Quote:
Originally Posted by alienhunt
why not take a page out of new science and employ the large-scale manufacturing of carbon nanotubes as a lightweight, extremely strong alternative that can act as a mesh. I have no means to test it, and I know large-scale manufacturing is a few years away, but with funding NASA could help make it reality much sooner.
I agree with the previous posters idea to move the human-occupied area to be above the insulation foam!
|
With our country's financial woes, NASA's budget woes, and the imminant demise of the Space Shuttle system (in 2010), the best move with respect to the Space Shuttle is to continue using the techniques developed to detect and repair damage before re-entry, and pour what little money is left into either their Constellation Program (Ares I and V, Orion, Altair, and EDS), or into
DIRECT.
DIRECT is said to be a more sane approach, given the budget cuts and the economic woes, as it's a
far more cost-effective approach supporting NASA's Vision for Space Exploration than Constellation. DIRECT replaces the Areas I and V boosters with a family of rockets using parts and technology already in existance, including the Shuttle's main tank, it's liquid main engines, and it's boosters.
While its origens predate the first Shuttle launch, the latest efforts include 62 NASA engineers, NASA-contractor engineers, and managers from the Constellation Program. Version 3.0 was unveiled just over a month ago in May, 2009, and on June 17, they presented their proposal at a public hearing of the Review of U.S. Human Space Flight Plans Committee, a in Washington D.C. panel reviewing US space efforts.
Lest anyone errantly think their cost-savings are "marginal," the title of Version 3.0 is Direct 3.0: Landing Twice the Mass on the Moon at Half the Cost."
Hardly "marginal."
Some question it's safety, but given that it's largely derivative of what we've been using for more than 30 years, sans the energy/payload robbing (by 130,000 lbs) and foam-problematic Shuttle,