New Crew exploration Vehicle

Lets open this up with thoughts on what the NEW design will look like.

Are we going back to the Apollo style capsule? or a slighltly better version.

It must not only get to the ISS but then onto the Moon if I read his thought right.

Michael

home.earthlink.net... my thoughts on getting there

Ps - thanks for a space section

[Edited on 15-1-2004 by Ark-Angel]

[Edited on 15-1-2004 by Ark-Angel]

What is a vehical?

Anyways I saw on TV proposed designs and one looked like a hugh flying wing as compared to the current shuttle.

Maybe they are just bringing out of the closet the existing TR-3B etc.,

www.geocities.com...

Originally posted by THENEO
What is a vehical?

You know having technology and using it aren't the same thing or is they hehehe

thanks for pointing out the error

Michael

Link to Nasa gearing up for this: www.space.com...


[Edited on 15-1-2004 by Ark-Angel]

Could our Goverment be ready to come out with say a saucer shape vehical ops that's vehicle from all that downed UFO parts laying around? Or some ion engine driven craft to go all the way taking fuel as it goes?

Michael

A-A,

yes I agree that just because they have it there is no compelling reason to use it,

but just in case they decided to do that it would present the perfect opportunity to do so.

how likely is it, not that high I think.

besides with any craft there is always payload issues and while the TR-3 has many capabilities I doubt that a high payload is one of them from what I can understand based upon known paramaters of the craft (mostly for surveillance etc.).

I feel STRONGLY that this vehicle will employ "borrowed" anti-grav propulsion, it's the perfect opprotunity to unveil the craft they've been working on all these years. All you have to do is examine the lag between development and public disclosure of military vehicles.

Did you check out the link to Nasa gearing up, going to start 4 new departments. People over there must be grinning ear to ear. Question is how long will that grin last, Columbia took that grin from Nasa and put on public display how internal affairs had help to bring about the disaster, now they get rewarded with an even bigger task of ending up on Mars.

I was hoping for a mixture of private and government working together on extracting the riches of the Moon both in it's soil and location for telescopes.

Do you think Nasa can handle this?????

Michael

[Edited on 16-1-2004 by Ark-Angel]

[Edited on 16-1-2004 by Ark-Angel]

Originally posted by dangermouse
I feel STRONGLY that this vehicle will employ "borrowed" anti-grav propulsion, it's the perfect opprotunity to unveil the craft they've been working on all these years. All you have to do is examine the lag between development and public disclosure of military vehicles.

Well, just cause I was all but flamed in another forum for having worked for NASA i'd like to add this little tidbit to ATS. Despite the fact that there is no alien cover up at NASA (at least not a large centralized one ) there is classified tech. NASA does indeed work with the USAF and that includes classified things of various levels. This is actualy not a secret. I'd just like to add that there is VERY good reason the general public is not let in on it. For example, if i said you could make a nuclear weapon out of tin foil, a AA battery, and some rocks would you want that to be public? Remember if YOU can find it on the net so can any one else.

[Edited on 15-1-2004 by ScienceGuyQ]

another link to fill in some of the blanks,

www.space.com...

Cost on this will come from what was going to the ISS project that when killed will give like 15 billion to getting to the Moon and beyond.

Michael

Some of the ideas i and some friends have been discussing about our future mission's to mars and the moon. I personnel think we need to develop a vehicle to go from earth to the ISS frist. THen once we have that working build a space ship in space that would only be used in that enviroment, no reentry capabilities. That why stress on the ship is limited, and payload launch issue don't occur. You have to look at it like this, could we build a ship on earth and launch it to Mars with all they will need for a minimal 12 month period.
We have proven we can do this for trips to the moon but that is only 4 month's( 2 month's each way i belive). But mars will be a whole nother story, building in space will make it easier in the long run. The ship to Mars will need fuel( with present technology), food, space for the astronauts, lander for Mars, recovery vehicle, all this would almost make and earth launch impossible. I agree with building a base on the moon to accomplish this, the advantages are just to great to pass up. But i think we need a dedicated space vehicle to fly back and forth from the ISS to the Moon base. That why we don't have to worry about the ship having to be refit after every reentry. Just my two cents on this.

Originally posted by Jay
Some of the ideas i and some friends have been discussing about our future mission's to mars and the moon. I personnel think we need to develop a vehicle to go from earth to the ISS frist.

Jay, take a moment and read how I saw going to the Moon in a previous thread. I agree, having one vehicle for getting to the station, then another to go onto the Moon or Mars but I also feel having robotics to help build a Mars space station would help with deployment to the surface and backup by allowing for inspection of the craft before heading to the surface only to find a problem too late. We can do this as a people and if Nasa stops supporting the piggy bank ISS which is doing nothing except costing us, then we really do have a chance.

Let me know what you think of what I sent George W Bush.

Michael

quote:Originally posted by dangermouse
I feel STRONGLY that this vehicle will employ "borrowed" anti-grav propulsion, it's the perfect opprotunity to unveil the craft they've been working on all these years. All you have to do is examine the lag between development and public disclosure of military vehicles.



Well, just cause I was all but flamed in another forum for having worked for NASA i'd like to add this little tidbit to ATS. Despite the fact that there is no alien cover up at NASA (at least not a large centralized one ) there is classified tech. NASA does indeed work with the USAF and that includes classified things of various levels. This is actualy not a secret. I'd just like to add that there is VERY good reason the general public is not let in on it. For example, if i said you could make a nuclear weapon out of tin foil, a AA battery, and some rocks would you want that to be public? Remember if YOU can find it on the net so can any one else.

[Edited on 15-1-2004 by ScienceGuyQ]

I know a few things about secrets, nothing huge but my uncle was a U2 mechanic and, without being specific, told me about 'stuff from STAR WARS' back in the 80's.
So in your humble opinion, do you think the CEV will use anti-grav, or some other 'new' technology?

concepts of exploration vehicle

www.spaceflight.nasa.gov...

www.spaceflight.nasa.gov...

[Edited on 16-1-2004 by MarkLuitzen]

Originally posted by MarkLuitzen
concepts of exploration vehicle

These are ALL Nasa and I believe if were going to do this right then people outside of Nasa need to be part of design work. It could be setup as a national contest, best idea of speak your thoughts on what it should look like and why perhaps. If we only allow Nasa to design then the same pitfalls which hit the ISS project will surface in this one.

Hopefully we won't make that mistake.

Michael

originally posted by: Ark-Angel
Lets open this up with thoughts on what the NEW design will look like.

Are we going back to the Apollo style capsule? or a slighltly better version.

It must not only get to the ISS but then onto the Moon if I read his thought right.

Michael

home.earthlink.net... my thoughts on getting there

Ps - thanks for a space section

[Edited on 15-1-2004 by Ark-Angel]

[Edited on 15-1-2004 by Ark-Angel]

Although this thread is two decades old, I should mention that the initial Lockheed Martin Crew Exploration Vehicle design featured a delta-wing crew module attached to a mission module and propulsion stage with rocket engines, but by 2006 it was replaced by a more conventional Apollo CSM-style design. This was christened the Orion, and it was selected over a design envisaged by a Boeing/Northrop Grumman design team on August 31, 2006. The Orion spacecraft was the lunar orbiting component of the Constellation program, which also included the Ares SLV family and Altair lunar lander. Although Barack Obama canceled the Constellation program in February 2010, he let development of the Orion spacecraft continue, and the Orion had its first successful flight launched Delta IV Heavy in December 2014 before being selected as the lunar orbiting component of the Artemis program. The first SLS launch on November 16, 2022, was used for the first lunar flight of the Orion, which is now destined to take people to the Moon for the first time since the late 1960s (the Human Landing System variant of the Starship mega-rocket will be used for the lunar landing component of the Artemis program, but that's another story).

Link:
en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...
)