Project "Starlab" space station

[ISProgram]

Would a Antares-derived tug be feasible at this point?

 

[K_Jameson]

An Antares-derived logistic spacecraft (coded in sc3 because we lacks the Antares chief-programmer Fausto) would be essentially the Service Module with the cargo instead the crew's capsule. The weights aren't so different, so this system could work, in theory.

---------- Post added at 05:34 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:28 AM ----------

As promised, a couple of screenshots of the last born Greenhouse module.

The internals. I have no idea if this can be considered realistic; obviously the arrangment with a sense of "up" and "down" is purely conventional; the hydroponics could have been installed in every orientation.



The external. Note the new textures.
The (few) animations aren't implemented yet and must be solved the RCS dilemma (see my last post in the previous page). The module will have four lateral windows and one very large porthole at front. All the windows are covered with protective panels in this view. The porthole, with over 1 meter of diameter, will be the largest single window of the entire station.



---------- Post added 08-27-15 at 02:24 PM ---------- Previous post was 08-26-15 at 05:34 PM ----------

"Greenhouse" can remain as a valid name for the module. Anyway, an alternative name can be "Space Seed". Again, an obvious Star Trek connection.

For the launch, I think that a single Jarvis E can launch both modules and deliver it in a provisional orbit; then the modules equipped with RCS and navigation system can propel itself at the station and perform rendezvous and docking.
A single launch for two modules at the cost of a fair redesign of the meshes isn't a bad business; a subsequent Eridanus launch can deliver additional dotations as the exposed facility, the small robotic arm for the laboratory and even a full canadarm for the core station.
Nothing definitive for now, only speculations.

 

[ISProgram]

Isn't that architecture a bit risky? I mean, if the launch vehicle goes up in smokes, you lose 2 (expensive?) space station modules. Half your space station.

Wherein for the alternative, the margin for launch failure is a bit more tolerable, you're only at risk for losing one module.

 

[n122vu]

]"Greenhouse" can remain as a valid name for the module. Anyway, an alternative name can be "Space Seed". Again, an obvious Star Trek connection.

What about the "Valley Forge" module? It's a reference to the space masterpiece Silent Running.

In a future where all flora is extinct on Earth, an astronaut is given orders to destroy the last of Earth's botany, kept in a greenhouse aboard a spacecraft.

 

[K_Jameson]

Isn't that architecture a bit risky?

Yes, it is. But... you know... what is the fun in having an heavy launch vehicle and not use it?
But... you have a point. A dual Jarvis L launch can accomplish the same job with less risks. For the Antares-derived tug that you have proposed: I'm thinking seriously to remove from mothball a couple of service modules from the Antares 1.0 (the old one, spacecraft3-ruled) and use it for this job.
For the actual docking a station-based canadarm could be necessary and the launch sequence should be swapped: first, Eridanus with the robotic arm and the other accessories, then the modules. I'll think about it...

---------- Post added 08-28-15 at 06:55 AM ---------- Previous post was 08-27-15 at 08:18 PM ----------

What about the "Valley Forge" module? It's a reference to the space masterpiece Silent Running.

I've never seen that movie... :shifty:

---------- Post added at 03:36 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:55 AM ----------

EDIT

OK, after a brief search I found that the "Valley Forge" reference is very pertinent! A good idea, I think about it.

 

[ISProgram]

The rockets aren't gonna be smart, right?

 

[K_Jameson]

Sorry, I did not undestand... what do you mean?

 

[ISProgram]

...Eh...

The joke was misplaced. I mixed up the reference. The Valley Forge is destroyed by a nuclear charge at the end of Silent Running. Another movie, Dark Star, which I actually got the privilege to see just yesterday, has similar ending, only the ship in that movie is destroyed by a literal smart bomb that REALLY got smart. Started questioning its own existence/purpose, for example.

Because of the similarity in both movie endings, and the fact that I first heard of said movies just yesterday, led to this mistake.

