Project Mirai (Hatsunese Space Station)

[Pipcard]

edit: Station and module names revealed

edit: [ame="http://orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=6972"]Now available on Orbit Hangar![/ame]

Now that I have made the [ame="http://www.orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=6424"]spaceport[/ame], [ame="http://www.orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=6438"]launch vehicles[/ame], and [ame="http://www.orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=6737"]manned spacecraft[/ame] of the Hatsunia Aerospace Science and Development Agency (HASDA), it is now time to create the space station.

This is a very rough mock-up of the core module, which will be about the same size as the Kibo module, but with a solar array that has a total span of 33.9 m and an area of 83.5 m².

 

[K_Jameson]

Good to hear that will be another space station around.
In order to a ASVI - Hatsune cooperation, this module can be a good addition to Starlab. ;-) ;-)

The complete station will be a modular one as ISS or Mir? Number of modules? Expected total pressurized volume?

 

[Pipcard]

It will be a modular station with seven main pressurized sections. I can't calculate pressurized volume right now.

 

[Nicholander]

So this is that big project you were going to be working on, nice! I like the hexagonal solar panel layout, by the way. (Also, I thought this "Big project" was going to be a Hayabusa like probe)

 

[Pipcard]

The layout of the seven main modules and the truss (Note that there will be two docking ports on the core for RCVs. Also, there is one inflatable module.)

edit: some elongated modules:

 

[K_Jameson]

Excellent.
Very ISS-like. Have you idea of its designed orbit?

 

[Pipcard]

That's the issue.

I can't decide whether it will be:

-3.9° inclination: same latitude as Negishima; more payload efficiency when launching due east; however, it will only fly near the equator over South America, Africa, and Southeast Asia.

-23.4° (ecliptic) inclination; alternatively an orbit aligned with the Moon

-39° inclination: allows the HSS to fly over northern Hatsunia (Japan), but has no other reason. There will be a cupola module.

-90° (polar) inclination: best for Earth observation, but hardest to get to. 2 SRBs will be needed on the M-II when launching the RCV.

It will orbit at about 390 km.

 

[K_Jameson]

I have the same problem with Starlab.

For Starlab 1 the choice is currently a near coplanar - but higher - orbit with ISS. This orbit enables some sort of traffic with the other space station but don't offers substantial advantages using the station as staging point for BLEO operations.
An orbit aligned with the Moon can enable the moving of Starlab in an Earth-Moon libration point or even in LLO, when adequate tug modules will be available... so, the final choice is still debated.

 

[Nicholander]

I'd go for it being aligned with the ecliptic, so it's good for interplanetary transfers.

 

[K_Jameson]

Interplanetary manned spacecrafts are not yet existing (and on-orbit refuel of cryogenics not yet proven), so this placement is useless, if you want use only realistic or near-tech vehicles...

 

[Pipcard]

The HSS supports a crew of six (two RCVs each carrying three astronauts and cargo). During the expedition handover period, there are three RCVs docked.

The central truss segment will also have a docking port and a pressurized section that will function as an airlock.

A resupply vehicle based on the HTV berths to the node that is perpendicular to the vertical axis.

 

[Pipcard]

Update: after some consultation (through PM) with a co-author (e of pi) of the Eyes Turned Skyward alternate history timeline, the HSS now looks like this:

(White parts are roughly where the radiators will go. They will also be on the solar truss segments)

 

[ISProgram]

This just occurred to me; how will the truss be delivered/constructed in orbit, barring the absence of any Shuttle/Buran-esque vehicle with a large cargo bay in the Hatsunese space program?

 

[Pipcard]

The truss segments will be delivered to the station via an orbital tug derived from an HTV-like vehicle.

There will be a robotic arm on the station that can relocate itself by moving "end over end", i.e. one end of the arm attaches to a [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grapple_Fixture"]power/data grapple fixture[/ame], and that becomes the new parent attachment, while the other end of the arm lets go of the old PDGF (although I'm not sure if I can simulate this, especially without needing a .dll, so this relocation might need to be done via manual scenario file editing).

This is also why I asked about it in the KSP thread.

Also, I want to have a suntracking capability as well. Donamy used someone else's sun-tracking joint .dll with his vessels (which mostly use the non-.dll spacecraft3 plugin), but I'm not sure how that was implemented for his meshes.

 

[K_Jameson]

Solar tracking would be interesting even for Starlab, but I have not idea to how integrate a tracking DLL in a spacecraft3 vessel. I don't like the spacecraft-DLL converter and I have not time or desire to write a true DLL: i prefer spend my time drawing new spacecrafts and developing exploration ideas than going deep in computer programmation...

 

[orbitingpluto]

Solar tracking would be interesting even for Starlab, but I have not idea to how integrate a tracking DLL in a spacecraft3 vessel. I don't like the spacecraft-DLL converter and I have not time or desire to write a true DLL: i prefer spend my time drawing new spacecrafts and developing exploration ideas than going deep in computer programmation...

From what I know playing around with some of Donamy's stuff, how it works is there's the parent vessel, the suntracking vessel, and then the vessel that is panel(s) to be pointed at the sun. The suntracking vessel is attached to the parnet vessel via attachment points, and the panel is likewise attached to the suntracking vessel via attachment points as well. There's no C++ involved in using it, as far as I can tell.

 

[Pipcard]

I checked the scenario file for Donamy's Tiangong add-on, and you're right. The suntracking vessel is invisible, too. It is a very clever solution.

 

[K_Jameson]

It is a brilliant solution... but implementing it in Starlab, at this stage of development, means to redo a lot of work!
Damn!

 

[Cosmic Penguin]

About the orbit inclination - the most important thing is: what kind of things would the station do? Do you want it to do Earth observation as its primary job? Do you want to allow its crew to see the whole Hatsunia? (I have been to the northernmost point of Japan and it's just over 45 deg. North) Do you want to use it as a BLEO human mission base station? Would you like the ability for transportation from bases at higher latitudes?

It would be easier to suggest an inclination base on the answers.

 

[Pipcard]

If I wanted the station's crew to see most of Japan/Hatsunia, then I could place it on the arbitrary inclination of 39 degrees.

I could imagine the station being at the same inclination as the ISS so Russians can visit for short periods of time, but the station's plan currently supports only APAS docking ports, not the Soyuz probe-and-drogue (or maybe, I could put another docking adapter on the same node module as the solar truss). If I put it on Cape Canaveral's inclination, then the astronauts won't be able to see the northern island of Japan/Hatsunia.