Project Fictional Space Shuttle Program

[Cras]

The original plan was, as I remember it, for Enterprise to be the 2nd space worthy Shuttle, and Challenger was only considered when a cost analysis was performed and deemed it to be the cheaper option for conversion. So you could say it is either Enterprise or Challenger, not both.

 

[Urwumpe]

So you could say it is either Enterprise or Challenger, not both.

Yes, but Challenger was also faster ready to fly than an eventual Enterprise. That is what I meant there... also the next one would still have likely been named Challenger.

 

[DaveS]

Yes, but Challenger was also faster ready to fly than an eventual Enterprise. That is what I meant there... also the next one would still have likely been named Challenger.

I believe the names had already been decided on, so Challenger was out if Enterprise was in.

 

[Urwumpe]

I believe the names had already been decided on, so Challenger was out if Enterprise was in.

I believe that the numbering had been cast in stone, but the actual names of the Orbiters have ultimatively been decided only shortly before roll-out and only once been subject of a presidential decree. Challenger got its name officially in 1982, as far as I can see.

 

[skyballer455]

New Schedule!

Here is an adjusted plan for the first four years of the program, based on input from Urwumpe:

FSSP Planned Flights

1978

March
STS-1 (Columbia)

The first test flight of the space shuttle. This flight will test the
flight surfaces of the space shuttle during orbit.

October
STS-2 (Columbia)

The second test flight of the shuttle. This flight will test the RMS capabilities of 
the shuttle.

1979

April
STS-3 (Columbia) 

Third test of the shuttle. More various tests performed in flight.

November
STS-4 (Columbia)
Final test flight. More various tests performed in flight to finalize 
atmospheric tests.

1980

March
STS-5 (Columbia)

First operational space shuttle flight. Will deploy a test sattelite (custom payload)
which will be retrieved on a later flight. This will test the space shuttles 
sattelite deployment capabilities

July
STS-6 (Columbia)

This flight will further test the RMS capabilities by deploying a sattelite using the RMS arm.

December 
STS-7 (Challenger)

First flight of Challenger orbiter. Will carry aboard many research modules aboard.

1981

February 
STS-8 (Columbia)

Mission to retreive the test sattelite that was deployed by STS-5. This mission will bring 
back the sattelite for study on the ground.

May
STS-9 (Columbia)

First mission to deploy telecommunications sattelites.

July
STS-10 (Challenger)

EVA systems tested for first time.

October
STS-11 (Enterprise)

More EVA Tests performed. Sattelite deployed by EVA.

Thank you!

 

[Cras]

From my reading, I was under the impression that should Enterprise had been converted to be spaceworthy, then it would have flown as Space Shuttle Enterprise. It was when it was decided the test article STA-099 was to be converted instead, that they decided to name it, and it was given the name Challenger.

The vehicle numbers were set in stone, which is why Enterprise was still classified as OV-101 and Challenger OV-099

 

[Michkov]

OT question, what would be needed to make the Enterprise spaceworthy?

 

[Urwumpe]

OT question, what would be needed to make the Enterprise spaceworthy?

Well, start at the obvious:

• Reaction Control System
• Main Propulsion System
• Orbital Maneuvering System
• Thermal Protection System
• ECLSS

And also many smaller changes, like more powerful fuel cells and many missing wirings for RMS and Ku-Band antenna.



Next, it would have needed a massive diet, because its structure was pretty heavy even compared to the heavy Columbia.

 

[Andy44]

OT question, what would be needed to make the Enterprise spaceworthy?

The reason Enterprise was never fitted for spaceflight was because during the approach and landing tests, engineers at the factory realized that changes had to be made to the airframe before launching it.

Columbia was still under construction, so it wasn't too expensive to fix it. Enterprise, on the other hand, was a complete airframe, and to make the required changes would've required disassembling the airframe and sending wings and other subassemblies back to vendors to be upgraded to the new specs. It was found to be cheaper to upgrade a structural test article, STA-099, which became OV-099 (Challenger).

So, the answer to your question is that Enterprise would have to be taken apart and her frame fixed up to spec. This was considered a second time after the Challenger wreck.

After that, you install all the usual systems a space-worthy orbiter gets, engines, heat shield, hydraulics, APUs, avionics, etc.