:facepalm:

 

[K_Jameson]

:lol:

---------- Post added at 08:34 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:02 PM ----------

Hey Andrew,I know you guys over at FOI hade made a couple of updates to the Eridanus spaceplane including a refitted nose cap,so it won't block the RCS,and an extended arm for the RMS,any chance of releasing these with the starlab?it would be a shame to see those very useful updates go to waiste.Thanks

I noticed this question only now, I'm sorry.
Well, i'm planning to release an update for the Quasar launcher along with Starlab - only a cosmetic improvement with the new design of the boosters used in the last Orbiter Live Missions broadcasts and some modified textures.
For Eridanus, don't expect any improvement... Fausto is the master here, and has vanished from long time...

 

[Nicholander]

Hmm... That is a sort of problem, and though I really like the Eridanus idea, personally I couldn't complete that kind of mission in the game, because it is just simply impossible for me to de-orbit, reenter the atmosphere, and land the thing. However, that's just me, and there's probably lots of other people who could land Eridanus in their dreams!

The best option you have as I see it is adding a rendezvous module for each station. Or, alternatively, making a completely custom built space tug, that can some how change the position of its RCS thrusters, so it doesn't need an arm to dock with Starlab.

EDIT: DANG IT NICH!!!!!!!!!!!!! I was looking at the wrong page when typing this, so this is a response to the post at the bottom of the previous page. And since you can't delete posts I'm stuck with this here. Dang it.

 

[Cras]

Eridanus is equivalent to a wideawake nightmare to de-orbit, the thing produces just unholy amounts of lift and pretty much requires you to be rolled from either onto its side or inverted to get her to stay in the atmosphere. Couple that with the fact it doesnt play very well with Aerobrake or Glideslopes autopilots, you just end up sitting there for 45 minutes working a joy stick back and forth to keep the thing under some semblance of control.

 

[Interceptor]

Eridanus is equivalent to a wideawake nightmare to de-orbit, the thing produces just unholy amounts of lift and pretty much requires you to be rolled from either onto its side or inverted to get her to stay in the atmosphere. Couple that with the fact it doesnt play very well with Aerobrake or Glideslopes autopilots, you just end up sitting there for 45 minutes working a joy stick back and forth to keep the thing under some semblance of control.

Fausto changed the aerodynamics in the latest unreleased version,and it also works now with autofcs,too bad it will probably never be released.

---------- Post added at 12:50 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:49 PM ----------

Eridanus is equivalent to a wideawake nightmare to de-orbit, the thing produces just unholy amounts of lift and pretty much requires you to be rolled from either onto its side or inverted to get her to stay in the atmosphere. Couple that with the fact it doesnt play very well with Aerobrake or Glideslopes autopilots, you just end up sitting there for 45 minutes working a joy stick back and forth to keep the thing under some semblance of control.

Fausto changed the aerodynamics in the latest unreleased version,and it also works now with autofcs,too bad it will probably never be released,but you never know,I can't speak for the man.

 

[Cras]

That is too bad it wont get released because really, that is the big thing that was holding it back. Other then that it was fun to fly, the panel to work the bay doors and solar panels, the robotic arm. The payload bay was a tad on the short side so some payloads couldnt be crammed into it but I just found de-orbiting the thing to be very difficult. I was able to do it but never felt like I was in control of the thing like I am when I deorbit the Shuttle.

 

[K_Jameson]

I've spent the last days thinking at the optimal method for shipping the Starchaser laboratory and the Greenhouse module at the station. The addition of autonomous flight and docking capabilities would involve a substantial redesign of the modules for accomodation of the necessary fuel tanks, fuel lines, engines, et cetera. I don't want modify the simple and clean design of these modules, so I'd go for the "tug" option. For keeping the thing simple, I'm thinking at a disposable design. One for each module, two total. Maybe with the option of retaining one module at the station for some kind of subsequent use.
So I'm looking for a simple and credible design that can manage an off-center cargo of about twenty tons... some ideas or references?


Meanwhile, I'm thinking to a better name for the laboratory.
"Starchaser", some time ago, was a generic name for a yet-to-do generic big expansion module. When that module was concretized, I've chosen the name "Challenger" instead*, so the new laboratory has inherited the "Starchaser" name. But I would like a more pertinent name, just as for the Greenhouse that now has two adequate candidate names ("Space Seed" and "Valley Forge", see the discussion above).


