Re: Orbiter shape.
From: Pete Lynn (pete_at_peterlynnkites.com)
Date: 07/23/04
- Next message: Paul F. Dietz: "Re: Orbiter shape."
- Previous message: Steven James Forsberg: "NASA budget...to be reduced..."
- In reply to: Peter Fairbrother: "Orbiter shape."
- Next in thread: Peter Fairbrother: "Re: Orbiter shape."
- Reply: Peter Fairbrother: "Re: Orbiter shape."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 13:10:29 +1200
"Peter Fairbrother" <zenadsl6186@zen.co.uk> wrote in message
news:BD24A3B4.553C6%zenadsl6186@zen.co.uk...
> We have to design an orbiter. By an orbiter I mean a second stage of a
TSTO, or the orbiting stage of a MSTO.
>
> What shape should it be? It has to survive reentry from LEO, and
> land under control - and that probably means on a runway.
I would be inclined to think more in terms of rocket first, aircraft
much, much later. Do not compromise the rocket design if you can
possibly avoid it.
The type of design I am liking the sound of at the moment is a very
fluffy large diameter but very short, (to the point of being more of a
disk), capsule. Say something like five metres diameter and two meters
high, for example.
Sort of toroidal tanks, (ease of manufacture?), people in the centre
with as pure a rocket design as possible. Vertical landing on a soft
surface without landing gear, perhaps starting with rockets or
paragliders but moving on to the likes of, rotors, aerial capture,
rotating kites, etc. This should eventually be lighter and better than
HL, VL craft can get to the gate much quicker. The flat capsule might
have a subsonic L/D of nearly five all by itself, with the likes of a
rotor or paraglider on top this could be much better than the shuttle,
potential cross range should be considerable.
Start with an unpowered landing, (unless using rockets :-), developing
powered landing later if the reality requires it, no point in solving
problems and spending money until you have to.
Pete.
- Next message: Paul F. Dietz: "Re: Orbiter shape."
- Previous message: Steven James Forsberg: "NASA budget...to be reduced..."
- In reply to: Peter Fairbrother: "Orbiter shape."
- Next in thread: Peter Fairbrother: "Re: Orbiter shape."
- Reply: Peter Fairbrother: "Re: Orbiter shape."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|