TR Space Space Programs

[Zafer]

I can’t believe that we are actually and seriously thinking of being in a position to send a rocket to the moon in about 2 and a half years from now.
How fast do our current rockets travel? To be able to establish orbit you need a speed of 27000km per hour. Then you need to achieve 40000+ km per hour to overcome earths pull.
Nasa says it costs them 1.6 billion dollars to send a rocket to the moon.
We have to develop a viable rocket yet. So god knows how much it is going to cost. We could have 4 or even 6 more I class frigates for that money, instead of a 1.6 + (more like 2.6+) billion dollar rocket that is going to smash on to the surface of the moon.
This sounds like a pipe dream to me. There are other priorities before wasting money on moon rockets.
I am all for developing technology and rockets to establish satellites in orbit. This will give us confidence and more flexibility with our ballistic missile program which is important and vital for our anti missile missile program. But not moon rockets! At least not yet!

NASA says moon rocket could cost as much as $1.6 billion per launch

After nearly a decade of funneling money into a project to build a gargantuan rocket that NASA hopes will return astronauts to the moon, the launch vehicle is finally assembled and ready for testing.

edition.cnn.com

That would be in 8 years.
In 2-3 years a hard landing launch from a foreign launcher possibly SpaceX.

 

[Mustafa27]

I can’t believe that we are actually and seriously thinking of being in a position to send a rocket to the moon in about 2 and a half years from now.
How fast do our current rockets travel? To be able to establish orbit you need a speed of 27000km per hour. Then you need to achieve 40000+ km per hour to overcome earths pull.
Nasa says it costs them 1.6 billion dollars to send a rocket to the moon.
We have to develop a viable rocket yet. So god knows how much it is going to cost. We could have 4 or even 6 more I class frigates for that money, instead of a 1.6 + (more like 2.6+) billion dollar rocket that is going to smash on to the surface of the moon.
This sounds like a pipe dream to me. There are other priorities before wasting money on moon rockets.
I am all for developing technology and rockets to establish satellites in orbit. This will give us confidence and more flexibility with our ballistic missile program which is important and vital for our anti missile missile program. But not moon rockets! At least not yet!

NASA says moon rocket could cost as much as $1.6 billion per launch

After nearly a decade of funneling money into a project to build a gargantuan rocket that NASA hopes will return astronauts to the moon, the launch vehicle is finally assembled and ready for testing.

edition.cnn.com

They already told us 2023 will be a foreign launcher most likely spacex since they talked with elon, they gave 2028 for domestic launch,

 

[Raptor]

The last was India, or they are still working on it, idk. That's why I think @Nilgiri can give more detailed information

Since I am from India,maybe I can give you info.
Basically last year India's vikram lander hard landed and crashed to the moon surface,due to communication problem(can't give exact reason because ISRO is ultra secretive about the stuff for whatever reasons)
India would send another landing mission in this year.
Basically you need to perform Trans-lunar insertion to get into the orbit of the moon with a particular angle of ejection i forget the angle but I guess 45° w.r.t moon after you successfully inserted the spacecraft to Moon's orbit

You need to perform retrograde burn and decrease your ΔV so that you successfully descend to the surface to the moon,its very complex thing.

India's lander reached at 2km from the surface of the moon is when suddenly ISRO suffered communication problem(Open information).

 

[King_West]

Handy PDF file on the TUA: https://cdn.tua.gov.tr/60229ce82baee.pdf - In English

Thank you! Very interesting

 

[the]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but a "hard landing" is simply to say "we reached the Moon".

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1359251387394179074

^ informative thread about the Space programme.

He says that landing on the Moon is not likely to happen in 2023 without a Lunar orbit mission to collect data first . A more reasonable estimate would be 2028. (for landing).

 

[Yasar_TR]

If it is a foreign launch, what is the advantage in that apart from coughing up 1.6 billion dollars to a foreign company? What kind of mentality is this; to give 1.6 billion dollars to Elon Musk and ask him to send a rocket to moon and smash it on it?
All of this is to change the live daily agenda of the country to something more appealing.
It is a waste of money if you are not doing it yourself. Especially if it is not going to achieve anything concrete but fund Elon Musk. Especially at a time when COVID has made millions jobless and pushed them to destitute and below poverty line in our country and in need of state help; We are going to waste 1.6 billion dollars when that money is needed elsewhere to invest in equipment to defend the country or investments to create jobs.

To have a space agency and to work on rockets and missiles and prepare to send your own satellites and space vehicles to space is great. That is good vision. But if anybody says they are going to send some equipment and our flag to moon, only to be smashed and destroyed then it is a big NO !

 

[Nilgiri]

A soft landing is any type of aircraft, rocket or spacecraft landing that does not result in significant damage to or destruction of the vehicle or its payload, as opposed to a hard landing. If I'm not mistaken, very few ( 4 may be ) countries around the world have made soft landings on the Moon. The last was India, or they are still working on it, idk. That's why I think @Nilgiri can give more detailed information. A hard landing occurs when an aircraft or spacecraft hits the ground with a greater vertical speed and force than in a normal landing. So I think We can say that mission completion by the falling to surface.

Yes this is essentially correct. A hard landing is where you just impact the surface like bullet to earthen backstop.

Science for that can be rather limited...you can do spectroscopy during the descent, or you can remote sense the impact event itself (for ejecta analysis from orbit). Carrying survivable payload to do sensor science in-situ and communicate back to orbiter etc would be a tough project with its own extra costs and single point failure drawback etc...in a hard landing.

Soft landing is where you design the impact velocity to be as low as possible, so you have good survivability for instrumentation and payloads on board.... there is more science you can incorporate naturally....but of course there is extra cost/mass going to ensuring the soft landing.

Pro vs con have to be analysed for both approaches for any mission.

Since I am from India,maybe I can give you info.
Basically last year India's vikram lander hard landed and crashed to the moon surface,due to communication problem(can't give exact reason because ISRO is ultra secretive about the stuff for whatever reasons)
India would send another landing mission in this year.
Basically you need to perform Trans-lunar insertion to get into the orbit of the moon with a particular angle of ejection i forget the angle but I guess 45° w.r.t moon after you successfully inserted the spacecraft to Moon's orbit
View attachment 13832
You need to perform retrograde burn and decrease your ΔV so that you successfully descend to the surface to the moon,its very complex thing.

India's lander reached at 2km from the surface of the moon is when suddenly ISRO suffered communication problem(Open information).

I made quick diagram here:

It is just about managing energy/thrust budget (your delta V addition subtraction as you have put it) to complete the necessary burns (and envelope from main launch itself) and the remaining envelope left is for other budgets (for payload and payload survival etc).

As you can see from diagram, there is no strict (entry/exit) "angle" of 45 degrees, from orbit to landing or from launch to orbit, as you go tangent (90 deg) to perpendicular (0 degree) relative to planet surface normal vector....or vice versa...either way the degree change is 90 degrees in total....this of course "averages" out to 45 degree...but every single angle in between is passed in both....as it is just orbit raise (to LEO) in the launch case or lowering of orbit (essentially) to surface altitude with a final approach correction (Neil Armstrong had to eyeball his and it was very tense moment) for soft landing (since this needs to be perfect 0 degree to normal for lowest shear impact).

In Indian case, for chandrayaan, mangalyaan etc... many burns were used to raise the orbit (and finally do the TLI) given our launcher size constraint (till we have much larger GSLV and ULV etc) affecting payload mass budget (and thus orbit thruster size that can be used)..since you can fire this only so much +/- around perigee and apogee nodes. When you have one large thruster (say NASA sized heavy launch rocket) you can do the full burn in one go as the orbit thruster can be that size/mass/budget for that appropriate window in the relevant node.

Another diagram I made for more context readers may find useful (this time where the "end" is a geostationary orbit):

Jokowi asks Elon Musk to study Indonesia as venue for SpaceX launch site

Hey HOMBRE if you got a problem with me take it to the MOD by clicking that report button down there assuming you can see it. Here's a thing you need to know. I don't give care if I get banned from any forum. I'm not the one at loss. I don't get paid here anyway I don't know what is your...

defencehub.live

 

[what]

1.6bln Dollars was in the what 60s? Nowadays space has become relatively cheap and remember commercial companies are competing with each other pulling the cost of rocket launches down. The moon mission is most likey only for PR and wont be a billion € venture.

I am more interested in the rockets, satelites and especially the Regional GPS for example.

 

[Yasar_TR]

1.6bln Dollars was in the what 60s? Nowadays space has become relatively cheap and remember commercial companies are competing with each other pulling the cost of rocket launches down. The moon mission is most likey only for PR and wont be a billion € venture.

I am more interested in the rockets, satelites and especially the Regional GPS for example.

NASA says moon rocket could cost as much as $1.6 billion per launch

After nearly a decade of funneling money into a project to build a gargantuan rocket that NASA hopes will return astronauts to the moon, the launch vehicle is finally assembled and ready for testing.

edition.cnn.com

No not 60’s !
This article is dated December 2019!

