When it comes to space travel, the International Space Station and trips to the Sun, Moon, Mars or other places in the Universe, it is often necessary to refuel before a space vehicle returns to earth. As such, an orbital depot containing fuel has been placed near the earth or another body so that in orbit refueling can take place.
Without having this cache of fuel, resources required for space exploration and travel would be non-existent. Whereas, if these types of resource depots can be placed in the infrastructure, space exploration and space travel could become more prevalent in the future. As different types of depots are necessary depending on the type of fuel necessary to complete a mission, this is easier said than done.
Whether a depot at a fixed location such as the ISS or delivered by a tanker which can provide a single load to a spacecraft with or without a crew, either of these concepts could make a huge difference in the future. While one concept requires positioning at the space station, the other does not necessarily have to be anywhere near the space station for the transfer of fuel to take place.
Several entities could benefit from in-orbit refueling and storage facilities. These include, commercial companies such as Virgin, communications satellites, defense ministries and space agencies. Whereas, the end of life for satellites would be extended, thus also cutting the time satellites are in geosynchronous orbit.
While there had been some plans developed in the past with regards to satellite refueling, the transfer plans were totally scrapped after having been delivered to a number of space agencies. While this is the case, those agencies and others are exited about these new concepts and hopeful that at least some, if not all will come to fruition.
While a separately launched spacecraft has the capability to deploy a fraction or all of transfer fuel with a crew or payload, doing so could have a major impact. For, whether using a smaller vehicle or covering a larger area, both could save space agencies a great deal of time and money. In addition, the size of a launch vehicle could be reduced which could also increase flight rates.
Concepts also suggest that depots could be placed behind the Moon to help reduce the costs of trips to the Moon or Mars. Whereas, others suggest that placing a depot in the orbit of Mars could also be useful with regards to reducing costs and making such missions more likely. For, only when crews can assure a safe return from Mars, the Moon or the Sun can such missions take place.
With rockets and spacecraft, fuel usually takes up about 1/2 or more of the total mass. Whereas, larger rocket engines often use a cryogenic fuel like liquid oxygen or hydrogen as an oxidizer due to the specific impulse possible. While this is the case, the transfer must be done with extreme condition to the probability of boil-off. As such, while these concepts are all plausible, it will most likely be quite some time before any such concepts are operable due to a number of cost and time efficiency factors.
Without having this cache of fuel, resources required for space exploration and travel would be non-existent. Whereas, if these types of resource depots can be placed in the infrastructure, space exploration and space travel could become more prevalent in the future. As different types of depots are necessary depending on the type of fuel necessary to complete a mission, this is easier said than done.
Whether a depot at a fixed location such as the ISS or delivered by a tanker which can provide a single load to a spacecraft with or without a crew, either of these concepts could make a huge difference in the future. While one concept requires positioning at the space station, the other does not necessarily have to be anywhere near the space station for the transfer of fuel to take place.
Several entities could benefit from in-orbit refueling and storage facilities. These include, commercial companies such as Virgin, communications satellites, defense ministries and space agencies. Whereas, the end of life for satellites would be extended, thus also cutting the time satellites are in geosynchronous orbit.
While there had been some plans developed in the past with regards to satellite refueling, the transfer plans were totally scrapped after having been delivered to a number of space agencies. While this is the case, those agencies and others are exited about these new concepts and hopeful that at least some, if not all will come to fruition.
While a separately launched spacecraft has the capability to deploy a fraction or all of transfer fuel with a crew or payload, doing so could have a major impact. For, whether using a smaller vehicle or covering a larger area, both could save space agencies a great deal of time and money. In addition, the size of a launch vehicle could be reduced which could also increase flight rates.
Concepts also suggest that depots could be placed behind the Moon to help reduce the costs of trips to the Moon or Mars. Whereas, others suggest that placing a depot in the orbit of Mars could also be useful with regards to reducing costs and making such missions more likely. For, only when crews can assure a safe return from Mars, the Moon or the Sun can such missions take place.
With rockets and spacecraft, fuel usually takes up about 1/2 or more of the total mass. Whereas, larger rocket engines often use a cryogenic fuel like liquid oxygen or hydrogen as an oxidizer due to the specific impulse possible. While this is the case, the transfer must be done with extreme condition to the probability of boil-off. As such, while these concepts are all plausible, it will most likely be quite some time before any such concepts are operable due to a number of cost and time efficiency factors.
About the Author:
See our updated home page for more information about in orbit refueling. Find out everything you need to know from this website at http://www.csdc.space/about-csdc today.
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment