Skip to content

ACES as a Cislunar wet lab to augment a gateway space station

ACES as a Cislunar wet lab to augment a gateway space station

This post is a mirror image of the SLS EUS stage as gateway wet lab to augment a cislunar Gateway SLS EUS Gateway Wet Lab

We need to know Volumes of the ACES LH2 tanks but let’s guess the fact it’s three times that of the Centaur(150 M3) or 450 M3


Skylab-II 3.0; An SLS three Barrow LH2 tank derived space station with an attached Tranqulity derived module with a Bigalow/water shroud for radiation sheltor

(A)(1) Skylab-II with 3 barrows and two domes instead of just 2 SLS propellant tank barrows should fit in an SLS 10 meter payload fairing SLS payload planners guide 

Space Launch System Core Stage


The planner’s guide states that the 10 m diameter PLF concept has 15.32 Meters cylindrical while the proposed Skylab-II is 11.5 meters high.So it appears a 3 barrow Skylab-II would fit in this space.Please note that on page 58 of the SLS payload planners guide there is another 11.12 meters tapered payload fairing geometry.Is it possible to fit an ISS module on top of the SLS propellant tanks? The tapered geometry makes it possible to make a radiation shelter as proposed in the Skylab-II paper; “a possible solution is to place an ISS US Lab size module within the Skylab II leaving approximately 2 meters between shells (Figure 6). If the void were filled with water the mass of water alone would be 389 mt. For water mass only, this would take 4-5 launches using the 95 mt SLS” Skylab-II proposal 

“Skylab II; Making a Deep Space Habitat from a Space Launch System Propellant Tank”  Griffen & Smitherman Et al


This image is of Centaur lofting Cygnus to the ISS

We propose that the 3 Barrows Skylab-II with an attached ISS module on the forward dome of the LH2 could be enshrouded within a Bigalow that would inflate on orbit.Distributed launch of water would follow.If we are using a 8 meter long ISS module then the Bigalow inflatable would encapsulate that prior to inflation and fit in the remaining tapered 11.12 meters of the SLS 10  meter circumference payload fairing.****


The Diameter of the ISS Tranquility module is 4.48 meters and an inflated Bigalow B330 is 6.7 meters so this leaves 2.22 meters for salt water and Kelp as a radiation barrier.A Bigalow enshrouded  ISS module atop the Skylab-II should be less volume than the proposed 389 metric tons of the ISS module inside a Skylab-II proposal

In our Rappolee flowers proposal, we suggested payload fairings with attached mesh as a deployed solar array; SLS 10 meter fairing that’s a total of 27.43 meters on a side for deployed fairings still attached to the spacecraft so 27.43 x 2 = 54.86 meters diameter of our Rappolee flower

r=27.43 m =2363.749706365 m2     172.34777297594 m c The ISS USOC solar arrays are 1500 M 2 since the Payload fairings are concave in shape then 2363 M 2 is under the true surface area.


(1) Skylab-II 47,432 Kg? Full capability C 2 Figure 15 20140012883

(2) ISS Tranquility module 19,000 Kg

(3) B330 20,000 Kg

(4) SLS 10 meter fairing brought to LEO Kg?

(4) solar voltaic cells lining 10-meter fairing and deployable mesh Rappolee (flower) Kg?

SLS has payload ranges  70  90 130 metric tons to LEO

SLS first stage O2 tank has another 9.5 meter barrow segment and this sounds like our 3 barrow proposal? so 11.5 meters plus 9.5 meters? “The current SLS upper stage H2 tank weighs 4200 kg (9240 lbm). This is an exceptionally lightweight pressure vessel; equivalent to two sport utility vehicles. The simplest approach is to use a tank off the production line then outfit it as a DSH. Figure 12 shows other options include using the first stage oxygen tank or the end domes of the first stage hydrogen tank welded to a shortened barrel section. Either approach offer the same diameter with the oxygen tank providing a 9.5 m (373 in.) barrel section and thus greater volume than the upper stage hydrogen tank”

pressure vessel; equivalent to two sport utility vehicles. The simplest approach is to use a tank off the production line then outfit it as a DSH. Figure 12 shows other options include using the first stage oxygen tank or the end domes of the first stage hydrogen tank welded to a shortened barrel section. Either approach offer the same diameter with the oxygen tank providing a 9.5 m (373 in.) barrel section and thus greater volume than the upper stage hydrogen tank”



According to this Youtube, each SLS LH2 Barrow is 6.7056 Meters X 5 barrows plus two domes 135 feet total or 41.148 meters.A 41 meter space station payload wil not fit in the NASA space vehicle assembly building.

26.44 meters is the 10 meter PLF concept so subtracting 2 LH2 Barrows makes for a 3 segment plus 2 domes Skylab-II just a little too big for the 10 meter PLF


**** A discovery, a paper from the NASA NTRS archive that speaks of a “full capability Skylab-II or C-2 it is 16.5 meters tall and would need the 10 meter PLF? Habitat Concepts for Deep Space Exploration

This is close I think to the Skylab-II MAX that I blogged about earlier last year.Except Skylab MAX is an entire SLS LH2 tank inserted into LEO and this would be a 40 meter tall payload on top of the SLS!

SLS EUS derived Gateway Cislunar space station

SLS EUS propellant tanks could augment any cislunar gateway with a wet lab, An EUS LH2 tank would increase the pressurized volume of a Skylab-II C 2 full capability habitat by 45% (see figure 15)   20140012883

LH2 Tank ~9,400 ft3 capacity 8.4 m dia, ~7.5 m length

LO2 Tank ~3,400 ft3 capacity 5.5 m dia, ~6.0 m length

LH2 tank  315.8703 m3 pressurized  volume added to the Skylab-II  500 m3 pressurized volume a 45 % increase


CONOPS; (A) EUS delivers skylab-II to cislunar space(B) ACES derived ICE and IVF consume remaining propellants and water is recovered(C) EUS has a hatch between the EUS and skylab-II that is designed to allow egress.(D) EUS continues to supply additional solar power(E) EUS LH2 tank would need outfitting.(F) connecting the EUS LH2 & LO2 tanks would cause thermal regulation problems to think this out further, perhaps the LO2 tank might have its own hatch and a future attach point for a docking port?(weight?) (G) what protocols would be needed for an EVA  to remove the Engines?

Lunar Dust ripened cheese; (gunpowder Emmental)

Lunar Dust ripened cheese; (gunpowder Emmental)

This is also a USDA SBIR proposal for ISS to explore the effects of Zero G on cheese Yeats and cheese curing on orbit in Nanoracks 🙂

Astronaut tended to experiment with cheese boring samples returned to earth from a small wheel of cheese in a Nanao racks cabinet with astronaut taste testing.



Ice Giant SEP docked with spacecraft and Dual flow RTG-REP/SEP power

We last blogged about a common SEP & spacecraft docking mechanisms that allow for power to flow both ways between SEP stage and spacecraft RTG power sources.(SEP/REP hybrid)We suggested that this allows for a spacecraft in hibernation or partly in hibernation so that RTG power can be shunted to the SEP stage to augment the solar panels in the outer solar system.

This post changes the spacecraft and SEP geometries so that both spacecraft are docked to one another “nose to nose”We do this to allow the spacecraft chemical rocket engine to point 360 degrees away from the SEP engines, this should allow for both to be able to fire into ice giant orbits.Instead of LOR (Lunar orbit rendezvous), we have After Planetary Orbital Insertion Separation(APOIS) Or Planetary spacecraft orbit rendezvous (SPOR)

The Ice Giant study proposes that spacecraft might have 150,90 or 50 Kg payloads, our plan requires a rethink of this.Perhaps the spacecraft has 100 Kg and the SEP carries 50 Kg and one of these two carries the atmosphere probe? in a few cases, duplicative instruments might be called for(magnetometer comes to mind).After APOIS the SEP stage with the smaller(?) payload leaves planetary orbit to perform a centaur & Trojan mission.

We chose the idea of identical spacecraft and SEP stage with identical atmosphere probes.orbital insertion utilizing both chemical and RTG power allows for the entire stack in orbit and requires a rethink of spacecraft & SEP geometry to in reference to atmosphere probe delivery! The chemical engine allows for a delivery of probe to the atmosphere from orbit with a subsequent avoidance maneuver, this greatly lowers the speed and changes the geometry of the atmosphere entry probe and reduces the challenges of ablative technologies(?)It’s unlikely we are doing aerobraking.

Both spacecraft and SEP should have ELECTRA & Earth communications gear. ELECTRA allows for enhanced capabilities for probe entry geometries. Both spacecraft should be able to do the independent flight in orbit to conduct simultaneous magnetic fields from different orbits.Independent flight is due to occur as the SEP stage breaks orbit to the Centaur Trojan targets in any event.This calls for both SC and SEP stage to carry duplicative energetic particle & plasma detectors.After APOIS the SEP stage will have a limit to its power to instruments out at the ice giants.Trades between SC or SEP doing a close in polar orbit for magnetometer gravity field for planetary interior characteristics, IE SEP stage impacts Polar region at EOM and SC escapes satellites to Trojan/Centaur.We believe having the SEP and SC both with instruments enter into orbit has the highest score for science objectives as does the APOIS  wich results in two spacecraft at each ice giant followed by orbit escape to secondary targets.After APOIS both might be doing satellite tours.This is close to the science results of the Final Ice Giant report for dual spacecraft one planet.



(A)(1) One ARRM class SEP stage and two docked SC, this works for Uranus and Neptune assuming one of the ice giant SC separates before Jupiter flyby.(A)(2)Trades on wich SC the SEP stage stays with, The Common dual power flow docking mechanisms put both Uranus and Neptune into play for trades(A)(3)Trades on SC alone without SEP using ballistic ice giant satellites escape to Trojan/Centaur, how would Triton work out?

(B)(1) Saturn-Uranus dual missions with 1 SC 2 probes 1 SEP (B)(2) 2 SEP with 2 SC Jupiter (flyby probe?)Saturn(flyby probe)or (orbital and escape to?) Uranus-Neptune trades.


(C)(1) For each trade in (A)&(B) above we need a Decadel Survey derived list of Instruments that are   (C)(2) On both the SC and SEP &   (C)(3) are not duplicated on both S and SEP.   (C)(4) We have already blogged about a SEP that deploys multiple probes at multiple targets IE Jupiter Saturn Uranus & Titan(ICE Giant Spider).Neptune end of orbiter mission with SEP Triton orbit followed by escape to Trojans/Centaurs after APOIS.(C)(2) TDU/Kilo power concepts could power the proposed Ice Giant spacecraft with power shared with a docked SEP/NEP stage hybrid.














Reintroduce the California Condor to its former Northern Range in British Columbia

Reintroduce the California Condor to its former Northern Range in British Columbia, add Canada as a third nation partner in the condor recovery project.Canada has an opportunity of vast wild spaces that might keep human raised condors from human recontact.Climate change might very well extend Condor range further north?

Professor Ann Salomon has some ideas that could be incorporated into a Canadian/First Nations partnership that could be incorporated into a future reintroduction of the California back into its former northern range.Professor Salomon discusses social-ecological interactions to build and cultivate clam gardens.    Clam Gardens talk 

The Vancouver Aquarium and the federal and provincial governments along with the first nations groups could be our social ecology interaction for species restoration.My thoughts along these lines would be to allow the native American and first nations permissions to hunt whale and marine mammals to periodically surreptitiously feed California condors.this could be an important source of income to the Native American/First Nations groups.

The Native Americans and Inuit on the American side could be contracted to provide marine mammals periodically on the beach in Big Sur to the California Condor population there.First Nations groups could provide marine mammals to the beach for any future British Columbian population.This social-ecological partnership with forest nations would be an important source of employment.I do not know if First Nations groups have an exemption from prohibitions to hunting marine mammals.

Condors fed on Grey Whales in ancient times 

A quote from the article; HAVE GRAY WHALES RECOVERED FROM WHALING? A SUMMARY OF NEW SCIENTIFIC ANALYSIS: Alter, S.E., Rynes, E., and S.R. Palumbi. 2007. “DNA evidence for historical population size and past ecological impacts of gray whales.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

The whales are themselves food for predators such as orcas, and for scavengers such as the nearly extinct California condor that once fed regularly on washed up marine mammal carcasses”

Proposed protocol;

The Washington state native American group has treaty rights to hunt whale and this is recognized under the IWC rules (Inuit) Makah whaling rights  The Makah would be contracted with a social-ecological partnership to hunt young gray whales and younger specimens of seal during the migration season to feed Big Sur California Condors on the beach.Makah hunters under contract would travel from Washington state and perform this contract off Big Sur nesting sites.Marine mammal kills will be tested for toxic metals and compounds.Marine mammals will be disassembled for easy access by Condors.This would require a further exemption to the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA)(such as for Alaska Native subsistence).

Later as the protocol shows its weakness or strength(heavy metals) as compared to lead pellets this social-ecological partnership could extend to a California Condor reintroduction to British Columbia.

DDE & Condors

Marine Mammal Mercury study


if it’s shown that condors prefer marine mammals over lead shot feeding and all other things being equal then we should consider the contribution of Canadian and American funding of an aboriginal industry of providing ecological support to species restoration.



Introduction of Baja California mangrove ecosystems to Mission Bay San Diego

The introduction of Baja California mangrove ecosystems to Mission Bay San Diego in response to climate change and to provide ecosystem biomass for commercial and sports fisheries.Future climate change might warm Mission Bay to the Mangroves current Baja California range.It’s proposed the mangrove tree would be from seed only with no soil brought in to reduce unintended introductions.