The guy who bought a SpaceX ticket to the Moon is broke

"Yes, I have no money," tweeted Yusaku Maezawa.

futurism.com

MY BAD . SPACE X IS CHARGING 5 BILLION DOLLARS TO FLY TO MOON. BUT NOT GUARANTEEING THIS COST. IT MAY BE AS HIGH AS 10 BILLION DOLLARS.

 

[Zafer]

If it is a foreign launch, what is the advantage in that apart from coughing up 1.6 billion dollars to a foreign company? What kind of mentality is this; to give 1.6 billion dollars to Elon Musk and ask him to send a rocket to moon and smash it on it?
All of this is to change the live daily agenda of the country to something more appealing.
It is a waste of money if you are not doing it yourself. Especially if it is not going to achieve anything concrete but fund Elon Musk. Especially at a time when COVID has made millions jobless and pushed them to destitute and below poverty line in our country and in need of state help; We are going to waste 1.6 billion dollars when that money is needed elsewhere to invest in equipment to defend the country or investments to create jobs.

To have a space agency and to work on rockets and missiles and prepare to send your own satellites and space vehicles to space is great. That is good vision. But if anybody says they are going to send some equipment and our flag to moon, only to be smashed and destroyed then it is a big NO !

Who will pay $1.6bn for a crash landing piece of equipment to Moon, that can not be Turkey. That amount is for a one of manned flight to Moon when done by Boeing. And even that will go down to $1bn when a series of 10 flights are booked.

There was a space challenge e few years back and an Israeli team hired a third party rocket to send their equipment which failed to accomplish the landing. If they can do it just for a space challenge we can do it as a nation too. I am guessing it should be under $30mn for the whole process.

Please do some homework before talking.

 

[Yasar_TR]

Who will pay $1.6bn for a crash landing piece of equipment to Moon, that can not be Turkey. That amount is for a one of manned flight to Moon when done by Boeing. And even that will go down to $1bn when a series of 10 flights are booked.

There was a space challenge e few years back and an Israeli team hired a third party rocket to send their equipment which failed to accomplish the landing. If they can do it just for a space challenge we can do it as a nation too. I am guessing it should be under $30mn for the whole process.

Please do some homework before talking.

Elon Musk’s company , estimates the cost of a flight with spacex rocket to moon to be between 5-10 billion dollars!
I think you are the one who needs to do homeworking!
I give you references! You are empty talk!

The guy who bought a SpaceX ticket to the Moon is broke

"Yes, I have no money," tweeted Yusaku Maezawa.

futurism.com

 

[Zafer]

Elon Musk’s company , estimates the cost of a flight with spacex rocket to moon to be between 5-10 billion dollars!

The guy who bought a SpaceX ticket to the Moon is broke

"Yes, I have no money," tweeted Yusaku Maezawa.

futurism.com

I heard that in the link you provided in post #309

News of the Israeli team.

SpaceIL lander crashes on moon

An Israeli lunar lander originally built to win a prize competition crashed onto the surface of the moon April 11 when its main engine malfunctioned.

spacenews.com

 

[Bogeyman]

Minister of Industry and Technology Mustafa Varank, for the countries with which international cooperation will be made in the field of space, "We have signed international agreements with three countries so far. Agreements with Pakistan and Azerbaijan are at the signing stage. Besides, our negotiations with companies in the USA, Russia, Japan, India and China are continuing." said.

Sanayi ve Teknoloji Bakanı Varank: Cumhurbaşkanı'mızın gönlünden geçen bir kadın astronotun uzaya gitmesi

Sanayi ve Teknoloji Bakanı Varank, "Cumhurbaşkanı'mızın gönlünden geçen bir kadın astronotun uzaya gitmesi. En uygun vatandaşımızın orada misyonu gerçekleştirmesini sağlayacağız." dedi. - Anadolu Ajansı

www.aa.com.tr

 

[Yasar_TR]

I heard that in the link you provided in post #309

News of the Israeli team.

SpaceIL lander crashes on moon

An Israeli lunar lander originally built to win a prize competition crashed onto the surface of the moon April 11 when its main engine malfunctioned.

spacenews.com

Beresheet moon rocket program cost them between 100-200 million dollars. Mission cost was 100 million. But it was a special system of reaching the moon that they used as it needed to be cheap. (Typical Jewish mentality. Get it cheap) and it took them weeks to reach the moon.
The average distance to the Moon is 380,000km (240,000 miles) - Beresheet travelled more than 15 times that distance. And the main thing driving this was cost.
Normally rockets reach the moon within a few days as they travel at high speed and a direct route. Beresheet was a normal satellite rocket that swung shot around the world 15 times ; each time increasing its orbit and speed finally it was far away from the earth to be able to reach the moon. I don’t think spacex will use this method.
Nevertheless the Israeli effort was ingenious and well worth what it has achieved.

