КК Союз без орбитального отсека

[Туфи]

Interesting even that picture seems to picture existing Soyuz SA with diameter of 217cm estimated from that picture  :twisted:

Ну, если учесть диаметр "Днепра" 300см, то диаметр капсулы (я линейкой померял) там ~230 см, imho это небольшая ошибка. Но сама конструкция критики не выдерживает.
Возможно, просто студенты/молодые сотрудники развлекались, вряд ли кто-то оценивал это предложение всерьез.

Я привел эту картинку, потому что она соответствует заголовку треда.

I agree with you SpaceR that picture is relevant to this thread no matter how wrong was the concept where it first appeared. I must say that I'm not against guys using Dnepr and trying to use it for new things. I find that rather useful and stimulating for a young students. But students of today are little spoiled and lazy and can't be pushed to do that kind of work. They expect Lego kits to play with them which can't prepare them for engineering job.

I also used ruler to find out proportions, but I used different measuring points. I enlarged the picture and measured how wide SA is 67mm, then I measured the distance on that sketch labeled as 4280mm and on the sketch it was 133mm. Simple proportion gives 2156mm for the width of the SA which is in reasonable agreements with currently used SA. Error made because of crude measuring method can reach 40mm so it is between 211-219 cm by the method I used. Your knowledge about fairing of Dnepr has maybe just pointed to another flaw in that sketch. Are they falsely represented the measures just to make it like it would fit inside? Because if you are right and that SA diameter is 230cm then height of that system is 5836mm when according to my estimation it is 5471mm. That is not a small difference.

This thread made me think about this a lot. Let say enlargement of SA diameter is logical. So the mass of spacecraft is rising. There is no new rocket carriers at sight. Solution is to cut mass by deleting something. BO is logical choice at this moment for cutting out. For near Earth orbit and taxi to OS you need nothing more then this. Cramp space will help cosmonauts to adjust until space sickness problems go away and they will have enough place to move around aboard OS. BO mass is about 1,8t so I guess it is possible to convert that mass into larger SA with docking ring. There will be a reduction in time that spacecraft can be in autonomous flight but for taxi mission nothing more is needed.

Is larger crew needed? Well USSR had cases when cosmonauts went "nuts" on orbit making his companion on orbit really under pressure. That was in time when Soyuz had two cosmonaut crew. Now it uses three cosmonauts crew. That is minimum crew that enables 24h monitoring of space operations in three 8h periods. But OS operations require that you count in a possible illness of a cosmonaut during their work. There one man more make a difference. It is sad that currently crew enlargement work is done motivated with hunger for more possible tourist money then this 3+x crew complement work strategy in scope.

@MKOLOM: Суштина мојих претходних пар постова је да је ширина приказаног Сојуза и даље 217 центиметара. Пар шала које се ту провлаче са дилемом да ли треба угојити инжињере или смршати космонауте ми немојте узети за зло. На крају сам се шалио и на свој рачун изјавом да је можда најбоље да космонаути буду слабог вида као и ја па пошто неће моћи да уоче проблем, проблема неће ни бити. = The essence of my previous couple posts is that width of presented Soyuz is still 217 cm. Couple jokes that are placed between with dilemma to fatten the engineers or to make cosmonauts thinner please do not take at heart. In the end I ridiculed even myself by saying that it is maybe best that cosmonauts are as nearsighted as I am and since that they can't see the problem then there is no problem. У овом посту сам само описао како сам проценио дијаметар Сојуза на основу слике и написао да уклањање БО има смисла само ако истовремено порасте диjаметар СА јер ће тада маса остати практично иста и биће могуће користити исту ракету за лансирање. Увећење посаде сматрам логичним, јер је 3 минимална посада довољна за кратке мисије Сојуза у ниској орбити, док је то мало за једну орбиталну станицу.

[MKOLOM]

Туфи, спасибо интересно ознакомиться

[avmich]

. . .

Почитал. Повеселило :) (особенно последний абзац).

Лучше всего это характеризует приведенная в самом низу цитата Льва  :D
Извините, но в дальнейшем обсуждении смысла не вижу.

З.Ы. От своих комментариев лучше воздержусь, поскольку это весьма напоминает мои собственные представления о обсуждаемых вопросах где-то 1,5-2-летней давности.

Жаль. Совсем не претендую на безошибочность, и проблемы с этим вариантом вижу - непонятно, однако, почему ТМА летает, а этот вариант не стоит всерьёз рассматривать. Хотя, конечно, у всех может быть особое мнение.

[MKOLOM]

SpaceR

А для ПТК НП новый носитель не так уж и обязателен - можно использовать те что есть

Из тех что есть это какие? Может быть "Зенит"? Но он не сертифицирован