Monday, December 28, 2009

Introducing……The Astroliner*




*The following is a theoretical/extrapolative concept/construction only; at this point, it only exists via several rather crude line drawings created by this blogger. Once more: This craft does not yet exist!

Of rockets and trips to outer space

Ever since first satellites and then living beings have been traveling to space, rockets have been used. Other then perhaps more boosting power and different fuels, the technology hasn’t changed much since that time. Even the hallowed Space Shuttle is in essence a rocket. And guess what its replacement will be….you got it! Yet another rocket!

Rockets are rather simple to use as well as largely being simple in design. What payloads need is enough of a boost to escape the gravity well that is part of Earth. Despite their frequent use, there are at least three noted drawbacks for using such a method to boost people and cargo up into even LEO (Low Earth Orbit):

- Rockets are assuredly up to the task as a multitude of successful launches can show, but they are the poster child for inefficience for doing so. Even a LEO shot takes a staggering amount of fuel. Rather then keep on using throwaway modules and such, the time has come for a powered and reusable module able to take off and land unassisted.

- Due in part to the massive amounts of fuel required, rockets are inherently dangerous. As the 1986 Space Shuttle accident showed us, one errant spark into the massive amounts of fuel needed for boosting people and payloads in orbit can result in a catastrophe. If what fuel that is needed is contained internally, that would drastically increase the safety factor.

- Third most, the carriage capacity of the rockets we use is severly limited. (The most that a Space Shuttle can carry at one time is seven people.) Though we have proven that we can land a person on the moon with the technology we have, more capacity is needed on a per flight basis in order to lower the number of flights and the associated risks that come with it.

You would think that a means to address the above issues would be at least on the drawing board, but to date, I have seen nothing of the sort. It is time to take several well tested technologies and figure out a way to merge them into the next generation of space faring craft. This craft would combine the vast cargo capacity of a C-5M equivalent with the V/STOL technology perfected during the time of the Harrier Jump Jet….



Introducing….The Astroliner!!!!




I can bet that many who are reading this blog post are saying something to the effect of “What in HELL is that?” I am one of the many that is AutoCAD challenged, so I had to resort to three imported vector drawings. The following are notes related to the above picture:

1 - Primary pilot control of the craft. Area is designed as a breakout box and could be detached from the primary vehicle in case of an emergency. The module would have limited internal power if separated from the craft, but would provide a potential extra layer of safety.

2 – Secondary pilot control of the craft. This module would be attached to the Passenger Compartment (4)

3 – These appear in a pattern that goes almost all the way around the craft. They could be one or more of several features including, but not limited to:

- Shielded high resolution cameras

- An electric grid active across the entire craft (Could be useful for destroying space debris before it possible damaged the craft itself or maybe as an added barrier against the cold of space or the heat of re-entry)

- Even though this concept is far reaching and altruistic in its goals, we are after all human beings. Denoted places could possibly also be used to mount a weapon system for protecting the craft.

4 – The passenger module for the craft. Ideally it would be able to transport 100 people along with their space gear. It is attached to the secondary pilot control module as a single breakout box which could also be ejected from the craft if the need arose. Like the primary module, it would have limited power if detached from the main craft.

5 – An airlock access for linking up with other craft or even other emplacements in space.

It gets even better in the following picture:



The above picture is a theoretical side view of the craft; the numeric values are described as follows:

1 – A side view of the primary pilot module. As stated before, they would have control of all of the craft form that area. If an emergency happened or the equivalent, control could be passed to the secondary pilot module

2,3,4,5 – From left to right, they are the side view of the secondary pilot module, an empty gap useful for preventing a terrorist takeover, the passenger module, and the airlock for exit from the aforementioned area.

12 – Airlock egress for connecting to other craft, other structures, or possibly for EVA purposes.

6, 8 – Cargo transport and storage areas. While the nose cone and rear areas would not open as they would using a C-5M, load/unload ramps would be a part of the cargo bay construction; the efficiency of this method was not lost on the author of this at all, but you want a combination of minimal exposure to the harsh environment of deep space along with a quick and efficient way to offload what cargo that has been brought. To keep the cargo where it is supposed to be, magnetic locking would be useful. (As a means of amusement at one time, I brought up a concept of “Electro-Magnetic Velcro” or EMV.)

7 – The central power plant for the craft. This needs to be covered in more detail later in the post.

9, 10, 11 – From left to right, they consist of the forward thrust vents (2), the area for maintaining and monitoring the V/STOL modules, and the rearward thrust vents (4)

The theory behind this design is that the central power plant (7) would generate the power to run the front and back vents as well as the V/STOL array described in the next picture.



Needless to say, this design might well be in violation of most all things flight related, but probably the most major component is why I opted to design at a ratio of 2:1 rather then a ratio of 3:2 which I saw on many other craft including the Space Shuttle: V/STOL ports/nacelles on the wing areas

1 – The bottom of the Astroliner would be fitted with a total of twenty Nine (29) limited rotation /fixed V/STOL nacelles. There would be a large one at the nose of the craft, 24 others in groups of six each, and two each on the wing area. The lift from the V/STOL nacelles on the wings should compensate for its smaller size in relation to the craft

2 – Landing flat on the ground would probably not be good for the craft, so not only would wheels be needed (for a runway takeoff/landing scenario), but also a series of landing struts ( for use in V/STOL mode)

3 – Once more, the peripheral areas could be used for observation, an electric grid that may help protect the craft regarding some collisions and a place to mount defensive weaponry if such became necessary.

4 – Frontal jet intake/nacelle. Not only could it be used to assist during a runway takeoff, it could also be used to damp forward motion so that the pilot could then use the V/STOL nacelles to land.

5 – Rear jet vent/nacelle. The only major use of this would be to give the craft sufficient thrust to move it out of the gravity well created by the Earth or thrust to move it quickly along to whatever future destinations that may be attempted...

Implied Needs regarding this craft

Before I hear the cries of “You forgot….” there are many other aspects of this craft that need to be included in its construction such as:

- Not only will heat shielding need to facilitate reentry, but also a durable outer skin would need to be constructed. Deep space is a harsh environment.

- Perhaps even newer, stronger composites will have to be invented. (Several have already been incorporated into the large planes that travel the skies.)

- The landing struts as the wheels will have to not only be strong enough to support the weight of the craft, but they will need to be strong and durable enough to withstand repeated use in both the rigorous conditions of deep space as well as on Earth.

- Without the benefit of an atmosphere for shielding, radiation levels would be an issue as well. The craft would need adequate shielding from the effects of the aforementioned.

- Despite its plane configuration, this craft will be first and foremost a space traveling transport. Not only would pressurization be a requirement, but hermetically sealing compartments would also be needed as well as other precautions unique to traveling in outer space.

- Repair materials to cover most any contingency would need to be stored on the craft in case an EVA is needed for repairs. Space is a hostile environment after all despite its beauty.

- If the craft design becomes space worthy, over time, different configurations could be built, such as one where the forward cargo bay is converted into a lab or where one is converted into a passenger liner.

- Because the craft would be a cutting edge design, it would need to be built with (constant) future upgrades in mind, both physical as well as electronic based.

- Autopilot technology is almost one hundred years old. A craft such as this would definitely need such a system in place, but obviously one far more computerized then what was around in 1914. Needless to say, the crew needed to operate a craft like this would have to be highly skilled and educated in a number of fields beyond basic flight knowledge.

- Perhaps there are other aspects that should be included in this list; if so, they have not been deliberately omitted at all. If (or when) a craft such as this is built, it will be the culmination of a lot of technology, most readily available now while some would have to be adapted or even invented for such an ambitious undertaking such as this.

Holy Star Trek, Batman!

If you have read this far, you may be either shaking your head or laughing uncontrollably, but if that is the case, reread this post. The craft described in the included pictures is buildable using our present technological level. The C5A cargo transport has been around since the late 1960’s; V/STOL capacity even longer. It is the matter of merging the technologies and breaking (not so) new ground to make this craft a reality. There is nothing ‘Star Trek’ about its design at all.

However, there is one exception to this statement, though with some research and testing, still not out of bounds using what we already know…

Powering the Astroliner

In the side view of the drawing presented earlier, the lower section of the craft was denoted as (9, 10, 11). The areas the numeric values describe are as follows:

9 – Forward jet port (or however they are denoted) consisting of two side by side apertures. It serves two purposes: First off, it will assist in lifting the craft from the earth out into space. Secondly, it would be used to damp forward motion so that the V/STOL technology could then be used as well as making adjustments using V/STOL data input. If the craft wound up being landed as a large plane, these forward vents could also be used to slow the craft down upon landing, similar to what a passenger jet does.

10 - This area comprises the 29 V/STOL apertures denoted in the drawing. They would also be able to exert thrust, but in a more or less downward fashion. Though they would not have the 90 degree rotational ability of their jet counterparts, they would have limited circular mobility within their confines. They would be controlled by a computer for the most part, subject to human input for the desired action.

11 – Rearward jet port consisting of four side by side apertures. This array would be responsible for most of the initial lifting of the craft; it could also be used for such on a longer trip through space (Such as to Mars.)

The lower portion of the craft was so delineated due to essentially the whole marked off area being used for the thrust nacelles so listed earlier. With such a complicated set of engines, a highly skilled crew would need to be on board for monitoring, maintenance and service of the array. As stated before, we have decades of experience in building such propulsion devices; the Astroliner design is for the most part doable.

As both ships and submarines have proven, a nuclear reactor doesn’t need to be of a massive size to do its job. The Astroliner design would involve a large amount of fuel, but if said fuel needed to be carried on the craft that would defeat its purpose. The only way to minimize the weight of the craft in regards to its power requirements would be using a nuclear reactor prototype of some sort. The number reference of “7” is denoted on the side view cutaway as being the power plant for the craft, but therein lays yet another design challenge.

A Steam turbine setup or the equivalent is not viable for a deep space craft, so a means will need to be found to convert the energy from the nuclear reactor directly into the needed thrust to propel the craft with out irradiating the general area in the process. V/STOL engines and research have been around for over fifty years. The reactor that would need to be installed would have to be even more compact then what is used on naval vessels, but also able to generate the massive propulsion power that would be needed. The weight of the solid fuel that would be needed otherwise would make the Astroliner an unworkable proposition.

The control of the power thus generated would once more largely be in the hands of a computer (or several for purposes of redundancy), but would have a human interface as well. Once this craft was landed, a standby mode could be initiated. This would provide only a trickle of power to the thrust array, but would prevent freeze ups or a potentially long restart period. The reactor on board would also provide other primary power as needed for the craft to function. Regarding the propulsion systems needed for the Pilot and passenger modules (In case the craft had to be vacated), that would have to be figured out as well.

Conclusion

If (or when) this craft is constructed, it would represent cutting edge technology; not only would this craft be able to fly to the moon, but it could possibly be equipped to take us to Mars or maybe even beyond there.

I personally do not think NASA is up to the task for a project this massive in scope; once something like this becomes politicized, it then becomes a political football put to use for either gathering votes or as a chess piece of sorts in the morass that represents our Congress these days. Private enterprise not only has the potential funds needed for this enterprise, they would approach the matter with an overall better eye regarding efficiency and safety. The potential long term profits would be enormous, but it would take private enterprise to stay focused to the task with their eye on the prize.

As always, I welcome all comments on this post whether good or bad.



A Jaded Bard

1 Comments:

Blogger Lasivian said...

I believe you underestimate the amount of fuel and thrust required to life something beyond the earth's gravity.

01 February, 2010 07:03  

Post a Comment

<< Home