(* "Challenger" because the module is derived from a Jarvis stage and the original Jarvis rocket has taken the name from the astronaut Gregory Jarvis, that died on the Challenger disaster. )

 

[PhantomCruiser]

I kind of like Valley Forge, but with the historical connotations to an American make it (to me anyways) too stately(?) for a module. The SF movie was pretty cool, and I would understand the connection, but still... bloody footprints in the snow and all that...

If the module is for the crew to grow and consume the "fruits" of their labor (pun intended), what is the Italian word for breadbasket? Or maybe a region in Italy known for fertile soil?

 

[K_Jameson]

I kind of like Valley Forge, but with the historical connotations to an American make it (to me anyways) too stately(?) for a module. The SF movie was pretty cool, and I would understand the connection, but still... bloody footprints in the snow and all that...

The historical aspect is important and definitely plays against the "Valley Forge" name. I'm still with "Space Seed" because of the Star Trek connection, that is funny and has precedents in the Italian spaceflight (our astronaut Samantha Cristoforetti is a fan and has performed various homages at the series). But even the simple "Greenhouse" is a perfectly acceptable name.
Not the same for the "Starchaser" name of the other laboratory.

If the module is for the crew to grow and consume the "fruits" of their labor (pun intended), what is the Italian word for breadbasket? Or maybe a region in Italy known for fertile soil?

Breadbasket = Granaio (I think)

Various regions of Italy are fertile; the area with the more intensive agriculture is the Po valley.

Although a couple of Italy-inspired names for our works have been suggested by me (Eridanus, Verrazzano), I'm not so attached to the Italian nomenclature, diversely from my fellow FOI developers. The space adventure for me is an effort of the entire humanity, and I've always been open to names with every heritage - Italian, European, American, Russian or even Chinese. No barriers.

---------- Post added at 08:22 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:56 PM ----------

Speaking of references and citations... into the Starchaser laboratory, near the small porthole, we can see these small desktop models:



I've modeled the Enterprise-D following faithfully the lines of the original. It's not perfect, nor complete, but for a small model is more than enough. The model is 1/2000 scale.

Next to the Enterprise we have the model of a space station. This is my homage to the FOI community, a model (rough but with the right proportions) of the now-defunct Gaia space station. The model is 1/200 scale.

 

[K_Jameson]

Concept of the Antares-derived space tug for delivering the two laboratories at the station:



Substantially, the tug is a modified and simplified Antares Short Range service module, mounted upside down and with RCS and some other equipments repositioned. The deployable solar panels are replaced by fixed ones.

---------- Post added 09-03-15 at 12:43 PM ---------- Previous post was 09-02-15 at 10:03 PM ----------

Another and more ambitious idea is to use an sc3 equivalent of the good old Kulch's Tranzit Space Tug. Such a spacecraft could retrieve both modules from the respective orbits and take it to the station. After this work, the tug, equipped with docking ports at both ends and a pressurized passage for the crew, could be docked at the aft port of the Challenger module or at the lateral port of the Starlab core for subsequent uses. The module could house even a large canadarm for every logistic need (module relocations, spacecraft berthing).

In fact, the simpler way would be to use directly the Tranzit spacecraft, but FOI's politic is to realize all in-house!

 

[K_Jameson]

A thing like this:

 

[PhantomCruiser]

I like it a lot!
A fitting homage to Yuri and the Tranzit module.

 

[K_Jameson]

Thank you :thumbup:
It is only an idea but I spend some time to investigate it.

This concept has 35 tons of propellant and a full weight that can be estimated around 45 or 50 tons. The basic spaceframe is the same of the two latter station's modules, with the removal of the main pressurized compartment, replaced by the fuel and oxidizer tanks, and the addition of a second docking port. A pressurized passage, surrounded by the tanks, connects the two docking ports, allowing to leave the tug docked at the station without taking up any slot for dockings.