Space Garage

Topics related to manned space missions

Moderator: clayton

Post Reply
User avatar
Dick Jacobson
Posts: 1397
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 9:21 pm
Location: Cottage Grove, MN

Space Garage

Post by Dick Jacobson »

The final Hubble repair mission was a magnificent success, and now we are about to lose the capability of repairing things in orbit. In my opinion, the Hubble missions are the most useful things that astronauts have ever done in space. Although it was thrilling to watch astronauts bound across the surface of the Moon, taking pictures and collecting rocks, this could have been done almost as well with robots. As for the International Space Station, I can't think of any important science that has been produced, nor of anything that can be manufactured profitably. Now that we are about to reach a full crew size of six, maybe there will be enough crew time to produce results. We are learning how to keep humans alive and healthy in space, and that's important, but it's disappointing that there have been so few results beyond space medicine.

After the recent Hubble mission was originally canceled, the possibility of doing a robotic repair was studied. The conclusion was that robots are not yet mature enough to handle the job. Humans have a unique ability to cope with unexpected problems as was demonstrated in the recent flight. I think it will be a very long time before human eye-hand-brain coordination can be duplicated by machines. It's a shame that, for the time being, this unique human ability cannot be put to use repairing satellites.

Maybe what we need is a Space Garage. The Ares V rocket will have a diameter of 10 meters with a capacity of 188 metric tons to low orbit. Imagine launching a cylindrical "repair shop" with one end that opens on a hinge. If a satellite needs to be serviced, just pop it in the can and close the lid. Then the shop can be filled with air so the astronauts can work in a shirtsleeve environment. It should be possible to undertake much more complicated repairs without being hindered by clumsy space suits, gloves, and helmets.

Will there be a market for a satellite repair shop? The Shuttle did 10 repair missions, five of them on Hubble. With 800 functioning satellites, there must be dozens of failures every year. A few years ago a very expensive (hundreds of millions) spy satellite failed shortly after launch. On Earth, we would never consider writing off a $100 million piece of hardware just because a small part failed. I don't think anyone can predict how the economics would work out, but then nobody has done manned spaceflight to save money anyway. If "build it and they will come" doesn't work out, maybe the garage could be used for microgravity experiments that are too large to fit on the ISS.

The Hubble repair missions have had strong public support because they have a clear and important purpose. Everyone agrees on the value of communication satellites, weather satellites, environment monitoring satellites, observatories, GPS, and so on. What better use is there of human capabilities than to keep them functioning?
30-inch homemade Newtonian with periscope
20-inch homemade equatorial Newtonian with periscope
14-inch homemade equatorial Newtonian
10-inch Newtonian that folds flat
6-inch Russian Maksutov-Newtonian on Vixen equatorial mount
Too many small scopes and binoculars to mention
User avatar
Dave Venne
Posts: 1931
Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2004 4:33 pm
Real Name: Dave Venne

Re: Space Garage

Post by Dave Venne »

That's an interesting concept, but I wonder about a couple of things...

It sounds like you're suggesting that the garage be parked in orbit and used as needed. That begs the question of how it would be used for repairing satellites that are in different orbits. For example, most weather satellites are either in geosynchronus or polar orbits; communications satellites are in a wide variety of orbits, only some of which could be reached by a low-orbit garage.

Is a 10 m garage big enough? I couldn't find the dimensions of the Hubble with solar panels extended, but from a description of its component's sizes I don't think it would fit in a 10 m diameter cylinder. How big would a repair facility need to be in order to repair enough satellites to earn its keep?
User avatar
Dick Jacobson
Posts: 1397
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 9:21 pm
Location: Cottage Grove, MN

Re: Space Garage

Post by Dick Jacobson »

Regarding different orbits, there has been a lot of talk about launching a "space tug" that could dock with satellites and change their orbits. I believe the European Space Agency is seriously looking at this. Of course it takes a lot of propellant and I have no idea how the economics would work out. My idea is that the tug would deliver the satellite to the repair shop and then the shop, using external thrusters, would carefully "embrace" the satellite.