In a fictional space shuttle program based on original plans, Enterprise would've been contructed to the proper spec in the first place, and wouldn't have needed such an expensive rebuild after the ALT. Just install the space-rated subsystems and roll her back out next to Columbia.

 

[skyballer455]

In a fictional space shuttle program based on original plans, Enterprise would've been contructed to the proper spec in the first place, and wouldn't have needed such an expensive rebuild after the ALT. Just install the space-rated subsystems and roll her back out next to Columbia

That is why in the plan above i have Enterprise flying on the 11th mission. That is four years into the program.

More updates, including a demo mission, are forthcoming.

 

[PhantomCruiser]

What about the 1979 mission that would have reboosted Skylab?

Had Columbia been delivered on time, she would have been part of a pretty extensive Skylab refurbish/reuse program.

 

[Andy44]

IIRC someone built an addon for the Skylab-to-shuttle docking adaptor that was designed for that purpose.

 

[PhantomCruiser]

It's probably stuck away in a warehouse gathering dust, or abandoned somewhere collecting corrosion.

The Skylab 1980 add-on has a nice series of missions (as does David's Skylab Fleet). IIRC the shuttle and Skylab operated at different internal pressures, either they had to pump down shuttle, or pump up Skylab, or use a dedicated module to serve as an airlock between them?

 

[Andy44]

It's probably stuck away in a warehouse gathering dust, or abandoned somewhere collecting corrosion.

The Skylab 1980 add-on has a nice series of missions (as does David's Skylab Fleet). IIRC the shuttle and Skylab operated at different internal pressures, either they had to pump down shuttle, or pump up Skylab, or use a dedicated module to serve as an airlock between them?

Yeah, that was the module I spoke of. It's basically an airlock with a room in it so crew can sit and outgas nitrogen beofre entering Skylab, which used an Apollo-style pure oxygen, low pressure atmosphere.

 

[Scav]

I recall Cairan did a wonderful blog series on alternate history, which brings up an interesting point: after 1986, what if the Challenger disaster never happened? What if the Soviet Union never collapsed and Germany never reunited? The Shuttle had been (mostly) politically driven; how would those events (or lack thereof) affect the rest of the 80's? The 90's? What if Buran hadn't failed or was replaced by something else?

All food for thought . . .

 

[Andy44]

I recall Cairan did a wonderful blog series on alternate history, which brings up an interesting point: after 1986, what if the Challenger disaster never happened? What if the Soviet Union never collapsed and Germany never reunited? The Shuttle had been (mostly) politically driven; how would those events (or lack thereof) affect the rest of the 80's? The 90's? What if Buran hadn't failed or was replaced by something else?

All food for thought . . .

There was a novel written with those assumptions in the 80s called "Storming Intrepid". Check it out if you can find a copy, it's pretty good.

 

[Pioneer]

I would like to get involved in this project if it becomes a community one skyballer. I have an intermediate knowledge of scenario editing and attaching payloads to the shuttle via the text file. Since I know how to rendevous with orbiting spacecraft, I will be willing to command some of these fictional missions. That is, if this project goes forward.

P.S. Check out David's Shuttle-C addon. It can be useful.

 

[skyballer455]

I would like to get involved in this project if it becomes a community one skyballer. I have an intermediate knowledge of scenario editing and attaching payloads to the shuttle via the text file. Since I know how to rendevous with orbiting spacecraft, I will be willing to command some of these fictional missions. That is, if this project goes forward.

P.S. Check out David's Shuttle-C addon. It can be useful.

Thanks for the support Pioneer! However, I don't know what you mean by commanding the missions.

I hope to have a test mission made soon.

Thanks!

 

[skyballer455]

Sample Mission Now Available!

I have now made a sample mission for the FSSP which simulates the first mission on the schedule, STS-1.

You can find the attached .zip file below.

To use, simply extract the into the Orbiter directory.

From there just follow the instructions.

Thanks! And please leave feedback!

(Note: this requires the Shuttle Fleet Addon)

 

[4throck]

What if Buran hadn't failed or was replaced by something else?

Buran didn't fail. It worked perfectly on the first test flight and then the project was canceled. If they continued, Buran would have serviced MIR, much like on the joint Shuttle/MIR that actually happened.
It was also planned to do a manned Soyuz + automated Buran docking.

Actually Buran could function fully automated from launch to landing.
A fictional Shuttle program could include that functionality.
I also think that the early Space Station Freedom "spacedock" design would make sense :thumbup: