Gaetano Marano at his Ghostnasa website has leaked, from a European Space Agency website, an EADS Astruim presentation that was part of a 8 July lunar architecture, industry day
credit: EADS Astrium
So it would appear that a European Moon mission would require four launches. Two for the lander and its Earth departure stage (EDS) to be sent into orbit around the Moon, probably to dock with an existing lunar station and another two to launch the crew space transportation system and its EDS, which would dock in Earth orbit before going to the Moon.
ESA's interest in a cislunar space station was already known and the use of such a station as a fuel depot seems to have heavily influenced the European Moonship design with its 16,000kg mass that is substantially less than the NASA Orion crew exploration vehicle's
click on any of the images in this blog post to see larger versions in the same browser window
credit: EADS Astrium
So it would appear that a European Moon mission would require four launches. Two for the lander and its Earth departure stage (EDS) to be sent into orbit around the Moon, probably to dock with an existing lunar station and another two to launch the crew space transportation system and its EDS, which would dock in Earth orbit before going to the Moon.
ESA's interest in a cislunar space station was already known and the use of such a station as a fuel depot seems to have heavily influenced the European Moonship design with its 16,000kg mass that is substantially less than the NASA Orion crew exploration vehicle's
click on any of the images in this blog post to see larger versions in the same browser window
credit: Astrium
So from this it would seem that Astrium is proposing a hypergolic service module engine and probably crew capsule reaction control system. It certainly overcomes the development work that NASA is now undertaking to find a way of storing cryogenic fuels for long durations
credit: Astrium
The Astrium crew space transportation system design above we have seen before. Even with a refueling depot in low lunar orbit 13,000kg seems a bit low for a final mass to me, assuming that is not dry mass
I do know that today's Samarra Space Center Soyuz FG can at a push put 16,000kg into LEO, an ESA official told me. But clearly Ariane 5 will need to be upgraded to achieve to 50,000kg and for that the idea is more strap-on solid rocket boosters and a twin Vinci engined upper stage acting as the EDS; an idea ESA's Bernard Hufenbach told me about a while ago
credit: Astrium
I am contacting Astrium and ESA and hope to have answers soon
.
despite a 4-steps "Multiple Launches Architecture" may look less reliable than an Apollo-like Single Launch or an (Ares1 + Ares5) two launch architecture, it may have a DOZENS TIMES LESS LOM RISK than (both) Apollo and ESAS !!!
however, that LOWER LOM RISK needs four main conditions:
1. all lunar missions must start from ISS as parking station for the CTS
2. the EDSs should be ready to fly and launched with minimum notice (to replace a failed EDS in orbit)
3. the CTS and the lunar lander should be launched before their EDSs
4. and (MOST IMPORTANT) the CTS' service module and the lunar lander's descent AND ascent stage MUST work with hypergolic propellents (like the Apollo LM) so, the CTS could wait up to six months (docked to the ISS) the launch of its EDS and the lunar lander could wait in stand-by the CTS crew up to six months running while already in lunar orbit (maybe, with enough extra-propellents for a small orbital reboost)
also, it seems that, soon, thanks to new researches and upgrades, the earth/moon/lunar surface stay of all hypergolic-driven vehicles (including the next Digital-Soyuz) should be extended to ONE YEAR or more!
last, the lunar lander orbital module doesn't need to have its own Vinci engine, but just the tanks to refuel the main EDS with enough propellents for TLI
that's why I hope that (also) NASA will adopt MY idea of "Multiple Launches Architecture" that costs LESS and is MORE reliable, as already explained two years ago in this article:
http://www.gaetanomarano.it/articles/007arianeX.html
the advanteges of the MLA vs. the Apollo-like single launch, is that, if ONE of the four launches will fail, the full missions may NOT fail too, since, the failed module could be replaced, then having a VERY LOW Loss-Of-Missions risk!
.
European lunar architecture details leaked?
ESA published a FULL set of .pdf documents on their
Space Exploration Strategy website:
http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Space_Exploration_Strategy/
Hello
You should not let Gaetano Marano post on your Blog, he is a world class troll who has been banned from a lot of boards ...
He likes to pretend he has invented many things and was robbed (google lunar x-prize, DIRECT and now Astrium's concept)
Do a little search on Google, you will see ...