, spending should create jobs. By the way anyone willing to leave earth should not worry about coming back! One way ticket . With 7 Billion people on this planet suicide jockeys should be welcomed. Sign me up Scottie !
i Throw a Leaf, in south Africa Forest, How is it possible any person Find That ? is it possible ?
same process we want to Find Alien world's in our Galaxy ? it is impossible to Find out.
@Badda, It's not impossible to find that leaf... maybe difficult yes, but not impossible. Read my full reply to your 1st comment, "Throw a Nut in sahara Desert" on how you can find alien world's in our galaxy, at the following Discovery News post:
Alien View of Earth Shapes Search for New Worlds:
http://news.discovery.com/space/aliens-planets-earth-light-110223.html
Just imagine, there is another 'Galileo - like alien being discovering what they are, and from a diffenert angle, another alien is peering at our planet (as a small blue speck) through a Hubble-Like kens wondering if life exists here, and if so, would we greet them with a warm reception.... keep dreaming people!!!
normally I cring at seeing God brought up on the internet, but I totally agree with you Phil, and unfortunatly think your completely correct on both a scientific and religous level. Mars is a great destination to think about, but we're way too primitive in tech to expect to be able to get there and back without a major accident at our current tech. We have trouble just getting off the ground and past low-earth orbit with crews...using our space station as a mobile "transport" between here and the Moon to support a colony or two is much better than trying to send the ISS to another planet. A Mars ship should probably be built on on the moon.
But it's quite an idea when it comes to "what can we do with the ISS"...
Thanks for understanding my take on this - though I too agree at 'wow, look at the ISS and what it is doing' .... you know, if it weren't for the citizens of this world being killed by one another for the sake of freedoms or whatever causes to be held precious, the news stories of the ISS could make news headlines more often, esp great that would be if more of Earth's citizen's couls look at the ISS as a perfect example of, "Yes, we CAN all get along!" PS: God (religion at large) and science does and should mix ... the 'current generation' (no matter what and when described as such), needs to be taking unselfish steps toward making these unrealistic and goals - heck, I'm sure discoverers like Galileo felt like he wanted to make a dash to the moon --- God didn't stop him, mankind's limited technology did --- we need to learn that and practice patience --- this 'got to have it now' attitude has egot to cease and desist until we fix Earth --- geez, whats that I've heard before?: "God helps those who help themselves" - I'm sure will haste man' efforts to meet other worlds and inhabitants --- He doesn't want us to stagnate as a species , He glories in our acheivements because ours are His...... what we want when it come to technological development is spoken of having to be done and always described to be done in 'OUR lifetime' has to stop...lets gear up our children, and children's children, etc through education economics understanding where we came from and who we are seek spiritual guidance and a sense of global community ----- together the inhabitants of the Earth can do many things fro the benefit of all .... the current ISS is only a start ... a first step, ... I better quit here .... take care friends out there!
I think Mars trips are irreelevant for the time being - meaning decades after we as an 'intelligent' species as humankind can get our act together to better take care of our own planet and its inhabitants before we go about wasting zillions of monies on any ET trips other than revisiting the moon - and all I mean by revisiting the moon is to build and establish a minimum of 2 permanent moon bases on the 2 opposite sides of the moon as viewable by the earth with humungous hubble-type telescopic observatories; plus nuclear warhead devices for the singular mission of providing an earth-defense mechanism to destroy any wayward asteroids, meteors, etc found to be headed earthbound. The observatories will allow us to see far beyond our wildest dreams and the positions best available to communicate with ET entities (which God has put out there for us to communicate with). Think this absurd? We already know Mars missions reveal the environment already to hostile even without the presence of alien life forms - plus the distance and time factors to/from are insane --- we need to be realistic with our outerspace travel desires - and keep them rational for the better sake of humankind here on earth. God gave us the brains to explore beyond ourselves, but most important He made Earth our home, and we as its caretakers have been so derelict in the duty for its care its disgusting - we need to fix so many problems here on Earth before we should be even thinking about contaminating the outer planets God has made.
Other worlds!
NASA is not a military organization they don't have bombs and aren't allowed to have bombs.
Reality check, folks. NASA just had its budget slashed from 0.58% of the annual budget (they only get 18 billion dollars) down to 0.45% for 2012. This space station and anything innovative from NASA isn't going to happen. Thank congress for that. Ultimately, thank the American citizens. No interest=no money.
Hey it's NASA's fault. If they had figured out a way to drop bombs from this thing then Congress wouldn't have reduced their funding.
I have sent to the ESA at the European Union regarding the International Space Station (ISS) a suggestion that goes one step beyond this article. I said to fill the space with cargo and send it to Mars. It certainly could be used first for Moon transfer but then go to support a Mars mission. A fast Manned Mission to Mars is appropriate with AeroCapture manuvers that then could transfer to
a lander craft for Mars surface activity. That lander might be carried by the Node (ISS) orbiting Mars.
That is good that mankind is trying to move farward and not just setting out in space waiting for someone to hand it to us!
Sincerely
Charles L. Stringer
What I canNOT understand is why "billions", of SURFACE-VALUE dollars are being wasted on such a project. What will Earth tell the ships crew, when a navigational deviation, of less than one degree sends the ship off, floating into the universe? Here, on home-world, we have something very strange, called "SEARCH-and-RESCUE". In space, there is NO such thing. If a ship is in trouble, in space, by the time a STANDARD S.O.S. would reach Earth, everyone on such a primitive ship, would be atleast WEEKS, or even YEARS, dead! What is the point of even attempting space travel before we have even developed Warp Drive engines? How safe will landers "away teams" feel knowing that, IF an alien presence DOES become hostile, that the closest security personnel are 5 years, maybe 10 years, away. And what about food. How does one store enough food for a voyage of 2, to 5, YEARS? Shouldn't we begin building food re-plicaters, before engaging in such missions. I am sorry, but it is obvious that this plan has NOT been thought out. It must be just propaganda, designed to make the public feel better, about the future.
I think your confusing science and technology with science fiction.
1: What is a surface value dollar?
2: Warp drives and food replicators are the stuff of a sci-fi TV programs
3: Star Trek is not real, they are actors
4: Please tell me you are trolling and are not actually serious?
Hang on a minute, this was my idea, lol,,serously though this did run through my head about a year ago. But surley it really makes sense doesn't it?
maybe the answer to living on the moon in a protected enviroment is to live in the moon . i.e. build a base under the moons surface. as for moving the spacecentre science fiction got there a long time ago. but you also need a way of producing food,water, and oxegen.as for the spinning centre wheel ,how about using maglev with no moving parts to worry about