Re: Plutonium on Next Atlas V - Bad Idea?
- From: "Ed Kyle" <edkyle99@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 15 Aug 2005 12:34:22 -0700
Damon Hill wrote:
>
> Ed, you're showing signs of Bbo Hllrism. Are you feeling
> well?
I'm just wondering about flying an RTG (New
Horizons only has one RTG) on an untested
LV configuration. NASA launched Titan IIIEs
with RTG-free payloads before it launched
Viking and Voyager. Atlas Centaur was pretty
well wrung out before it was used for RTG
launches. Boeing found a suprise during its
first Delta IV Heavy launch - and Atlas 551 is
nearly as powerful as a Heavy. If there are
any gotchas in Atlas V, they are more likely
to crop up in the most powerful (551) variant.
I know that launch failure is always possible,
but it is also true that failure is more probable
during an inaugural type launch. I would feel
better about this if the rocket flew with
another payload first.
The risk is that the next launch vehicle that
fails while carrying an RTG payload will be the
last, because the public outcry (which could be
worldwide) could put a stop to future use of this
power source irregardless of whether plutonium is
released.
- Ed Kyle
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Plutonium on Next Atlas V - Bad Idea?
- From: Cardman
- 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: Cardman
- Re: Plutonium on Next Atlas V - Bad Idea?
- From: Damon Hill
- Plutonium on Next Atlas V - Bad Idea?
- Prev by Date: Re: Deja Vu
- Next by Date: Re: Improved lunar landing architecture
- 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
|