The Flickr Photovoltaicarray Image Generatr

fut-spasta/SSF_v_c_o_KPP (ca. 1988-91, unnumbered Boeing Defense & Space Grp photo) by Mike Acs

“SPACE STATION OPERATIONS – In this Boeing painting by Paul Hudson, Space Station Freedom receives new supplies via a logistics module delivered by the space shuttle. An astronaut performs Extra Vehicular Activity (EVA) below the truss. The space station is depicted here at Permanently Manned Capability (PMC). NASA will reach PMC in 2000 after 18 assembly flights. Year-round life sciences, microgravity, and technology research will be performed by a four-person permanent crew. Boeing is NASA’s prime contractor for Space Station Freedom’s work package one, building the living, laboratory and logistics modules; connecting nodes, viewing cupolas; and selected onboard systems needed to sustain crew life in space. Boeing’s space station work is under way at facilities in Huntsville, Ala., near NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center.”

This particular work was also featured in a subsequent Boeing “Space Station Freedom” poster, with the following subtitle:

“NASA and Boeing are building Space Station Freedom where the unique properties of space promise to unlock scientific mysteries benefitting all mankind.”

Although barely hinted at in this photo, in the poster, the black TPS tiles of the orbiter's SSME heat shield can be seen to bear their individual white tile numbers. Although of course not legible, their inclusion is a testimony to Mr. Hudson's exquisite attention to detail. His works are genuinely gorgeous.

The man:

youtu.be/AuGzt0Lbd5c?si=uTwQt36Zivn0RO2r
Credit: interruptProductions/YouTube

See more:

fut-spasta (SOC)_v_bw_o_TPMBK (ca. 1981, unnumbered Boeing photo) by Mike Acs

“Space Operations Center

American manned space station. Study 1979. The Space Operations Center was proposed by NASA's Johnson Spaceflight Center in 1979.

Status: Study 1979.

Like most other space station studies from the mid/late 1970s its primary mission was the assembly and servicing of large spacecraft in Earth orbit -- not science. NASA/JSC signed a contract with Boeing in 1980 to further develop the design. Like most NASA space station plans, SOC would be assembled in orbit from modules launched on the Space Shuttle. The crew's tour of duty would have been 90 days. NASA originally estimated the total cost to be $2.7 billion, but the estimated cost had increased to $4.7 billion by 1981. SOC would have been operational by 1990.

NASA's Johnson Spaceflight Center extended the Boeing contract in February 1982 to study a cheaper, modular, evolutionary approach to assembling the Space Operations Center. An initial power module would consist of solar arrays and radiators. The next launches would have delivered a space tug 'garage', two pressurized crew modules and a logistics module. The completed Space Operations Center also would have contained a satellite servicing and assembly facility and several laboratory modules. Even with this revised approach, however, the cost of the SOC program had grown to $9 billion. Another problem was Space Operations Center's primary mission: spacecraft assembly and servicing. The likely users (commercial satellite operators and telecommunications companies) were not really interested in the kind of large geostationary space platforms proposed by NASA. By 1983, the only enthusiastic users for NASA's space station plans were scientists working in the fields of microgravity research and life sciences. Their needs would dictate future space station design although NASA's 1984 station plans did incorporate a SOC-type spacecraft servicing facility as well.”

Above & image from/at:

www.astronautix.com/s/spaceoperationscenter.html
Credit: Marcus Lindroos/Astronautix website

The abridged version of the above:

“The Space Operations Center was proposed by NASA's Johnson Spaceflight Center in 1979. Like most other space station studies from the mid/late 1970s its primary mission was the assembly and servicing of large spacecraft in Earth orbit -- not science.
NASA/JSC signed a contract with Boeing in 1980 to further develop the design. This illustration is from 1981. Like most NASA space station plans, SOC would be assembled in orbit from modules launched on the Space Shuttle. The Shuttle depicted here delivers a resupply module for the SOC crew; the tour of duty would have been 90 days.”

The above & image from/at:

www.pmview.com/spaceodysseytwo/station/sld002.htm

sites.google.com/site/spaceodysseytwo/station/soc81.jpg
Credit: PMView Pro website

8.625” x 10.875”.

Take a closer look at this, it’s exquisite, the perspective, the detail, the lighting/shading, etc., etc., right down to the "NO STEP" on the inboard elevon, which I don't think actually existed, but who cares, (BTW, I easily wiped off the reddish tint visible on the wing). Houston/Galveston Bay are just above the orbiter.
Another John J. Olson masterpiece.

