Orion: Open question

Michel Van

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
5,160
Reaction score
1,835
after watching Orion Tv-Doku
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,3282.msg26465.html#msg26465
(thank McTodd ;D)

Freeman Dyson make some instresting remarks about ORION

He say to launch Orion from open Sea, instat of Nevada Fields
as launch option is this much "cleaner" as desert
gona like Aldebaran, more like Seadragon or of a big Platform ?

also he say that the USAF Orion are in reality fake

to George Dyson remark of gigant H-bomb on Doomsday Orion is possibly
with Teller–Ulam design you can build real big Bomb
like 50 megaton Tsar prototype Bomb.(100 MT final Version)
with 1500 ton (3,306,934 lbs) of Payload, as H-bomb that ultimate Doomsday weapon

they really went to Coca-cola to find a way to Store and deliver tausend Atombombs to injector ?
 

Orionblamblam

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
8,363
Reaction score
2,220
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
Michel Van said:
He say to launch Orion from open Sea, instat of Nevada Fields
as launch option is this much "cleaner" as desert
gona like Aldebaran, more like Seadragon or of a big Platform ?


It woudl be off of a platform of some kind. Orion, unlike Sea Dragon, was extremely dense. It'd sink.


also he say that the USAF Orion are in reality fake

Errr... no. A great deal of Orion work was doen for the USAF. The Orioneers *actual* *goal* was ships of exploration, but they had to go to the military for funding, and thus did design work for the USAF.


they really went to Coca-cola to find a way to Store and deliver tausend Atombombs to injector ?

Yes. The early Orion pulse unit storage and track system was rather clumsy. The final design was really quite elegant. It wasn't exactly a straight scaleup of a Coke machione, but they did learn useful things from the Coke people.
 

Michel Van

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
5,160
Reaction score
1,835
Orionblamblam said:
It would be off of a platform of some kind. Orion, unlike Sea Dragon, was extremely dense. It'd sink.

even Orion swim like Sea Dragon, there is another problem
the waterpressure would compress the shockabsorber bags!

had Cole ever a Idea how Aldebaran had to Take off from the Sea ?
 

Orionblamblam

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
8,363
Reaction score
2,220
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
Michel Van said:
the waterpressure would compress the shockabsorber bags!

Not really a problem, in that the shock absorbers would see a hell of a lot more pressure from the atom bombs than from being a little ways under water. A bigger issue would be the setting off of a nuke under water. No, the Orion would never be under water, always above it. The platform would hold it well above water, by quite a distance (at least the distance of the proper separation between the ship and the bomb, so that the first bomb would also be above water).

had Cole ever a Idea how Aldebaran had to Take off from the Sea ?

Doubtful. Aldebaran was far more a work of *art* than of *engineering.*
 

Justo Miranda

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2007
Messages
4,895
Reaction score
3,821
Website
www.amazon.com
When reading about the Orion project the first impression is: “that thing cannot work without killing the crew”. Reading further the feeling is “errarum humanum est, et perseverare diavolicum”. Watching the drawings it reaches to the “what if?”.

After all, our engineers can build sturdy structures and shock absorbers of any size. Our scientists have also advanced a lot in the technique of magnetic confinement that may serve to tame the bomb.

The Orion designs are very sophisticated and are far from the idea of a guy who puts a cover over a nuke, sits on it and push the button!

Someone with an open mind would consider ALL the options. Nature does it and we cannot hope for eternal luck with the Eros asteroids or the comets in random orbit of the type that almost annihilated us 8000 years ago.

I believe that if the most extreme ecologists could live the environmental consequences of a KT impact, they would consider the nuclear option as a life option.
 

Attachments

  • Escanear0001.jpg
    Escanear0001.jpg
    32.7 KB · Views: 183
  • Escanear0002.jpg
    Escanear0002.jpg
    56.7 KB · Views: 191

Michel Van

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
5,160
Reaction score
1,835
construction of platform for Orion sealaunch is easy

like Troll A platform (Norwegian platform for production of gas)
Troll A has an overall height of 472 meters and weighs 656,000 tons
The platform is built of reinforced concrete using the Condeep technology.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condeep

the question is Wat is left over after liftoff ?

to Comet busting
George Dyson say in TV doku some thing like that:
if a Comet is to hit earth and we have some month
only way to stop is to build a Orion ship and intercept it
in movie "Deep Impact" spaceship Messiah use Nuclear plus engine
(not much view in movie)
 

Justo Miranda

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2007
Messages
4,895
Reaction score
3,821
Website
www.amazon.com
Michel Van said:
had Cole ever a Idea how Aldebaran had to Take off from the Sea ?

The only solution is to vaporize sea water as ejection mass for the nozzle.
After reaching certain speed, it will get free from the water suction and change to hot air as ejection mass.
Afterwards, it must fly from some minutes by ground effect until reaching the required speed for the real take off.
This will be achieved by increasing the nuclear reactor temperature to disociate the air admitted by the air intakes and convert it into ionized plasma to eject it by the nozzle and obtain orbital speed.
 

Orionblamblam

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
8,363
Reaction score
2,220
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
Michel Van said:
the question is Wat is left over after liftoff ?


Quite a lot. Build the launch platform *stout,* and then slather it over with something like asphalt. Get a few thousand-gallon-per-second seawater pumps going to hose the thing down with just prior to and during launch, and your platform should be in pretty good shape. You'll need to slather on some more asphalt after each launch, but it might be only a fraction of an inch.


if a Comet is to hit earth and we have some month
only way to stop is to build a Orion ship and intercept it
[/quote]

Sadly, this is true *only* if you already have an Orion lying around. If we found out that the Earth is going to get whacked in a month, there's no chance that even the preliminary design could be completed in time. If we know that we're going to get hit in 2036, on the other hand, Orion would eb a great way to deal with it.
 

Michel Van

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
5,160
Reaction score
1,835
so here my version of Orion Sea Launch Platfrom

as model I used USAF Orion Space Ship 10 meter ø
there 6 Service towers and supply towers (raised above like Titan I Silo system)

the Blast Pit is close at on end ! idea behind this:

the walls are strong enough support the blast.
before liftoff few thousand-gallon-per-second seawater runs wall down.
the shockwave of first detonation focus downwards reflects at bottom
and give additional trust to pusherplate (including the water vapor.)

so can they use a smaller nuke for the first blast.

or is this a "Flash in Pan" Idea again ?

to cover the platform with asphalt there is alternative

for ROMBUS Booster need a special launch pad.
a reinforced concrete dish that filled with water before launch
rombus1.jpg

this protect the Launch pad of force of Liftoff Thrust of 17,932,784 lbf (8134 ton)
some thing similar proposed for Boeing SPS SSTO with a artificial lake
 

Attachments

  • Orion003.png
    Orion003.png
    24 KB · Views: 90

McTodd

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Jul 21, 2007
Messages
69
Reaction score
11
Michel Van said:
after watching Orion Tv-Doku
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,3282.msg26465.html#msg26465
(thank McTodd ;D)
Glad you enjoyed it, Michel - it's a shame they never think to release quality programmes like that on DVD, I'd buy it! BTW, I now have a better recording in 16:9 aspect ratio, so I shall upload that as well in the next few days. Just keep an eye on that page.
 

Orionblamblam

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
8,363
Reaction score
2,220
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
Michel Van said:
so here my version of Orion Sea Launch Platfrom

Based on experience with the subscale flight models and ideas regarding silo-launched nuclear retaliatory Orions, what *might* have been done with a floating ocean-based platform is that the orion would be kept within a silo and launched like a sea launched ballisting missile. Basically, shot into the air via compressed gas (generated by tanks of pressurized nitrogen, say, or vaporized liquid nitrogen, or possibly something like gunpowder), and the first nuke is fired only after forward motion is attained and the silo is cleared.