San Diego’s Mission Bay is an artificially dredged bay that we propose would be the site of an experiment to naturalize Baja California Mangrove species of trees.

Assist the mangrove to move North? 

It’s been proposed that humans assist plants to migrate into new habitats in response to climate change, in this case, we do not propose to introduce mangrove trees into San Diego wetlands but into Mission Bay an artificially dredged recreational inshore bay.The experiment would be to observe Mangrove tree root harboring of planktonic and larval crustaceans and fish.

Assisted Migration wiki

Reintroduce Sea Otters rehabilitated at Marine mammal centers to the Point Loma Kelp Forrest, San Diego

Reintroduce Sea Otters (Enhydra lutris) rehabilitated at Marine mammal centers to the Point Loma Kelp Forrest (Macrocystis pyrifera), San Diego and to the Baja California kelp forests. Baja California kelp forests

Mexico with a border just miles away could be the third nation along with Canada as a partner for the reintroduction of sea otters to Southern California.

There are many who share my dream of sea otters back to the kelp beds off San Diego;

LA waterkeepers

Earth Justice

Lawsuits have overturned rules that permitted the government to remove sea otters from Southern California waters

Ban on Sea Otters from Southern California waters lifted



Sea Otter Kelp ecology

Our proposed protocols;

experienced older sea otters that find their way into marine mammal recovery centers would along with younger less experienced animals would be released if deemed recovered into the San Diego kelp bed forest.




Relocate American and Japanese Military assets from Okinawa to a city at sea to reduce local tensions

Relocate American and Japanese Military  assets from Okinawa to a city at sea to reduce local tensions


(A) (1)relocate American and Japanese military assets from Okinawa to reduce tensions there among the two nations citizens by building a city at sea that has these military assets as an economic anchor tenant.(A)(2) This requires a military and commercial airport and seaport at sea that creates an economic base for the city and its inhabitants.(A)(3) This city at sea would be built by both nations and the citizens of the city at sea would be from both nations.(A)(4)Property taxes would pay down a minority portion of the cost to build for the civilian portion and the military assets by America. and Japan. (A)(5) Military Sealift Command ships could resupply the military assets.

(B)(1) American and Japanese oceanographic research ships could be ported at the city at sea furthering the economic base and adding to the cities expertise. civil servants who work as ocean researchers would be encouraged to be a city at sea homeowners.

(B)(2) American aircraft carrier reactors and life support equipment could power the American military assets based at the city at sea.

(B)(3)This city at sea would have both American and Japanese addresses with postal codes, it would be a home of record for the military, civil service, contractors for the purpose of being a home of record and to calculate cost of living and housing allowances.These allowances are used for mortgages.



Cities at sea-1

Cities at sea-2

cities at sea-3

Cities at sea-4

Cities at sea-5

Cities at sea-6

Cities at sea-7   (C)(1)This link has a model not likely to be used in this proposal in that this proposal is not a Libertarian Nirvana.This proposal envisions American and Japanese military commanders and personnel and a civilian elected city government.(C)(2)Perhaps a portion of the city at sea could be a special economic zone with different laws and nationalities from many other countries.I am not interested in Libertarians who inadvertently encourage labor and human rights exploitation.(C)(3)Non-American Japanese residence should be allowed to vote in local government elections.(C)(4) I would see the civil government owning the cities hull and common spaces along with condominium associations but much of the business would be well served by ESOP’s or employee ownership as an important part of the community.(C)(5)


DEROC ; Distributed Evolved Recovery Of “Jettisoned” Components

DEROM ; Distributed Evolved Recovery Of Jettisoned Matter. (DEROC ) components might be a better choice.

How would it work? not sure but here is a guess( see Rappolee Flower post) Payload adapter and payload shroud/fairing would be brought to LEO.Payload fairing would deploy around payload but would not jettison from payload adapter (Rappolee flowers Post ).Payload separates.Rappolee flowers deploy photovoltaic on the inside of the fairing.A mesh deploys around the fairing halves that has more photovoltaic cells and acts as an antenna.The mesh is designed to deploy with the fairing halves to create a circular object.

We need to dock and store these somewhere for later use or use them as is somehow(power)the underside of the former payload adapter could have a grapple fixture or a docking mechanism with the power connector for other docked power users.

We are selling power and communications to some communications provider perhaps?

EDIT; “Highly evolved secondary fairing payload” “HESFP”

Next post on this topic


%d bloggers like this: