Raffaello Multi-Purpose Logistics Module

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

steve - 21 Sep 2005 23:47 GMT

I can only assume once the shuttle's flown for the last time, the tons of
rubbish (sorry garbage) that was returned safely to earth in the Raffaello
Multi-Purpose Logistics Module will now be stored in some kind of orbital
space fill site. Is NASA developing a Multi Purpose Cargo Return System?
Those gyros returned on sts114 are just the sort of items that simply wont
fit in Apollo mk2. Can't see the astronauts doing what I'm sure we've all
done when returning home in the car with an 8x4 sheet of whatever from the
DIY(hardware) store.

Perhaps, with lessons learned from years of car design, the rear seats will
somehow rotate, fold flat and provide a generous load area.........

Shouldn't moan.......The UK's not even got a redstone. Likes the sattelites
our government does. Just hasn't got the ability to launch em. Bloody
marvelous.

I'm off to watch sattelite TV.

Reply to this Message

Jeff Findley - 22 Sep 2005 18:19 GMT

> I can only assume once the shuttle's flown for the last time, the tons of
> rubbish (sorry garbage) that was returned safely to earth in the Raffaello
> Multi-Purpose Logistics Module will now be stored in some kind of orbital
> space fill site. Is NASA developing a Multi Purpose Cargo Return System?
> Those gyros returned on sts114 are just the sort of items that simply wont
> fit in Apollo mk2.

Why not? Just stick them inside the service module (like the SIM bay on the
original Apollo SM). Or launch the CMG (and other spares) separately on top
of their own service module and have the SSRMS grapple and berth the thing
(like an MPLM) when it gets to ISS.

> Can't see the astronauts doing what I'm sure we've all
> done when returning home in the car with an 8x4 sheet of whatever from the
> DIY(hardware) store.

That's what NASA is planning on doing with cargo that will fit through the
docking port. They plan on launching CEV's with a combination of crew and
pressurized cargo, or even pressurized cargo only.

> Perhaps, with lessons learned from years of car design, the rear seats will
> somehow rotate, fold flat and provide a generous load area.........

See what I wrote above.

Jeff

Signature

Remove icky phrase from email address to get a valid address.

Reply to this Message

Derek Lyons - 23 Sep 2005 21:58 GMT

>> I can only assume once the shuttle's flown for the last time, the tons of
>> rubbish (sorry garbage) that was returned safely to earth in the Raffaello
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>of their own service module and have the SSRMS grapple and berth the thing
>(like an MPLM) when it gets to ISS.

Which only accomplishes half the spec - now figure out how to return.

D.

Signature

Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL

Reply to this Message

Jeff Findley - 23 Sep 2005 22:27 GMT

> >Why not? Just stick them inside the service module (like the SIM bay on the
> >original Apollo SM). Or launch the CMG (and other spares) separately on top
> >of their own service module and have the SSRMS grapple and berth the thing
> >(like an MPLM) when it gets to ISS.
>
> Which only accomplishes half the spec - now figure out how to return.

When the shuttle is gone, who's going to care about returning CMG's to
earth?

Let's say someone does care. Build one CEV with a large side hatch in it
and its avionics in a nitrogen pressurized container, so it can be
completely depressurized in orbit. Launch it, dock to ISS, depressurize,
open hatch, remove CMG with SSRMS, place bad CMG inside, close hatch,
depressurize with N2, deorbit the CEV.

That's one advantage to having an open assembly line for vehicles. If you
need a specialized version, you can build one.

Jeff

Signature

Remove icky phrase from email address to get a valid address.

Reply to this Message

snidely - 24 Sep 2005 00:18 GMT

[...]

> Let's say someone does care. Build one CEV with a large side hatch in it
> and its avionics in a nitrogen pressurized container, so it can be
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> That's one advantage to having an open assembly line for vehicles. If you
> need a specialized version, you can build one.

Assuming it doesn't conflict a) other production, b) available tooling,
and doesn't c) break the design (e.g., a big enough hatch might have to
cut through structural elements such as an internal truss frame).

Haven't heard any suggestions that Soyuz could be adapted to bringing
down big pieces. Were there any rumors to that effect after Columbia's
LOCV?

/dps

/dps

Reply to this Message

Jeff Findley - 24 Sep 2005 14:37 GMT

> [...]
> > Let's say someone does care. Build one CEV with a large side hatch in it
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> and doesn't c) break the design (e.g., a big enough hatch might have to
> cut through structural elements such as an internal truss frame).

While this is true, one can also find examples where this sort of thing was
done before. Aircraft have had all sorts of modifications like this.

http://www.aerospace-technology.com/projects/boeing747-400f/boeing747-400f4.html

> Haven't heard any suggestions that Soyuz could be adapted to bringing
> down big pieces. Were there any rumors to that effect after Columbia's
> LOCV?

The Soyuz RV is pretty small, especially compared with the larger than
Apollo proposal for the US CEV.

Jeff

Signature

Remove icky phrase from email address to get a valid address.

Reply to this Message

Derek Lyons - 25 Sep 2005 17:59 GMT

>When the shuttle is gone, who's going to care about returning CMG's to
>earth?

The engineers who build them. The managers responsible for seeing
that they last till their 'sell-by' date.

D.

Signature

Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL

Reply to this Message

Space Forum / Shuttle / September 2005

Raffaello Multi-Purpose Logistics Module