One discovery of the flight models was that Orion may not work very well at zero velocity within an atmosphere.

It might have looked somethign like this:

300px-Peacekeeper_missile.jpg


Since the pusher plate was of slightly larger diameter than the rest of the vehicle, and you wouldn't want to scrape the plate or the vehicle along the walls of the silo, the Orion could well have had a sacrificial sabot somewhat like the MX. Big chunks of foam, I'd imagine. They'd get blasted to flinders by the nuke, but who cares?
 

Michel Van

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
5,160
Reaction score
1,835
another question
this time to Chemical Orion Drive (the Put Put testmodel)

Hermann Ganswindt proposed a Put Put Drive on 27. Mai 1891
konst_020.jpg


that Put-Put work i know, but is better or worst as chemical Rocket engine ?
in poit of view 1891 ...
 

Orionblamblam

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
8,363
Reaction score
2,220
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
Michel Van said:
another question
this time to Chemical Orion Drive (the Put Put testmodel)

Hermann Ganswindt proposed a Put Put Drive on 27. Mai 1891
konst_020.jpg


that Put-Put work i know, but is better or worst as chemical Rocket engine ?
in poit of view 1891 ...

Worse. Chemical "Orions" have specific impulses *far* below regular rockets. Ganswindt's design was even worse, as it used a chemical explosive to fire a block of iron *forwards* to bang into the bell and rebound. He'd ahve been much better off just having a cannon pointing aft, shooting blanks.
 

Michel Van

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
5,160
Reaction score
1,835
i found another crazy Idea to use Nuke to get in space

"the Atomic Gun" by Conastintin Paul van Lent in 1955

take mountain of 4.572 meter (15000 feet) high
drill on top of it a shaft of 7,62 meter (25 feet) ø and 762 meter (2500 feet) deep
on deep end of shaft is a spherical chamber of 30,48 meter (100 feed) ø

on the bottom of chamber is 15,24 meter (50 feet) high tower with a Atombomb
and the chamber is filled with powdered steel and aluminum.
(this is "charge" for the Atomic Gun)
the Top of Chamber (and bottom of shaft) is plugged by thick cylinder of concrete
on top of that the payload (in this case a Space Sation build out concrete)

van Lent want to use to 2 Atombombs, on in Chamber and second on top of mountain
"To produce momentary vaccum through which his rocket can pass"

i think Jules Verne is turning in his grave

Source
the Dream Machines
by Ron Miller
ISBN 0-89464-039-9
Page 363 and 365
 

Orionblamblam

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
8,363
Reaction score
2,220
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
Michel Van said:
on the bottom of chamber is 15,24 meter (50 feet) high tower with a Atombomb
and the chamber is filled with powdered steel and aluminum.

The idea has merit... except for the powdered metals bit. That's silly. You'd do far better filling the chamber with either liquidifed or high-pressure gas. Hydrogen would be best.
 

Skybolt

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
2,299
Reaction score
195
Well there is the story of the steel lid put on a secondary tunnel in a subterranean nuclear test in Nevada and shot beyond the escape velocity by the explosion. A legend ?
 

Orionblamblam

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
8,363
Reaction score
2,220
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
Skybolt said:
Well there is the story of the steel lid put on a secondary tunnel in a subterranean nuclear test in Nevada and shot beyond the escape velocity by the explosion. A legend ?

Yes and no. The "manhole cover" was indeed shot off the mouth of the borehole at extreme velocity, likely exceeding escape velocity. However, it is not thought that it left the atmosphere. Due the gasses compressed behind it, the sudden acceleration, and aerothermal heating from hypersonic speeds at low altitude, the plate certainly experienced substantial surface ablation (melting and vaporization of the steel), and likely also got close to or higher than the melting point. So it might have been a shotgun blast of steel droplets. Regardless, the drag on a flat plate at low altitude and orbital velocity would have been stupendous.
 
Top