Discussion Your Venus/Mars mission concepts/proposals

[K_Jameson]

I continue to speak about release dates that are regularly disregarded, making a bad impression... so I will resist the temptation, this time :blush:

The curious thing is that this addon has nothing of really complicated and is pratically completed from about one year... the problem are scenarios and documentation... currently I prefer to sketching various concepts as the Uranus and Neptune probes, other minor spacecrafts and the Starlab space station.

 

[fsci123]

Does this thread have to be about probes or coud it be about manned missions?

Also how could I calculate when Venus and Mars will "align" in the 2080s?

 

[ISProgram]

Well, I made this thread with the intention of unmanned mission proposals, but I don't see why we can't add manned missions.

 

[ISProgram]

Currently having a severe case of Writer's Block, so I haven't been working on much of anything even though I'm bored these days.

Recently began the model for MITO, but I was inspired a bit too much. Familiar, isn't it...?

VESPA's model is still in preliminary stages, Giovanni's design has proven to be a major pacing item in completing it.

Also, a mission to 16 Psyche is in early concept, but it's stalled at the moment...due to WB...

 

[Nicholander]

Interesting! It's good to see that you're back! :thumbup:

By the way, did you learn anything about actually modding the probes into Orbiter? (Programming, textures, UV mapping, etc.) But if you didn't I'd be happy to help! (I've modded working spacecraft into Orbiter before.)

 

[ISProgram]

Please forgive me for this necropost.

Um, I'm still quite a novice when it comes to implementing spacecraft in Orbiter. I can think up everything, features, the models, etc., but coding is beyond my level of expertise at the moment.

To be honest, my issues with textures/UV mapping is the main obstacle to finishing this launch vehicle project.

And to be honest, this project wasn't entirely in the forefront of my thoughts right now; I've been considering ways to "fix" my fictional space program, the lot of what I've established up to now is contradictory and possibly realistically inaccurate.

._.

As to this late reply: I was actually at a job out of state for the last six weeks lol, and I only got back on Monday. And I literally just noticed this reply 10 minutes ago...

 

[ISProgram]

Reminded me of PADSL; similar engineering goals as well.

---------- Post added 08-11-15 at 03:11 AM ---------- Previous post was 08-10-15 at 10:26 PM ----------

The addition of thruster groups/clusters on MITO:

 

[ISProgram]

Still working on MITO's model. On the topic of VESPA-O, it is likely that the "Giovanni" atmospheric probe will be changed to a weather station; a balloon based platform with up to 4 dropsondes. Still thinking about the design really.

In unrelated news, the (uncompleted) model of a 4179 Toutatis orbiter, currently being referred to as DSEC-4.

---------- Post added at 08:18 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:37 AM ----------

Haven't figured out what the payload for VESPA-A will be, but here's what it looks like so far. Between VESPA-A and O, there are a few other projects I'm working on (like DSEC), so I have to prioritize some things over others.

Even though VESPA-O is nearly done, I'm still only half satisfied with the instrument suite, too focused in the visible spectrum IMHO.

 

[ISProgram]

So VESPA-A (which is in desperate need of a new moniker) has had a few changes from the established plan that I had for 6+ months. Preliminary mass calculations show that it will weigh ~4,000 kg dry. So the configuration on launch vehicle is in doubt a bit. Just a bit.

The main issue is the delta-V; I'm aiming for the spacecraft to have a delta-V of about 2 km/s, which is over triple that required for the Venusian transfer and trajectory corrections. This is because I want the cruise stage, after droping the aeroshell off at Venus, to conduct its own mission, in a similar manner to Vega 1+2, which as you might know visited Halley's comet after passing Venus to deliver probes.

The planned solution to this issue, if it turns out to be one, is to install a toroidal tank to the bottom of the cruise stage platform. As already designed, the cruise stage can accommodate this, and the space that would be taken up by fuel tanks on the forward platform can be used for other instruments. If I go for the independent cruise concept, it will likely have a toroidal tank. The extended mission will also probably just be one of technology demonstration.

A comparison between VESPA-A and TSL (an earlier Mars concept first mentioned here). VESPA is small enough to fit within a 4m payload fairing, TSL is large enough that it needs a 5.5m+ fairing to encapsulate it.

In other thoughts, I need to get some incentive to finish this project more quickly; I'm going a bit to slow IMHO, so slow I might get bored with it before anything really comes to fruition. :facepalm:

 

[K_Jameson]

2 km/s for a 4,000 kg-dry weight means a total wet mass of 7,500/8,000 kg. Your launchers are able to put such a mass in an interplanetary course?

 

[ISProgram]

2 km/s for a 4,000 kg-dry weight means a total wet mass of 7,500/8,000 kg. Your launchers are able to put such a mass in an interplanetary course?

Actually, yes, the Aquarius launcher can definitely put that much into a interplanetary trajectory (it has a LEO payload of 50 mT). The smaller Verseau launcher can't achieve this performance, which is an issue for VESPA-A (right now).

VESPA-O (2,700 kg wet) can already launch to Venus with a Verseau, though it's at the upper limit of what the vehicle can put on the trajectory (3,150 kg). Since Verseau is supposed to launch both VESPA components, the mass increase for V-A vs V-O will likely require the use of a triple-core configuration, pending additional mass calculations.

---------- Post added 08-19-15 at 12:28 AM ---------- Previous post was 08-18-15 at 09:40 PM ----------

Possibly, I will delay VESPA-A's launch by 5 years, to the June 2039 opportunity. This is slightly more favorable in terms of delta-V; the 2036 and 2037 are among the highest in terms of delta-V requirement in the entire 2030-40 timeframe.

This has the drawback of a lengthy period between VESPA-O's launch (2032), which realistically would just add development risk and cost overruns. 7 years seems a long time for any spacecraft launch.

The alternative is pushing both VESPAs launch opportunity up by 2 years; this results in V-O flying in 2031, and V-A taking the more favorable launch opportunity in 2032.

This has the issue of possibly creating mass issues with V-O which is already near the maximum performance of its launcher for the 2032 window (and the 2031 opportunity is less favorable). The secondary drawback is that this may create a ripple effect in the launch vehicle manifest, requiring that some other payloads (commercial, government, the like) be shuffled around.

Yes, I have a flight manifest, I plan very thoroughly.

 

[ISProgram]

Overall comparison of the two VESPA, low-fidelity:

VESPA-A's mass calculation was...exaggerated, it's not likely to exceed 4,000 kg wet unless I keep the toroidal tank concept.

---------- Post added 08-21-15 at 09:53 AM ---------- Previous post was 08-20-15 at 03:59 PM ----------

Okay, have decided that VESPA-A's cruise stage will not perform a extended mission after dropping the aeroshell at Venus; rather, it will be targeted into the atmosphere at a relatively shallow angle and send back data and telemetry until it burns up, in a identical manner to the Pioneer Venus Multiprobe.

It will use the same two instruments, an Ion Mass Spectrometer and a Neutral Mass Spectrometer.

Still considering at least putting a 6U cubesat onboard the cruise stage just because.

---------- Post added at 12:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:53 AM ----------

Also continuing some launch vehicle data points, the launch vehicle designs for Aquarius and Verseau changed quite a bit during the hiatus of this project.

The Aquarius B1 (104) has a payload of 61,475 kg, an increase from the previously established 50,300 kg capacity. I will need to test this in Orbiter later.

"Verseau", which is the baseline launcher for both VESPAs...isn't doing so hot. Despite the slight diameter increase to the vehicle, it has actually lost payload capacity; it's only capable of sending 650 kg to Venus on the 3032 opportunity! Clearly this is an issue, so the rocket will possibly revert back to the 3.9m version or or that version will get scaled up to the new 4m diameter. Nevertheless, this shouldn't be a real issue.

Another detailed VESPA post, continuing from here, should be here soon.

EDIT: I just realized I made a very obvious popular culture reference...kudos to whoever figures it out.

---------- Post added at 09:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:28 PM ----------

Okay, after much trial and error, discovered an error on the calculations...:facepalm:

Verseau can send 3,579 kg to Venus (w/ 2 SRB strap-ons) in the 2032 opportunity, and about 4,070 kg (w/ 4 SRB strap-ons) to Venus in the 2034 opportunity. These represent the current capability of the configuration that were, from the start, intended to launch the respective components.

However, with the payload increase from the redesign, the single-core variant can send 2,711 kg to Venus in 2032 opportunity,while VESPA-A is about 2,700 kg itself. While it's near the maximum capability for the launcher, it is possible that V-A will fly on the single core.

@ K_Jameson: Earlier I mentioned the Aquarius is a response to an earlier inquiry about whether or not the launcher could achieve this type of performance. For reference, Aquarius can send 12,800 kg to Venus in 2032, and 12,064 kg in 2034.