Last, but NOT least:

www.398th.org/Images/Images_Association/Text/Olson_Cleari...
Credit: 398th Bomb Group Memorial Association website

space.nss.org/national-space-society-governor-jack-olson-...
Credit: NSS website

See more:

fut-Marsexp_vr_c_o_KPP (ca. 1988-89/1998?, verso hand-annotated CN 6414-89) by Mike Acs

“A variety of Artificial Gravity/Mars Transfer Vehicle (AG/MTV) concepts were developed by the Martin Marietta Astronautics Group for NASA’s Mars Exploration Case Studies in 1988 to 1989. Each of these concepts used a large diameter (~39 to 46 m) aerobrake (AB) with a low lift to drag (L/D) ratio of ~0.2 for Mars Orbit Capture (MOC). These large ABs required assembly in LEO before being outfitted with habitation, auxiliary Photo-Voltaic Array (PVA) power and chemical propulsion system elements within their protective envelope. By rotating the AB about its central axis at different spin rates and mounting the habitat modules near the outer perimeter of the AB to increase the rotation radius, a range of centrifugal forces can be generated for the crew during the transit out to Mars and back…

However, initial concepts had several drawbacks, to include being very large, requiring significant orbital assembly for the AB and overall vehicle, with large Initial Mass in Low Earth Orbit (IMLEO) requirements. Additionally, problems of the five different concepts developed ranged from incompatible internal arrangements of varying habitation modules, the required movement of major pressurized mechanical joints, large propellant consumption to start/stop a tethered combination along with associated dynamic control problems & possible critical mechanical failures, even the possibility of crew isolation from systems enclosed within the AB e.g., Mars Descent/Ascent Vehicle (MDAV).

To avoid the deficiencies of those concepts, Martin Marietta proposed ‘Concept 6’, an AG/MTV design that used chemical propulsion and carried twin cylindrical Space Station Freedom (SSF) habitation modules whose long axes were oriented perpendicular to the longitudinal spin axis of the MTV—referred to as the Dumbbell B configuration. The hab modules were connected to a central logistics and docking hub by two pressurized tunnels each ~12.5 m long. Each hab module—designed to accommodate two to three crewmembers—had excess capacity so that either could serve as a safe-haven for the entire crew in case of an emergency. Attached to the Sun-facing side of each tunnel and hab module were ~30 and 75 m2, respectively, of PVAs producing ~26 kWₑ of electrical power for the spacecraft’s various systems. Once fully assembled, the rotation radius from the center of the logistics module to the floor of each hab module was ~17 m allowing centrifugal acceleration levels ranging from 0.38-g to 0.68-g for vehicle spin rates of 4.5 to 6 rpm. At a slightly higher spin rate of 7.25 rpm, 1-g could be achieved. The pressurized logistics hub also provided a shirt-sleeve environment and anytime crew access to the MDAV docked to the front of the vehicle.
The aft end Mars Orbit Capture Stage (MOCS) and forward Trans-Earth Injection Stages (TEIS) used four ~25 thousand-pound thrust liquid oxygen/liquid hydrogen (LOX/LH₂) RL10B-2 engines with an Iₛₚ of ~460 s. The MOCS also functioned as the TMI stage using propellant supplied from six surrounding drop tanks jettisoned in pairs as they are drained. The vehicle IMLEO at TMI was ~710.8 t.”

The above, at/per:

ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20160014801/downloads/2016001...

The second paragraph consists of my paraphrasing, the rest is direct copy/paste.

The two capsules docked to the ‘top’ SSF habitation module are referred to as Earth Crew Capsule Vehicles (ECCV).

Who knew?!?
Did YOU!?!
I didn’t!!!
While I’ve never paid close attention to artificial gravity considerations with regard to a Mars Transfer Vehicle, I know I’ve NEVER seen this distinctive “dumbbell” design!

FINALLY, as if ALL of the linked to above/below, wasn’t enough…which it should be frankly, this beautiful work is by Martin Marietta artist Robert S. Murray. I like the clever framing of the AG/MTV by an obliquely viewed Arsia Mons (below) & Pavonis Mons (above), capped off by the tenuous upper atmosphere layer of haze visible on the Martian limb…nice, very nice.

A WIN:

www.paintingsbyrobertsmurray.com/about-me.html
Credit: “Paintings by Robert S. Murray” website

midcurrent.com/art/robert-s-murray/
Credit: “MIDCURRENT” website

See more:

Reflections of a Resource Prospector by Gordon Brandly

Available under a Creative Commons by-nc-sa license

...or of it's solar panels, anyway. :)

See more:

Framing for the Cochiti Photovoltaic project by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Albuquerque District

COCHITI LAKE, N.M. – The framework for the photovoltaic electric generation system at the project, Sept. 30, 2016. Photo by Erin Larivee. This was a 2016 Photo Drive entry.

See more:

Photovoltaic Array at Cochiti Lake by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Albuquerque District

COCHITI LAKE, N.M. – The completed photovoltaic electric generation system at the project, Oct. 20, 2016. Photo by Erin Larivee. This was a 2016 Photo Drive entry.

See more:

Single Array by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Albuquerque District

COCHITI LAKE, N.M. – One of the photovoltaic arrays in the electric generation system at the project, Oct. 3, 2016. Photo by Erin Larivee. This was a 2016 Photo Drive entry.

See more: