[amsat-bb] An alternative ... or ... competition !!!.

Frank H. Bauer ka3hdo at comcast.net
Sun Jul 5 16:13:11 PDT 2009


So that you all know, there is a lot of international discussion and dialog
going on right now on the next steps for ISS.  The current international
commitment is to fly ISS to 2015.  But given that several of the
international partners, most notably Europe and Japan, have just gotten
their modules on-orbit, there is discussion, dialog and debate on extending
ISS to 2020 and beyond.  In the USA, some of this dialog is occurring
through the Obama-chartered Human Spaceflight Review Committee, let by Norm
Augustine, where they have a sub-group looking at ISS Schedule, ISS Utility
and ISS Cost.  See: http://www.nasa.gov/offices/hsf/home/index.html

While  the statement, below, might have been made, I would wait until all
the ISS Partners get together to modify their future ISS strategy in
writing.  And remember that ISS has done a fantastic job of international
collaboration..they all (US, Russia, Europe, Canada, and Japan) all depend
upon each other to ensure a robust ISS system.  So separating one segment
from the others will have great repercussions for all parties.

On another topic, WRT the Lunar ILN, if you read the solicitation, they are
discussing *15 kg* payloads.  And these need to accomplish some scientific
objective to further lunar exploration.   Given this, I do not think the ILN
is a viable AMSAT project.

73,  Frank Bauer, KA3HDO

Message: 5
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 2009 12:46:08 +0200
From: John Hackett <archie.hackett at hotmail.com>
Subject: [amsat-bb]  An alternative ... or ... competition !!!.
To: <eu-amsat at yahoogroups.com>
Cc: allan_gm1sxx at hotmail.com, amsat-bb at amsat.org
Message-ID: <BLU141-W15D0416BC901BCBCAA5F4D912A0 at phx.gbl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"

Ladies and Gentlemen,
                               For those that don't know it, The chief of
RosKosmos, the Russian Space Agency *confirmed* last week the Russian
intention to pull the plug on the ISS in the 2015 - 2020 timeframe and to
construct another dedicated Russian space station.

According to Anatoly Zak RosKosmos informed NASA of these plans 14 days ago.

The new Russian station is *NOT* intended to be a laboratory like the ISS
but more of an in-orbit contruction platform for future Mars-like and outer
space missions.

The station will comprise a maintainable 'ball' section with several docking
ports with attachable modules.

I propose that amateur radio satellite operators get together and form a
group to suggest/try to influence/impliment an ARISS type of project for
this space station.

A Strela type frame could be attached to the underside of the 'ball' and
since the station is planned for a Molinya type orbit the coverage would be
suitable for DX.

The planned orbit would put the station predominently over Russia - as
opposed to the current ISS equatorial orbit.

Personally, I would suggest an RS-10/11 RS-12/13 clone with a ROBOT ...
(read: propagation tester) - as these satellites were without the shadow of
a doubt the best for recruiting newcomers.

It would, in my opinion, be a viable concept and an alternative to some of
the latest 'ideas' of a transponder on the moon ... which wouldn't 'catch'
many potential newcomers but would (*IN MY OPINION*) only serve a few
dedicated 'experts' ... leading to the demise of amateur satellite
communications in general.

Comments, monies and praise to LA2QAA.

Criticisms, horsewhipping and flaming to GM1SXX.

73 John.   <la2qaa at amsat.org>

Interested parties may read the following ...

The OPSEK project

2008, the Russian successor to the International Space Station, ISS, was
identified as Orbitalniy Pilotiruemyi Eksperimentalniy Kompleks, OPSEK, or
Orbital Manned Assembly and Experiment Complex in English.* Unlike previous
designs of Mir, Mir-2 and the ISS, the heart of the station would be a
four-ton ball-shaped node module.
Equipped with six docking ports, this relatively small and simple element
would be the only permanent element of the station. All other modules would
come and go as their lifespan and mission requires.

      The initial architecture of the OPSEK complex could be built out of
modules originally planned for the Russian segment of the ISS. The exact
scenario of the OPSEK assembly would depend on the end of the ISS and the
readiness of the latest Russian modules.
According to a 2008 scenario, the MLM multipurpose module, the node module
and a pair of NEM power platforms could be first launched to the ISS in
2011, 2013 and 2014-2015, respectively. With the deorbiting of the ISS
looming around 2020, these modules could separate from the old outpost to
form the core of the new Russian station. Another, more controversial
scenario considered the separation of the practically entire Russian
segment, including the MIM-2 docking compartment and the Zvezda service
module, prior to the ISS deorbiting. In this case, the 20-year-old service
module would temporarily take a responsibility for the flight control of the
OPSEK, until its replacement with a 40-ton versatile core module, UMB,
launched by a next-generation rocket from yet-to-be built launch site in
Vostochny during 2020s.

separation of the Russian segment from the ISS would leave the rest of the
outpost without effective orbital maneuvering capabilities, leaving the
European ATV spacecraft as a likely candidate to perform the tasks of
attitude control and deorbiting. To achieve this the ATV would have to be
modified to enable its docking with the US segment of the ISS.

on the operational orbit selected for the OPSEK, it might be necessary to
change the orbital inclination of the modules departing the ISS and forming
the new station. The lowest inclination accessible from Vostochny is 51.7
degrees, while the ISS is orbiting the Earth with the inclination 51.6
degrees toward the Equator. It is estimated that one or two Progress cargo
ships would be necessary to push the modules from one inclination to

official statements during 2008 and 2009, it is clear that the one of the
chief objectives of the OPSEK complex would be the support for expedition to
Mars. All major elements of the Martian expeditionary complex, such as main
habitation module, Mars lander and nuclear-powered space tug would dock to
the station before its departure from the low-Earth orbit toward Mars. The
Martian expedition would at the OPSEK as well.

      The station would also play a similar role in lunar exploration.
Reusable space tugs could link OPSEK with the Lunar Orbital Station, LOS, in
orbit around the Moon, thus creating a transport chain for a permanent lunar
base. Such tasks  as servicing of modular satellites by orbital tugs based
at the OPSEK complex were also cited.

broader terms, TsNIIMash research institute, a chief strategist of the
Russian space agency, formulated the OPSEK concept as a foundation of the
nation's space strategy. By 2009, the new station was seen as a cornerstone
of a new space exploration plan, which extended four decades into the 21st
century. An ambitious program apparently included manned missions to the
Moon, Mars and beyond. (344)

      Cooperation with Europe and the US

2008, Russian plans for maintaining presence in the low-Earth orbit in
general and the creation of a successor to the ISS in particular had been
met enthusiastically in Europe. As ESA had little hope to match the US
effort to return to the Moon at the beginning of the 21st century,
preserving a destination in the low-Earth orbit seemed critical for the
political support of the manned space flight on the continent.

June 2009, Simonetta Di Pippo, ESA director of human space flight told the
editor of RussianSpaceWeb.com that she shared the Russian vision of the
future space station as a platform for deep space missions. "I have
continuous consultations with officials in Russia. We meet every month,
month and a half, and now we are going to start jointly, the study how to
proceed beyond 2025, Di Pippo said, ..."and we have a common idea that we
would like to preserve presence in the lower orbit. We are studying
different scenarios, whether we need permanent presence or, maybe, a
human-tended capability, and we can end up with a totally different solution
in the end, but I don?t believe we can leave Earth orbit."

      Di Pippo also said that although  current NASA plans for return to the
Moon reserved no essential role for the station, it could change in the
future. "Even on the NASA side, they have too many different developments
(associated with the Earth orbit), including commercial involvement, which
they can not immediately give up," Di Pippo said. 

      By the end of 2010,
all partners in the ISS project were expecting to agree on the extension of
the ISS lifespan from 2015 to 2020 or even 2025. Once end of life for the
ISS was decided an active planning for post-ISS manned space flight could
begin in Russia, Europe and possibly the US.


More information about the AMSAT-BB mailing list