orion project question

[Skipjack]

That's because you're absolutely barking mad. That is no way to do space colonization...

Ahh really and you are being totally realistic and reasonable, yes? An orion like you described is not going to happen. There is no money and no political will to do that. I would like it, but it wont happen.
Bigelows inflatable space habitats are the next best thing. You could also build slightly bigger versions of sundancer, based on the same principle. The current design is meant to be launched by the Falcon9, which is not a heavy lift launch vehicle. If you had a bigger launcher, you could launch bigger modules. I would have to do the math, but I could easily see a module having a diameter of 12 meters or so (twice that of sundancer).
With a sundancer module weighing in at about 8.5 tons and a (e.g.) a Jupiter being able to lift up to 90 tons, even bigger modules might be possible (anyone care to do a crude calculation?).
The idea of the inflatable ring space station is not new. It was actually propagated by von Braun.
Sundancer modules actually do have very good shielding and are more durable than the modules of the ISS. Von Braun visioned an outer shell to be attached to the inflatable modules at some point. So one might be able to make the modules even more durable.

[Betruger]

I think he's saying it's not a viable solution because with the same launch regime you could put up a more suitable station design. And then that design is dependent on the same sociopolitical restrictions that you point out for 93143's Orion suggestion -- which is a separate story.

BA330s and Orion ships are totally different animals, made for different purposes..

[djolds1]

Actually, the living area is a sphere. The entire thing is quite a bit more than that, so you do have a cylindrical load, everything included.

A million tons should be plenty. Thing is, I think you could launch either the sphere, or a small version of the O'Neil cylinder into orbit. Stay inside the earth's magnetic field, and much less shielding is needed, making things even easier.

http://settlement.arc.nasa.gov/75Summer ... le4.1a.gif
http://settlement.arc.nasa.gov/75Summer ... le4.1b.gif
http://settlement.arc.nasa.gov/75Summer ... le4.2a.gif

http://settlement.arc.nasa.gov/75Summer ... ure4.7.gif

Any nuclear capable country can put a space colony in orbit. It sounds like they thought it'd be manrated easily, so you could probably put the colonists up at the same time.

Not a Wang Gun. 5000 gees. Turns people into chunky red salsa.

India might be interested.

Agreed. Actually, Brian Wang had an analysis of historical colonization trends at Nextbigfuture a few months back - the "smaller" countries stood out as the colonization leaders.

That's because you're absolutely barking mad. That is no way to do space colonization...

Not sexy, but it is doable. Use them as cyclers...

Sundancer modules are less than 9 mT, with an outside diameter of 6.3 m fully inflated. And he wants to launch HUNDREDS of them to build a ring station.

Forget the ring station. Could probably be cannon launched and then inflated.

Doable? Sure. Optimal? ...no.

And what do you mean, cyclers? Why would we want a cycler that big? Made out of pieces that tiny?

Your own word - colonization. Actually several cyclers on Mars orbits would be optimal. Deliver 100 people a month...

[djolds1]

So one way or another, you're going to need some orbital assembly if you want cities.

IMO the easiest method is to toss a few hundred or thousand tonnes of capital startup equipment to a near earth asteroid, and bootstrap up to an industrial infrastructure from there. If you're willing to be dedicated/ruthless, there's no need for the workers to come back to Earth...

The idea of the inflatable ring space station is not new. It was actually propagated by von Braun.

Plenty of ideas for self-deployment.

http://www.up-ship.com/eAPR/ev1n6.htm
http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/rocket3u.html

Sundancer modules actually do have very good shielding and are more durable than the modules of the ISS.

HDPE layer?

[Skipjack]

http://www.hobbyspace.com/nucleus/index ... catid=76#c

They do have multiple layers, among them some kevlar like materials, from what I understand.

As I said, I would imagine hundreds of these, or bigger modules (as big as the existing launchers allow) to be attached to each other in a linear fashion with the docking modules having a small angle between the two hatches.
Now, again, once you have a the basic structure in space already, you can attach additional layers of protection. These dont have to be sealed airtight, which IMHO can be done a lot more easily with orbital assembly.
djolds posted a link that shows a structure that looks somewhat simillar to what I imagine, only that mine would be much bigger (as I am trying to somehow match the original idea that started the thread). Sure there would not be a lot of empty space and no sky to do kiting, but it does seem a lot less far fetched to me...
Again, I am not sure how big you could actually make the expanded diameter of these modules with e.g. the capabilities of a Jupiter launcher at hand. I imagine them to be potentially quite a lot bigger than the current sundancer modules.

[csgt428]

It makes absolutely NO SENSE to haul all that stuff out of earths gravity well! The moons gravity well is far weaker...much less energy involved. The asteroids even better to get materials from having essentially no gravity well. It is now known that the polar regions of the moon contain huge amounts of water. The crust contains a high % of aluminum and other very useful materials for building, propellant, oxygen, ect. If that isn't sufficient look to the asteroid belt. With a laser, telescopic and spectroscopic system for ascertaining the composition of asteroids from a distance, then mining useful materials from them robotically and sending them where needed using mass drivers or better means (fusion), a small starter "tech seed" brought up from earth could balloon into whatever we need to start colonies in space using materials FROM space.

[93143]

Ahh really and you are being totally realistic and reasonable, yes?

I never said that...

Actually I have my doubts about the technical feasibility of launching a space colony from Earth, even on a Super Orion; there could be structural issues, as others have pointed out. I was going to mention that last time, but I decided it diluted the message...

If you had a bigger launcher, you could launch bigger modules.

Exactly. You could at least do one big enough to max out a Skylon D1...

With a sundancer module weighing in at about 8.5 tons and a (e.g.) a Jupiter being able to lift up to 90 tons, even bigger modules might be possible (anyone care to do a crude calculation?).

Well, sqrt(90/8.5) = 3.25, and 2.5rt(90/8.5) = 2.57, so maybe 3 times the linear dimensions? Uninflated, it should fit in a 12-metre fairing. If it doesn't, Jupiter can go up to 14 m without much trouble...

Your own word - colonization. Actually several cyclers on Mars orbits would be optimal. Deliver 100 people a month...

I didn't mean Mars colonization... we've been going on about Bernal spheres and O'Neill cylinders; how did you wind up at Mars?

[MirariNefas]

IMO the easiest method is to toss a few hundred or thousand tonnes of capital startup equipment to a near earth asteroid, and bootstrap up to an industrial infrastructure from there. If you're willing to be dedicated/ruthless, there's no need for the workers to come back to Earth...

Agreed. Send two Sundancers, orbit them around the asteroid, tether them and swing them like bolos. You now have gravity-simulated accomodations for the workers.

So, I was reading through the Project Orion stuff on Google Books. It looks like they weren't planning on recycling wastes? On page 106 it says, "Propellant is shit and fission products." Yeah. They were strange beans.

[kunkmiester]

Not a Wang Gun. 5000 gees. Turns people into chunky red salsa.

We're talking Orion, not Wang.

It makes absolutely NO SENSE to haul all that stuff out of earths gravity well! The moons gravity well is far weaker...much less energy involved. The asteroids even better to get materials from having essentially no gravity well. It is now known that the polar regions of the moon contain huge amounts of water. The crust contains a high % of aluminum and other very useful materials for building, propellant, oxygen, ect. If that isn't sufficient look to the asteroid belt. With a laser, telescopic and spectroscopic system for ascertaining the composition of asteroids from a distance, then mining useful materials from them robotically and sending them where needed using mass drivers or better means (fusion), a small starter "tech seed" brought up from earth could balloon into whatever we need to start colonies in space using materials FROM space.

Problem is, you'd have to build the factory on the Moon to do it. We already have most of the industrial infrastructure here on earth.

Something else that came up on the search was a NASA proposal for an automated lunar factory:
http://spaceguppy.com/index.html
Which is feasible, but it'd probably be a few years before it's putting out colony parts.