Moon Landing by Israel’s Beresheet Spacecraft Ends in Crash (Published 2019)

The spacecraft’s orbit of the moon was a first for a private effort, but the landing failure highlighted the risks of fast and cheap approaches to space exploration.

www.nytimes.com

 

[Nilgiri]

Normally rockets reach the moon within a few days as they travel at high speed and a direct route. Beresheet was a normal satellite rocket that swung shot around the world 15 times ; each time increasing its orbit and speed finally it was far away from the earth to be able to reach the moon. I don’t think spacex will use this method.
Nevertheless the Israeli effort was ingenious and well worth what it has achieved.

Yes India did same thing as Israel. Both were constrained by the payload available (Israel's was a secondary payload on falcon 9 to cut cost, whereas india used PSLV and GSLV which do not have requisite heavy payload capability for large orbit thruster that can do one direct burn).

This means their orbit thruster is only so big given smaller mass budget available....so to get the delta v needed for TLI (insertion into lunar trajectory)....it needs to be staged over more burns.

Say a big thruster can impart 1000 units of impulse all in "one go" (in one minute say)...and 1000 units is what is needed to get TLI condition.

But in same minute of time, say a smaller thruster can do 200 units of impulse.

It basically would then need 5 burns (5*200) to gain the total 1000 units needed for TLI (trans lunar injection).

The smaller the thruster, the more burns (and orbit raises) you need till the final one does the TLI...or TPI (trans planet injection) if its a planet or sun etc.

Why not just run the motor longer you ask compared to doing separate burns discreetly?

Well it needs to do these 5 burns discretely as the appropriate window to do a burn is short (that 1 minute around perigee/apogee when energy transfer is most efficient to increase or decrease delta V).

I explain bit more here:

Space - TUA Turkish Space Programs Presentation at 19:00

I'm okay with just Regional Positioning System within 10 years.

defencehub.live

SpaceX has full heavy launch capability like NASA, so they can do it in just one burn for TLI...given they can put a huge thruster on the final stage...given the starting launcher size is capable to launch this sized payload to LEO.

 

[Nilgiri]

Related conversation:

Space Programs

He said the astronaut will be sent. Therefore, I do not think we will send tourists. Maybe a deal has been arranged for the International Space Station. They can turn people into astronauts overnight if they will not pilot a vehicle or do spacewalk. We should prepare some important experiments...

defencehub.live

Maybe mods can combine the threads?

 

[the]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1359490244639412224

It might not even be the 300 million budget originally thought. No way the agency can complete these projects with such little funding.

 

[Zafer]

T

Beresheet moon rocket program cost them between 100-200 million dollars. Mission cost was 100 million. But it was a special system of reaching the moon that they used as it needed to be cheap. (Typical Jewish mentality. Get it cheap) and it took them weeks to reach the moon.
The average distance to the Moon is 380,000km (240,000 miles) - Beresheet travelled more than 15 times that distance. And the main thing driving this was cost.
Normally rockets reach the moon within a few days as they travel at high speed and a direct route. Beresheet was a normal satellite rocket that swung shot around the world 15 times ; each time increasing its orbit and speed finally it was far away from the earth to be able to reach the moon. I don’t think spacex will use this method.
Nevertheless the Israeli effort was ingenious and well worth what it has achieved.

Moon Landing by Israel’s Beresheet Spacecraft Ends in Crash (Published 2019)

The spacecraft’s orbit of the moon was a first for a private effort, but the landing failure highlighted the risks of fast and cheap approaches to space exploration.

www.nytimes.com

View attachment 13839

This lander was launched by SpaceX as a secondary payload.
And it was made for soft landing.

Turkey's 2023 SpaceX payload is for hard landing.
Turkey's 2028 payload is for soft landing and to be launched by our own rocket.

 

[Constan]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1359490244639412224

It might not even be the 300 million budget originally thought. No way the agency can complete these projects with such little funding.

Where's China ?
Of course we are not going anywhere with this budget we can only buy a spacesuit for RTE

 

[Saithan]

Turkish Space Agency logo marks ‘decisive movement into universe'

The Turkish Space Agency (TUA) logo, which was unveiled Tuesday during an event in the capital Ankara, symbolizes an uninterrupted, decisive movement...

www.dailysabah.com