As far as diameter, 10 meters would be more than twice the 15-foot diameter of the Shuttle payload bay. I'm not sure, but I think Hubble would fit inside even with its solar panels extended. Antennas and solar arrays on other satellites might need to be folded in.
30-inch homemade Newtonian with periscope
20-inch homemade equatorial Newtonian with periscope
14-inch homemade equatorial Newtonian
10-inch Newtonian that folds flat
6-inch Russian Maksutov-Newtonian on Vixen equatorial mount
Too many small scopes and binoculars to mention
User avatar
Dave Venne
Posts: 1931
Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2004 4:33 pm
Real Name: Dave Venne

Re: Space Garage

Post by Dave Venne »

I tried to find more information about space tugs in this context, but didn't have much luck. The only references I could find were for tugs that either helped geosynchronus satellites maintain position, or helped extend the lives of low-orbit satellites by lifting their orbits. Neither use suggests that the tugs could deal with substantial changes in orbital inclination, altitude or eccentricity.

As for the Hubble's dimensions, I found that the body of the Hubble has a diameter of 4.2 m and the solar panels have a width of 2.6 m in the direction of the body's radius. The panels look like they are attached to the Hubble body by struts that I guessimate are about 1.5 m long. So the total width of Hubble might be around 4.2 + 2 * (1.5 + 2.6), or 12.4 m. I don't think it would fit into a 10 m diameter cylinder unless the panels were detached.
User avatar
Brad E
Posts: 56
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 9:34 am
Real Name: Brad Enderle
Location: Woodbury, MN
Contact:

Re: Space Garage

Post by Brad E »

Speaking of space tugs, in my opinion, if we used Ion-drive engines.. albeit slow but extremely efficient, it would be at least technically feasible to do so. just ion scoot up to whatever satellite, then take the time to adjust the orbit after it's shut down properly and bring it to the LEO repair facility, pop it out.. Ion-drive it back to it's original.. I'm thinking that a new generation of ION drives that had an extended range would be able to pull this off Delta-V wise.. any thoughts? :mrgreen:
Scope: 8" Dob
"I cannot imagine how the clockwork of the universe can exist without a clockmaker."
-Voltaire
User avatar
Dick Jacobson
Posts: 1397
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 9:21 pm
Location: Cottage Grove, MN

Re: Space Garage

Post by Dick Jacobson »

Ion drives, low thrust but very efficient, are definitely a possibility for space tugs. If you google "orbital transver vehicle" or "orbital maneuvering vehicle" you'll find a lot of articles. A space tug was part of NASA's original plans for a space station but I suppose the Shuttle ate all the money. I believe it was in Aviation Week where I saw that the European Space Agency is looking at developing a space tug. The current plan for de-commissioning Hubble is to develop a vehicle to dock with it automatically and kick it out of orbit. This is almost the same thing as a space tug. Automatic docking is routine at the ISS with the Progress and ATV vehicles. A tug/OTV/OMV seems well within current technology.

I'm sure that Hubble will take up residence at the bottom of the Pacific well before my "Space Garage" is built. The whole idea, if it has any merit, will require agreement between the satellite builders and garage builders. Otherwise the garage won't get built because satellites are not repairable, and the satellites won't be designed for repair because there is no place to repair them. The high cost of launching the Shuttle killed the satellite repair idea. If we could get the launch cost down, leave the garage in orbit, maybe even leave the repair crew in orbit for multiple repairs, and if the value of assets in orbit continues to increase, at some point the idea should begin to make sense.
30-inch homemade Newtonian with periscope
20-inch homemade equatorial Newtonian with periscope
14-inch homemade equatorial Newtonian
10-inch Newtonian that folds flat
6-inch Russian Maksutov-Newtonian on Vixen equatorial mount
Too many small scopes and binoculars to mention
User avatar
Dave Venne
Posts: 1931
Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2004 4:33 pm
Real Name: Dave Venne

Re: Space Garage

Post by Dave Venne »