Most likely, you'd probably build a super liner for something like the Jupiter for people, and the sphere itself would be put up with a light crew to finish assembling things in orbit. It wouldn't be the most efficient way to build it, but the point is, IT CAN BE DONE, AND NOW, NOT LATER. You can start cutting metal as soon as the designs are done, no waiting possibly decades to build massive space infrastructure. Most likely, this would be the start of the space infrastructure, since there's now people who have an incentive to start expanding things.

Besides, if you park it an an L point, you don't have to worry about accidentally pulling a Skylab... there'd be quite a bit of drag on a Bernal sphere in LEO...

I'm sure you could do much better than LEO while keeping it in the field. You're right, the mass really isn't too big of a deal, especially if it's designed to have stuff rearranged in orbit--put the shielding plates where they provide structural support, then move them to where they need to be later.

[djolds1]

Your own word - colonization. Actually several cyclers on Mars orbits would be optimal. Deliver 100 people a month...

I didn't mean Mars colonization... we've been going on about Bernal spheres and O'Neill cylinders; how did you wind up at Mars?

Sorry. My default assumption when the word "colonization" comes up. Colonizing a planet with significant gravity, atmo and a spotty tho existing magnetic field is IMO at least an order of magnitude easier than building an artificial environment. Mars you can do from Earth. The station requires an infrastructure on Earth to build the infrastructure in space to build the habitat...

[djolds1]

IMO the easiest method is to toss a few hundred or thousand tonnes of capital startup equipment to a near earth asteroid, and bootstrap up to an industrial infrastructure from there. If you're willing to be dedicated/ruthless, there's no need for the workers to come back to Earth...

Agreed. Send two Sundancers, orbit them around the asteroid, tether them and swing them like bolos. You now have gravity-simulated accomodations for the workers.

I was thinking a labor force of a few dozen to a few hundred (no reason to use bleeding edge tech), so more than 1 or 2 Sundancers. Tho a "web" habitat of linked bolos is entirely practical.

So, I was reading through the Project Orion stuff on Google Books. It looks like they weren't planning on recycling wastes? On page 106 it says, "Propellant is shit and fission products." Yeah. They were strange beans.

IIRC they planned on tungsten and/or polymers for the shaped charge plasma. Certainly anything could be placed on a pulse unit to add some mass.

[hanelyp]

Problem is, you'd have to build the factory on the Moon to do it. We already have most of the industrial infrastructure here on earth.

If you're going to have a viable colony, at some point it'll need the industrial infrastructure to build nearly anything needed for maintenance and eventual replacement of critical systems. Exception might be made for high value/mass components, like IC chips, though as the colony grows the point will be reached where producing even that kind of item locally will become more practical.

So, what is the minimal practical base from which to bootstrap such an industrial base, assuming a sufficient supply of ore from asteroids or other local sources?

[kunkmiester]

That is true, Hanelyp, but most of the important stuff could be built with enough time before failure it's not an immediate problem.

This really becomes a chicken-egg problem if you let it. I was seeing boosting a few long range ships to prospect so you had a source of stuff besides earth. On the other hand, if you assume that you need a complete infrastructure in orbit first, you'll never get anywhere.

Launch it all at once. Automated factories, mining ships, colonies. Or start with one and go from there. I'd imagine you'd have a reasonable amount of industrial capacity simply for maintenance purposes, so all you'd really need is raw materials.

If you include the shielding needed, you could simply put it out by the asteroids you'd want to mine, and there you go. With enough labor, anything is possible, you just need expertise and basic tools.

[TallDave]

Colonization is so 20th century. Let's get some self-replicating AI to build us a Dyson sphere!

It's what all the cool postindustrial civs are doing.

[Giorgio]

I saw it again yesterday on Discovery.
In a small episode dedicated to human advancement in space colonization they showed the original video of the first Orion Project test.

I found it also on youtube (from a BBC show):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3Lxx2VAYi8

Probably most of you have already seen it several times, but I tought it was still worth to post it.
In my opinion Orion is still one of the most fascinating idea to lift heavy loads into space.