The Largest payloads put in orbit - Page 2

publiusr · #31 (**permalink**) 20-October-2005, 08:34 PM

I don't blame you. Those Titans were all but stick built for their payloads and were real pad-sitters. Delta IV looks to be another, however.

I loved Atlas III. You kept the balloon tank but got rid of the sustainer system and had the RD-180.

A powerful engine and lightweight tankage made for liftoffs like a scalded cat.

Enzp · #32 (**permalink**) 21-October-2005, 03:35 AM

Aren't the Russian heavy lifting systems reliable and still in existence? How do they compare in terms of payload to the Saturn rockets? Why not just buy launchers from them. It would be cheaper than re-engineering the Saturn and rebuilding the infrastructure, and the Russians would love the business.

I told my wife yesterday that I was going to put her butt in orbit if she didn't quit moving my stuff around. That would be quite a payload there.

Bob B. · #33 (**permalink**) 21-October-2005, 04:03 AM

As far as I know, the largest thing the Russians have is the Proton rocket, which can put about 20 metric tons into orbit. The Soviet Union did some work on a big launcher (Energia) but I believe the program was cancelled when the USSR broke up.

gwiz · #34 (**permalink**) 21-October-2005, 12:50 PM

As far as largest dimension goes, if you count antennae, the RAE 2 lunar orbiting radio astronomy satellite was 1.5 km across.

Cugel · #35 (**permalink**) 21-October-2005, 03:26 PM

If size matters I know another candidate:

STS-75 (Columbia)
Mission Highlights: The highlight of the mission was the deployment of the Tethered Satellite to test the ability of such systems to produce electricity. On the fourth day of the flight, the TSS was deployed to a distance of almost 12 miles from the shuttle...

publiusr · #36 (**permalink**) 21-October-2005, 08:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob B.

As far as I know, the largest thing the Russians have is the Proton rocket, which can put about 20 metric tons into orbit. The Soviet Union did some work on a big launcher (Energia) but I believe the program was cancelled when the USSR broke up.

The Energiya core has been discontinued, but the kerosene strap-ons (ZENIT) are still in production.

Each Zenit has a four nozzle engine (RD-170) that has more thrust than Saturn V's F-1. Boeing's Sea Launch uses ZENIT, and the half-strength, two nozzle RD-180 is used on Atlas III (balloon tanks) and V, but its heavier tankage takes away from its performance a bit.

www.k26.com/buran
www.buran.ru

The RD-180 was to figure in some wide-body Atlas designs, and in the Energiya replacement called ANGARA-100 as seen in:
www.russianspaceweb.com

Ariane -M seems interesting.

So those are three HLLV concepts right there--four with Magnum/Longfellow at:
www.nasaspaceflight.com

publiusr · #37 (**permalink**) 21-October-2005, 08:40 PM

Some nice CEV links here:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/for...d=493&start=61

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/for...d=493&start=71

Bob B. · #38 (**permalink**) 21-October-2005, 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by publiusr

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob B.

As far as I know, the largest thing the Russians have is the Proton rocket, which can put about 20 metric tons into orbit. The Soviet Union did some work on a big launcher (Energia) but I believe the program was cancelled when the USSR broke up.

The Energiya core has been discontinued, but the kerosene strap-ons (ZENIT) are still in production.

Each Zenit has a four nozzle engine (RD-170) that has more thrust than Saturn V's F-1. Boeing's Sea Launch uses ZENIT, and the half-strength, two nozzle RD-180 is used on Atlas III (balloon tanks) and V, but its heavier tankage takes away from its performance a bit.

This is all true. But the Zenit has only about 75% the lift performance of the Proton, thus I thought it moot to mention it.

Is Proton the largest Russian launch vehicle currently used? I think it is.

Enzp · #39 (**permalink**) 22-October-2005, 07:52 AM

So does it have merit to develop from there rather than starting over?

genebujold · #40 (**permalink**) 23-October-2005, 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Davros

Since they stopped making Saturn V's, capable of lifting perhaps 70,000 kg, nobody has a hope in heck of launching anything like that big again in the near future...

The most awe-inspiring sight in my entire life was watching the Apollo 11 liftoff from the Intercoastal waterway in our boat. We'd travelled about four hours (two by land, one by sea) to position ourselves about two miles away from the launch site. Even so, we could see the rocket poised on the pad before launch. It tool 11 seconds (telling!) for the sound of it's liftoff to reach us. Even then it was so loud we could hardly hear one another or the radio, and the boat, even the very water, shook with the incredible power of that event.

I've seen a shuttle launch since, and it's just not the same.

One of these days I hope mankind builds a rocket capable of launching 1,000,000 kg into orbit in a single launch.

That would really be something!

William_Thompson · #41 (**permalink**) 24-October-2005, 01:39 PM

The Air Force and The NSA has been putting things in orbit secretly from the south pacific that only a few people in the intelligence community knows about. The engines are made of radio active coils and liquid hydrogen is fed on them which turns them into energy and steam. They had a test firing for the and NASA press about 11 years ago but noone seems to remember that.

gwiz · #42 (**permalink**) 24-October-2005, 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by genebujold

The most awe-inspiring sight in my entire life was watching the Apollo 11 liftoff from the Intercoastal waterway in our boat. We'd travelled about four hours (two by land, one by sea) to position ourselves about two miles away from the launch site. Even so, we could see the rocket poised on the pad before launch. It tool 11 seconds (telling!) for the sound of it's liftoff to reach us. Even then it was so loud we could hardly hear one another or the radio, and the boat, even the very water, shook with the incredible power of that event.

It couldn't have been that impressive, everyone knows it was only a Saturn I in a posh frock...

I saw Apollo 17, the only Saturn V night launch. It's not something I'm ever likely to forget. After the lightshow and the visceral impact of the noise of the actual liftoff it was visible for a very long time, past staging and well into the second stage burn.

publiusr · #43 (**permalink**) 26-October-2005, 07:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by William_Thompson

The Air Force and The NSA has been putting things in orbit secretly from the south pacific that only a few people in the intelligence community knows about. The engines are made of radio active coils and liquid hydrogen is fed on them which turns them into energy and steam. They had a test firing for the and NASA press about 11 years ago but noone seems to remember that.

Who told you that? I know about NERVA engines--but what is this I keep hearing about secret launches and such?

publiusr · #44 (**permalink**) 03-November-2005, 07:15 PM

steve1 · #45 (**permalink**) 03-November-2005, 11:06 PM

Reviewed the very large payload rockets being developed and the Russians are supposed to be working on a 100 metric ton lift capacity rocket, as well as a 125 metric tonne booster. The energiya was supposed to lift about 75 tonnes, but was never fully developed. Truly large rocket boosters must be developed if really permanent space habitats are planned.

publiusr · #46 (**permalink**) 04-November-2005, 07:02 PM

That is very true. Energia put up 90-100 tons, but could lift more:
www.k26.com/buran
www.buran.ru

The replacement for UR-500 Proton is this vehicle below (which will be exported in part to Korea):
http://www.russianspaceweb.com/angara.html
An Energiya class Angara is here
http://www.russianspaceweb.com/angara100.html

For the time being, an upgraded R-7 is what is most likely, placing it in the Zenit Ariane 4 range. Still too small even for circumlunar missions:

http://www.russianspaceweb.com/soyuz3_lv.html

Kliper: http://www.spacedaily.com/news/spacetravel-05zzzy.html
http://www.russianspaceweb.com/kliper.html

Launch window · #47 (**permalink**) 19-November-2005, 08:23 AM

Ariane 5 ECA Lofts Record Payload into Orbit
http://www.universetoday.com/am/publ....html?17112005
I wonder if they'll be building that Ariane-M for the Mars sample return mission ?

genebujold · #48 (**permalink**) 22-November-2005, 12:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Davros

IIRC the biggest single payload ever launched was Skylab, weighing in at a very hefty 77,000 kg.

Bingo! I'm glad someone here realizes how much more powerful Saturn V was than the space shuttle.

Even if they did have to throw it away every launch...

Still, in constant dollars it's proven to be far cheaper than the Space Shuttle!

Uh, ok. So, uh, why don't we bring it back with a few, low-cost improvements?

Uh? Ahem... Uh...

William_Thompson · #49 (**permalink**) 23-November-2005, 12:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by publiusr

Who told you that? I know about NERVA engines--but what is this I keep hearing about secret launches and such?

I heard on National Public Radio about them test firing a nuke engine and they had to make a press release.

I will have to dig around for that program. It was at least 12 years ago.

genebujold · #50 (**permalink**) 25-November-2005, 01:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gwiz

It couldn't have been that impressive, everyone knows it was only a Saturn I in a posh frock...

Oh, go...

Yo. I was there. You weren't.

Don't EVER get on this board and tell someone what they experienced, particularly when they were a child, "couldn't have been that impressive."

What a ridiculously thick-headed pompous ***!

Where do you people come from, anyway? Does the Grinch work overtime so that you drip acid of deceit trying to steal incredible memories from children?

Are you that self-abasing that you have to resort to derisive comments about the experiences of other people in order to bolster your pathetically low sense of self esteem?

If I'm wrong, please clue me in, as I'm wide open for an intelligent response. I'm not, however, open for unintelligent responses, nor am I in the mood for over-active moderators who're willing to force everyone to toe the line from one side but who turn a blind eye to the other.

Look both ways before you leap.

JonClarke · #51 (**permalink**) 25-November-2005, 03:10 AM

Obviously you did not read his comments on how impressive the Apollo 17 launch was.

Jon