METEOR: city in space

Orionblamblam

ACCESS: USAP
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
5 April 2006
Messages
11,789
Reaction score
9,296
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
In the early/mid 1950's, work was performed at Goodyear Aircraft on the METEOR concept ("Manned Earth-Satellite Terminal Evolving From Earth-To-Orbit Ferry Rockets"). This was somewhat similar to the "Colliers" space program as envisioned by von Braun and others... just not so small and limited. The space station envisioned was something more like Babylon 5 than vonBrauns' "Wheel." The space station envisioned was something more like Babylon 5 than vonBrauns' "Wheel." 2,500 feet long (that's right, prit near half a mile) and 1,500 feet in diameter, the METEOR space station would be assembled in orbit by stripping the third stage of a reusable launch vehicle for parts over a period of 40 months or so.

METEOR was so much better than current plans that it's not *even* funny... :'(
 

Attachments

  • meteor1a.jpg
    meteor1a.jpg
    71.7 KB · Views: 952
  • meteor4a.jpg
    meteor4a.jpg
    114.1 KB · Views: 850
  • meteor art 10a.jpg
    meteor art 10a.jpg
    138 KB · Views: 788
  • meteor station phase 4a.jpg
    meteor station phase 4a.jpg
    80.1 KB · Views: 794
  • meteor station phase 9a.jpg
    meteor station phase 9a.jpg
    107.4 KB · Views: 738
  • ferrya.jpg
    ferrya.jpg
    44.9 KB · Views: 243
oh year much more fun as ISS

the METEOR in 1955 had a size of
300 meterø x 900 meter long tube, with disk 450 mø 12 m tick.
with crew of 5000 men ?
this is more a Bablyon X-1 ;D

only 2500-3000 shuttle launches over 3,5 years or two per day
how long they work on ISS now? ::)
 
And to whet your appetite:

http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2006/05/11/all-aboard-for-outer-space/

Grif
 
Goodyear METEOR Jr. 3-Stage Fully Reusable Rocket Concept model found in the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum Collections Database web site. Previous drawing identifies it as "Ferry Rocket."

From the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum Collections Database:
In 1954, several years before spaceflight began, space enthusiast Darrell C. Romick and two other Goodyear Aircraft workers designed this model of a reusable space transportation system and displayed it at the American Rocket Society's annual conference. Three piloted, winged rocket stages nested in a column would fire in sequence to launch the third stage at the top into orbit. All had retractable landing gear and could be flown as a glider during the return to landing. Although the concept was too massive to be practical at the time, it was an early vision for a space shuttle that could ferry people and equipment to and from an Earth-orbiting space station. The Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company gave this model to the Museum in 1980.
 

Attachments

  • A19800236000CP02.jpg
    A19800236000CP02.jpg
    43.8 KB · Views: 202
Concept artwork of METEOR rockets in an airship hanger published in When Giants Roamed the Sky: Karl Arnstein and the Rise of Airships from Zeppelin to Goodyear by Dale Topping.

Even before the Soviet satellite Sputnik opened the eyes of the world to space travel, Goodyear Aircraft Corporation developed an ambitious proposal for a reusable, manned space vehicle. This artist's concept depicts the nearly 200-foot (60 m) high Air Dock filled with Goodyear "Meteor, Jr." rockets undergoing assembly and a large rigid airship occupying the remainder of the hangar. (Lockheed Martin)
 

Attachments

  • gyrocketairshipia1.jpg
    gyrocketairshipia1.jpg
    63.3 KB · Views: 197
Triton said:
Concept artwork of METEOR rockets in an airship hanger published in When Giants Roamed the Sky: Karl Arnstein and the Rise of Airships from Zeppelin to Goodyear by Dale Topping.

Even before the Soviet satellite Sputnik opened the eyes of the world to space travel, Goodyear Aircraft Corporation developed an ambitious proposal for a reusable, manned space vehicle. This artist's concept depicts the nearly 200-foot (60 m) high Air Dock filled with Goodyear "Meteor, Jr." rockets undergoing assembly and a large rigid airship occupying the remainder of the hangar. (Lockheed Martin)

I sent it before;
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,2504.msg55047/highlight,goodyear+space.html#msg55047
 
So that's what this is ;D
 

Attachments

  • 306 PS-C 58-5134.jpg
    306 PS-C 58-5134.jpg
    189.1 KB · Views: 154
  • 306 PS-C 58-5135.jpg
    306 PS-C 58-5135.jpg
    330.3 KB · Views: 188
  • Untitled-1.jpg
    Untitled-1.jpg
    136.3 KB · Views: 162
  • 306 PS-C 58-5136.jpg
    306 PS-C 58-5136.jpg
    223.2 KB · Views: 157
RyanCrierie said:
So that's what this is ;D

Yup. SIGH. Must I do all of my own self promotion for me?
http://www.up-ship.com/drawndoc/drawndocspaceother.htm#spacedoc55
sdoc55ani.jpg
 
Orionblamblam said:
SIGH. Must I do all of my own self promotion for me?
http://www.up-ship.com/drawndoc/drawndocspaceother.htm#spacedoc55
sdoc55ani.jpg
Why yes... Yes you do... In fact we DEMAND not only SELF promotion, but SHAMELESS self promotion!

As with "nuking-the-site-from-orbit" it is after all the ONLY way to be sure....

Randy
 
RanulfC said:
Why yes... Yes you do... In fact we DEMAND not only SELF promotion, but SHAMELESS self promotion!

As with "nuking-the-site-from-orbit" it is after all the ONLY way to be sure....

Randy

no no no
he just remind me that i forgot to order the METEOR PDF at
http://www.up-ship.com/
the best aerospace site with best price-quality ratio !
::)
 
Hi,


here is the Goodyear Meteor.


https://archive.org/stream/missilesrockets3195unse#page/n139/mode/2up
 

Attachments

  • missilesrockets3195unse_0142.jpg
    missilesrockets3195unse_0142.jpg
    406.8 KB · Views: 94
  • Meteor.png
    Meteor.png
    661.9 KB · Views: 98
And,


https://archive.org/stream/missilesrockets3195unse#page/n315/mode/2up
 

Attachments

  • Goodyear.png
    Goodyear.png
    361.3 KB · Views: 127
And;


https://archive.org/stream/missilesrockets6196unse#page/n671/mode/2up
 

Attachments

  • Goodyear.png
    Goodyear.png
    564.4 KB · Views: 124
Hi,

a many jets powered Goodyear proposal in this artist drawing ?;

http://blog.modernmechanix.com/all-aboard-for-outer-space/3/#mmGal
 

Attachments

  • xlg_outer_space_3.jpg
    xlg_outer_space_3.jpg
    233.9 KB · Views: 115
hesham said:
Hi,

a many jets powered Goodyear proposal in this artist drawing ?;

http://blog.modernmechanix.com/all-aboard-for-outer-space/3/#mmGal

Seems to have been attachable jets for ferrying the spacecraft from landing sites back to the launch sites, in cases where the two were not in close proximity.
 
From Oltre il Cielo 1959 02
 

Attachments

  • 2.png
    2.png
    818.6 KB · Views: 172
  • 1.png
    1.png
    895.2 KB · Views: 167
Did we send this picture before ?.
 

Attachments

  • 289750421_2147889812051952_2869382955676346702_n.jpg
    289750421_2147889812051952_2869382955676346702_n.jpg
    95 KB · Views: 95
Man, building that would have taken ALL the spacewalks! (where's the "mind blown" emoji when you need one?!?)
 
An almost certainly a lot of deaths.

And it would have been worth it.
I think that any potential loss of life could have been easily minimized by applying an actual engineering way less cartoonish design approach. As NBC is wont to say, The More You Know...
 
Last edited:
I think that any potential loss of life could have been easily minimized by applying an actual engineering way less cartoonish design approach. As NBC is wont to say, The More You Know...

The main issue is we've never had a good 'reason' to design and construct "working" space suits. We found out quickly that several design constraints and operational requirements were a lot more difficult and dangerous than we thought. METEOR was supposed to be built (as noted) with many EVA's and generally use "standard" construction techniques used on Earth both of which turned out to be a less viable for space use. Simple acts were more difficult to do and normal 'construction' techniques simply would not work the same and the effort to do so was secondary to the main "goals" of simply getting things done as part of a rivalry between the East and West.

Randyu
 
I'm not so sure that naming a space station after a fiery and destructive reentry event is a good idea...

On a more serious note, what was the intended purpose for a station of this size in the 1960s? Orbital manufacturing? R&D taken to the extreme? One-upping the Soviets?
 
I'm not so sure that naming a space station after a fiery and destructive reentry event is a good idea...

On a more serious note, what was the intended purpose for a station of this size in the 1960s? Orbital manufacturing? R&D taken to the extreme? One-upping the Soviets?

An orbital port. Shuttles from Earth would bring materials and people to the station where they'd transfer to orbital spacecraft. As such it would need business and manufacturing that would support the traffic and service the passengers.

Randy
 
An orbital port. Shuttles from Earth would bring materials and people to the station where they'd transfer to orbital spacecraft. As such it would need business and manufacturing that would support the traffic and service the passengers.

Randy
More likely, it would take shipments from out in space and trans ship them for reentry, but we might figure out some good processes for zero gee manufacturing.

Imagine being the owner of 75,000,000 tons of nickel-iron, in one asteroid. Or 7,500 tons of gold (iirc, that's 3x the total amount of gold mined on earth throughout history). 7,500 tons of iridium. Or any of the other "rare earths" that are rather common in asteroids.
 
Inflatables might assist metal recovery:


Now, a lot of ideas of self replicating probes I assume are of the “dry” variety:

Mass drivers to push..and all that.
But wet technology (I didn’t say wet workshop Byeman!)—might be the answer.

I can see inflatable “cells”…with artificial DNA digesting asteroids and extruding metal perhaps in a wire with minimal mechanics.

It is easier to drag a wire than an ingot if the same mass.

Inflatables catch the Sun and move wire segments perhaps.
 
More likely, it would take shipments from out in space and trans ship them for reentry, but we might figure out some good processes for zero gee manufacturing.

Imagine being the owner of 75,000,000 tons of nickel-iron, in one asteroid. Or 7,500 tons of gold (iirc, that's 3x the total amount of gold mined on earth throughout history). 7,500 tons of iridium. Or any of the other "rare earths" that are rather common in asteroids.
Minor correction, the amount of gold we've mined on Each is closer to 200,000 tons. With that being said, there are asteroids with megatons of gold (or more) so the point stands.
 
Minor correction, the amount of gold we've mined on Each is closer to 200,000 tons. With that being said, there are asteroids with megatons of gold (or more) so the point stands.
How'd I stuff that up?

I hate having weird data stuck in my brain...
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom