Re: Size of the proposed "new" space vehicle?
- From: "tomcat" <jlavine@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 7 Oct 2005 15:29:53 -0700
Jeff Findley wrote:
> You're horribly delusional. Try looking at the X-33 program and tell us
> again how quick and easy it would be to build a "triangle spaceplane". Part
> of the problem with such a design is the shape of the fuel tanks, which is
> exactly where X-33 had some serious problems. More time and money might
> have fixed those issues, but the program was cancelled because of the
> reluctance to throw good money after bad.
>
> Jeff
Delta Clipper had a problem with the fuel tanks, one that could easily
have been solved if NASA had tried.
Let's not make building a spaceplane out to be more that what it is.
The hard R&D work has been done with the Space Shuttle.
The Shuttle proved the waverider concept, the H2/lox SSME, glideslope
technology, crew adaptability to space, and general space engineering.
When SSTO HTOL's were first being designed, during the 70's, everything
was up in the air. So, financial backing was lacking. These SSTO HTOL
designs didn't fail -- they were never built.
Was hypersonic plasma really hot? Will waveriders really ride the
wave? Can rocket engines be relied on? Should jets, scram jets, and
then rockets be used sequentially? Can pilots really fly hypersonic
vehicles? Will there be surprises in Outer Space?
In addition a lot of technology was lacking in the 70's. Titanium
could not be easily worked or machined. Computers were crude by
today's standard. (In fact, the apollo capsules used coded paper tape
instead of computers to save weight.) Composite was unheard of outside
classroom speculation. Fly by wire technology didn't exist until the
F-16.
Today, we can build everything except the surface skin using tried and
true off-the-shelf technology. Not a small advantage over the 70's!
And, with regard to surface skin, we can always fall back on ballistic
nose cone technology: Corelle on top of reinforced carbon carbon, over
metal plate. Add a vacuum bottle design, a little cyrogenic cooling
with a nomex interior and the heat problem should be solved.
There are several things going on at NASA and elsewhere in the
government that muddies up the water. The 'rocket people' are fighting
the 'aircraft people'. The 'military people' are fighting the 'NASA
civilians'. And, everyone wants to keep their jobs.
Some view NASA as a spectator sport like baseball and football. They
believe people want to watch the roman candles lift off from gantrys,
not take off from runways. Most influential people don't see
interplanetary voyages, or even Moon missions, as practical. Just so
much showmanship to be kept at a slow, economical pace.
Then you have the 'Deep Black' Generals hidden deep within mountain
bunkers, separating America's 'real' technology from the . . . NASA
circus acts.
Controlling technology so great that even Aliens shake and shiver,
these 'shadow czars' rule with an iron fist, slowly turning America
into a double country: the Eloi, and the Morlocks. The Eloi dance
around in innocence while morlocks lurk beneath the surface making all
manner of . . . deals.
Heaven forbid you ever meet these shadows. You might offend one and
burst into flames, leaving only a stain on the concrete. Note: See
"Men In Black" by Steven Spielberg.
What is true here and what is fiction I don't know. But the
performance of the X-33 doesn't mean diddly, or say anything about
America's technology. Best to use good common sense.
If you can build something with off-the-shelf tried and true parts --
then go ahead and build it because it is bound to work.
tomcat
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Size of the proposed "new" space vehicle?
- From: Mike Dennis
- Re: Size of the proposed "new" space vehicle?
- References:
- Re: Size of the proposed "new" space vehicle?
- From: Mike Dennis
- Re: Size of the proposed "new" space vehicle?
- From: tomcat
- Re: Size of the proposed "new" space vehicle?
- From: Jeff Findley
- Re: Size of the proposed "new" space vehicle?
- Prev by Date: Re: How many times did space shuttles retrieve satellites from orbit?
- Next by Date: Re: NASA Administrator Agrees With What Many Critics Have Been Saying for Years
- Previous by thread: Re: Size of the proposed "new" space vehicle?
- Next by thread: Re: Size of the proposed "new" space vehicle?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|