Re: Plutonium on Next Atlas V - Bad Idea?
- From: "Ed Kyle" <edkyle99@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 15 Aug 2005 09:41:56 -0700
paris2012@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Well what are the alternatives to Atlas 551 ?
>
> There aren't that many Titan IV left, and would you consider Delta 4H ?
Delta 4H is proven in the sense that it has
flown once. And, a previously unknown failure
mode was discovered during its flight - a failure
mode that did not crop up during the previous
successful Delta 4M missions. But it isn't a
necessarily a matter of switching launch vehicles.
The question is shouldn't an Atlas 551 be flown
without an RTG payload first, to prove the vehicle?
- Ed Kyle
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Plutonium on Next Atlas V - Bad Idea?
- From: Damon Hill
- Re: Plutonium on Next Atlas V - Bad Idea?
- References:
- Plutonium on Next Atlas V - Bad Idea?
- From: Ed Kyle
- Re: Plutonium on Next Atlas V - Bad Idea?
- From: Cardman
- Re: Plutonium on Next Atlas V - Bad Idea?
- From: Ed Kyle
- Re: Plutonium on Next Atlas V - Bad Idea?
- From: Cardman
- Re: Plutonium on Next Atlas V - Bad Idea?
- From: Ed Kyle
- Re: Plutonium on Next Atlas V - Bad Idea?
- From: paris2012
- Plutonium on Next Atlas V - Bad Idea?
- Prev by Date: Re: How journalists write 'balanced' shuttle articles -- like watching sausages and laws being made?
- Next by Date: Re: Air Force Signs Off on SRB-CEV
- Previous by thread: Re: Plutonium on Next Atlas V - Bad Idea?
- Next by thread: Re: Plutonium on Next Atlas V - Bad Idea?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|