Dick Jacobson wrote:If you google "orbital transver vehicle" or "orbital maneuvering vehicle" you'll find a lot of articles.
I see what you mean. There's everything from review articles to patents to studies dating back at least to the early 1980s. Obviously a lot of people saw this as an option to explore. As propulsion technology improves it should definitely be revisited.
A space tug was part of NASA's original plans for a space station but I suppose the Shuttle ate all the money.
If the shuttle program had actually flown the intended 50 or so missions per year we might not be having this discussion.
If we could get the launch cost down, leave the garage in orbit, maybe even leave the repair crew in orbit for multiple repairs, and if the value of assets in orbit continues to increase, at some point the idea should begin to make sense.
I think you've just found a purpose for the ISS. Park a big, empty box (i.e., repair bay) next to it and make sure that at all times some of the crew are qualified to do repairs.
User avatar
Dick Jacobson
Posts: 1397
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 9:21 pm
Location: Cottage Grove, MN

Re: Space Garage

Post by Dick Jacobson »

I'm not sure whether a garage would work best as a free flyer or as part of a space station. Docking a lot of satellites at the station might be considered hazardous, and vibrations might disturb experiments being performed elsewhere on the station. On the other hand, I'm sure the crew would prefer to be part of a larger space station crew.

The current plan is to de-orbit the ISS around 2020, so it is very unlikely that a garage would ever be added to it. But if the ISS proves to be useless for research, a garage might give it a new lease on life.
30-inch homemade Newtonian with periscope
20-inch homemade equatorial Newtonian with periscope
14-inch homemade equatorial Newtonian
10-inch Newtonian that folds flat
6-inch Russian Maksutov-Newtonian on Vixen equatorial mount
Too many small scopes and binoculars to mention
User avatar
Starforce2
Posts: 794
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 12:14 am
Location: Oakdale

Re: Space Garage

Post by Starforce2 »

there's going to chuck the ISS that quick? Now that's a waste. Thing should be expanded and used for the lunar and mars missions.

At any rate, I had suggested using using an ion drive satalite to collect space junk. An orbit could be calculated where the space junk could either be recovered or released so that after a few more trips around the stuff hits the atmosphere, while the satalite escapes to collect more.
Sparrow
Posts: 76
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 2:34 pm
Real Name: Gwen Brogmus
Location: St. Paul, MN USA

Re: Space Garage

Post by Sparrow »

The zero-g environment continues to be a major health issue for crew. Rather than investing a lot more in the ISS it might make more sense to build an orbital platform that can be "spun up" to provide artificial gravity. This is likely a lot more complicated than "floating can" stations, but I'd bet we're going to have to develope this technology anyway for long manned missions. That's no reason per se to junk the ISS, but the question becomes one of cost.

Space junk: Talk about black comedy! Everywhere we go, we leave our trash.
8-inch Schmidt-Newtonian
Ham radio callsign w0vye
gbrogmus@comcast.net

"There is no democracy in physics." - Louis Walter Alvarez
"That's not right. It's not even wrong!" - Wolfgang Pauli
User avatar
Dick Jacobson
Posts: 1397
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 9:21 pm
Location: Cottage Grove, MN

Re: Space Garage

Post by Dick Jacobson »

I agree that de-orbiting the ISS in around 10 years seems like a huge waste. I've seen some estimates that it should be maintainable for around 25 years. (Keep in mind that some parts are already 10 years old.) One problem is that tiny micrometeoroids keep hitting it and I suppose it eventually becomes unsafe.

I have written NASA a proposal for a "perpetual" space station, built of self-sufficient modules. It would be designed so that new modules could be added to one end while worn-out modules were removed from the opposite end without disrupting overall operations. The overall station could continue in operation forever, always renewing itself as modules were added or removed.

No doubt there will be rotating stations in the future, but one of the big justifications right now for the ISS is to be able to study the effects of zero gravity on humans and various physical processes.

I believe it is important to continue supporting a space station. Flights to the Moon, Mars, asteroids, or whatever are a lot more glamorous but the ISS is where we do the serious business of learning how to support life in space, without running the risk of the air or water supply breaking down when you're 100 million miles from home!
30-inch homemade Newtonian with periscope
20-inch homemade equatorial Newtonian with periscope
14-inch homemade equatorial Newtonian
10-inch Newtonian that folds flat
6-inch Russian Maksutov-Newtonian on Vixen equatorial mount
Too many small scopes and binoculars to mention
Post Reply