Re: After the shuttle
- From: Pat Flannery <flanner@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 01:07:56 -0500
William Mook wrote:
Well, that may be true of the linear aerospike engine designed for the X-33. But I'm speaking of an older design that is pretty well proven;
http://history.nasa.gov/SP-4221/p236.htm
I could never understand why that design didn't get pushed forward immediately. I first saw in in the book "Frontiers Of Space" and it looked like an easy way to get a more effective engine design fairly quickly. (Okay, the surface-launched Mars ship was pushing it a bit- but the Hyperion looked doable) it would have been fairly easy to test on a sounding rocket...somewhere, I seem to remember someone putting a plug nozzle engine tester on a solid fueled rocket.
Pat .
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: After the shuttle
- From: William Mook
- Re: After the shuttle
- References:
- Re: After the shuttle
- From: Herm
- Re: After the shuttle
- From: WvB
- Re: After the shuttle
- From: William Mook
- Re: After the shuttle
- From: Jeff Findley
- Re: After the shuttle
- From: Pat Flannery
- Re: After the shuttle
- From: William Mook
- Re: After the shuttle
- From: Pat Flannery
- Re: After the shuttle
- From: William Mook
- Re: After the shuttle
- Prev by Date: Re: Great Untapped Financial Resources for Space Projects
- Next by Date: Re: After the shuttle
- Previous by thread: Re: After the shuttle
- Next by thread: Re: After the shuttle
- Index(es):